We landed on Mars... again? [Mod note post #1]

King Mob

Deleted User wrote: »

I genuinely had no idea that there were conspiracy theories about modern spaceflight. What a trip.

It's a pretty popular one. It mostly centers around claims like the above where the Challenger Crew are still alive.
Occasionally also an astronaut has a brain fart and says something that cranks can misinterpret to be evidence, like one guy saying "next door" when referring to Mission Control in Houston.

A lot of it is held up by the Flat Earther types cause they also have to believe all space missions are fake.

namloc1980

bfa1509 wrote: »

Oh I have plenty of evidence. Much of which I saved before it was mysteriously censored from the internet.

So any sign of all this evidence that you claim to have that the Mars landings are faked?

JJayoo

Parachute/heat shields/sky crane all crashed onto mars, fly tipping is gonna piss off the aliens

Dohnjoe

bfa1509 wrote: »

Oh I have plenty of evidence.

Good, I'd like to know what it is, but I suspect you don't have any because you have resorted to excuses and evading questions.

Now I will address any lurkers who are open minded and interested in the topic.

Translation: You want to engage with posters who will simply validate your extreme views instead of challenging them

Quantum Baloney

Always find it funny that people that all this space travel baloney at face value. It may be true, but you're a fool not to question it.

Dohnjoe

Quantum Baloney wrote: »

Always find it funny that people that all this space travel baloney at face value. It may be true, but you're a fool not to question it.

Which "space travel baloney" are you referring to exactly?

Hotblack Desiato

King Mob wrote: »

A lot of it is held up by the Flat Earther types cause they also have to believe all space missions are fake.

I wonder do any of them have satellite TV?

bfa1509

King Mob wrote: »

You have evidence, you just can't provide it?

Sure buddy. That've very believable...

I think it's clear to everyone you have no evidence.


A crank, not an investigative journalist. He did no investigating. His documentary is a collection of long debunk silly arguments.


Ok. So your evidence is that they faked a shuttle explosion. They went to the bother of building a fake shuttle and running a fake shuttle program for years before and after.
But they didn't bother to change the appearance of their fake victims, or even change their names. Or even just you know, shoot them.

That's ridiculous.

Why do you think this argument will convince anyone or do anything other than make your position look silly?

Dohnjoe wrote: »

Good, I'd like to know what it is, but I suspect you don't have any because you have resorted to excuses and evading questions.



Translation: You want to engage with posters who will simply validate your extreme views instead of challenging them

It's incredible how quickly one or both of you respond to posts in the conspiracy forum, it's almost as if threads are constantly monitored so you can flood them with posts and prevent any meaningful conversation. You are either die-hard NASA fanboys or you have some ulterior motive against conspiracies being discussed online. Which is it? I find both equally tiresome


Of course, when I present solid evidence that the moon landing is faked you attack the integrity of the character who created it. Very mature, King Mob, just your style.

Have you even watched the documentary? How can you explain the clear staging of the moon landing footage?

Also another thing I've noticed is your overuse of the word "silly". A very common technique for influencing the reader to distract them from the facts. You plant this idea in people's heads that if they could be so "silly" to believe such a thing then they are very childish indeed. How about you let the reader decide for themselves if it's so ridiculous?

Dohnjoe

Extraordinary claim
No evidence
No explanation
Avoids questions
Plays the victim card <--- We are currently here
Accuses others of being shills

EyesClosed

bfa1509 wrote: »

It's incredible how quickly one or both of you respond to posts in the conspiracy forum, it's almost as if threads are constantly monitored so you can flood them with posts and prevent any meaningful conversation. You are either die-hard NASA fanboys or you have some ulterior motive against conspiracies being discussed online. Which is it? I find both equally tiresome


Of course, when I present solid evidence that the moon landing is faked you attack the integrity of the character who created it. Very mature, King Mob, just your style.

Have you even watched the documentary? How can you explain the clear staging of the moon landing footage?

Also another thing I've noticed is your overuse of the word "silly". A very common technique for influencing the reader to distract them from the facts. You plant this idea in people's heads that if they could be so "silly" to believe such a thing that they are very childish indeed. How about you let the reader decide for themselves if it's so ridiculous?

What evidence did you provide?

namloc1980

bfa1509 wrote: »

It's incredible how quickly one or both of you respond to posts in the conspiracy forum, it's almost as if threads are constantly monitored so you can flood them with posts and prevent any meaningful conversation. You are either die-hard NASA fanboys or you have some ulterior motive against conspiracies being discussed online. Which is it? I find both equally tiresome


Of course, when I present solid evidence that the moon landing is faked you attack the integrity of the character who created it. Very mature, King Mob, just your style.

