As far as Nicolas's question, we have three cases:
You seem to omit any case that doesn't presume the existence of a conspiracy. Circular and tautological. If you unable to face the possibility of being wrong, then there is no point to saying you're right.
How about the category of people who disagree with your claims and who have the appropriate knowledge to substantiate their disagreement? I've worked on designs for machines that have put objects beyond low Earth orbit. I'm wondering what evidence you have that will prove to me that I haven't.
Imagine going to the circus and looking up with amazement at the tightrope walker. It's natural to be incredulous at such feats. But it doesn't matter whether the ringmaster is a pedophile or whether the concession stand is watering down the soda. It doesn't change the fundamental physics of tightrope walking; nor does it constitute proof that the acrobat isn't really doing what he appears to do -- especially to the acrobat. To people who actually know about space exploration, your claims sound no more credible than: "My soda tastes flat, therefore you're not really walking the tightrope."
|