ALL BLOG POSTS AND COMMENTS COPYRIGHT (C) 2003-2018 VOX DAY. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. REPRODUCTION WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION IS EXPRESSLY PROHIBITED.

Friday, December 14, 2018

Skepticism required here

As usual, expressing anything but perfect and unshakeable faith in the total accuracy of the U.S. government's Official Story concerning the Apollo Program and the Moon landings has the Moonies out in full frothing force. I find this more than a little amusing, as many of the Moonies believe that the U.S. government lies about absolutely everything else, but not this, dammit!

Seriously, what are the chances that despite the various anomalies and falsehoods that have been exposed and uncovered concerning these events over the years, that what remains is the pure, unvarnished truth? That is simply ludicrous. It is theoretically possible, but given what we know about the vagaries of human nature, it is extremely improbable. Some of the responses to my post yesterday and the subsequent Darkstream connecting the false narrative being pushed concerning the Yellow Vest Protests and the Moon landing narrative were informative.
You are now Unfollowed from my Feedly. There will never be enough time to follow nutjobs, even if I live to 1,000,000.
Fine by me. I have no desire to be followed by unquestioning, credulous individuals who unquestioningly swallow everything they are told by an Authority. Jordan Peterson will doubtless be more your style.
Come on Vox, if anyone else but Owen Benjamin was proposing this you would dismiss him as a crank. If the moon landing was a hoax, you'd think there would have been something about it in the Soviet archives. 
Totally false. I wrote about my skepticism concerning the Official Story of the Moon landings 12 years ago. Now, I have not said that the Moon landings were a hoax, I have only observed that I do not believe the Official Story concerning them. I don't know what people are lying about or the full extent of their lies and deception, I only know that the Official Story is not entirely true. That does not mean it is entirely false.
Great. We send people here, people on the cusp of some important realizations and recognitions. We tell them "read, critically of course, but with an open mind." And they come back and look at us pityingly and say "you mean read the guy who says the moon landings were faked?" As a strategy of separation, this is not going to yield the group you want.
This is written by someone who is clearly new here. If these people on the cusp of some important realizations are such inept readers as to somehow conclude that I am a guy "who says the moon landings are faked", I definitely don't want them here. Because that simply is not true. Agnosticism is not skepticism is not denial.
Damnit, Vox. Dread Ilk. You assholes. You're going to drag out this topic. You're going to question the fucking moon landing. I can't believe this.  I love astronomy. Love space. Love space news. The Pluto flyby was awesome. The GAIA data is incredible. I can't wait for the resulting image from the Event Horizon Telescope project. And now...you assholes are going to tell me the moon landing wasn't real. But...I...I know. I can see how it is a lie. After seeing the government lie about monumental things throughout my life, I can see the pattern. I cannot deny this possibility. 
A lot of things can be faked, for one reason or another. But being surprised at habitual liars lying, well, that's like being surprised every time you drop a ball and it hits the ground.
This is all HORRIBLE rhetoric for VD and Owen. I don't know what the hell these guys are thinking. Not only does it make them look crazy to the normies AND the people with a science/engineering background, but it also shits all over the greatest achievement of European man, the one achievement that we know will have monuments lasting a million years. 
It's not rhetoric, at least, not in my case. As usual, Vox's First Law applies: any sufficiently advanced intelligence is indistinguishable from insanity. It would be impossible to exaggerate my lack of concern about how people with one-half to two-thirds of my IQ happen to regard me. That's like being concerned about being informed that my son's dog has doubts about my thoughts on free trade.
It’s also worth noting that VD didn’t say the landing didn’t happen. He said there are enough indicators to know that some aspect of the official narrative isn’t true which could or could not include the landing.
Exactly. It's always intriguing to see people who literally can't read or understand what I wrote puffing out their chests and loftily offering to explain to me how every single aspect of the Official Story of the Apollo program and the Moon landings is not only absolutely true, but utterly beyond the possibility of any questioning whatsoever.

With that in mind, watch this and listen to the unusual, carefully chosen language about "participating in an adventure... on and about the Moon."


Now, I don't know why three of the greatest heroes of humanity are behaving in such a deceptive and shady manner after accomplishing one of the greatest, if not the greatest feats in the recorded history of Man. I don't know what they are hiding, or what it is that they are so obviously attempting to avoid saying. Owen Benjamin has proposed one potential explanation, others have provided a wide variety of other possibilities. I don't even pretend to know which is correct; I am genuinely agnostic on the subject. But one thing I have observed through my studies of history is that the objective truth that holds up over time very often diverges from both the Official Story as well as the primary alternative theories posited by the skeptics.

And since I don't believe the GDP figures that are released by the U.S. government on a regular basis, and I don't accept any of the various justifications that are offered for its various foreign adventures, why would you ever expect me to believe everything the U.S. government says about its historical accomplishments?

