I've been browing a number of sites and references on Apollo and the moon landng program. I have yet to find a significant site that doesn't have a page on the "hoax" somewhere. I find this intensely annoying, even frustrating. Perhaps NASA had the right of it; mentioning the "hoax" at all just re-enforces doubt on the part of the gullible.

So I am wondering; what other major events, explorations, scientific developments, et al of this century have this same level of sniping? Is Apollo alone in the staggering amount and persistance of hoax material?

The only other event I can think of off the top of my head is the history of the Holocaust, which also has virulent attackers. And there is of course the constant battle over Evolution.

So...did Amundsen have to put up with this sort of thing? Lindberg? Are there people running around shouting that you can't scale K2 as the atmosphere is so thin you'll explode? Is there a large body of literature arguing with silly science and bad logic that nothing man-made has ever pushed below one kilometer and that everything from coal mines to subways are part of a conspiracy to hide the true geological nature of the Earth?

__________________
"You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means."

Are you limiting this to outright "hoax," or do you include "conspiracies to cover up the truth?" The latter would include the JFK assassination, 911, Roswell, Pearl Harbor, etc. A while back, one of our illustrious HBs in this forum implied that the attack on Ft. Sumter SC (1861), in addition to the other events just listed, was also some sort of hoax or cover-up.

Well, the whole Wonderful World of JFK Conspiracy Theories subset pops into my head, but...you're talking about science-type stuff, yes?

Well, then...[thinks]...

There's a huge group of people that believe NASA is hiding the truth, not only about the Apollo moon landings, but also about (1) what's on the Moon (secret alien cities, Chinese oil drilling, diamonds, etc.), and (2) what's on Mars (ditto, ditto, ditto).

And about (3) what really happened when the Galileo hit Jupiter (well, okay, it didn't ignite it into another sun, but it MUST have done SOMETHING).

And about (4) what the Hubble can and cannot see (it can see the Moon, of course it can, don't be silly, which is why NASA tells us it can't, because otherwise they'd point it at the moon and we would all SEE that there's no American flag there).

And about (5) what all those SOHO pix really show, in their unedited versions. (you can see the outlines of starships silhouetted against the sun, before NASA tidies it up and says it's "debris" or something).

And about (6) whether there really is a Planet X out there, making the magma bobble.

In non-NASA news...

HAARP gets a lot of people putting on the ol' tinfoil. It's for weather control, or it's causing tsunamis and earthquakes, or else it's just beaming dangerous rays into the atmosphere that make people sick and stuff, but either way, it's NOT just for testing the ionosphere, oh no.

There are a sizeable, and vocal, body of believers who subscribe to the theory that the Pentagon is deliberately using "scalar weapons", in cahoots with the USGS, to cause earthquakes and volcanoes to erupt, and all those press conferences about how the Yellowstone hot spot isn't gonna blow are all lies, just lies. (Some of these people literally wouldn't pee on a USGS geologist if he was on fire. They would similarly treat a UN relief worker, as everyone knows the UN is only the witless tool of the New World Order, if not the International Zionist Conspiracy and/or the Illuminati, bent on taking over the world. And you thought the UN was "about" world peace...)

FEMA, in their capacity as managers of secret training and/or internment/concentration camps, get a fair amount of mistrustful flak from the Reynolds Wrap brigade.

And "vaccines" get a lot of people upset, too, as far as "scientific developments" go.

Also "mercury in fillings".
And "artificial light at night".
And "microwave ovens".
And "cell phones".
And "ID chips in dogs".
And "Kroger Shopper cards".

Jigsaw you just described a typical day at GLP 8-[

And flourides in the water;
And contrails caused by planes;
And the cover-up of the hollow earth;
And Zionists/Muslims/Illuminati/ <insert racial group of your choice>;

In fact, just go to www.crank.net It lists lots of different webpages on all sorts of conspiracy, fringe and outright nonsensical ideas.