Have you even watched the documentary? How can you explain the clear staging of the moon landing footage?

Also another thing I've noticed is your overuse of the word "silly". A very common technique for influencing the reader to distract them from the facts. You plant this idea in people's heads that if they could be so "silly" to believe such a thing that they are very childish indeed. How about you let the reader decide for themselves if it's so ridiculous?

Bart Sibrel is a joker to be honest. To the gullible it all seems convincing but scratch beneath the surface and his claims are just ludicrous. He's claimed that the moon photos are clearly staged because the shadows show multiple light sources and the shadows don't fall in the same direction. This is the most easily debunked of the numerous ridiculous claims he makes. Anyone with a pair of eyes knows how sun shadows work. But not Bart and his followers it seems.

bfa1509

Dohnjoe wrote: »

Extraordinary claim
No evidence
No explanation
Avoids questions
Plays the victim card <--- We are currently here
Accuses others of being shills

Identify and confirm highly emotional attachment to topic
Question OP's mental state
Flood thread with meaningless, repetitive posts
Ignore evidence provided
Ignore questions
Thread neutralised <-- No, we are currently here
Move to next popular conspiracy thread, Repeat

namloc1980

bfa1509 wrote: »

Identify and confirm highly emotional attachment to topic
Question OP's mental state
Flood thread with meaningless, repetitive posts
Ignore evidence provided
Ignore questions
Thread neutralised <-- No, we are currently here
Move to next popular conspiracy thread, Repeat

Except you haven't yet provided the evidence piece, just the usual tactic of referring to a YouTube video. You claimed you had plenty of evidence but none has been provided yet. I wonder why?

JJayoo

The whole 'man hasn't gone to the moon/space' conspiracy is pretty boring.

At least the ' haven't returned to the moon because they saw/found something' conspiracy has a bit of bite to it.

Personally I believe it's made off cheese and has giant alien mice rampaging around.

Dohnjoe

bfa1509 wrote: »

Identify and confirm highly emotional attachment to topic
Question OP's mental state
Flood thread with meaningless, repetitive posts
Ignore evidence provided
Ignore questions
Thread neutralised <-- No, we are currently here
Move to next popular conspiracy thread, Repeat

I'm simply asked you to back up your claim that the Mars landing was "faked", something you haven't done yet. I don't think you are able to provide any details because you don't have any.

Claim: Perseverance landing on Mars is "fake"
Details: zero
Timeline: none
Evidence: zero

Not looking good so far

King Mob

bfa1509 wrote: »

It's incredible how quickly one or both of you respond to posts in the conspiracy forum, it's almost as if threads are constantly monitored so you can flood them with posts and prevent any meaningful conversation. You are either die-hard NASA fanboys or you have some ulterior motive against conspiracies being discussed online. Which is it? I find both equally tiresome

I am a die hard space fan. I'm also interested in conspiracy theories.

It's very funny that we keep being accused of "ulterior motives" yet you guys never elaborate on what those are.

bfa1509 wrote: »

Of course, when I present solid evidence that the moon landing is faked you attack the integrity of the character who created it. Very mature, King Mob, just your style.

But you haven't presented any evidence for anything.
And yes Bart Sibeal is a conspiracy crank, not an investigive journalist.

Also he's the guy who cornered Buzz Aldrin, called him a lair and a coward and got a well deserved pop in the face for it.

bfa1509 wrote: »

Have you even watched the documentary? How can you explain the clear staging of the moon landing footage?

Yes I've seen the documentary.
There isn't any "clear staging" of the moon landing.

Your boy makes the claim that the Van Allen belts would have made the missions impossible.
In the documentary he never provides any numbers for this claim.
So could you please tell us how much radiation someone might receive if they went through the belts? How much is a lethal dose? Please also provide a source for these numbers.

If you can't provide this, please don't dodge and avoid, just admit you can't.

bfa1509 wrote: »

Also another thing I've noticed is your overuse of the word "silly". A very common technique for influencing the reader to distract them from the facts. You plant this idea in people's heads that if they could be so "silly" to believe such a thing then they are very childish indeed. How about you let the reader decide for themselves if it's so ridiculous?

But suggesting that all space missions are faked is silly.
You haven't presented any facts to be distracted from.

I'm allowed to express my opinion unfortunately.
If you want to influence people away from the idea that it's silly you're going to have to stop whinging about how mean we are and actually present evidence.