Labels: , ,

276 Comments:

1 – 200 of 276 Newer› Newest»
Blogger Maurice December 14, 2018 4:20 AM  

"This is all HORRIBLE rhetoric for VD and Owen. I don't know what the hell these guys are thinking. Not only does it make them look crazy to the normies AND the people with a science/engineering background, but it also shits all over the greatest achievement of European man, the one achievement that we know will have monuments lasting a million years. "

Dear children, keep yourselves from idols. - 1 John 5:21

Blogger AdognamedOp December 14, 2018 4:26 AM  

So believing a nation that gave us the best aircraft and space borne vechicles landed men on the moon makes me a "Moonie"? Fk off savage.

Blogger VD December 14, 2018 4:31 AM  

So believing a nation that gave us the best aircraft and space borne vechicles landed men on the moon makes me a "Moonie"?

Certainly. Anyone who takes ANYTHING the U.S. government says at face value is at least as credulous as the average cultist.

Be sure to eat your 11 helpings of bread today. With margarine.

Observe, those who would learn the dark arts of communication, what excellent rhetoric "Moonie" is.

Blogger Assyrian Nationalist December 14, 2018 4:55 AM  

Interesting reactions. Very visceral, similar to what you'd get when questioning evolution or the Official Story of the 9/11 attacks.

Blogger Underachiever December 14, 2018 5:05 AM  

You are on the right track, Vox.

The Earth is flat, space is fake, and the moon landings were a Masonic hoax staged in part to bring people away from God. The Soviet Union never revealed the deception because there is a conspiracy to create a world government headed by the Antichrist, and that conspiracy must have had sufficient power over the Soviet Union.

By the way, you can find pictures of Buzz Aldrin doing the 666/one eye symbolism that everyone in Hollywood loves doing. I presume if you want fame, it helps to sell your soul to Satan, and that explains why this symbolism is so common.

There are also doppelgangers of the astronauts who supposedly died in the Challenger Disaster running around with the same or similar names (one of them teachers at Yale Law School).

Psalm 104:5: Who laid the foundations of the earth, that it should not be removed for ever.

Revelation 6:13 And the stars of heaven fell unto the earth, even as a fig tree casteth her untimely figs, when she is shaken of a mighty wind. (If every star is larger than the Earth, then wouldn't even one of them falling unto the Earth destroy it?)

A plain reading of Genesis says that the Earth was created before the Sun.
"And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and years: 15And let them be for lights in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth: and it was so. 16And God made two great lights; the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night: he made the stars also. 17And God set them in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth, 18And to rule over the day and over the night, and to divide the light from the darkness: and God saw that it was good. 19And the evening and the morning were the fourth day."

Here is a picture of the masons praying to a pyramid.

https://aplanetruth.info/space-travelers-and-freemasons/

Blogger CoolHand December 14, 2018 5:06 AM  

What I don't understand here VD is how you jump from the idea that the US govt lies directly to the rhetoric of calling anyone who thinks man has set foot on the moon a "moonie".

It's excellent rhetoric, I just don't understand why it's being deployed as it is.

Sure, I get why you'd deride people who begin their explanations with "I believe..." when dealing with any govt on earth.

What I don't understand is why you go from there to the sweeping generalization of everyone who thinks the moon landings happened.

There's a lot of territory under that arc, and a hell of a lot of evidence that doesn't have to be taken as gospel from the govt to get there.

Sort of the same tactic that people who buy the govt story on 9/11 use to lump everyone who doesn't buy it wholesale in with the people who think GWB was in those towers personally hanging micronanowhatever thermite grenades from every beam.

Is that not a form of discredit/disqualify? Why deploy such a scattergun against folks on your own blog?

Certainly there were some people who were just REEEEing from the mere mention of skepticism, but dogpile soon ensued wherein anyone who didn't affirm the "didn't happen" line absolutely and without question was decried as a boomer cuck in love with the govt and Muh Science.

Help me out here, what was the point of gathering everyone around and doing the "One of Us! One of Us!" chant?

Your position was clearly stated, but the comment section quickly devolved well beyond the case you yourself laid out.

Was there a reason you did this?

Blogger M Cephas December 14, 2018 5:11 AM  

I'm just waiting for the day Vox Day and Owen Benjamin read "Galileo Was Wrong, The Church Was Right" or watch "The Principle Movie" so they can start questioning the Copernican Principle, and the Theory of Relativity.

It's rather lonely being a geocentrist that is also not some annoying flat-earther.

Blogger Dominik K. December 14, 2018 5:12 AM  

It would be impossible to exaggerate my lack of concern about how people with one-half to two-thirds of my IQ happen to regard me. That's like being concerned about being informed that my son's dog has doubts about my thoughts on free trade.

Being one of these people I had to laugh nevertheless. You still can be funny Vox, even if it was not intended. This part made my day.

Blogger Remonstrances December 14, 2018 5:19 AM  

Well, first of all, you'll have to build a massive rocket...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P6MOnehCOUw

Blogger Al From Bay Shore December 14, 2018 5:28 AM  

This moon stuff is above my pay-grade. Yes, I get the fact that the gov't has lied many, many times but I've too many other things on my plate. I'll pick and choose those things from this blog in which to delve. I like the stuff about the Sci-Fi literature controversies and how the comics industry operates. Just because you follow a dude doesn't mean you have to delve into every single topic and concept that is entertained by such. I'm waiting for the next blog post.

