A few questions to hoax proponents

[yuriarmstrong]

A friend of mine would like to know the rationale by those who think the Apollo program was faked to the following questions:

Some questions for true Apollo Hoax disciples only:

1. I believe your position on the LRO photographs that have imaged the Apollo landing sites is that they are Photoshop fakes, is that correct?
2. Does the hoax community believe that the space faring nations are motivated to continue to fake evidence and photographs, such as the LRO images, forever?
3. What is the commonly accepted reason as to what would motivate the space faring nations, especially China and Russia, to continue to promote what you call the Apollo hoax?
4. Is there a standard of evidence strong enough that would change your minds that Apollo was not hoaxed?

[Ginnie]

Just in case you were misled by the forum's title "Apollohoax" - there is a history behind this, but suffice to say most members here firmly believe that the Space Mission happened as commonly accepted. That is, we don't deny NASA's achievements - we believe man landed on the moon etc.

Now there are presently one or two members here that believe otherwise. Maybe you'll get some answers from them.

My main question to any HB continues to be "At what point were the missions faked? Mercury? Gemini? One of the Apollo missions? " I've never been able to get an answer to that one.

[yuriarmstrong]

Yes, I thought this forum would be filled with hoax believers. They are becoming hard to find you see.

[theteacher]

Sept 11, 2010 15:43:48 GMT -4 yuriarmstrong said:

A friend of mine would like to know the rationale by those who think the Apollo program was faked to the following questions:

Some questions for true Apollo Hoax disciples only:
1. I believe your position on the LRO photographs that have imaged the Apollo landing sites is that they are Photoshop fakes, is that correct?
2. Does the hoax community believe that the space faring nations are motivated to continue to fake evidence and photographs, such as the LRO images, forever?
3. What is the commonly accepted reason as to what would motivate the space faring nations, especially China and Russia, to continue to promote what you call the Apollo hoax?
4. Is there a standard of evidence strong enough that would change your minds that Apollo was not hoaxed?

Really good questions, and I'd like to add: When somebody - anybody - lands on the Moon, will they then claim to be the first? If not, why not?

[PhantomWolf]

Sept 11, 2010 16:18:48 GMT -4 yuriarmstrong said:

Yes, I thought this forum would be filled with hoax believers. They are becoming hard to find you see.

We'd noticed this too, though I did find out that one of my colleagues is an HB, which surprised me as otherwise she seems fairly normal. For the most part it seems to be based on the idea that she might just know something no one else does, rather than on actual hard evidence. Otherwise it seems that really the only ones left are the loons, the ignorant, and the fame/money hungery.

Sept 11, 2010 15:43:48 GMT -4 yuriarmstrong said:

A friend of mine would like to know the rationale by those who think the Apollo program was faked to the following questions:

Some questions for true Apollo Hoax disciples only:

1. I believe your position on the LRO photographs that have imaged the Apollo landing sites is that they are Photoshop fakes, is that correct?
2. Does the hoax community believe that the space faring nations are motivated to continue to fake evidence and photographs, such as the LRO images, forever?
3. What is the commonly accepted reason as to what would motivate the space faring nations, especially China and Russia, to continue to promote what you call the Apollo hoax?
4. Is there a standard of evidence strong enough that would change your minds that Apollo was not hoaxed?

The only one likely to pop up at the moment is rodin who currently makes visits to post every few days. The only other really active(?) ones are lionking and deadhoosiers, neither of who have posted in the hoax section for quite a long time, so it's unlikely that you'll get an answer to your questions from an HB here, and especially not from an HP (there are several that read the forums, including Jack White, Jim Fetzer, and Jarrad White, but none post here.)

However since I have been dealing with them for a few years, I'll have a shot at their answers for you.....

1. I believe your position on the LRO photographs that have imaged the Apollo landing sites is that they are Photoshop fakes, is that correct?

This would seem to be the predominant position, though a few do suggest that it is possible that NASA has landed unmanned missions at the sites either at the time Apollo was supposed to have happened to do things such as collect rock samples, or since, and that this is what is showing up in the images.

2. Does the hoax community believe that the space faring nations are motivated to continue to fake evidence and photographs, such as the LRO images, forever?

Again there is not a concensus on this. Some believe that all of them are in it to the point that ALL manned space flight is haoxed, or even that all spaceflight, including unmanned, beyond the VA Belts is impossible. Others suggest merely that NASA has either managed to fool them, threaten them, or bribe them into silence. Most will claim that NASA is so involved in the hoax now that it has to continue with it in fear of being found out.

3. What is the commonly accepted reason as to what would motivate the space faring nations, especially China and Russia, to continue to promote what you call the Apollo hoax?

See above. The most common claim for Russia is that they were bribed with wheat to keep mum, but some will tell you that they are all in on it and controlled by a higher power, be it the Illuminati, The NWO, or the Jews. There are a few that would claim that the Soviet Union didn't have the technolongy to expose it and have been just as fooled as we have been, and one or two that claim they did try and no-one will believe them about it.

4. Is there a standard of evidence strong enough that would change your minds that Apollo was not hoaxed?

In reality, or in their world? Many had claimed that photos from an orbiter would work, before LRO took them. Many now say that if they could see the remenants with their own eyes through a telescope they would, but this is doubtful too, even if it was physically possible (the primary mirror would have to be the size of sporting stadium.) In the end whatever level of proof the majority put up is out of reach of our technology or finacial levels because they know that if it can't or won't be done, they can keep claiming that really they are open-minded, but no-one will provide that final proof for them. Of course when it does happen (like LRO) the goalposts rapidly slide to a new position.

Hope that's of some help to you.

[gwiz]

Sept 11, 2010 16:18:48 GMT -4 yuriarmstrong said:

Yes, I thought this forum would be filled with hoax believers. They are becoming hard to find you see.

If you ignore the lunatic fringe like David Icke's Forum, there are a couple of other sites where things are generally fairly polite.

There's a thread here - Challenge to Jack White - with discussion of the ongoing debate on the Education Forum where a couple of high-profile hoax believers, Jack White and Jim Fetzer, are taking part.

Unexplained Mysteries has a long-running Apollo hoax thread, but none of the hoax believers there have much of a clue as to how things work on Earth, let alone in space.

Most of them appear to have retreated to YouTube, where they can control anyone trying to respond to their arguments, and the sort of detailed explanation that is really needed is limited by the allowed length of comments.

[ka9q]

Sept 11, 2010 16:18:48 GMT -4 yuriarmstrong said:

Yes, I thought this forum would be filled with hoax believers. They are becoming hard to find you see.

Check out Youtube. You won't have to look very long.

[gwiz]

Sept 11, 2010 15:43:48 GMT -4 yuriarmstrong said:

Is there a standard of evidence strong enough that would change your minds that Apollo was not hoaxed?

No. Duane Damon on the Education Forum has just given an example of this. In the context of the C-rock photo, he posted

Conspiracy researcher Ralph Rene discovered that fact many years ago when he asked NASA to send him a copy of their "C" rock photo, but they switched the ID numbers, so they could send him a different faked photo instead of the one he asked for.

Then months later, when he finally did receive the correct photo, the "C" has been purposely airbrushed out.

He got a reply showing that, contrary to his claim, there was no C in the photo as originally released a few days after the mission, so NASA didn't need months to airbrush it out. Did he withdraw his claim?

Wel, I'm glad to see that somebody at NASA's quality control knew to airbrush out that "C" for that magazine cover.

He then goes on to give similar treatment to all refutations of his claims about LRO photos. In other words, no matter what the evidence, he will explain it away. He will never change his mind.