I haven't seen Carrot Cruncher (at least by that name) in years.

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

I haven't seen Carrot Cruncher (at least by that name) in years.

All right, now you've piqued my curiosity. Who is/was Carrot Cruncher?

__________________
--Doug

"When your statics problem becomes a dynamics problem, you're in trouble." --me

Moor's Law: "As you go from freshman engineering to Ph.D., the amount of work required per credit hour doubles approximately every 18 months." --me, inspired by Prof. Scott Moor

One wascally wabbit, no doubt. Hehehehehehhhh...

__________________
Bring back Firefly!

"It is quite clear that Occam's razor does not sharpen in your pyramid." (Nicolas)

"Still, a man hears what he wants to hear and disregards the rest." (Paul Simon)

Carrot Cruncher was a persistent hoax believer on one of the incarnations of Apollo Hoax.

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

Is he the one who stalked you or seriously threatened you, Jay, or am I having a false memory?

CJSF

__________________
Two years ago moved from my town
I was looking up past the city lights
But the city lights got in my way

See the constellation ride across the sky
No cigar, no lady on his arm
Just a guy made of dots and lines

-from "See The Constellation"
by They Might Be Giants

I don't remember if he was the one.

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

I was one who fence-sat for a while, mainly because I didn't know much about the Moon and Apollo. I heard the "evidence" of the conspiracy: "the pictures don't show stars", "the landscape looks like a backdrop (or the Nevada desert)", "the (unspecified) radiation would kill the astronauts", etc.

Again, not knowing much about the moon landings at that time, the CTs sounded plausible. However, I decided to do my own research. I found sites like this one (BA) and Clavius that explained how everything worked and what the Moon/interplanetary environment is really like. It took me no time after that to decide the CTs were rubbish.



CT believers, on the other hand, are strange in the fact that they will refute till the death anything that contradicts their CT, but will take the slightest rumor at face value if it supports their theory. For example:

(I apologize in advance for starting a CT if this spreads...) Since the Mars landscape looks a lot like the American Southwest, I told a person I know that is a rabid CT believer--in the Hoagland Mars mess mainly--that the Mars Sojouner footage was really made on a soundstage in southern Utah and the "bunny" that got run over was a Desert Cottontail that got in the way. (I had joked about that here on BAUT a while ago IIRC). He hung on my every word and proceeded to gleefully tell all his friends that the Mars footage was faked and the "bunny" was proof, just based on my one sentence...and he refused to believe me when I later told him I was joking and made the whole thing up.

__________________
"WARNING: Being launched into space is hazardous."--Lonewulf

Triplebrick is no longer birdable. It was fun while it lasted.

"N'oubliez pas: l'ours n'est pas un nounours!"--Nounours de Salmonberry

And if I recall correctly, there is a simple histogram shift one can apply to the pathfinder imagery that makes the landscape look very earth-like - blue sky, tan rocks, etc... I joked with some of my fellow grad-students about that, and some really thought I was on to something. I hope they are not in the Hoagland / CT camp now, but who knows?

CJSF

__________________
Two years ago moved from my town
I was looking up past the city lights
But the city lights got in my way

See the constellation ride across the sky
No cigar, no lady on his arm
Just a guy made of dots and lines

-from "See The Constellation"
by They Might Be Giants

That's true of all kinds of believers, unfortunately. I've even seen people do the same thing with accepted scientific theories-- not paying any attention to the actual science behind them, but just treating them as dogmatic truths rather than theories to be tested. Embracing any idea uncritically is harmful, but all too common.

__________________
"If this were play'd upon a stage now, I could condemn it as an improbable fiction."
Shakespeare, Twelfth Night
Illuminati's Razor-The most complicatedly evil answer is usually the most correct answer. - Fazor
"Every book is a children's book if the kid can read." - Mitch Hedberg
"Distance doesn’t matter much in space, where if you just start a thing off with the right kind of shove, sooner or later it will get where you want it to go." -Frederik Pohl, Mining the Oort

Not exactly the same thing, but on forums (not this one) I've never seen either side of a HOTLY contested political debate give in and say "You know, I think you're right and I'm wrong - I'm switching sides now." This is true for every GW debate I've read too. I've come to the conclusion that no matter what the evidence, believers cannot be convinced otherwise and will not change, and it's almost a waste of effort to try. I think they have to change on their own.

I salute those who can maintain a long debate with believers.

On the other hand, has any suspected space/astronomy conspiracy ever been proven to actually be one?