For reference, I have already told them why the sky has no stars (it’s because of camera exposure, the moon surface is very reflective so lower exposure is used to not overexpose the image) and why the flag wasn’t drooping down (there was an extending arm in the stand to hold it upright, as a flag drooping down is a sad flag). I have also explained that the videos of the moon landing were upscaled/remastered when they asked why the video quality of the clips were so good.
Currently, their main argument is the fact that the U.S. were able to do the moon landing in the mid 20th century while are experiencing delays for the current moon mission. They argue that, if the moon landing could be done way back then, with modern technology, it should be possible to quickly get back to the moon. They also argue NASA could have just reused the same designs as the Apollo missions if they actually went to the moon.
I have argued that NASA’s budget is a fraction of what is used to be, and that the addition of new modern technologies introduces additional parts that could break and thus need to be tested. I have also mentioned that the Soviet Union would immediately call out the US if they faked the moon landing, and that samples of moon rocks were sent to Soviet scientists to study and verify. They insist that the Soviets were scared of what the US would do if they spoke out against a fake moon landing, which I didn’t agree with (given they were both nuclear superpowers)
They then argued that it’s impossible to tell whether the moon rocks are actually from the moon landing, they could be samples collected by rovers. I responded that no rovers had successfully collected moon rocks at the time, and then they switched to arguing that it’s impossible to verify the rocks are from the moon. I followed up by saying there are methods of doing that (through the composition of the rocks and such). They then asked how anybody knows what moon rocks look like if nobody else has been to the moon, and I got kind of stumped. I tried to explain that there are models to how the moon formed, how we know the rocks aren’t from Earth, satellites that map out the surface, etc., but they reiterated that no one can “prove” that they were from the moon without going there in the first place.
One interesting thing they also mentioned is that, if the US really did do a moon landing, why the Soviets (during cold war era) or Chinese (in modern era) didn’t do what they do best and copied their designs to land on the moon. Given that the US and China are having a new space race with the goal of being the first to establish a lunar base, they argue that China could just copy the Apollo program designs if the US really did do a moon landing.
To summarise, their main points/questions right now are: a) Explain why the US hasn’t gone back in so long, and why with modern technology it seems so difficult? (especially given that NASA has been experiencing numerous delays in the Artemis missions, that certainly hasn’t given them a good impression…) b) How do you verify moon rocks without having actually been on the moon? How did scientists figure out what a moon rock looks like? c) Why aren’t the old Apollo designs being reused for a moon landing? (by either the Americans or the Chinese)
They say that there isn’t strong evidence either side (but believes that it is false, saying that “we will see” once someone else lands on the moon)
And what other points can I bring up to definitively say, yes, the moon landing wasn’t faked?
edit:
Another thing, they also can’t believe that astronauts could bring and ride the little moon buggies. I am also partially interested in how that was achieved to be honest!
Why bother? That person is either dumb as rocks, and you can’t do anything about that, or they’re having a little fun with you.
it was faked. dont try to pretend otherwise
theres retroreflectors on the moon that were intentionally. imstalled so that precise aiming of a laser would signify someone installed it on the moon if you saw the reflection back
theyre used to measure the moon earth distance but the fact that installation is there in that time period shows man was on the moon
Okay that is actually kind of cool. I never knew this was done! I am anticipating that they would ask whether they were placed by humans or rovers/landers/non-human methods, so was it possible (at the time) to put these retroreflectors on the moon without human intervention? I’m assuming, like the collection of moon rocks, it was not (otherwise why would they bother with having humans doing it with all that human error?)
To be fair (basically the only time I’ll say that in reference to Moon landing deniers) there are also retroreflectors like those mounted on some of the unmanned landers and rovers that have been sent to the Moon as well. So this alone isn’t going to “convince” him. It does indicate that the Americans were able to launch something to the Moon and land it at the same time that the Apollo missions were underway, so if you were dealing with a rational person who could be convinced by reason this would still count for something.
Unfortunately, I doubt that’s what’s going on here.
Without the ability of a private person to verify that, though, it’s no more persuasive than explaining all the other things we did up there.
And if the person is capable enough to actually use a laser to accurately target and measure the reflection of these retroreflectors, they’re not a moon landing denier.
you cant win everyone. similar to flat earthers who refuse to go on a paid trip to see 24 hour sun is up day, they will believe the shit till the end
Arguing with a fool is like wrestling a pig - all that happens is you both get dirty and the pig likes it.
The Russians admitted it.
That would be my main argument as well - if it had been faked, the Soviets would have known and cried foul.
You cannot successfully argue with a pigeon.
If it were faked, the Soviets would have had a field day. They didn’t. If all the other facts didn’t work, I find that most convincing. The nemesis had to accept it begrudgingly.
Between the 70s and today, the motivations for moon landings have changed. Back then: fuck the commies, we go first, and science. Turns out the moon isn’t that interesting to continue sending people there. Rocks and dust, yawn. Not worth the ROI. The reason why there is renewed interest now is because people think realistically they can build a base on the moon. That was science fiction in 1969.
For your own mental health, give yourself a time frame and if they still think it’s fake allow yourself to let it go. Chances are they don’t want to be convinced and you have to let nature take its course and hope the seed of doubt you have planted comes to life and blossoms.
Well even that is assuming that there ever was a competition and the whole nation divide isn’t orchestrated by cabal overlords. Not saying I believe that but with the new knowledge of how the world is run, it’s tough to be sure of many things. It’s like “entertain every possibility, we’ll maybe see or we won’t”
This is the best possible argument.
Nothing about science or technology, simple James Bond spy stuff
Wait, y’all believe in the moon?
