It looks the link is too wacky even for this thread: EARTH HAS 4 CORNER

hahaha

i had an entire thread devoted to this subject but the mods deemed that it wasn't threadworthy and in some way it led to this thread. i hope the mods realize that maybe we'd do better w/ a fringe forum or simply allowing one fringe thread per topic instead of trying to cram every single "fringe" thread into one thread.

also, the use of the word "fringe" isn't fair in regards to the moon landing as it is highly unlikely that humans have ever walked on the moon.

Absolutely, "fringe" most definitely isn't the right word.

I hope you're saying that even 'fringe' gives the idea too much credibility?

BTW I don't know or care much about this subject, but isn't JFK assassination the big exception in that list? I was under the impression it was pretty much proven that the official account is bogus and debate was just re what form the conspiracy took? I'm also pretty sure it is a majority of people who believe it was a conspiracy, which means it's not fringe by definition.

I´ve only seen speculations about conspiracies in the JFK case. No real facts. C´mon, Oswald in a conspiration?

Like I said, I have no idea about any of this stuff - I was just under the impression that it was pretty widely accepted to be a conspiracy of some sort. If I'm wrong I stand corrected.

Have you become more assured about that? I recall you earlier on just found it possible?

lolz you know. you were there, right? ;-)

lemme guess: you're also 100% certain that your religion is the "correct" one, amirite?

i love when people are sure of things they can't possibly be sure of. it makes me

Just further to the JFK thing I note from wiki:

More people believe in a conspiracy than believe in evolution. Not to say that they're right, certainly people believe stupid things, but it's clearly not a 'fringe' belief.

Yes, at least you give a small possibility for the alternative that man has walked on the moon?

(I´m personnally practically totally assured man walked on the moon)

I'm only going to post once on this, I'm just not interested in having an extended debate on it because as far as I'm concerned there is nothing to debate.

No, I'm not 100% certain of anything, including the veracity of first-hand experiences, I just work on best inference. In the case of the moon landings the evidence is simply overwhelming - the tens of thousands of people who worked on the project, the Russians who observed and would have every interest in discrediting the US, the recent pictures we have of various landing modules on the surface etc.

donniccolo, what odds are you giving? I dug out my estimate from march, when this subject still was blessed with an own thread:
http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/sh...&postcount=125

the "evidence" you site is just about the same thing as citing the bible as "evidence" for christianity or the koran as "evidence" for islam. it simply is not real evidence and i cannot have an adult debate when my opponent is allowed to state things as fact that simply are not fact.

while thousands of people worked for NASA, it would only take a small group to conspire to fake the landings. the workers were unknowingly in on it.

the russians didn't have the capability to track the US from 1969-1972. the russians eventually developed this technology and coincidentally, the united states cancelled the last 3 apollo missions, citing "budget" as the reason. what was the most important thing in the nation instantly became an afterthought. practically overnight. riiiiiiiight.

also, the russians were the most advanced nation in the world re: space technology, and they beat the us in virtually every aspect of the space race...yet amazingly enough they, or any other nation, has never been able to duplicate the feat that the US "accomplished" in 1969 using 8 years of 1960s technology.

to repeat, the US started their moon aspirations in 1961, "created the technology from scratch in <8 years", and flew 7 missions to the moon (6 landed and returned) in just 3 years... in the late 60s early 70s.

today, in 2010, not the US or any other nation can plan to be on the moon before 2030... why? why why why?



hehe blessed w/ own thread. ah the good days!

i am at 90/10 or 95/5 that man has not landed on moon.

(in reality its like 99/1 but no one wants to hear that )

i will not discuss this with people who are certain either way, as certainty is a dangerous thing...

I´m not sure we want to hear the 90/10 or 95/5 either...
I still go with my 0.000000000000001/99.999999999999999.

To repeat, this is a terrible argument. It hasn't gotten any better, in fact. Why would we continue going to the moon several times per year, or even at all? You do realize that we haven't taken these trips just for fun or for your sake, right?

As I mentioned before, but can't seem to find, people claim that we dropped 2 atomic bombs in the span of just a few days. But we haven't used 1 in the over 60 years since then. Why are you not also skeptical of this? Why does your reasoning fail in this situation, but you believe it's legit in the moon landing discussion?

Even my favoured "bollocks" would give his post too much credibility.

cus its really ****ing expensive

guy on politics linked this article. CCD is real, but this sounds like a bunch of hooey.

Seriously how good are Ted talks. Any suggestions?
One of my favorites Surgery's past, present and robotic future And I think there are a bunch of new ones coming out.

i enjoy anything about science/humanity but i am not a fan of any of the music/poetry/art stuff.

you are comparing dropping a massive life-taking atomic bomb to flying 300k miles to the moon? really?

if you have done any reading about the moon landings, you would know that the political climate in the 60s and 70s was not one that would've abruptly stopped the Apollo program w/ 3 missions still on the docket. it just didn't make sense.

also, see below re: budget. you state that its too expensive to go, yet the US still has "aspirations" to "return". also if its so expensive, why go SEVEN times?! why not six? or five? or eight?



that is laughable! the US spends $ regardless of how expensive anything is. for a country in trillions of dollars of debt running over budget, $ is not an issue. besides that, the fact that they continue the space program at a huge expense and that they have planned and cancelled missions to the moon yet again, contradicts your statement that budget is an issue.

TED.com is the best!

^^i'd argue with you more, but you blinded by hubris

how can you argue about TED.com ? ;-)

hubris is a nice word. so rarely used.