Was the 1969 moon landing Real or Fake.

Yup, the room for doubt here is about as high as the room for doubt we have for evolution or gravity.

I like to say the room for doubt is there, but it is infinitesimally small. Or lim(x->0)

@Maroxad: Yeah, that's kind of my point. If there was no longer any room for doubt in science, then it would cease to be science. So the room for doubt always needs to be there, no matter how small the probability. But that's something for trained scientists to question, not random laymen who have no expertise in science.

Regarding the Moon landings, the probability of it being faked is way less than 1% for sure. Even if conspiracy theorists believe America faked the video footage, we have third-party scientific evidence that there was human presence on the Moon:

Third-party evidence for Apollo Moon landings

Space missions from other nations, not just America, have demonstrated corroborating evidence for the Apollo missions.

While that's technically true, by that logic you could say the same thing about literally any point in history and invalidate the concept of reality, just because no events in the past can be 100% proven.

I could say that the day November 12 2023 was a time-skipped day and it never actually happened. You can't 100% prove it that is a false statement, because you can't bring it to the present to demonstrate it.

Yet I'm pretty sure enough observational and empirical evidence exists to show that the likelihood yesterday did exist is so close to 100%, that it's not really worth considering the probability that it didn't.

Conspiracies like this should have the same level of non-consideration. Until such a time as actual solid evidence can show something contrary to common sense, the likelihood of their truth is so low as to not be worth validation as a possibility.

@Vaasman: Sure, I can see how that can be misconstrued by tinfoil hat conspiracy theorists to peddle all kinds of insane conspiracy theories, from the Flat Earth to flying saucers.

For practical reasons, I can see why many would argue that we should dismiss all conspiracy theories and not give them any credence. But at the same time, we should be careful not to turn science into a dogma. It should always be open to questioning.

However, the people doing the questioning should at least be qualified to do so. It doesn't make any sense for some random Internet influencer who has no qualifications in a field to be peddling conspiracy theories in that field. It's the job of a scientist to question scientific theories and facts, not a random layperson with no science qualifications.

It isn't about science being dogma.

We shouldn't give credence to conspiracy theories because none of the inquiries and skepticism they proclaim to hold are made in good faith. They stem from predetermined beliefs and biases predicated on ignorance, institutional distrust, contrarianism, intellectual dishonesty, and should be discounted as such, because if you dignify them in addressment, you legitimize what drives them.

Conspiracy theories are borne from a psychological issue and need, not from an epistemological or evidentiary one. Facts and evidence will never convince these people, whether it be about 9/11, the moon landing, JFK, election denialism, whatever it may be. You can shove explicit evidence in their face and they'll deny it, because evidence and fact is not the problem. The individual's psychological need is.

I think this is why sometimes the "intellectual elite" can sometimes appear arrogant, among other reasons.

These levels of "non-consideration" are so low they should be dismissed outright, because the second you comment "oh well of course there's a 0.000000000000000000000001% chance..." the crazies will pounce on it.

So they just say "no" or "you're stupid to believe it" or something along those lines because their mind is rooted in rational thought, whereas the mind of the conspiracy theorists is rooted in belief. They want to believe that minute chance is actually likely without even considering all the variables and perfect conditions necessary for it to happen.

@MirkoS77:

That's kind of the point of my last paragraph:

This is how you weed out bad-faith actors from good-faith actors. Scientific facts should be open to questioning... from actual qualified scientists, publishing their findings ideally in peer-reviewed journals. The online influencers peddling conspiracy theories are not scientists, so they're just talking out of their arse and in no position to be doubting the work of scientists who know what they're talking about.

Science and history are two different things.

Right, which is why I excluded that paragraph. The main bulk of CT's suspicions and arguments are based on such fundamental misunderstandings of basic science that it would never get to the point of being peer reviewed, but can be dismissed before it'd ever reach the point of any significant scientific discipline or those trained in it. Such extremes are not required.