__________________
Now while I might be amused by Cthulhians, I don't necessarily distrust them to carry out the functions of government. -- JayUtah

What's it like being a skeptic in the Middle East? Check out my blog.

...Paul McCartney was replaced by a look-alike. :wink:

Also on GLP recently! :roll:

__________________
Any day you wake up on "the right side of the dirt" is a good day.

T. Anderson

Hrm.

I guess what I was thinking of is not the amount of conspirologist (!?) literature on a subject, but the amount to which the conspiracy viewpoint is discussed and debunked within the mainstream literature of a subject.

I mean, if you go to the official homepage of NOAA (http://www.noaa.gov/), do you find a page refuting the existence of Deep Ones?

If you look at a history of the US Air Force, is there a chapter on Project Blue Book and Roswell?

__________________
"You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means."

I think the current 9/11 conspiracy theories are getting a lot of attention at the moment.

__________________
Webmaster, Rocket & Space Technology

I don't think NASA dedicates a lot of time, if any, to answering Apollo Hoax conspiracists. They were originally going to fund a book by Jim Oberg then pulled out. I won't speculate as to why, maybe JimO will see this and provide the reasons.

__________________
Now while I might be amused by Cthulhians, I don't necessarily distrust them to carry out the functions of government. -- JayUtah

What's it like being a skeptic in the Middle East? Check out my blog.

Put that way, I'd agree -- Apollo must be near the top.

That's a new one to me. What are "Deep Ones?"

__________________
"You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means."

There was even a piece of CNN tonight. Fortunately, they were interviewing someone from Popular Science Magazine who has an article coming out soon debunking the 9/11 claims.

I dunno about 9/11 claims (somehow, BBC and Deutsche Welle don't go there quite as often as American broadcast news).

But I did just get suckered into a WTC Towers collapse thread at GLP. Horrible place. Wish I'd never been tempted to go over there. Sad to say, I'm a theater carpenter and my structural engineering skills still outclass anything that's been seen in THAT thread.

(No, my friend, a 775,000 pound plane does NOT knock over a 500,000 ton skyscraper!)

__________________
"You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means."

FYI, here's a link to the article:

http://www.popularmechanics.com/scie...e/1227842.html

__________________
Webmaster, Rocket & Space Technology

I like this link better. Deep Ones are so cute!

__________________
Now while I might be amused by Cthulhians, I don't necessarily distrust them to carry out the functions of government. -- JayUtah

What's it like being a skeptic in the Middle East? Check out my blog.

I once stumbled across a website claiming that an atomic bomb was not dripped on Hiroshima. Fortunately, I didn't save the URL.

__________________
"That's Not Blight. It's New Jersey" - The Wall Street Journal

You might have been lucky enough to swing by Liberty Forum where this is discussed along with the fact that nuclear bombs and nuclear power do not work and stealth technology is also a big ol' sham.

Warning, if glp leaves you needing paracetamol, Liberty Forum might make you want to pop your brain in an autoclave once you're done...

Wow. That cactus guy is an absolute work of art. 8-[

I see what you're getting at here.

Not really, AFAIK.

The FDA/CFSAN used to have a "yes, Virginia, microwave ovens are safe" page around somewhere, ditto a "no, Virginia, cell phones do not cause brain cancer" page.

The USGS had at least one "no, the Yellowstone hotspot is not going to blow us all to kingdom come just yet" page around somewhere.

The HAARP website has tons of patiently posted tech specs which you can use to refute various woos, but they don't deliberately address it thus, "Hey, all you woos, HAARP does not cause tsunamis", etc.

I get the impression that the USGS, the FDA, et al, feel that it's better to ignore these folks, than to feed their obsessions by deliberately addressing their paranoia.

P.S. If you think GLP is weird now, you oughta have seen it before the Great 2004 Christmas Massacre. It's actually much quieter now than it used to be--it blew apart into about six different satellite message boards in December (long story), and what's left there now is really only the pitiful remnant of about 6 diehard posters. The rest are all scattered to the four corners of the Internet.

Links upon request.

I'm evil. I know it.