For reference, I have already told them why the sky has no stars (it’s because of camera exposure, the moon surface is very reflective so lower exposure is used to not overexpose the image) and why the flag wasn’t drooping down (there was an extending arm in the stand to hold it upright, as a flag drooping down is a sad flag). I have also explained that the videos of the moon landing were upscaled/remastered when they asked why the video quality of the clips were so good.
Currently, their main argument is the fact that the U.S. were able to do the moon landing in the mid 20th century while are experiencing delays for the current moon mission. They argue that, if the moon landing could be done way back then, with modern technology, it should be possible to quickly get back to the moon. They also argue NASA could have just reused the same designs as the Apollo missions if they actually went to the moon.
I have argued that NASA’s budget is a fraction of what is used to be, and that the addition of new modern technologies introduces additional parts that could break and thus need to be tested. I have also mentioned that the Soviet Union would immediately call out the US if they faked the moon landing, and that samples of moon rocks were sent to Soviet scientists to study and verify. They insist that the Soviets were scared of what the US would do if they spoke out against a fake moon landing, which I didn’t agree with (given they were both nuclear superpowers)
They then argued that it’s impossible to tell whether the moon rocks are actually from the moon landing, they could be samples collected by rovers. I responded that no rovers had successfully collected moon rocks at the time, and then they switched to arguing that it’s impossible to verify the rocks are from the moon. I followed up by saying there are methods of doing that (through the composition of the rocks and such). They then asked how anybody knows what moon rocks look like if nobody else has been to the moon, and I got kind of stumped. I tried to explain that there are models to how the moon formed, how we know the rocks aren’t from Earth, satellites that map out the surface, etc., but they reiterated that no one can “prove” that they were from the moon without going there in the first place.
One interesting thing they also mentioned is that, if the US really did do a moon landing, why the Soviets (during cold war era) or Chinese (in modern era) didn’t do what they do best and copied their designs to land on the moon. Given that the US and China are having a new space race with the goal of being the first to establish a lunar base, they argue that China could just copy the Apollo program designs if the US really did do a moon landing.
To summarise, their main points/questions right now are: a) Explain why the US hasn’t gone back in so long, and why with modern technology it seems so difficult? (especially given that NASA has been experiencing numerous delays in the Artemis missions, that certainly hasn’t given them a good impression…) b) How do you verify moon rocks without having actually been on the moon? How did scientists figure out what a moon rock looks like? c) Why aren’t the old Apollo designs being reused for a moon landing? (by either the Americans or the Chinese)
They say that there isn’t strong evidence either side (but believes that it is false, saying that “we will see” once someone else lands on the moon)
And what other points can I bring up to definitively say, yes, the moon landing wasn’t faked?
edit:
Another thing, they also can’t believe that astronauts could bring and ride the little moon buggies. I am also partially interested in how that was achieved to be honest!
Ask them what type of evidence would convince them and go from there. If what they say is reasonable, present it. If not, then there’s nothing that will convince them
deleted by creator
can’t logic someone out of somewhere they didnt logic themselves in.
So first try to understand how your friend feels and what is really going on with them.
Gotta put this guy in a room with my high school astronomy teacher. He DESPISED moon landing conspiracy theorists. I still remember when he showed us a documentary about them and kept yelling at every person in it for believing this stuff.
Check out professor Dave on YouTube, he just made 2 long videos on the topic
2 Things:
-
They left a mirror at at least some of the landing sites, and we can bounce a laser off that mirror back to Earth. Proof that we were there.
-
They have sent probes up to circle the moon, and those probes photographed the sites. You can see lunar landers, abandoned gear, footprints, and the tracks from lunar rovers.
-
Velco them to a stiff board, tilt it so their head is reclined, cover their face with a rag, and pour Tang onto them until they acquiesce.
The reason we can’t build the same thing as before is because the tooling is all gone, the set up of tools used to make those parts no longer exists. Half of designing a large complex thing is setting up all the machinery to actually produce what you want, testing and checking and dialing everything in, verifying that what you’re getting out is with in tolerances and will fit together properly. Building test segments and measuring how the behave and then going back and readjusting all the tools to account for differences and altering the design to match what you can actually make. Also all the people who knew the ins and outs of the old designs and manufacturing processes to make them are retired (and probably have forgotten some stuff) or dead. Recreating those production lines, manufacturing methods, retesting and dialing it all in, it would be expensive and time consuming, more so than just building something new based on modern manufacturing techniques and using already produced parts.