Blogger Duke Norfolk December 14, 2018 5:35 AM  

"It's always intriguing to see people who literally can't read or understand what I wrote puffing out their chests and loftily offering to explain to me how every single aspect of the Official Story of the Apollo program and the Moon landings is not only absolutely true, but utterly beyond the possibility of any questioning whatsoever."

Yeah, if nothing else it's a good reading comprehension test. And it's depressing to see how many seemingly somewhat intelligent people fail, badly.

Of course it also has much to do with emotional triggers and such, as it does with poor reading comp. But still.

I find this endlessly amusing. And the thing is that a decade ago (or less) I would have been much more likely to react more like these folks do. Largely due to reading here I have become much more skeptical (and yes, cynical at times) about the world we live in. A world that's increasingly rife with lies.

Blogger Individual 6 December 14, 2018 5:35 AM  

During that conference the astronauts were told to speak slowly so that the journalists could keep up and write down what they are saying, you dumbass.

Blogger Shimshon December 14, 2018 5:40 AM  

It's amazing how a briefly expressed skepticism is taken to mean that you are a hoaxxer. Not just once, but over and over. Does that make them ineducable?

That press conference is very odd indeed.

Blogger GithYankee December 14, 2018 5:42 AM  

Dave McGowan's "Wagging the Moondoggie" is enough to get people started on a skeptical path. The .pdf is available free with a simple search.

The moon landing is the usual narrative: Believe in this thing or else, despite the fact the "proof" is easily faked, the "proof" has never been replicated, the documentation of the "proof" has been lost, and not believing in the "proof" makes you a heretic.

Blogger Ron December 14, 2018 5:45 AM  

But hey, we had to have landed on the moon because I watched it live on tv.

Uncovering the truth about the moon landing might make an interesting Alt Hero Q comic.

Blogger bobby December 14, 2018 5:48 AM  

This is written by someone who is clearly new here."

Nope. Here a lot. And I understand agnosticism, although your post title of "no one went to the moon" was enough to get a derisive mention from the person I directed towards your site.

I like to point people to your writings when I think they're ready for a sort of next-step progression. Most aren't going to just wander in by accident and learn - you're presented widely as too much of a boogeyman, specifically because it allows people to dismiss you outside the merits. My comment meant, the moon post doesn't help that effort.

But, your blog, your party, and I can't expect you to serve my purposes.

Blogger Al From Bay Shore December 14, 2018 5:50 AM  

Now you dudes got me thinking about "Capricorn One". If, say, "Day of the Jackal" and "The Odessa File" are a type of fiction based on some semblance of truth then.....

Blogger john darson December 14, 2018 5:57 AM  

I think it is quite possible we landed on the moon, but the average person is conditioned in the pavlovian sense to urgently screech if some precious notion of theres is questioned. Truth does not fear investigation. To stop the investigation of truth, thought-terminating cliches are used (right wing conspiracy theory, racist etc) and that is a serious symptom present in current society. The video of armstrong is quite weird, the sense one gets when viewing it is that it is a man acting under tight control. An objective thinker would probably be able to examine the facts and make a cogent counterpoint, rather than squeal when questioned, in the manner of the average ardent supporter of the global free market thought experiment.

Blogger Cluttermonkey December 14, 2018 5:58 AM  

I had a good chcukle at "Moonie"

Blogger Space Monkey December 14, 2018 5:58 AM  

It's funny.

People are so focused on the Apollo 11 landings.

They pour over the video, the press conferences.

There wasn't just one landing, though. There were five.

Five separate missions and landings.

If it was fake, why bother with five landings?

One would have been more than sufficient.

Five is overkill for faked missions. Way overkill.

It's highly improbable that the landings were fake.

Blogger Al From Bay Shore December 14, 2018 5:59 AM  

@18 I'm going to "appropriate" your term "thought-terminating cliches" if you don't mind. I like that.

Blogger VD December 14, 2018 6:00 AM  

It's excellent rhetoric, I just don't understand why it's being deployed as it is.

Because the usual sort of thoughtless idiots elected to attack me on the subject. Do you not know me at all? If someone throws a rhetorical molotov cocktail at me, I'll launch a rhetorical nuke in response.

Deal with it, Moonies. You chose this fight. All I did was express my usual doubts about the veracity of the U.S. government.

Keep it up and you know what my next book will be....

Blogger VD December 14, 2018 6:04 AM  

My comment meant, the moon post doesn't help that effort.

Probably not. But when have I ever indicated that I give even the smallest of damns in that regard? If I wanted to be popular, I'd make Shapiro look principled and Peterson look honest by comparison.

Blogger Shimshon December 14, 2018 6:05 AM  

"Keep it up and you know what my next book will be...."

It won't be ASoS. But if the response it SJWAP then the delay is worth it. Have Doritos on me.