King Mob

bfa1509 wrote: »

Identify and confirm highly emotional attachment to topic
Question OP's mental state
Flood thread with meaningless, repetitive posts
Ignore evidence provided
Ignore questions
Thread neutralised <-- No, we are currently here
Move to next popular conspiracy thread, Repeat

But no one has questioned your mental state.
You haven't provided any evidence at all.
None of your questions have been ignored.

The only one who has done any of those things is yourself.
You've questioned other posters motives.
You've ignored tons of questions and evidence.

And what do you mean by "thread neutralised" exactly?

bfa1509

bfa1509 wrote: »

It's incredible how quickly one or both of you respond to posts in the conspiracy forum, it's almost as if threads are constantly monitored so you can flood them with posts and prevent any meaningful conversation. You are either die-hard NASA fanboys or you have some ulterior motive against conspiracies being discussed online. Which is it? I find both equally tiresome


Of course, when I present solid evidence that the moon landing is faked you attack the integrity of the character who created it. Very mature, King Mob, just your style.

Have you even watched the documentary? How can you explain the clear staging of the moon landing footage?

Also another thing I've noticed is your overuse of the word "silly". A very common technique for influencing the reader to distract them from the facts. You plant this idea in people's heads that if they could be so "silly" to believe such a thing then they are very childish indeed. How about you let the reader decide for themselves if it's so ridiculous?

It is absolutely sad, indeed. Worse, it's not just a silly passing interest of theirs; they've both been at it for many years :pac: (I actually couldn't believe that at first, but it's true). One must have little going on in their life for this to occupy so much of their time.

I'd be curious as to what causes/drives such behavior on a psychological level. I sensed passive agressiveness, and projection of insecurity/inferiority from the very beginning. KingMob, in particular, gets very insecure when I've made any jokes about him, which is telling.

Imagine their conversations with anyone they might happen to spend time with in person:

"Hey, why are you constantly on that forum"?
"I'm interested in conspiracies.."
"Oh really, what conspiracies do you subscribe to"?
"None of them. They're all silly nonsense"
"Eh, okayyyy..."

It's all stranger than the strangest of conspiracies I'd honestly feel sorry for them if it weren't such a nuisance and dragging the threads down. Unfortunately, there's nothing you can do but ignore, like many of us already have. These guys are in for the long haul.

robinph

Have the USSR ever disputed that the moon landings happened? Have the USA ever disputed that USSR got to Mars and the moon first? Have the USA or Russia disputed that China landed on the moon?

What is the purpose of faking a rover landing on Mars?

King Mob

robinph wrote: »

Have the USSR ever disputed that the moon landings happened? Have the USA ever disputed that USSR got to Mars and the moon first? Have the USA or Russia disputed that China landed on the moon?

Pretty much never. There was one Russian official a while back who made some sly remarks around "confirming if the Americans went" or some such.
Other than that neither Russia or America or any other country or agency has suggested that any space missiin has been faked.

In fact they did a lot of cross confirmation. For example the soil samples retrieved by the Russia Luna program were checked against the Apollo samples since they were made available to scientists from all countries.

Generally when confronted with this issue, conspiracy theorists ignore it and pretend they didn't see it.
Otherwise the claim is that the Americans and Russians were in it together for some reason.
Or if it's one of the flat earth folks, it's cause the entire world is under the control of a sinister satanic cabal who are dedicated to making people think the world is round.

robinph wrote: »

What is the purpose of faking a rover landing on Mars?

Apparently, spending billions on making fake rovers, probes, rockets, launch pads and other infrastructure, then hiring and training thousands of actors and fake experts and also bribing all the earth's scientists and paying for the department to keep all of this running in secret is part of an elaborate scam to get money out of the government.

Dohnjoe

robinph wrote: »

Have the USSR ever disputed that the moon landings happened? Have the USA ever disputed that USSR got to Mars and the moon first? Have the USA or Russia disputed that China landed on the moon?

What is the purpose of faking a rover landing on Mars?

Was it just this one that was faked? faked how? were other Mars landings faked, if so which ones and how can we tell? what about the orbiters are they also faked? how have all the world's scientists, experts, international space agencies, foreign intelligence agencies all been fooled?

So many questions that will be evaded or unanswered for obvious reasons.

robinph

robinph wrote: »

Have the USSR ever disputed that the moon landings happened? Have the USA ever disputed that USSR got to Mars and the moon first? Have the USA or Russia disputed that China landed on the moon?

