In this case it is. If Mr. Rogan thinks that the Apollo missions were faked, then that is an extraordinary claim placing the burden of proof directly on his shoulders.

...and there's little chance of proving rogan wrong as long as his idea of "debate" is to out yell the opposition.

One does not equate to the other. Does the government lie? Sure. Does it lie about EVERYTHING? How could it?

If you want to demonstrate that the Apollo missions were faked then you must provide actual evidence theat there were faked. Handwaving that the "evil government" lies, so they must be lying bout Apollo is not a valid argument.

No...IMO, Phil made the mistake of allowing that line of reasoning to go forward AT ALL. Joe should have been reminded that "Evil Nazi Von Braun = no Moon landing" is simply not a reasonable assumption.

No, Joe did a good job of out yelling everyone, but as he himself said, He's not a scientist and he doesn't know what he is talking about.

Rogan brings nothing new to the hoax argument...besides his credulous belief.

What arguments? "Werner Von Braun was a Nazi, so we didn't land on the Moon" is not an argument. "I'm totally ignorant, but you're still wrong" isn't an argument, either.

And yet, that's what we do. And have for years. Have you read any of those discussions? They go on for hundreds of pages, often with the person claiming to have been smarter than all the world's scientists in relevant fields (after all, they've figured out something all those scientists haven't) failing to understand even remarkably elementary concepts of science.

It says nothing about whether or not Apollo was valid. Say he had evidence that Von Braun personally killed puppies. What does that have to do with rocket design? (And note that I have, as I've mentioned repeatedly, pretty strong evidence that some of my family died in the Holocaust.)

I don't. I think he parroted the same tired old arguments that even I, with my relatively limited knowledge of science, have known were wrong for years. I think he changed the subject so often that there almost couldn't have been said to really have a subject to change; it was almost Joycean stream-of-conciousness, except Joyce was too smart to fall for this foolishness.

__________________
Gillian

"Now everyone was giving her that kind of look UFOlogists get when they suddenly say, 'Hey, if you shade your eyes you can see it is just a flock of geese after all.'"

"You can't erase icing."

"I can't believe it doesn't work! I found it on the internet, man!"

Hmmmph. Our galaxy has apparently gone through a recent growth spurt. 35 million years for a radio signal to leave the Milky Way?

__________________
Apollo unbelievers go here for immediate salvation:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=khDI2MsWSYc

"I had a hand in Tom Morrow's kiester."
-JayUtah

"The only physical proof nasa has that they landed men on the moon is 840 lbs. of rocks"
-straydog02

Caused, no doubt, by all of those lemons that Grisham hung on the LM.

The relevance of von Braun's Nazi affiliation is usually styled as evidence that NASA (and by extension, the U.S. government as a whole) was immoral; they should have shunned the "war criminal" instead of welcoming him. Keep in mind that to most conspiracists, believing Apollo was faked is just a whistle stop to the greater belief that the Powers That Be are corrupt, evil, and oppressive. So some arguments seem more at home in the larger Grand Unified Conspiracy context than in the context of any one conspiracy theory. And So the argument goes that an organization that stoops to hiring ex-Nazis is not to be trusted. Therefore if they claim something happened, it probably didn't.

But not everyone who tramples Wernher von Braun's reputation does so with such an eloquent argument in mind. Some apparently think that any dirt dug up automatically helps their cause. "Apollo was faked because von Braun was a Nazi -- so there!" This non sequitur might be an example of what I call Kid Logic. It's the sort of reasoning that works when you're younger than about 10, especially among siblings. "I did the dishes, so that means you have to give me all the songs off your iPod." That's flawless reasoning in Kid Logic. Some people just don't outgrow it.

We'll never prevent history scholars from debating in hindsight the nuance of von Braun's motivation, even were it relevant. But a larger historical perspective suggests von Braun was honest when he described his relationship with Nazi Germany as one only of temporary convenience. Whether the Nazis, the U.S. Army, NASA, or Fairchild, von Braun simply went wherever it looked like someone would let him build rockets. He even risked his life to save V-2 design data after the Nazi officials ordered it destroyed.

Some of the newer books on logic and argumentation include a special category of fallacy that addresses comparisons to German Nazis. It's a special case of well-poisoning, but the Nazis are such easy targets for it that it's a notable special case. Unlike many people, I actually know a Nazi. That is, I know a German who fought in World War 2 in the Wehrmacht and pledged allegiance to the Nazi party. He really didn't have much choice, but there it is. And to attach him to Nazi atrocities would be the worst kind of folly -- he has done more philanthropy than any ten other men. Simply put, appeals to Nazism don't work well as arguments.

But back to von Braun himself. The notion that he went to Antarctica to get Apollo's moon rocks is pretty absurd.