Blogger Dr Sarcasticus December 14, 2018 6:08 AM  

I would invite everyone to watch this short, 3 minute video which demonstrates that sounds were heard on the moon: https://youtu.be/w5O43FkzYZc

This is as close to a smoking gun that I could find which shows the moon landings were faked.

Blogger SemiSpook37 December 14, 2018 6:08 AM  

Basically, it appears that Vox and Owen are touching upon something I happen to deal with on a daily basis, having spent my entire career in the M-I Complex. “Official Story”, in my opinion, is govie-speak for something going on that they didn’t expect, and rather than be up front about reality, they just decided to whip up a story that would preclude most people from asking questions for the sole purpose of covering their asses.

It’s always about what they want to hear, not what we need to hear.

Blogger CoolHand December 14, 2018 6:11 AM  

@22 Guess I missed the opening salvo then. First I heard of the whole deal was that other post. Haven't gotten to watch the Dark Stream of same name yet, had a long day in the shop.

Totally explains why I'm lost, I entirely missed the start of the war. Showed up late to the party.

The whole deal does remind me never to poke VD without ample reason and medical supplies on hand though, so there's that.

Blogger john darson December 14, 2018 6:11 AM  

@21 It is not from me, but from book from one Robert Jay Lifton

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thought-terminating_clich%C3%A9

Blogger Monocle434 December 14, 2018 6:16 AM  

>Designate those who disagree to be "Moonies"
>Trust my (uninformed) opinion because of my high IQ

Didn't you JUST finish writing a book about the Cult like behavior of Jordan Peterson? If it's between being lied to by a Satanist, and listening to someone who is THIS wrong about a scientific matter - relying on an argument based on impressions, analogy, and inductive inference, I'm almost inclined to choose the former.

How is one to trust any of your other conclusions, if you and Owen are choosing THIS hill to die on? I don't think either of you all realize how absurd the position is to those with significant familiarity with the science and history of the matter.

Don't think I'll be returning. Being this confident AND being this wrong would be career ending malpractice in a profession or engineering.

Blogger The Lab Manager December 14, 2018 6:18 AM  

I've watched most of that conference presented in the clip above. You would think these guys would be ecstatic and excited. The whole video of them being asked questions and their responses is just weird especially after achieving such a feat.

Blogger DJT December 14, 2018 6:20 AM  

Ignore mountains of data, which were produced in the other thread, and instead hone in on odd phrases by astronauts, many of which were awkward people who didn't seek fame?

Address the data and facts offered in the other thread. If something was wrong with the moon missions, you have to offer more than a few weird phrases in one of thousands of interviews. Because the slight odd innuendo is Glenn Beck chalkboard-tier.

Why would they fake nine missions to the moon, each one years in the making, every minute detail of which is available for public scrutiny? Continuing after most of the public lost interest? It doesn't hold up.

Was Lewis and Clark also fake? The government funded that, and there's a lot less data for it.

Blogger DJT December 14, 2018 6:26 AM  

You would think these guys would be ecstatic and excited.

Stop expecting a professional man to behave like a woman. Put down the soy.

Many of the astronauts were excited at the time. Listen to the flight loop recordings. If you want excitement, listen to Jim Lovell while photographing the Earthrise scene. These guys enjoyed themselves, but were not overtaken by emotion.

And Armstrong was especially known to be quite sullen in general.

Blogger Christopher B December 14, 2018 6:34 AM  

I find it interesting that to support your scepticism about a government project supposedly carried out in secret you cite as an example a different government project known to have been penetrated by a hostile power, and been the subject of a coverup to disguise the extent of the breach.

Blogger DJT December 14, 2018 6:34 AM  

What precisely is in doubt? The launches happened, the flights happened (they were tracked by multiple countries). The training for all of it happened.

So they did everything except the landing itself? Why? The landing was easier than TLI and docking.

Blogger Emmett Fitz-Hume December 14, 2018 6:35 AM  

Shimshon wrote:It's amazing how a briefly expressed skepticism is taken to mean that you are a hoaxxer. Not just once, but over and over. Does that make them ineducable?


And it applies to just about every orthodox cultural belief. Climate change, Evolution, JFK's assassination, etc.

What's even more interesting to me is how the Skeptical community, a community I used to be a member of back in my callow, atheist youth, has mutated in the past few decades.

There was a time that these questions, were encouraged, even if only a thought experiment. But they've become gatekeepers themselves, regarding these subjects that People Must Not Question Or Else.

Men like Michael Shermer, Brian Dunning, Adam Savage, and James Randi, people I used to admire, do little else but shout down or ridicule skeptics, people skeptical of them and their preferred theories.

This is a world of lies. Up above, Duke Norfolk says it is increasingly rife with them. Start asking questions. Liars hate that.

Blogger Fenton Wood December 14, 2018 6:38 AM  

NASA hired Stanley Kubrick to fake the moon landing, but being a perfectionist, he insisted on shooting on location.

Blogger Al From Bay Shore December 14, 2018 6:40 AM  

OT: Cernovich has turned against Jordan Peterson.

Blogger pdwalker December 14, 2018 6:40 AM  

It’s highly improbable that the landings were fake

That’s not what VD claimed. All he said is that it seems like they are lying about something, and given how many times the govt has lied to the population, it would be unsurprising if they weren’t lying about something here.