And we have been doing that… but it’s not getting nearly the same level of funding the Apollo program had, nor the same level of political commitment. Between 1963 and 1971, nasa’s budget was on average double what it is today (accounting for inflation) and they were allowed to focus most of that on a single project for that whole 8 year period. Compare that to today where nasa has hundreds of different projects ( ISS, near earth science satellites, mars rovers, probes to asteroids and outer planets, Artemis) and their goals and plans get whiplashed about every 4 years each time the administration changes. Not to mention Boeing routinely running over budget and over time and forcing nasa to foot the bill for their fuck ups. Blue origin and space X are also behind schedule on their lander projects as well.
So why were we able to do it back then and can’t now? NASA got the funding they needed, got to focus most of it on a single project and got to make a long term plan and stick with it, and private companies were much less willing to screw them over for a quick buck.
you dont have ti provide anything, the weight of the proof is with the non believer :)
but okay lets go:
beyond all the obvious evidence:
the biggest evidence is around how difficult it would have been to stage it. how many people need to be bribed for eternal silence - this includes suppliers, ex workers, employees, crews, etc…why hasnt anyone admitted the lie in their deathbed?
what I am saying is that it is more difficult to stage this (successfully) than actually do the freakin thing.
Literally not worth arguing with a person that believes this. These kinds of beliefs aren’t rooted in logic or reality so you’re not going to change their mind.
I think the most convincing evidence that we did go to the moon has to do with the dynamics of the moon dust in the original Apollo footage. If you look at the footage you’ll see the dust gets kicked up pretty high, higher than what you’d expect given Earth’s gravity, and it falls at a slower rate too.
So the question is: if they faked this footage then how did they get the dust to behave like this?
One possible explanation is that the footage was filmed underwater. The issue with this, though, is this is not at all how you’d expect dust to behave underwater. (you can go to the beach, kick up a bunch of sand underneath the water and see for yourself).
Another possibility is suspension cables. I guess you could explain the astronauts perceived lower gravity with suspension cables, but for pieces of dust? You can’t have suspension cables for individual pieces of dust.
So the simplest explanation is that this footage really was actually taken on a lower gravity environment, such as the moon.
Oh that is a good bit of evidence!
If someone is denying the moon landing, I doubt pointing out the mechanics of dust particles in low-g environments will do the trick.
The strongest evidence is the fact that modern equipment can see the actual tracks the A11 astronauts left while hiking and driving on the moon.
If that’s not enough, it’s probably best to drop the matter. You can’t use evidence to convince someone who does not want to be convinced.
The strongest evidence is the fact that modern equipment can see the actual tracks the A11 astronauts left while hiking and driving on the moon.
The problem with this is that if you’re someone who thinks the moon landing is fake then you’re simply just going to dismiss this as yet another example of NASA propaganda. Because though those tracks are there, no one can actually see it for themselves (unless you happen to have a really high powered telescope, which is unlikely). The moon dust thing though, that’s something you can reason through and examine for yourself
Here are images of the moon’s surface where you can make out details like rover tracks.
Other countries took photos of the Apollo landing sites as well, including China.
The best ones so far were taken by the Indian Chandrayaan orbiters.
Really shows how deep this conspiracy goes ! :)
The Apollo missions were staged, that’s 100% a fact.
Jokes aside, yeah Soviets are the answer. If there was the slightest inkling that we faked it, they wouldn’t have come out to congratulate us.
Never accept the premise of assholes.
They’ve made the dumbass claim that the earth is flat, so it’s their job to prove it. All you have to do is reject every idiotic piece of faulty logic they cough up as stupid.
They made the claim, make them do all the lifting, then just be dismissive, and give them nothing that resembles frustration.
Point out that their theory can be completely ignored without consequences.
Tell them the landing was real, because if it wasn’t then how would the aliens on the dark side of the moon have told us not to come back?
(This is something my co worker unironically believes)