The latest conspiracist clap-trap says there are photos of von Braun in Antarctica packaging up hundreds of pounds of "moon rocks". They imply these were just recently uncovered. Well, there are indeed pictures of von Braun in Antarctica. It was no secret he was going there on vacation, and NASA has for years offered publicity photos of him in Antarctica. No pictures of him loading up rocks, of course. But then again, we haven't actually seen any such photos. There are just rumors that they exist.

The rest of the claim has been around for years.

Lunites were discovered in very small quantities in Antarctica after Apollo, identified by their similarity to the Apollo samples. The timeline of the available evidence does not lend itself to explaining the Apollo samples as Antarctic lunites.

Lunites share only some of the properties of Apollo samples. Lunites have spent considerable time on Earth and are weathered appropriately.

Why would NASA draw attention to von Braun's trip to Antarctica if he were going there for nefarious purposes? Wouldn't such a thing have been done in secret?

Why would a propulsion and structures engineer be the one to send to Antarctica on a purely geological mission? What did von Braun know about the ins and outs of moon rocks? If you wanted to collect lunites, wouldn't you send someone who is an expert on lunites?

Since Wernher von Braun was a conspicuous figure in the Apollo program, and since conspiracy theorists generally have only superficial understanding of Apollo, it's natural for them to cast their conspiracy theory scenario using only the major players that everyone knows. Neil Armstrong becomes the proxy for every astronaut, and von Braun becomes the proxy for every NASA official. In the naive, simplified world of conspiracy theories, von Braun personally did everything to put Apollo together and Neil Armstrong flew the only mission of consequence.

__________________
"Facts are stubborn things." --John Adams
Clavius Moon Base

Sorry Jay, but I already invoked Godwin's Law

__________________
Carl Matherly

Offical Battlestar Galactica Apologist

Named Time Magazine's 2006 "Person of the Year"

Grown, no doubt, by citris-loving nazis with exotic rock collections.

__________________
Apollo unbelievers go here for immediate salvation:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=khDI2MsWSYc

"I had a hand in Tom Morrow's kiester."
-JayUtah

"The only physical proof nasa has that they landed men on the moon is 840 lbs. of rocks"
-straydog02

Sorry Jay, but I already invoked Godwin's Law

I noticed that you did. Godwin is correct, but with tongue in cheek. Sooner or later every informal debate invokes Nazis.

The serious logicians and rhetoricians look deeper and discuss why Nazi analogies are so insidious. Obviously no one wants to be put in a position that appears to defend Nazis. Feelings still run very deep, and you can't necessarily expect otherwise rational people to behave rationally when Nazism is invoked. So the rhetoric underlying Godwin's Law seems to be that Nazi analogies are a sort of smelly diaper. No one wants to challenge the analogy, so no one will.

__________________
"Facts are stubborn things." --John Adams
Clavius Moon Base

Actually, I find it interesting from a historical perspective to consider various people's affiliations in retrospect. It's something worth talking over with other historians and historical amateurs. It just doesn't have anything whatsoever to do with the realities of Apollo, any more than the reality of her use of slave labour changes the fact that Leni Reifenstahl was a brilliant director.

__________________
Gillian

"Now everyone was giving her that kind of look UFOlogists get when they suddenly say, 'Hey, if you shade your eyes you can see it is just a flock of geese after all.'"

"You can't erase icing."

"I can't believe it doesn't work! I found it on the internet, man!"

yoau are I meant the opposite, but in this case you can learn from it or let you get you down, sorry did not catch it.

__________________
If it's just us, it seems like an awful waste of space.
Contact Carl Sagan

I was not aware that Leni Riefenstahl had used slave labour, although I know that von Braun did.

__________________
"All your bias are belong to us." Ara Pacis
"A witty saying proves nothing." Voltaire

Why would a propulsion and structures engineer be the one to send to Antarctica on a purely geological mission? ... Since Wernher von Braun was a conspicuous figure in the Apollo program...

It may because he is conspicuous and important to the Space Program that CTs find it so plausible.

After all, didn't Kirk go on most Away Team missions?

Doesn't it follow that you send your most important, conspicuous person on the really important missions - even when that person has no relevance or expertise to offer and should not be placed at unnecessary risk?

(BTW, I am serious about this. Hollywood has established a "groundrule" that you don't send minor characters on important missions, unless they're supposed to die. The more important the mission, the more important the character who executes it.)

__________________
Never attribute to malice what can be adequately explained by ignorance or stupidity.
Isaac Asimov

So Jack Schmidt was a red shirt.

__________________
If it's just us, it seems like an awful waste of space.
Contact Carl Sagan

Oh, yes.

As to the quote . . . .

Well, look. Learning from things is all well and good, but not being outright killed doesn't necessarily make you stronger. That's just sense. A career of inhaling coal dust may or may not kill you, but it sure won't do much for your lungs.

__________________
Gillian

"Now everyone was giving her that kind of look UFOlogists get when they suddenly say, 'Hey, if you shade your eyes you can see it is just a flock of geese after all.'"

"You can't erase icing."