Is reading comprehension taught in school anymore?

Blogger DJT December 14, 2018 6:42 AM  

And I'll say it again:

If anything seems impossible today that was possible in the 1960s,it is because of demographic change. No exceptions.

This may be a law. I have to think about it some more. I haven't thought of any counter-examples yet.

Blogger Tupla-J December 14, 2018 6:43 AM  

@6, the reason is that if one gets triggered by the word, it should tell him something important about himself.

Finding out your blind spots and emotional triggers is good for you.

Blogger Strings6459 December 14, 2018 6:44 AM  

For a real fake NASA story watch video of the Challenger explosion and see if you can find any evidence of an o-ring burn through. After the explosion neither booster has smoke coming from any where but the nozzle and their trajectories are similar, the burn through would provide another force to alter flight dynamics. Exhaust hot enough to burn through the side of the fuel tank would show signs of of its' existence. There should be smoke.


In a video side view of the explosion flame can be spotted in at least one frame where the structure attaches the shuttle to the fuel tank. Early TV reports discussed a crack found in the structure during pre-flight inspection. As far as I know the final report makes no mention of what happened to the cracked structure under the heavy vibration of launch. So the explosion was attributed to a vendor rather than a bad decision by NASA.

The tribute to Reagan video available on YouTube has excellent footage of the explosion.

Blogger Brad Richards December 14, 2018 6:44 AM  

Vox Day reminds me of a certain cousin of mine. My cousin is a smart guy, with an...interesting...social skill. He will sometimes take a completely outlandish position and make it seem completely believable. He will lead people along, seemingly entirely serious, until he has them convinced. I swear, he could make you believe that water is not wet.

Sometimes he ends the charade, telling people it was all just a joke. Other times, he just leaves the people completely gas-lighted - until they come to their senses on their own, maybe days later. As I said, it's an "interesting" social skill.

I don't know what Vox's game is here. He's done this a couple of times before as well, but this is the most egregious. I rarely comment, because I assume most people are smart enough to see when they are being manipulated. In this case, apparently not.

If someone thinks vaccinations cause autism, if they think the moon landings were faked, if they think 9/11 was a plot by the government, if they believe in chem-trails, if they believe the earth is flat - well, likely there's no way to reach them. But don't let yourself be led into this looney bin, just because Vox is playing mind-games for fun.

Blogger Galahad78 December 14, 2018 6:45 AM  

It never ceases to amaze me how people jumps to what they think VD has said, instead of understanding what VD has actually said.

(I'm guilty, also, until I learnt better).

Blogger DJT December 14, 2018 6:46 AM  

Being skeptical on what grounds? Nothing is offered, no analysis of data that doesn't add up. Just an odd phrase from an astronaut (which I don't think is odd coming from Armstrong).

And the poorly understood things like parallax in photos, not understanding different kinds of radiation, etc.

It's on par with flat earthism, and the constant moving of goalposts is the same.

Blogger VD December 14, 2018 6:46 AM  

Didn't you JUST finish writing a book about the Cult like behavior of Jordan Peterson? If it's between being lied to by a Satanist, and listening to someone who is THIS wrong about a scientific matter - relying on an argument based on impressions, analogy, and inductive inference, I'm almost inclined to choose the former.

I'm not at all surprised. A lot of people who are connected to NASA are inclined to Satanism.

How is one to trust any of your other conclusions, if you and Owen are choosing THIS hill to die on? I don't think either of you all realize how absurd the position is to those with significant familiarity with the science and history of the matter.

Take the opposite position on all of them, by all means. Good luck with that.

Don't think I'll be returning.

Good riddance.

Blogger DJT December 14, 2018 6:47 AM  

I expect VD is trolling and I'm just too autistic to catch on.

Blogger VD December 14, 2018 6:50 AM  

Being skeptical on what grounds? Nothing is offered, no analysis of data that doesn't add up. Just an odd phrase from an astronaut (which I don't think is odd coming from Armstrong).

Then you're either stupid or autistic.

It's on par with flat earthism, and the constant moving of goalposts is the same.

The only people I've seen moving any goalposts are the Moonies. The fact that you bring up "flat earthism" is self-discrediting. You should know better than to rely upon that sort of inept rhetoric here, Moonie.

Blogger Danny von Canstein December 14, 2018 6:51 AM  

Hahaha! "Moonies". Oh man, that is brilliant rhetoric. I am really enjoying the knee-jerk reactionaries, Vox. All you do is question the "Official Narrative" & all-of-a-sudden, the Moonies come out in force, all guns blazing!! ROFL

I really think many of them have already concocted several reasons WHY you would DARE to question the almighty narrative, when you've given precisely ZERO reasons other than that the "official story" is rarely the whole truth and nothing but the truth. That, in itself, is ENOUGH to question!

Maybe they found aliens or evidence of an ancient interstellar civilization and chose not to reveal it.

Maybe they only really landed two or three missions later.

