What would make me believe in a hoax is someone who actually worked for NASA at the time, someone who was actually involved in some aspect of the undertaking of Apollo, someone who was actually in a position to know something was fishy, coming forward with some peice of evidence that cannot be explained in any other way. But it would have to be pretty convincing, and verifiable by others, and not inconsistent with what we already know about physics, engineering, etc. Then, maybe, I'd want to look deeper.

Personally, I've never looked for stuff simply to debunk HBs notions. I've always wanted to see if they were correct. Sibrels secret footage had me stumped for a while. I was not content with just saying 'yes but it could have happened as NASA says', I wanted to see if it could be true, that the Earth was faked in the window. That's when I noticed, after a while, the direction of the sunlight coming in through the hatch window. Not only did I have evidence that the footage could have been taken on the way to the Moon, as a practice run, I also had evidence that the footage was impossible to fake in the way described by the HBs.

That's the problem with the HBs. They assume we're just trying to defend NASA. I certainly am not. They are hardly the slickest organisation on (or off) the planet.

The HBs say 'it could have been faked like this...'. We say 'actually, no, that would not work'. If NASA faked the Moon Landings, the HBs have yet to find any real evidence of it, that stands up to much scrutiny.