Lessons of the "Fake Moon Flight" Myth (corrosive media culture alert)

The Skeptical Enquirer ^ | March, 2003 | James Oberg

[Mamzelle]

NASA exploited a celebrity culture for attention and funds--but it eventually stopped working. It was also personally hard on the celebrities involved--some managed more gracefully than others.

One site I enjoy is the Jet Propulsion Laboratory from Cal Tech. No dream has ended, but the celebrity worship ought to. Try getting some inspiration there. Much more reliable than worrying about a few nuts making names for themselves off a "hoax."

[general_re]

Tell me about it - I'm sort of bitter about the virus-like spread of liberal rhetorical tactics far beyond their originators. You know, where you throw out words like "racist" or "atheist" and pretend that this is somehow a refutation of the argument being presented. So much for logic and reasoned discourse, I guess....

[Mamzelle]

In the context of this discussion of the hoax, the Skeptical Enquirer ought to own its ideology and agenda, rather to engage in threats upon having it exposed.

Not to mention, the non-profits who promote this argument (that this hoax poses a threat that needs debunking) are then promoted *by* that argument.

[general_re]

In the context of the discussion of the hoax, one who has an actual argument ought to be able to present it on its own merits, rather than relying on innuendo.

[Timesink]

While I'm loathe to boil down the myriad accomplishments of NASA in the Mercury/Apollo era down to just a couple of lines, sometimes you have to in order to show the stupid just how stupid they are. With that said: Once you've accomplished the following, just how "hard" is it to go to the moon?

1) Learn how to get objects into space, period. Proof: You've got a satellite dish, don't ya?

2) Learn how to keep oxygen inside a tin can. Go take away that big cylinder that Grandma keeps dragging around with her and see how long she can keep breathing.

3) Learn to aim. Here's a compass. You figure it out.

The end.

[theDentist]

More likely 1/10th of a percent of the Population.

[Darksheare]

Don't forget those who willingly WANT to be deceived.

[Mamzelle]

Please--you entered into this discussion with copious ad hominem. Embittered exwife, yaddayadda. Not that I mind, but this lofty attitude doesn't exactly jib with that.

This cheesy publication has been waved in its "hard copy" form under my nose a number of times, by an atheist enthused with some debunking of faith. Seen it and read it.

Kind of silly, considering that atheism is a faith, too. The truly skeptical would be the agnostic.

My argument is that this is hoax generated and nurtured by those who who claim most to want to debunk it. L'raison d'etre. L'raison to publish, get face time, and distract from genuine exploration.

[capitan_refugio]

I am a "lumper," not a "splitter."

[Darksheare]

Ah, okers.
The "Please deceive me" crowd would have been included in your original wording.

Sometimes I think they run New York.
After all, this state had 14 years of Mario M Cuomo.
*chuckle*

[general_re]

Please--you entered into this discussion with copious ad hominem.

Please - you reap what you sow. You lost any claim to the moral high-ground on that score a long, long time ago.

My argument is that this is hoax generated and nurtured by those who who claim most to want to debunk it.

Fascinating. Got anything to back it up besides rumor, innuendo, personal smears, or guilt-by-association?

Yeah, that's about what I figured...

[pragmatic_asian]

"There's no speed limit in an airless body short of the thrust you can apply, to fall and maintain orbit escape velocity is the limit."

There actually is a universal speed limit - light speed.

[discostu]

And why is that? Because it would require infinite thrust to move past it. Einstein did suggest condensing space in front of the craft though, he was a bit vague on how to do unfortunately.

[atomic conspiracy]

Gee, Mammy, you've managed to prove that secular humanists were involved in the Godless March on Washington, what a revelation. CFI isn't CSICOP. The US Army has atheist members, is it an atheist front? Some of its members participated in the Godless march on Washington. Does that make the march an Army project? Another outspoken critic of secular humanism, Osama bin Laden, might say so. You still haven't addressed the issue: what is the purpose of this attempt to discredit CSICOP with an elaborate ad hominem attack? You aren't a moon hoax believer, so just which of their actual positions does this purportedly call into question?

No boss worries about any such thing,

I do. Obviously some businesses would go belly-up tomorrow if their employees had to start being honest (some of the ones CSICOP targets, oddly enough), but this is not true of all.

You know, when I get p*ssant implied threats like these...you do take yourself ohsoseriously.

You're the second person who has claimed that I threatened to sue. These strawmen seem to pop up a lot when religious activists are involved. You were lying and I called you on it, and now you try to trivilize it, a p*ssant tactic if I've ever seen one (and after years of dealing with religious frauds, I've seen many).

[atomic conspiracy]

Tell me about it - I'm sort of bitter about the virus-like spread of liberal rhetorical tactics far beyond their originators. You know, where you throw out words like "racist" or "atheist" and pretend that this is somehow a refutation of the argument being presented. So much for logic and reasoned discourse, I guess....

A direct hit, General, congratulations.

[TomB]

Darn, I always miss out on these threads.

Hey ac, how about pinging me next time you start one of these. It's always fun to watch Mammy self-destruct.

Although these threads haven't been the same since JimRob got rid of most of the tin-foilers. Don't get me wrong, I glad they're gone, they just made these threads sooooo much more intersting.