Not only do some conspiracy theorists not believe in the Moon, there are so many of them that there’s a variety of these beliefs.
- Lunar Hologram Theory: The most popular term. It suggests the Moon is a projection onto the “firmament” or a cloaking device used by advanced civilizations or governments.
- The Hollow Moon / Spaceship Moon: While these versions allow for a physical object, they argue the Moon is an artificial structure (essentially a giant satellite or base) rather than a natural celestial body.
- Plasma Moon: A subset of the Flat Earth community often argues the Moon is a localized “cold light” or a plasma phenomenon, rather than a solid mass reflecting the Sun.
So yeah. Poe’s Law, there’s nothing so dumb that you won’t find someone actually believing it.
You missed cheese moon
That’s not a conspiracy theory you dumdum, that’s just fact
I went down a rabbit hole and read/watched a bunch of holographic Moon stuff and holy fuck are these people stupid.
My favourite “proof” is the “lunar wave.” Some idiot filmed the Moon and saw an atmospheric refraction phenomenon, and concluded that the only logical explanation for the (honestly pretty fun-looking) wave he saw “on” the Moon was that MAYBE THE MOON ISN’T WHAT WE THINK IT IS, I’M JUST ASKING QUESTIONS HERE. Other morons then latched on to this, and made the logical conclusion that this “lunar wave” supports their belief that the Moon is a hologram, because of course it does.
I don’t even believe in y’all
I don’t even believe in myself.
My go-to is to just beg them to play Kerbal Space Program
They argue that, if the moon landing could be done way back then, with modern technology, it should be possible to quickly get back to the moon.
In the 1960s, getting to the moon was the most important thing in the solar system. The Soviet Union and the US spent ungodly amounts of money and risked uncountable lives in this endeavor. We did the thing, and now we’ve done the thing. We aren’t willing to risk those lives or spend that money anymore. New missions have to be much, much cheaper and much, much safer.
Technology has definitely improved, but there is a physical limit to the amount of energy that you can pull out of a given mass of kerosene and liquid oxygen. Getting to space hasn’t gotten any lighter, and fuel mass has always been the biggest hurdle. Again, play KSP. It will brand the tyranny of the rocket equation into your soul.
They also argue NASA could have just reused the same designs as the Apollo missions if they actually went to the moon.
They could, in the same way that we could start sending children underground to mine for coal again
To summarise,
a) Been there, done that. Anything new will involve sending more mass than the Apollo missions had to deal with. Tyranny of the rocket equation: more mass means more fuel means more thrusters means more mass means more fuel…
b) I could do some research and come back, but there is no answer to this that will satisfy a moon landing denier, because any explanation would require a baseline understanding of chemistry and also trust in the institutions that examine these moon rocks.
c) The answer to a also applies here
You can’t use logic to talk someone out of a position they didn’t use logic to decide on in the first place.
Those kinds of people should get nothing but scorn from the rest of us. No conversation, no attempting to change their minds.
Just pure, unadulterated scorn and derision. Nothing else. Fucking morons aren’t useful for anything other than diluting the gene pool anyway.
In the current age of the Internet that doesn’t work. It used to be people were afraid of being shunned by their community as then they would have nothing. Now with social media there are echo chambers that amplify views deserving of shunning and give refuge to those who would otherwise be shunned.
But deprogramming people like this is hard, and won’t always work. So I won’t blame anyone for shunning people like this, but just know it’s not really solving anything.
Then let them. What does it matter to you? People are allowed to be complete morons if they wish.
It matters to me because the sheer number of these morons who are being exploited by the rich are actively making my life and the lives the people I care about worse. To do nothing about it is to admit defeat and accept this as the way of the world. I don’t want to do that, I’d rather at least try something, even knowing the likelyhood is low.
And I don’t think pure doomerism is helpful either. By encouraging against any kind of deprogramming, you tacitly make it easier for the morons to spread without resistance.
That type of thinking is no different than the christians who believe that unless everyone else believes as they do then they ALL go to hell.
That ype of “enforced community” bullshit is exactly that. Bullshit.
People spend way too much of their time worrying about everyone else. Yes, helping when you can is a good thing.
You, however, are the one professing all the doom here. If not everyone believes the right things then we are all doomed.
Except who decides what those right things are, and what will happen when you teach society to think in that way, and then some demagogue takes control, and decides to subtly start changing what those right thoughts are?
Why, you get what we’re going through right now, don’t you…
So no, group think is never a good idea even if the thoughts are the “right” ones.
Ask what proof would change their mind and show them. Then when their mind is not changed, you will understand
This is it.
There’s a movement post-BLM where it’s not their job to explain racism to the ignorant. Very often, ignorant people refuse evidence. They waste everyone’s time and energy.
Why aren’t the old Apollo designs being reused for a moon landing? (by either the Americans or the Chinese)
If you want to address this question, show him some videos about Boeing and Airbus and how they can’t bring back airplane models they stopped production on because of massive supply chain issues. See if your friend is willing to accept that they can’t bring back the 747, for instance.
If this is a problem for aircraft, it is likely also a problem for spacecraft.
Never accept the premise of assholes.
They’ve made the dumbass claim that the earth is flat, so it’s their job to prove it. All you have to do is reject every idiotic piece of faulty logic they cough up as stupid.
They made the claim, make them do all the lifting, then just be dismissive, and give them nothing that resembles frustration.
Point out that their theory can be completely ignored without consequences.
Tell them the landing was real, because if it wasn’t then how would the aliens on the dark side of the moon have told us not to come back?
(This is something my co worker unironically believes)
You’re asking then to trust the government. It’s a big ask.