But it's aside the point: that it wouldn't make a difference to these people regardless in the debunking was placed in the hands of good faith actors. That would in fact only make it worse. They'd simply attribute experts and their determinations to their inherent distrust of institutionalism, those in positions of power, the illuminati and scheming shadowy figures behind the scenes pulling the levers of global politics, etc.....which is where conspiracy theories come from.

Point being: you can't use good-faith actors focusing on evidence and facts to address bad-faith ones focusing on distrust and emotional/psychological causes, because those causes will discount those facts and evidence before it even comes to bear. It's true for election denialism, it's true for the moon landing.

@MirkoS77: I get the point you're making. That was more-or-less my own position a couple years ago. If academic experts debate with crackpot conspiracy theorists, it's often a waste of time and can even backfire by legitimizing the conspiracy theorists. I understand that very well.

However, ever since the COVID pandemic, conspiracy theorists have become increasingly influential. They've built up very large followings, whereas actual scientists can't pull large audiences like that. While it was easy to ignore and dismiss conspiracy theorists before, it's pretty hard to ignore them nowadays.

I think the big psychological issue at play here is the distrust of government, not necessarily the distrust of science. This is why scientific institutions have traditionally been kept separate from government, so scientific research can be conducted without political interference. The CT crowd are doubting the Moon landings because they distrust the US government, hence why it's important to mention that it's corroborated by third-party evidence from outside the US (including enemy nations).

@Jag85: "The CT crowd are doubting the Moon landings because they distrust the US government, hence why it's important to mention that it's corroborated by third-party evidence from outside the US (including enemy nations)."

This is a point I routinely bring up when I get into it with these nutters. If the moon landing was faked, enemy nations would know and it would be the perfect ammo to discredit the US.

Now some of them are reaching hard and are trying to say the USSR and US were in on the fake.

@statisticalpc: I haven't been following the Moon landing conspiracies... But who actually believes the USA and USSR were in on the faked Moon landings? I haven't seen the CT crowd take it that far yet.

@Jag85: I haven't seen a unified statement from them, but I've spoken with a few individuals who believe the Bolsheviks are secretly in charge of the United States and that was their "evidence" that the Soviet Union was in on it.

The conspiracy rabbit hole goes to places I probably couldn't imagine even if I was strung out on PCP.

His point is that unlike mathematicians; scientists and historians do not have the privilege of (mathematical) proof, they only have evidence. That is why he didn't mention mathematical facts. But this tiny window for doubt does not invalidate these historical events or historical facts at all, in fact, having room for doubt or falsifiability is CRUCIAL to anything scientifically related. And is one of the ways we distinguish pseudo sciences from real sciences.

Unfortunately, tinfoil hatters use this tiny window, exaggerate them, and try to use sciences honesty as a weapon against it. If you do mention the limitations of your evidence they might just think that you literally refuted your own argument, call you an idiot and block you on Twitter (speaking from experience here).

But the fact is, these cranks would need exceptional evidence to prove that vaccines cause autism, evolution isn't real, climate change isn't anthropogenic, the moon landing was staged, COVID originated from a lab or that Jordan B. Peterson isn't a quack.

Of course it was real and it's not even worth discussing. It's one of the many conspiracy theories that have occupied a lot of people's heads, and it's actually one the the more benign ones. Like someone else noted we used to just laugh at those idiots, but now they managed to make it to legitimate discussions. I mean, not really, but a lot of normal people make the mistake of arguing with conspiracy theorists, making them, and their loser followers, feel worthy. It works the same as the basic right wing vote fishing strategy - you may be a loser but your vote counts the same as everyone else's, so let's **** things up because, hey, we can.

I agree, but disagree it was Covid, but instead the rise of Trumpism that has proliferated disinformation, CTs, and institutional distrust to the degree it's gotten. Since even before his rise to the presidency, Trump has been incessantly vomiting up his delusions and attacking and undermining anything he deems an authority so he can substitute whatever narrative he invents that advantages him and his interests in their place. He couldn't care less as to the broader ramifications, hell, I doubt he's even astute enough to be cognizant of them.

