I alsways wondered about these ones claiming that NASA killed the Apollo 1 astronauts on purpose because they knew "the truth". I think this is a good idea.

Why won't* NASA sue these hoaxbelievers?

maybe because that would be a complete waste of time and give those people (hoax believers) more exposure than they deserve?

__________________
"blacker than the blackest black... times infinity."- Nathan Explosion
The.. Best.. Thread..Ever...

Why don't the hoax believers sue NASA?

__________________
Reality moves at the speed of light.
If the text of this post is blue, it's a "Moderator comment".
[ The RULES of the Forum ] [ Forum FAQs ] [ Conspiracy Theory advice ] [ Alternate Theory Advice ]
To report a post (even this one) to the moderation team - use the /!\ icon at the top-right of the post.

Because doing so would give hoax believers an aura of credibility.

Of which they have *zero.*

__________________
There in the valley of Scorpio, beneath the Cross of jade
Smoking on the seashell pipe the gypsies had made
We sat and we dreamed a while...in that crystal thought time in Mexico. ~Donovan

In 1923 a young rabble-rouser led a group of fellow losers in an attempt to take over the government of Munich. He was arrested, put on trial and given a country-wide podium to spout his rubbish. Ten years later he was Chancellor.

__________________
Friendly Rabid Atheists (mostly)

NASA is in a 'damned if they do, damned if they don't' position. If they try and sue them, HBs will say it's because they are trying to silence those who know the truth. If they don't, HBs will say it's because they don't want it all to come out in a public court case.

HBs thrive on attention. They don't give a damn whether they get good or bad publicity, as long as someone notices them. Spending the money to give them a forum is a big mistake. They simply are not worth the effort.

__________________
"The very powerful and the very stupid have one thing in common: They don't alter their views to fit the facts, they alter the facts to fit their views." The Doctor, Doctor Who: The Face of Evil.

Because; they have no solid evidence and know they can't win.
Although that usually gets translated to: because the government courts are in on it and they can't win.

__________________
Numbers are not case sensitive. (me)

NASA actually commissioned (or were close to commissioning) a book countering the Apollo HB's - to be written by Jim Oberg. But there was a bit of backlash so they canceled.

I understand a guy name, I think, Phil Plait, also was involved in such an effort for a time.

__________________
Friendly Rabid Atheists (mostly)

Oh yeah, I forgot about that.

In answer to the OP, there is no such thing as bad publicity. Suing a hoax proponent would likely result in MORE people getting sucked into the make believe world of the HB, simply because of the publicity.

__________________
Very funny Scotty, now beam down my clothes.

Not if the HB's lawyer is Moon Man.

__________________
"Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge" -- Charles Darwin
"Your right to hold an opinion is not being contested. Your expectation that it be taken seriously is." -- Jason Thompson
Meet the OOONG TOE.

Oh, THAT would be lovely!

What would NASA sue for? Slander/libel?

The US government and government agencies have no right to sue for defamation.

On top of that, in the USA the plaintiff generally has to be able to prove that the defendant is knowingly and maliciously spreading false information in order to win a defamation case. We don't really have a law against being delusional.

Then there's the 1st Amendment issue. A suit brought by a government agency to quell the HB's accusations would quickly run afoul of that, I think.

Besides (as I understand it) even if they could sue, NASA would have to argue that they suffered damages as a result of the accusations. No damages, no case.

__________________
Brett
Peters Creek, Alaska
─────────────────────────────────────────────
My moderation comments will appear in this color.
To report a post (even this one) to the moderation team, click the reporting icon in the upper-right corner of the post:
─────────────────────────────────────────────
◄ Rules For Posting To This Board ► ◄ Forum FAQs ► ◄ Conspiracy Theory Advice ► ◄ Alternate Theory Advice ►

Indeed, NASA can't sue for such things. The astronauts themselves might be able to do so, but I assume they just have better things to do with their time and money.

Can an organisation sue for slander or defamation? Or can only persons do that? OP did speficially mention Apollo 1, and murder. Not a lawsuit about spreading misinformation about the moonlandings in general.

__________________
"Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge" -- Charles Darwin
"Your right to hold an opinion is not being contested. Your expectation that it be taken seriously is." -- Jason Thompson
Meet the OOONG TOE.

Yes, corporations can sue for libel or slander.

They could charge for tickets! (I'd pay, and we all know that I'm on a bit of a budget.) Or Pay-Per-View, even, so we can all get the chance.

__________________
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!"

They could try suing for libel in the UK. If the BCA can sue Simon Singh, then there appears to be no limit to what you can get away with. Mind you, it doesn't seem to be working out well for the BCA and chiropracters in general.

Answer to to question posed in the thread title: because the money spent on lawyers could be more productively spent on scientists.

__________________
Microsoft is over if you want it.

The bar has been lowered for the promotion of ATM ideas; the bar for the acceptance of ATM ideas must remain high.

There certainly is a strong contrarian element in the HB makeup. They firmly believe that TPTB and MSM are constantly conspiring to block their access to "the straight skinny".

__________________
Friendly Rabid Atheists (mostly)

Say someone was paying an astronaut to appear at an "event" (as is often done) that someone would have to believe the HB claims, and not pay for the astronaut appearence based on what the HB has said.

Of course this is overly simplified, but that would be "damages" caused by the HB which could be acted upon...simply calling the astronaut names, ie. liar, isn't "enough" to justify a lawsuit.


At least that is the way I understand it...

__________________
"The facts gentlemen, and nothing but the facts, for careful eyes are narrowly watching." Isaac Asimov

The foundation of the refusal to pay the astronaut would have to be based on the HB's paradigm, "it never happened, so why pay him". I doubt they'd come out publicly with that thought.

__________________
Friendly Rabid Atheists (mostly)

I think it would be a far better use of NASA's time and money to educate all the fence-sitters and the not-so-informed about the flaws in the HBs' arguments. This is what they're doing right now, but it could be done better.

- Maha Vailo

__________________
When you get down to it, Science answers how. Religion answers why. - hippietrekx

The Warp Point, my new geek culture blog.

People need to take "Critical Thinking 101" before they leave high school.

__________________
Friendly Rabid Atheists (mostly)

...and maybe a little science...got a lot shakey folks getting diplomas these days. Seems a lot of basic learning has fallen by the wayside.

Didn't the Sci-Fi channel sue NASA over the UFO cover-up?

Do you have a cite for that?

__________________
"The facts gentlemen, and nothing but the facts, for careful eyes are narrowly watching." Isaac Asimov

I think Classic was referring to this.

But I'm not sure what it has to do with the subject of this thread.

__________________
"One does not require alien ruins in order to absorb a profound sense of wonder and mystery from the moon. That our civilization had actually visited it is miracle enough." Jason Roberts