When I consider the serial the "X-Files" and its incredible popularity when it made its big run a few years ago, I can see where many of its fans were taken in by Mulder's delusions and constant poking at governmental coverups he claimed exist. A lot of them identified with Mulder and his endless pursuits.

However, just as there isn't just conspiracy freaks who enjoyed that show, there isn't one stereotype to fit conspiracy conjecturists. I have a Phd niece who bought into the Moon hoax and when I poked a few holes through her thoughts she became quite emotional and claimed that I was being too emotional. She refuses to bring the subject up any longer.

Others I think might have found something in a conspiracy that education failed to give them: a series of cause and effect links that made them hungry to follow up on something to a conclusion. If they put a great deal of effort into it they will defend that effort just as a young wannabe trying out for some major league roster does not want to admit to himself that all he is is a wannabe who never will be.

Still others were attracted to the group think atmosphere that exists in those surroundings, almost like being on some research team of their own, pretending to uncover something.

As for the technology to go to the moon in 1969 being too underadvanced at that time I usually point right to the particle accelerators and point out that what is going on there dwarfs what goes on in space flight technology. The mathematics that governed moon flights of Apollo was over 200 years old and still functions to get us out to Saturn and Pluto. The math and technology that governs what goes on at the LHC, Brookhaven and Fermilab lies way beyond that of planetary travel.