We see the results. Not only government, but institutional and distrust of the elites (which, unfortunately, science falls under) are near at all-time highs. It's no surprise when a demagogic CT gains a platform of such power and influence that they hold such anchor.

@MirkoS77: Distrust of the government and political elites is a very rational position to hold, one that many academics hold. However, the difference with much of the CT crowd is that they distrust even academics, not just the government. In their worldview, academics are in cahoots with the government. In reality, most academic institutions such as universities have been independent from the government since their inception. So it's just an excuse to dismiss any academics debunking their theories.

lol. the moon is like 240,000 miles away, not 26,000. if you're going to jump on board a crazy conspiracy, at least get your basic fucking facts right..

@comp_atkins: Ha! I didn't make it that far into the video the first time I watched it.

"At 26,000 miles away traveling at 500mph (cause thats how fast jets fly) it would have taken like 50hrs to get up on that bitch. Shiiiiiit, it only took them 30 mins."

>.>

The top speed of the Apollo 11 ship was recorded at over 25,000 miles per hour. Some of the CT crowd might find that hard to believe since it wouldn't be possible on Earth. However, this is in outer space. You can't reach such a speed on Earth because of strong gravity and air resistance. There's far less gravity and no air resistance in outer space, so there's nothing stopping the ship from reaching over 25,000 mph.

When the vaccines first came out, people were going around telling people "if you don't get vaccinated you can transmit covid to others, if you get vaccinated you can't spread the virus"

I told people that wasn't true, it doesn't stop transmission, I've never been attacked by so many people. Everyone acted like I was a crazy conspiracist anti vaxxer just because I was telling them a basic truth.

It gets even weirder, we had politicians saying you couldn't pass the virus if your vaccinated, you had people on mainstream news saying if you got vaccinated you can't give the virus to others.

So many people were blatantly lying about the effectiveness of the vaccine, especially in the first 6 months of it being available... alot of people seem memory holed, like they don't remember this time at all, but I remember it very clearly.

Turned out I wasn't a conspiracy theorist at all for saying this, I was correct, but most people were just listening to the news and TV and calling me a liar because some fat head told them on TV they won't pass covid to others if they get vaccinated.

It's 2 guys cracking up making jokes and watching the moon landing footage on a YouTube channel

@MirkoS77, @Jag85

My take on this is at a more fundamental level. I think we live in an era where technology, politics, pop culture and society in general has trained an entire generation of people to expect certitude and instant results, see everything in terms of simplistic and binary black-and-white, while fearing and distrusting uncertainty and delays.

Unfortunately, that's not how science or reality works. Science is an continual process that refines and improves itself over time, and anyone who knows a thing about Quantum Mechanics knows that this universe runs on probability. Quick results requires mountains of hard work behind the scenes and certitude doesn't actually exist; only overwhelming probability.

Add on top the influence of the internet, which gives people access to almost unlimited information at their fingertips but does not adequately equip them to interpret and parse that information critically, and you have the Dunning-Kruger Brigade who think they know better than people who studied these topics all their lives just because they "researched" it for 5 minutes on YouTube.

@sargentd: I never once heard someone (credible) say that the COVID-19 vaccines will "stop the spread". Not once. I was told the COVID-19 vaccine would minimize the impacts if you caught it. "Herd Immunity" is what the vaccine aimed to accomplish.

Regarding these statements:

"I told people that wasn't true, it doesn't stop transmission, I've never been attacked by so many people. Everyone acted like I was a crazy conspiracist anti vaxxer just because I was telling them a basic truth.

It gets even weirder, we had politicians saying you couldn't pass the virus if your vaccinated, you had people on mainstream news saying if you got vaccinated you can't give the virus to others."

In an attempt to not come across as insulting: It is quite easy for most of the population outside of the scientific community to conflate, misinterpret, rearrange and not understand definitions. Most of the population does not exist inside of the scientific community. That includes newscasters, politicians, pundits, propagandists, Donald Trump, etc.

Just idiots trying to feel special by being in the minority denying reality, along with the usual anti-USA shit (denying American achievements is anti American, just like denying American problems is not patriotism).

