The Moon Landing Never Happened, a serious discussion

Post Reply New Topic

^This is the problem that we have with internet discourse in general. Someone can come along and post something that has been endlessly and exhaustively debunked and it generates four five thread pages of content. When it should just be ignored.

I honestly don't know; they say we're supposed to be able to look through a telescope and see things as small as tyre tracks, but then other things they insist we can't see like the mirrors-retroreflectors....so half of the time it's "which is it ?" when it's convenient.... I never said though I was fully convinced on this, I was always more in the 70/80 % crowd now, that it didn't happen.

I actually could now though these days fully buy the explanation that the Moon Landing fully DID happen, but just that the guys back in the 60s were just WAY more competent than the DEI hires and such and the absolute Bozos the Biden admin and todays' wokies and such have running something like the Artemis Project, which in today's terms if just laid out practically like this as to why they are nowhere close to getting a rocket like this off of the ground would certainly explain it very clearly and prosaically like this to me in the simplest terms.


Literally all the people in the Biden admin like that Sam Brinton and that Rachel Levine and Karine Jean-Pierre looked like they could not fight their way out of a wet paper bag, IMO.

I don't think that's right. I think it's because people can't let them go unchallenged that they persist. It makes it seem like a legitimate debate, and gives power to the conspiracist.

This thread for example, had no one responded, would have dropped down the list where far fewer people are likely to have seen it.

But instead it's been repeatedly on the front page of the site, getting it more views and more responses.

Maybe we can redo Pizzagate. Has anyone took a serious look into what goes on in the basement of that basement-less pizza joint?

^^^ trump Jr entered the chat

It's not just "Antipathy vs. the Biden Administration", as the hilarious struggles and ineptitude of the Artemis Project are well-known and they couldn't get this rocket off of the ground repeatedly. I think the extreme Woke regression over a few decades had directly something to do with this slide into failure.

The side you say is so "Anti-Science" hilariously happens to rule things now in the USA and also in countries like Hungary... you say it's "so wrong by definition" and always seem to be on the cusp of banning it instantly. but yet so many people like 77 million in the USA seem to agree with it and it seems to do nothing but grow... (hahaha)

I am definitely willing to say though it's a fallacy of sorts I'm overlooking that the Moon landing definitely could have happened, but it's just coloured in the present as the regression of skills thanks to Woke and DEI placement and all this has been so bad that it makes the West and countries like the USA look so incompetent in the present with a lot of this s**t, that it makes it to where the plausibility of feats like this in the past are also going to get called into question in a way that look like "conspiracies".

There's no doubt that mis-, and therefore dis-, information drives content engagement.

If you've visited social media lately you'll maybe notice that a good portion of the posts contain deliberate mistakes.

Why? Because people who know they are right have a really hard time resisting the urge to correct people who are wrong. I.e. we comment.

And every time we do, we validate their nonsense with our attention.

You'll get more responses to a post with an error, factual or logical, than you will to one that everyone accepts is true.

Enough bad actors now understand this enough to make most social media virtually unusable.

Sites driven by algorithms will often promote 'popular' content, and doesn't care whether it's true. WP is not algorithmically driven but it still shows you the threads that are most active.

Conspiracy theorists are, at least in part, attention seekers. They enjoy an oppositional standpoint because they know people can't resist engaging with it. And the more facts and proof you provide them with, the more they will refute them.

The only way to beat them is to ignore them.