Excellent points, Stuart.

Bill, unfortunately, it's just not that simple to determine the "truth", if there is such a thing as absolute truth. All we can really do is examine the evidence and try to judge its quality and consistency. But even those aren't necessarily definitive. As Stuart points out, the police have learned to be suspicious of too much consistency.

In this particular case, though, one thing that helps the case is the sheer volume of evidence in favor of the reality of Apollo. Too much to list, really - all the designs and drawings for the hardware, which can be examined to determine whether they would work as advertised. The experience of thousands of engineers and factory workers who built the stuff. The people at the Cape who prepped and launched the missions. The eyewitnesses to the launches and splashdowns. The radio and radar tracking done in many different countries. Thousands of photographs, miles of motion picture film. The lunar surface samples, examined by hundreds of geologists in dozens of countries. The remaining pieces of hardware on display for any and all to see.

And what do the conspiricists offer in rebuttal? A few poorly thought-out arguments that are almost pathetically easy to counter, if you have even the most basic understanding of Physics and engineering.

There's no real difficulty in disproving the hoax theory. The real problem is reaching the people who need to hear those rebuttals. Fox reaches into nearly every household in America -- but they only allow their side to be told. At least we have the BABB to try to balance the scales.