What is the purpose of faking a rover landing on Mars?

Just my own thoughts on this, is it the case no one will out the other as it keeps all programmes running and solvent, (lots of money involved in this, government and military funding).

I can't prove or disprove moon or mars landings, we take it for granted that the people working in these programmes have the best of intentions and only want to further the understanding of what is life for all humanity.

I'm a sceptic anyway find it very hard to trust anything.

robinph

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Just my own thoughts on this, is it the case no one will out the other as it keeps all programmes running and solvent, (lots of money involved in this, government and military funding).

I can't prove or disprove moon or mars landings, we take it for granted that the people working in these programmes have the best of intentions and only want to further the understanding of what is life for all humanity.

I'm a sceptic anyway find it very hard to trust anything.

Except the primary reason for the USSR and USA missions back in the day was for propaganda purposes and to show who had the biggest willy/ rockets. If either superpower could have saved some money on their own projects by being able to prove that the other was faking it they would have jumped at the chance.

Any opportunity to say the other guy was lying would have been infinitely preferable to blowing dogs, monkeys and people up in stupidly expensive and unreliable missiles.

King Mob

robinph wrote: »

Except the primary reason for the USSR and USA missions back in the day was for propaganda purposes and to show who had the biggest willy/ rockets.

It should be pointed out that this actually a big driver in the space race. A lot of the technology was derived from and funneled back into ICBM research among other military applications.
So if one or both were faking it, there'd be no point to the space race in the first place.

Similarly, there'd be no point in stopping it. Why wouldn't Russia just say they also landed someone on the moon? And then make the race for a moon base or to go to Mars.

It's not possible that the governments wouldn't know. If untrained amateurs with no idea of science or engineering could figure it out, so could the Russians.

robinph

robinph wrote: »

Except the primary reason for the USSR and USA missions back in the day was for propaganda purposes and to show who had the biggest willy/ rockets. If either superpower could have saved some money on their own projects by being able to prove that the other was faking it they would have jumped at the chance.

Any opportunity to say the other guy was lying would have been infinitely preferable to blowing dogs, monkeys and people up in stupidly expensive and unreliable missiles.

But thats what i'm trying to say "that they wont rat each other out as it kept the money rolling into these programmes" as per what you say the cold war, it was profitable for both sides to not say anything eg. (the military)
Feed the monster so to speak.

biobot

I regurgitate the news wrote: »

How do they have the technology to go to Mars but they don't have the technology to go to the moon anymore because they destroyed it

What was the name of that filim...?

King Mob

Deleted User wrote: »

But thats what i'm trying to say "that they wont rat each other out as it kept the money rolling into these programmes" as per what you say the cold war, it was profitable for both sides to not say anything eg. (the military)
Feed the monster so to speak.

But why would they be rolling money into these programmes when they get nothing out of it?

Why not rat the other guy out, have him lose prestige and then you can spend your money on other more useful stuff?

Dohnjoe

Deleted User wrote: »

Just my own thoughts on this, is it the case no one will out the other as it keeps all programmes running and solvent, (lots of money involved in this, government and military funding).

The entire Cold war was based on paranoia and suspicion. Both sides watched each other like hawks, there were vast spy networks, all space launches and missions were tracked by the other side, hundreds of thousands of employees were involved on either side. There's never been any leaks or evidence indicating missions were "faked".

The notion that e.g. the moon landings were faked is simply a fantasy constructed by individuals not based on any credible evidence, like the flat-earth theory.

I can't prove or disprove moon or mars landings, we take it for granted that the people working in these programmes have the best of intentions and only want to further the understanding of what is life for all humanity.

There's no credible evidence of any alternative happening. So why would you be "on the fence" about it?

richardkeiths

The same nut jobs who claim the moon landings were faked more than likely are sceptics about vaccines and the origins of Covid 19.

Conspiracy theorists come from a lack of control. These individuals are usually uneducated so thinking they know something that the mainstream public dont helps them compensate for their inferiority.

robinph

[Deleted User] wrote: »

But thats what i'm trying to say "that they wont rat each other out as it kept the money rolling into these programmes" as per what you say the cold war, it was profitable for both sides to not say anything eg. (the military)
Feed the monster so to speak.

It wasn't profitable to blow up massive rockets and waste tonnes of resources during the Cold War. Whilst it might be true that the military had some power in government in the USSR, for the USA the government would have cancelled the waste of money at any chance if they thought they could win the war by just proving that the USSR was faking it. Whilst the military had power in USSR, they didn't have money.