Live data from Hacker News

Neil Armstrong's reply to a Moon landing skeptic

kottke.org

41–50 of 201 posts

Re: Neil Armstrong's reply to a Moon landing skeptic

#41

While we laugh at skeptics, often they serve a valuable purpose. Skeptics have often revolutionized our understanding of the universe. Like Galileo. We should be careful of unquestioningly believing "established" facts.

Do you really think lunar landing conspiracy theorists are going to "revolutionize our understanding of the universe"?

There is room for subtly in these arguments, it is not an all or nothing proposition of listen to everyone, or listen to no one.

Re: Neil Armstrong's reply to a Moon landing skeptic

#42

They would have you believe that the United States Government perpetrated a gigantic fraud on its citizenry. Well, it certainly wouldn’t be the first time that happened, by any government. The “Weapons of Mass Destruction” lie could be described using the exact same sentence, and that wasn’t even twenty years ago. Not defending the moon landing doubters, or conspiracy theorists in general, but: the proper response to…

The WMD claim had plenty of holes poked through it even at the time . There were constant stories making it clear the inspectors in Iraq were not finding anything, and whistle blowers like Valerie Plame who directly contradicted the White House claims. Today, less than twenty years later, it's no longer a question that there weren't any WMDs. The fraud Armstrong is pointing out isn't really comparable.

It’s a single example. The list of governmental frauds is as long as recorded history.

Re: Neil Armstrong's reply to a Moon landing skeptic

#43

While we laugh at skeptics, often they serve a valuable purpose. Skeptics have often revolutionized our understanding of the universe. Like Galileo. We should be careful of unquestioningly believing "established" facts.

There is a difference between, on one side, questioning one's understanding of the universe, which is how science works and progress and, on the other side, being unable to accept facts, which is where moon landing skeptics are.

Re: Neil Armstrong's reply to a Moon landing skeptic

#44

They would have you believe that the United States Government perpetrated a gigantic fraud on its citizenry. Well, it certainly wouldn’t be the first time that happened, by any government. The “Weapons of Mass Destruction” lie could be described using the exact same sentence, and that wasn’t even twenty years ago. Not defending the moon landing doubters, or conspiracy theorists in general, but: the proper response to…

Oh and didn't the WMD fraud come out internally ? Tell me one NASA or JPL scientist officially on the mission who is claiming that it was fake ? Stop being contrarian for the sake of it .

> Stop being contrarian for the sake of it .

That would eliminate the need for this website almost entirely.

Re: Neil Armstrong's reply to a Moon landing skeptic

#45

While we laugh at skeptics, often they serve a valuable purpose. Skeptics have often revolutionized our understanding of the universe. Like Galileo. We should be careful of unquestioningly believing "established" facts.

We don't laugh at skeptics who doubt something because they have evidence to the contrary. But to believe in a conspiracy that, as Armstrong writes, would require hundreds of thousands of people to lie, without any evidence at all, is delusional.

Re: Neil Armstrong's reply to a Moon landing skeptic

#46

What gets me most about these fools is they completely ignore how much such a huge fake job would cost. It would be so expensive that you could cut the budget in half and just...go to the moon.

Why would faking it with a soundstage and some actors in a room, and some small models, cost so much more? A big budget Hollywood film like James Bond Moonraker (1979) was 1/1000th the cost of the Apollo program, and with no famous actors/actresses, simpler script, TV quality, surely a fake would be cheaper than that?

If someone thought it was fake, they ought to be asking where the budget really went and whose pockets it lined.

Re: Neil Armstrong's reply to a Moon landing skeptic

#47

While we laugh at skeptics, often they serve a valuable purpose. Skeptics have often revolutionized our understanding of the universe. Like Galileo. We should be careful of unquestioningly believing "established" facts.

It’s true that we shouldn’t just follow dogmas, but skepticism isn’t about simply being contrarian. It’s about only accepting evidence based claims and scrupulously and accurately evaluating the evidence. Conspiracy theory types typically fail badly at this because they usually don’t actually know how to evaluate evidence.

Re: Neil Armstrong's reply to a Moon landing skeptic

#48

They would have you believe that the United States Government perpetrated a gigantic fraud on its citizenry. Well, it certainly wouldn’t be the first time that happened, by any government. The “Weapons of Mass Destruction” lie could be described using the exact same sentence, and that wasn’t even twenty years ago. Not defending the moon landing doubters, or conspiracy theorists in general, but: the proper response to…

The WMD claim had plenty of holes poked through it even at the time . There were constant stories making it clear the inspectors in Iraq were not finding anything, and whistle blowers like Valerie Plame who directly contradicted the White House claims. Today, less than twenty years later, it's no longer a question that there weren't any WMDs. The fraud Armstrong is pointing out isn't really comparable.

That's not the point though. If Aldrin's implicit argument is the US government would never try and defraud its citizen, then any example of such a fraud disproves him.

Re: Neil Armstrong's reply to a Moon landing skeptic

#49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The WMD claim had plenty of holes poked through it even at the time . There were constant stories making it clear the inspectors in Iraq were not finding anything, and whistle blowers like Valerie Plame who directly contradicted the White House claims. Today, less than twenty years later, it's no longer a question that there weren't any WMDs. The fraud Armstrong is pointing out isn't really comparable.

It’s a single example. The list of governmental frauds is as long as recorded history.

Again, you are conflating frauds and have't actually refuted the point in question: did we land on the moon or not?

Re: Neil Armstrong's reply to a Moon landing skeptic

#50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oh and didn't the WMD fraud come out internally ? Tell me one NASA or JPL scientist officially on the mission who is claiming that it was fake ? Stop being contrarian for the sake of it .

As I said, I’m not defending the moon landing doubters. But it seems obvious to me that the recent increase in conspiracy theories is a direct result of unethical institutional and government actions coming to light.

It's actually the result of a natural civilization cycle where falling living standards and increased intra-elite competition and conflict erodes the public trust in its institutions and leads to political unrest. America is now in the thick of it (starting around 1970 and culminating in the last decade), and so trust will remain low and conspiracy theories high for years to come yet (not to mention the riots).

https://osf.io/preprints/socarxiv/7ahqn/

Post reply on HN