Don't forget fauci, head guy at the NIH

@statisticalpc: the most ridiculous conspiracy theory I can think of in recent years is that Covid 19 came from a wet market and not the Coronavirus lab in Wuhan.

Again, he's speaking to the lowest common denominator. The science behind vaccines is to build your body's efficiency at fighting off a given virus (using antibodies). Antibodies are created inside your system by being exposed to a virus. Being "immune" means your body is able to quickly identify the virus and attack and destroy it before you suffer the symptoms. Immunity is not a forcefield.

I imagine his statements are based around the timeline a given vaccinated body's exposure to the virus and its ability to destroy the virus before coming in contact with another person.

@sargentd: "the most ridiculous conspiracy theory I can think of in recent years is that Covid 19 came from a wet market and not the Coronavirus lab in Wuhan."

Has either scenario been proven yet? I wouldn't put it past the Chinese to use a wet market to test a newly engineered virus, but I will not say one way or the other without facts.

take off the tin foil hat, it didn't come from a wet market it came from the Corona virus lab in Wuhan

@statisticalpc: Good conversation

@sargentd: Agreed 💯. One professor told in a video interview that NASA couldn't go to the moon because it lost the technology to land on the moon again. Wtf?

Moon landing is the biggest lie by NASA and the lying US government, and most noobs have fallen hook, line, and winker to the charade.

Vaccine is also a government conspiracy to keep people sick. I never got vaccinated and never got sick during and after the peak COVID period. Most people who I know who got the jab became sick and nearly died.

I don't even vaccinate my two kids, and they they are happy, energetic, and get sick less often than the noobs who get their kids vaccinated.

Whenever someone preaches me the vaccine mantra, I tell them to stop wasting my time and get lost.

I would argue anti-intellectualism and anti-science in the US dates back to the beginning of the country. Even back 200 years ago, there was a medical freedom movement. With one of the founding fathers, Dr Benjamin Rush being a staunch advocate for medical freedom and wanting to enshrine medical freedom in the constitution. This however this movement was more or less hushed down following following the Civil War.

While Benjamin Rush had good intents no doubt. His vision, and his ideals came to be more or less exploited in the early 20th century. Once the issue surrounding slavery had more or less been settled. A movement lead by homeopaths, osteopaths, eclectics medicine practitioners and adherents of the Christian Science movement revived his message and medical movement, albeit for nefarious purposes. As in, legitimize their pseudoscientific methods and scams.

Of course, the success of vaccines made the movement really hard to rally behind, so for most of the 20th century they really lacked any real cause. Several dangerous diseases were effectively wiped out, this all changed with that paper published in the Lancet which linked autism to vaccinations. The messaging of the movement changed, from medical freedom to vaccines cause autism. And this became the rallying cry for a decade or so. But alas, the paper and science was so throroughly debunked and removed from the journal. That the anti-vax movement have more or less reverted back to the old message. One of medical freedom.

Right now the overwhelming majority of evidence is consistent with the virus being zoonotic in some way. With the Wet Market being a possible origin where this spread.

But you know how the tinfoil hatters are like. You give them an inch, and they take a mile.

Which is a damn shame, because we had a golden opportunity to discuss our relationship with food and medicine from COVID 19. But these conspiracy minded folks, turned it all into something ridiculous. It also sets a bad precedent for future incidents. As if scientists and physicians didn't have it bad enough already. Harassment among medical scientists and physicians is at an all time high. Now these poorly supported claims are thrown in the mix.

referring to owen who made the original statement. not the guys making fun of her. point stands though, if you're going to have an obviously controversial opinion on something, at least get the basic, BASIC level info right.

like saying 9/11 was faked, all 4 planes that hit the towers were actually secretly landed in canada.

I remember having a discussion with my flat earth coworker about the moon landing being fake, he was seriously like "how are space crafts supposed to fly through space if there's not even any air?"

let's not relitigate this.

@lamprey263:

Let's be fair, Earth being round was not common knowledge until... ...3rd Century BCE. Can't expect someone who's mentally stuck in the time the Seleucid Empire was still around to understand modern physics.

we need better trolls here.

this is just too blatant.

