Quote:
Originally Posted by ravens_cry
Heres a thought experiment. What would you do if NASA, came out, called a press conference with the backing of the whole agency and said "OK, we admit it, we faked it, we faked the moon landing." What would you do? What would be your reaction? This wasn't important enough I thought to start a whole new thread about, so I decided to ask it here. I hopes that is alright all ye mods.
|
An interesting question.
As others have indicated, a confession on its own is not sufficient. The thing one is confessing to must be self-consistent, and the faked moon landings scenario is clearly not self-consistent.
This is why HB arguments take the form they do - a series of accusations that some point or other is suspicious. But the HBs are unable to integrate these "suspicious" points into a coherent theory or narrative, despite having had nearly four decades to do so. And the more they learn about the official account of events, the more they realise it's difficult or impossible to create an "alternative" account. One of the more "reasonable" accounts, IIRC, had the astronauts fake most of the flight in Earth orbit while an unmanned probe went to the moon itself. Such a scenario is, of course, as complicated as actually landing men on the moon!
Also, if NASA were to confess, why haven't they done so already? Surely there'd be at least one whistleblower by now. But in fact whistleblowers are so conspicuous by their absence that some HBs have even tried to redefine the word "whistleblower" to include other HBs.