The moon hoaxists do not seem to care about facts. Everything that non-hoaxists say seems to be wrong. Perhaps, then we can use some alternate psychology against them. Maybe if we say that the scientific evidence clearly shows that we did not go to the moon, the hoax sites will try to prove that we did, since all science to them must be wrong.

Conspiracists don't necessarily go out of their way to go against science. It's that they go out of there way to go against NASA and don't care how much they violate the laws of physics to do that.

Another possibility would be to start a more ambitious and much more ridiculous Space Hoax theory. Nothing at all has ever been put into space. Space walk pictures were faked in big water tanks. Communications satellite are faked by equipment carried by weather balloons. The space shuttles are really smuggling drugs from South America. The sillier the better. The standard moon hoax theories would become a small subset of our grand space hoax conspiracy.

The purpose would be to become so silly that virtually no one, no matter how space illiterate, could possibly believe it. The space hoax theories, including its moon hoax subset, would be almost universally rejected. Anyone preaching moon hoax would be dismissed as one of those space hoax nuts and ignored. Thus, no more moon hoax.

__________________
Life is like a box of chocolates. All of your choices are bad for you.

A daring plan.

It's already been done. But I suspect this guy might be serious:

http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaver...917/proof.html

Oh, and by the way, not only is all space travel of any kind faked, but the Concorde isn't supersonic either. :roll:

Emphasis mine. This guy is either anti-US ( a common thing) or he thinks, the US is the only space-fairing nation in the world - or even the only nation in the world (another common misconception :-) )

Harald

You need to be careful when building a better hoax. More than likely the conspiracists will simply believe you. After all, when you've already believed 9 impossible things it's easy to believe another one (with apologies to the Red Queen).

__________________
"I often say that when you can measure what you are speaking about, and express it in numbers, you know something about it; but when you cannot measure it, when you cannot express it in numbers, your knowledge is of a meagre and unsatisfactory kind." - William Thompson, 1st Baron Lord Kelvin

"If it was so, it might be, and if it were so, it would be, but as it isn't, it ain't. That's logic!" - Tweedledee

This isn't right. This isn't even wrong. - Wolfgang Pauli

What's sad about that link (yours herald) is that to anyone without an understanding of relatively complex math...a laymen cannot tell the difference between when someone like phil 'proves' something using complex math, and when someone like our geocities nutbar "proves" something using math....

but I definetely like the idea of making a bigger, better, faster, shinier consipiracy. That'll Teach'em!

__________________
"The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, but wiser people so full of doubts."
--Bertrand Russell

You're blimmin' right you ought to apologise to the Red Queen! I don't think she'll take kindly to you attributing the words of the White Queen to her...

Umberto Eco, an exellent author(Name of The Rose), and a PHD of language and semiotics wrote a novel called Foulcoult's Pendulum. To make a long story short Eco tells a story were some book publishers who specialise in printing books by woowoo authors create a scam to bilk these woowoo's of their money. They create a program on a computer to randomly connect all the common themes their woowoo clients have submited. This creation ends up taking a life of its own. By the end of the book people are getting dead, including the publishers. So if any of you folks want to play games with the woowoo's---"watch your caboose Dix!"

__________________
I have grasped the bull by the tail and am lookin' 'im right in the eye.

Oops! ops: That will teach me to reference Carroll without checking. Of course, if I only had said it three times it would be true. :wink:

__________________
"I often say that when you can measure what you are speaking about, and express it in numbers, you know something about it; but when you cannot measure it, when you cannot express it in numbers, your knowledge is of a meagre and unsatisfactory kind." - William Thompson, 1st Baron Lord Kelvin

"If it was so, it might be, and if it were so, it would be, but as it isn't, it ain't. That's logic!" - Tweedledee

This isn't right. This isn't even wrong. - Wolfgang Pauli

I can't even understand what this chump is trying to say. Can anyone explain it?

Can anyone send something of this kind to him? I tried to find something but couldn't, since there is no "28.800 km/hr speed limit" and therefore no literature relating to it.

Also, this violates the basic laws of gravity (it is like thinking heavier balls fall at a faster rate, or a slower rate, or something so confusing that only an insane person can sort it out ) . I think the source of his confusion is that the small subatomic particles tend to have large velocities.

Since when is NASA called "The NASA?" (Although in theory it could be)

I'll have to ask him how large craters formed, then, since asteroids can't go faster than 28,000 km/hr. I guess this also means most comets don't exist, as well as quasars and anything outside our solar system.

I guess this also means most comets don't exist, as well as quasars and anything outside our solar system.

OK, now you're just being silly...

__________________
Things are only impossible until they're not!-Captain Jean-Luc Picard

Admin of the new and very much improved Apollohoax forum

Actually, I'm not. All extrasolar objects that I can think of have velocities greater than this so-called "speed limit", and almost all comets will at their perihelion. Quasars especially, with their high redshifts.

I can try. He's saying that the maximum speed you can reach is 1 190 km per hour. However, if you fly in the correct direction, you can use the Earth's rotation to give you added speed. At the equator you can get an additional 1 666 km per hour added to your 1 190 km per hour, for a total of 2 860 km per hour.

I'm going to refrain from over-quoting Pauli at this point.

Anyhow, he takes it for granted that the Concorde only flies at supersonic speeds from London to France. And the reason for that 'fact' is that going the other way it doesn't get the boost from the Earth's rotation, and thus only can go 1 190 km per hr.

One would think that he would accept a speed of over 1 190 km/hr for something with more mass than 1 kg, with that figure published in Physical Review. But I doubt that he'd accept any contradictory figures.

__________________
Jeff Schwarz
__________________________________________________
Argh!! They booby-trapped their sun!!    --Invader ZIM