@comp_atkins: Hard to tell. Probably a troll, but there are people who sincerely believe that stupid nonsense.

Hell, I have gotten laughed at for citing medical papers and institutions. But his prose has to be satire.

Are you FUCKING high? The US sent 6 crewed missions to the moon between 1969 and 1972. Why go to the moon again?

It would be harder and require even more impossibly ridiculous feats and an even bigger conspiracy across people and countries all around the planet to fake the moon landing than it would be to simply land on the moon.

The reason we haven’t been back is because congress decided not to pay money for it, since “the US won the space race”.

Your either trolling or incredibly dumb.... which is it??

After coming back to this thread, I want to say this. Going to the Moon after hitting orbit in space can take 3/4 days of flight from Earth to the Moon is why I always believe NASA doesn't want to go back until we're able to develop faster ships to fly and not drifting space speeds. No, I'm not talking about FTL (Faster then Light) travel (though that has always been debate in science for centuries) but trying to bypass those limitations and better life support systems.

So if you want to see Humanity go further into the stars, well, we need better space ships that aren't limited in terms of flight, we need to go faster, not waiting days or months, (or even years) just to go from Earth to the Moon or Mars.

@sargentd: the answers to the poll are so loaded. It's like you are telling people what to answer.

@davillain: also, other than space x, progress in development of rockets have been painfully slow.

And unless starship is developed successfully, there won't be any rocket anywhere near the power of the Saturn v for a long time.

That is one of the main 2 reasons there are no space flights to the moon current.

The other is also very obvious: NASA used to be massively financed during the Apollo program.

That money is long gone and Saturn level rockets are way to expensive to support without that level of financing.

So unless starship succeeds and these kind of extremely large rockets become way cheaper, we won't be seeing missions like that for a long time.

What is interesting to me however, is how many of these libertarian identifying 'America First' types are lining up to be useful idiots for Putin, a foreign autocratic dictator. Undermining American freedoms and American strengths, in favor of the interests of foreign dictators.

I call them flag-thumpers. Much like how the Bible-thumpers distort the bible to suit a political agenda that is contrary to its message, the flag thumpers distort the spirit of America to undermine American ideals.

Anti-science and anti-empiricist ideas such as moon landing denial and COVID-woo, are to some extent funded by and supported by authoritarian regimes like Russia with the goal being to confound as opposed to convincing, and allegedly Iran and China too. Anti-science and opposition to the arts is also the tool of virtually every authoritarian, whether that happened in the Soviet Union, Germany, France, Arabia, Cambodia, Florida, China and Brazil.

The hypothesis that COVID came from a lab is overwhelmingly rejected by the scientific community. As the claims do not hold up to evidence, scrutiny or scientific rigour. The zoonotic origin is so overwhelmingly supported by evidence, so many existing studies woudl have to be wrong.

Furin cleavage sites naturally occur in Coronaviruses, these furin cleavage sites significantly increase transmissability. In fact, it is arguably these that allow coronaviruses to spread between humans.

https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.2214427119

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41564-021-00908-w

The fact of the matter is, After the original SARS-CoV outbreak back in 2002. China built Coronavirus labs in pretty much every chinese city. The reason: China due to a number of factors, is particularly vulnerable to Coronaviruses in particular. It is the same reason US doesnt invest too heavily in Tropical Viruses, nations tend to invest in the biggest regional threats. The evidence for a zoonotic origin is overwhelming it baffles me anyone can think otherwise,

The Wuhan Seafood market was the epicenter of the disease,

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35881010/

Very closely related Coronaviruses have been found in Japan and Cambodia

https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-03217-0

sls and starship are both more powerful than the saturn v iirc

artemis 1 has already orbited the moon, albeit unmanned.

https://www.youtube.com/live/CMLD0Lp0JBg?si=MpMTtXXOyJ2cAL1w&t=11811

@comp_atkins: sls has an estimated cost per launch of 2 billion. It's completely unsustainable.