A Place For Apollo

[NobbyNobbs]

Don't get me wrong...I have no doubts that we've been to the moon. But what's a CT section without a thread for those who think otherwise? So here it is.

To start it off, I've been watching the conversation at the below link with morbid fascination.

(Can anyone refer me to something that teaches how to embed a link in a word or phrase? Thanks.)

http://s15.invisionfree.com/Loose_Change_Forum/index.php?showtopic=4560&st=1590

[defaultdotxbe]

type your word or phrase, select it, click the "insert link" button (globe with a chain on it) and type the address

speaking of links... (http://www.metacafe.com/watch/123520/buzz_aldrin_sucker_punch/)

[Hutch]

I have been on that thread over in Loose Change for awhile now, and I would suggest to all folks that are debating CT'ers to read it in it's entirety, for it is a beautiful example on how to do a defloration of a CT, to wit:

1. The major players on the Pro-Apollo side know their topic, know the references, and have done the research. Whatever move the CT'ers make to change the topic, they are ready with the necessary information, resources, and links.

2. They have seen or are seeing the CT'er tapes and know their weaknesses intimately.

3.They are, to an extent unknown on the LC site and (it must be admitted) sometimes rare here, unfailingly polite, addressing the arguments an not the person, and staying on the topic--a lot of that comes from many of them coming from the Bad Astronomy Forum--the BA has a very quick banning trigger when it comes to incivility and ad homs. This has kept them from being banned (part of it is that it is not a anti-9-11 CT Thread) while strongly making their points.

And it is also a good picture of the CT-mind, too. Some, mostly early in the thread, simply refuse to believe, no matter what the evidence. The later ones (DaveC, grommit, broodlinger) pick one or two "discrepancies" and cling to them no matter what the evidence, for if those small "discrepancies"are right, then no other evidence matters, the whole thing collapses and the CT is proven.

For the skeptic that runs into a thread on the Moon Hoax, there is no better resource IMHO than Moonbase Claviushttp://www.clavius.org the homepage of the most redoubtable Jay Windley, better known around the Internet as JayUtah. If you find yourself in disagreement with Mr. Utah on a topic, I suggest you be well-prepared; he is a most formidable foe. The site also has a Forum devoted to conspiracies, both Apollo and others.

There is also Bob Braeunig's site, which has a nice Moon Hoax section with plenty of links and infromation: http://www.braeunig.us/space/ Read the rest of the site for a good education on rocket and Space technology.

There is also the Bad Astronomy site which also takes shots at Mr. Bart Stibels film, but Phil (and the BAUT Forum) have so many irons in the fire that it may take some work to find the Apollo stuff. Still, for anything and everything that involves space and CT, BA is the man to see. http://www.badastronomy.com/

From those sites you can either counter or find the link to the information you need to leave any Moon-hoax conspirator in the dust. Gravy, Brainster, Markyx, and others are doing their best to give us the same resources; but since the 9-11 CT is relatively new (after all, Apollo was 36 years ago), information is still being disclosed and conclusions reached, considerable work remains to be done.

OK, I'll get off my soapbox now.

Press on.

[Foster Zygote]

There was a good program on the National Geographic channel a couple of months ago addressing the claims of the Apollo CT. It went up against most of the major CT claims and blew them all out of the water. After seeing some of these CTers interviewed directly my opinion of them was reinforced considerably. They are not experts yet they have it in their heads that they are. One fellow had made a little demonstration rig with a glove and a vacuum chamber/vacuum pump. His assertion was that the astronauts couldn't have moved in a fully pressurized suit. He then switched on the pump and removed virtually all of the air from the chamber and sure enough the glove felt as hard as a rock. But if this gentleman had had the slightest knowledge of what he was talking about he would have known that the suits worn by the astronauts were only pressurized to a fraction of the normal Earth air pressure near ground level. If he'd only removed a few p.s.i. from the chamber and created an accurate representation of the actual pressure differential experienced by the astronauts the glove would have moved much more easily. As it was the suits were awkward to move in as is evidenced by the video. But they certainly weren't impossibly stiff. Another, lesser, problem is that the industrial rubber glove used in the demo is not the same as the much more sophisticated gloves used on the Apollo program and therefor doesn't represent a completely accurate test.

I'm convinced that the CT personality type is one who needs to feel that he/she knows something that few others do. They need to feel that they're smarter than the rest of us who are "fooled".

Steven