Maybe Earth really IS the center of mass in the Universe and the geocentrists are correct.

Who the hell knows!??! But the "Moonies" will instantly tar and feather Mr. Day here at the mere mention of questioning their Holy Sacraments. I just shake my head at those readers HERE who put so much faith in their religion of Science or their government, especially after all the great analysis on this very blog which points to both continually failing to deliver on reproducibility, reliability, and repeatable ability to verify professed Truth. They should know better.

Thanks for standing firm, as always, Vox & for continuing to expose the darker parts of our human nature and condition. It is, as ever, very enlightening and always a pleasure to read. I am a fan for life & appreciate you continual genuine seeking for Truth in all things. Thank You, Sir

Blogger Dave December 14, 2018 6:56 AM  

Vox, are you jealous of the people that have walked on the moon? Why else would you be doing this? Don't you understand the good the space program has done for mankind?



In all seriousness, please don't ever stop doing what you're doing Vox, and by that I mean stirring up sht without regard for feelings or opinions. It's why we keep coming back.

The truth is out there.

Blogger Sillon Bono December 14, 2018 6:56 AM  

I'm a midwit that as a kid had an almost obsessive passion for space exploration.

What VD says makes perfect sense.

To me (my opinion) is that yes, the USA landed on the moon, but it was done in such a precarious manner that all information had to be "massaged" into a heroic story.

It is said that history is written by the winners, and the USA won the race to the moon.

However if anyone can prove that it was faked, I won't be the least surprised and my world won't shatter more than it has already after learning that most of what I have believed most of my life were just lies.

Blogger VFM #7634 December 14, 2018 6:57 AM  

I have read that there was Freemasonic occult funny business that would not go over well with the American people. Perhaps that has something to do with the shadiness of the Apollo 11 guys.

Blogger Durandel December 14, 2018 6:58 AM  

Please write the book. I want ASOS but seeing this “cult of Jordan”-esque response over questioning the official government narrative, I have a hunger for more cruelty art from the Dark Lord.

Blogger Danny von Canstein December 14, 2018 6:58 AM  

@ Sillon Bono

However if anyone can prove that it was faked, I won't be the least surprised and my world won't shatter more than it has already after learning that most of what I have believed most of my life were just lies.

THAT is the sanest, healthiest attitude with which to approach this or any other topic in question. Very well said.

Blogger VD December 14, 2018 6:59 AM  

I expect VD is trolling and I'm just too autistic to catch on.

Not at all. I have been perfectly clear. If the U.S. government says X, the truth is not X. Period. It may be X+Y, it may be X-Z, it may be Q. But whatever it is, it is not X.

Now, what you are too autistic to see is that the behavior of the Apollo 11 astronauts is entirely incongruous with the putative situation. Compare their behavior with John Glenn's after his historic flight, or even the crews of the various space shuttles. Something does not add up.

Look, this isn't that hard. Human nature and human behavior patterns are far more reliable than science.

Blogger Garuna December 14, 2018 7:02 AM  

It's very entertaining to see all these jimmies so rustled.

Though I am a moonie myself, clearly Vox has struck some kind of nerve. This isn't the normal response to what is perceived as ridiculous. This is anger.

I'm guessing most of these angry moonies are atheists who "fucking love science".

Blogger Jack Ward December 14, 2018 7:05 AM  

Not read any of the comments on this, but, my 2 cents worth.
My, now passed brother-in-law Terry, worked for NASA since graduating from Washington State with major of Aerospace engineering. During his time there he worked in the hot seat of mission control, was a lunar module engineer on the Apollo missions [if they had a problem Terry was the go to guy] and spent years running a 1000 person division at Johnson in Houston. His Division prepped the astronauts for mission and he supervised that big water tank you see often with the Astronauts floating around pretending it was zero gravity.
Enough of qualifications. I often would ask him about the conspiracy stuff and he would just laugh. He would ask me just who put in place the radar corner reflectors on the surface. He would point that 'something' blasted off from the launch pads and provided radar tracking reflections as the vehicles reached orbit. And, the number of people who would have had to keep the secret would have been massive. I also asked him where NASA stored the recovered alien ships and bodies. He also laughed at these questions, but, interestingly, never offered up any of the details as he did on the science and mechanics of pushing a lot of metal into orbit.
Now, he had his job at NASA and others had theirs. He may not have known. But for Terry to be silent about such would have required a great inducement to be so. I can see a situation here where there is truth and then truth. If entities from off planet are interfacing with us they could have provided those inducements. I imagine it would not have taken more than one meeting with a group of them and their sharing their reasons you humans need to keep this secret for the secret to be kept. Also could have been something like mind wipe. I have no idea. Heck, my sister has a dime that went to the moon with one of the astronauts who gave it to her with documentation. That would be hard to enter as legal proof but there it is. Terry gave me one of the few, direct prints of a famous photo shot by an astronaut, of another astronaut, in space suit, on an EVA in orbit. You would probably recognize it on sight. One of my prized possessions.
To modern day. These days anything can be faked. To an extent. Be interesting to see how long the Chinese rover on the Moon's dark side last. If it ever gets there.
My bottom line is we did go to the moon. I also suspect that things got interesting real quick somewhere along the way. We may never know for sure, until and if, the GE has a news conference with strange looking folks from Tau Ceti or wherever. Won't be holding my breath.