"I can't believe it doesn't work! I found it on the internet, man!"

I know that this is a side issue but i wanted to deal with this post since it was aimed at me.

Uhm. Pushing the entire planet into World War Two, for starters, a war that claimed the LIVES of 60 MILLION PEOPLE.

Firstly, I did note that the Nazi did evil things, I never said they didn't, however, they didn't push the entire planet into World War 2, not even all of Europe was involved (Spain and Switzerland remained Neutral throughout), and the US would not have been involved till later had the Japanese not attacked them. Remember that there were two wars happening at the time, though it's all covered under the one blanket name. Also remember that England and the Allies declared war on Germany, not the other way around (except for the US.) Secondly you are including the Pacific dead in the figure, lives that were lost because of Japan, not Germany. (A very rough break down was 20 mill Pacific, 20 mill Europe, 20 Mill Russian, a full breakdown is availible here) Nor do you take into account that Italy was on Germany's side. Blaming the Nazis entirely for WWII is as wrong as blaming the Japanese Imperial Government for it, it was a combined effort.

What then, in the face of that could be considered good? Pulled Germany our of the Depression?

Doing something evil does not lessen acts of good. If someone feeds staving families and gives money to charities but also is a serial murderer, the killings don't automatically wipe out the ability to consider the good acts good.

Britain is STILL PAYING OFF WAR DEBTS TO THE USA, NOW, in 2007 for a war that happened...how many years ago

Actually this is incorrect. While Britain has outstanding WW1 debts (they were essentially cancelled during the depression) it has paid off the last of its WW2 ones.

I am willing to front the Germans for the good stuff that they did, but the bad really overshadows that, and by a huge amount.

But it doesn't mean that everything they did was evil and bad, which is the point I was initially making. Just because a person is low-down, rotten, scum that deserves hanging from a lamppost, doesn't mean that they are incapable or doing kind and generous things to help people. Nor do the low-down rotten things they have done automatically remove the good things they did and make them 100% evil.

Starting and being the cause of WW2 nullifies any good will that the Germans could have built up with VW cars, the Authobahn, and engineering

No, that's what I'm saying, it doesn't. You can't add up the bad and the good and say it cancels out, you have to accept both and realise that they did both.

Germans and Muslims, sides of the same coin, no?

Personally, while I am neither, I find this remark both racist and extremely rude and condescending. I have friends that are Germans and I have friends who are Muslims. Not all Germans then or now were mass murders, not even all Nazi. Remember that Oskar Schindler was a Nazi and he is considered a Jewish Hero. Today not all Muslims are fanatics and suicide bombers. Most are very nice people who just want to live their lives the same as you and I, exactly the same as many of the Germans who joined up to the Nazi Party in the 1930's and 40's.

I also strongly suggest that you control your temper and your language, in your two posts you managed to break several of the forum rules, so unless you reign yourself in a bit, I'd suggest your stay here might be short indeed.

Let's say that von Braun really was an evil Nazi. Can the claim that the moon landings happened survive such a fact?

Of course it can, as long as you accept that an evil Nazi can still build great rockets.

Unfortunately as people have pointed out, though the accusation is irrelevant to the issue of Apollo being a Hoax it still shows a decided point of lacking critical thinking because the basis of the accusation is that nothing good can come from some thing so evil. This is simply untrue.

So, can we all agree, then, that we do not have to sing the praises of the Nazi party in order to defend the authenticity of the moon landings?

Of course, but I don't think anyone has been doing so. I doubt that anyone here doesn't believe that the leadership of the Nazi's got exactly what they deserved (well some might think that they didn't get enough of what they deserved, but you can only hang a person once unfortunately.) There is a need to counter the belief that Von Braun was a Nazi, All Nazis are evil, Nothing good can be done by a evil person, Apollo is supposed to be a good thing, therefore it can't have been done. The best way to do that is to point out that the middle two steps, that all Nazis are evil, and that nothing good can be done by a evil person, are false.

__________________
Howling from the Shadows

It must be fun to lead a life completely unburdened by reality. --- JayUtah

You can't reason an irrational person out of an irrational belief. --- Noclevername

Apollo: The History and the Hoax
Enter the World of Athran

BTW, I am serious about this. Hollywood has established a "groundrule" that you don't send minor characters on important missions, unless they're supposed to die.

And my agreement is serious. Conspiracy theories have more in common with Hollywood screenplays than they do with real history.

If you're going to pass off rocks you collected on Earth as samples collected from the Moon, you won't send a celebrity -- especially an unqualified celebrity on that recovery mission. You won't send photographers to cover the event and post the photos on your web site. The conspiracy theory requires NASA to have acted in a way that almost guaranteed they'd be caught. If you argue someone was trying to fool someone else, you have to propose that they acted in a way reasonably calculated to hide their actions. A more likely scenario would have tried to minimize evidence of the visit to Antarctica.

__________________
"Facts are stubborn things." --John Adams
Clavius Moon Base