Blogger Desert Screamer December 14, 2018 7:06 AM  

Thanks to the (((Mainstream Media))) manipulation of history we are approaching a new era of skepticism,where if you were not there and saw it with your own eyes,there are 50% of probabilities that it never happened.

Blogger Doktor Jeep December 14, 2018 7:07 AM  

It is almost as bad as questioning the holocaust.....

Blogger Bastion Harm December 14, 2018 7:11 AM  

Al From Bay Shore wrote:Now you dudes got me thinking about "Capricorn One"...

That was the first thing I thought of when I read this. That movie came out in '77 and was that year's most successful independent film. Makes one wonder if there wasn't a lot of skepticism in the air even back then. (Then, again, it was the 70s....sigh.)

Myself? More than likely we did go to the Moon, per the Official Narrative...however, if it turns out that that's not the case...wouldn't surprise me, considering the Empire of Lies we live in.

Blogger Bastion Harm December 14, 2018 7:18 AM  

Garuna wrote:It's very entertaining to see all these jimmies so rustled.

Though I am a moonie myself, clearly Vox has struck some kind of nerve. This isn't the normal response to what is perceived as ridiculous. This is anger.

I'm guessing most of these angry moonies are atheists who "fucking love science".


That's what gets me also.

As I said, I am perfectly willing to go along with the Official Narrative in this instance, but, frankly, if we didn't go that wouldn't surprise me either, nor would I be upset about it. Seems like vexations and vanities to me, per King Solomon.

Blogger Dominik K. December 14, 2018 7:23 AM  

VD bring it on! I had to laugh loud and that does not happen often. Maybe the contact with Owen has a positive influence on your humor.

Blogger Al From Bay Shore December 14, 2018 7:25 AM  

@59 I am a Moonie. At the same time, I too think it reasonable to entertain the idea that lies could be involved in the Moon Landing narrative. Our government has been caught in lies about many things. Why is the Moon Landing off limits to question? Is this not a fundamental criticism of the Far Left? They make rational and honest inquiry off limits to certain topics. The entire debate on race and IQ is one such topic.

Blogger Dominik K. December 14, 2018 7:32 AM  

I'm spamming the comment site, but VD's replies are awesome. They are not intended to be funny, but I enjoyed reading the comments so much. Please Moonies keep poking the bear. VD is the most lovable arrogant guy on this planet.

Blogger M Cephas December 14, 2018 7:32 AM  

I don't get how some people are saying they'll quit reading the blog over this. Are they gay for the moon or something?

Blogger LeeWillyMinifees December 14, 2018 7:34 AM  

Nobody can prove the existence or non-existence of moon landings.

But one thing we absolutely can prove to be false is the Apollo mission photo and video evidence.

The photos and videos are fake, because the real color of the Moon is brown.

Five independent sources confirm:

a) Spectrometry readings from Earth.
b) Telescope observation.
c) Apollo 10 photos.
d) Soviet moon mission photos.
e) Chinese Chang'e rover photos.

All five show a brown surface of the Moon. Anything that's gray is not the real Moon.

Blogger Chris Lutz December 14, 2018 7:37 AM  

@38 That’s not what VD claimed. All he said is that it seems like they are lying about something, and given how many times the govt has lied to the population, it would be unsurprising if they weren’t lying about something here.

To the extent that I lean one way or the other, I tend to assume that the landings were faked due to the means, motive, and opportunity heuristic and because I am a confirmed cynic when it comes to Official Stories narrated by the U.S. government.

Yeah, why would anyone believe that Vox tends to the belief that the moon landings were faked. I mean that's what he said. There's a difference between "I tend to assume that the landings were faked..." and I doubt parts of the story about going to the moon. The latter argument is what he is using now. It can include the former, but is much more general than the moon landing didn't happen.

People offered a lot of evidence refuting the conspiracy theorists claims in the other thread. Vox's latest evidence is astronauts not acting like PR flaks.

Blogger wreckage December 14, 2018 7:38 AM  

The moon landings aren't fake, but I strongly suspect there were some decidedly taboo secret side projects. Military applications and deliberate seeding of extremophiles would be my two top candidates.

Blogger JD Curtis December 14, 2018 7:40 AM  

20-JUN-09

"An experiment, begun when Apollo 11 astronauts Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin left a mirror on the lunar surface 40 years ago to allow Earth-based astronomers to fire lasers at it, has been ended by American science chiefs.

The National Science Foundation (NSF) last week wrote to scientists working at the McDonald Laser ranging station at Fort Davis in Texas to tell them the annual $125,000 funding for their research project was going be terminated following a review of its scientific merits.

The decision means that four decades of continuous lunar laser research at the McDonald Observatory, run by the University of Texas at Austin, will be halted by the end of this year."

Link

Blogger The Lab Manager December 14, 2018 7:44 AM  

"Stop expecting a professional man to behave like a woman. Put down the soy. "

FU! Where did I say that? You would think they would be showing a lot more energy. Sure, they were not the attention whores of today, but still, even when I do something professionally accomplished you would feel good about it.

Blogger Cataline Sergius December 14, 2018 7:44 AM  

Al From Bay Shore wrote:Now you dudes got me thinking about "Capricorn One".


Presumably some agency was pocketing those billions while pretending to make those landings on the cheap.

Why did they not continue such a successful long game con?

Why did they not fake Mars landings as well?

Much more importantly, why didn't they fake Venus landings?

Now, that is the real question.

Because surface conditions make that impossible, you answer.

It is radically different from Earth in other respects. It has the densest atmosphere of the four terrestrial planets, consisting of more than 96% carbon dioxide. The atmospheric pressure at the planet's surface is 92 times that of Earth, or roughly the pressure found 900 m (3,000 ft) underwater on Earth. Venus is by far the hottest planet in the Solar System, with a mean surface temperature of 735 K (462 °C; 863 °F), even though Mercury is closer to the Sun. Venus is shrouded by an opaque layer of highly reflective clouds of sulfuric acid, preventing its surface from being seen from space in visible light. It may have had water oceans in the past,[15][16] but these would have vaporized as the temperature rose due to a runaway greenhouse effect.[17] The water has probably photodissociated, and the free hydrogen has been swept into interplanetary space by the solar wind because of the lack of a planetary magnetic field.[18] Venus's surface is a dry desertscape interspersed with slab-like rocks and is periodically resurfaced by volcanism.

Ah, but how do we know this?

From space probes you blind fools! Space probes run by the Soviet Union (do you think it actually collapsed?) and NASA!

Of course they faked the data. But why?

Even into the early Seventies Carl Sagan was claiming that Venus must be teaming with life to have a cloud cover like that?

What did they really find there?

And why are they covering it up?

The Moon and Mars are just a smoke screen for what is happening on Venus.

Connect the dots, sheeple.



My god that quote is from Infogalactic, the rot runs that deep!

Blogger Sim1776 December 14, 2018 7:48 AM  

Nice try to "agree and amplify"...

Vox said nothing about "flat earth."

Blogger VD December 14, 2018 7:49 AM  

Yeah, why would anyone believe that Vox tends to the belief that the moon landings were faked. I mean that's what he said. There's a difference between "I tend to assume that the landings were faked..." and I doubt parts of the story about going to the moon. The latter argument is what he is using now.

Now? My opinion and my arguments have not changed one iota since 2006. What part of "to the extent that I lean one way or the other" do you find hard to understand. Do you not know what "agnostic" means?

If I had to place a bet on a) the Moon landings narrative being essentially true and b) the Moon landings narrative being significantly false in some way, I would choose (b). But I don't have to, so I don't.

What I am much more interested in knowing is why so many Moonies are so passionately attached to the complete truth of the narrative. That makes no sense at all to me.

Blogger Lazarus December 14, 2018 7:54 AM  

This article uses The Shining (Kubrik) and Toy Story in it's presentation. That's impressive.

The behavior of the American space program is itself a contradiction. How does one get from the first step into near Earth orbit and then all the way to the Moon in a decade, only to spend the next 50 years going no further than a few hundred miles, with no possibility of reaching the Moon with current technology? The lie is exposed in the false history of NASA’s mythology.

Anomalous Behavior of the Apollo Space Program

Blogger linesy December 14, 2018 7:57 AM  

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=TXgFAvdQWY0

Blogger Harry Spitz December 14, 2018 8:04 AM  

Astronomers have pictures of the LEMs ON THE 'EFFING MOON take from here on Earth.
https://www.nasa.gov/sites/default/files/images/515418main_020411a.jpg
So either you are trolling us, or you've gone completely 'round the bend.

Blogger Felix Krull December 14, 2018 8:10 AM  

That's it? A video with Armstrong being awkward?

Blogger basementhomebrewer December 14, 2018 8:10 AM  

The "why do multiple missions even after the public lost interest" question is the worst defense I have seen. If you know you have flaws in the footage you provided and you don't want people to pour over it, what do you do? Do it again till you get it right and shove it in people's faces. Do it until everyone is bored and uninterested. Only a small percentage of the population would go back and look at something again if they have seen it so often they were bored with it. Then to cap it off, destroy the original footage when people too young to have seen it live and become bored with it start asking to see the footage.

I am rather like VD. I don't know the answer on if it happened or not. I do suspect it didn't happen the way we were told it did. I also believe that thousands of people could work on specialized parts of a fake project and not realize that the project was fake, or that aspects of it were fake.

Blogger Robert What? December 14, 2018 8:14 AM  

@Vox, this is a curious hill to choose to die on. But that aside, I am not offended by anyone's skepticism. I have seen a number of articles & videos both fer and agin'. The most compelling con to my view is the claim that the Van Allen belts would have fried them. However, weighing the evidence, I choose to believe that the Moon landings did take place. And I have a hypothesis as to why so many believe they were hoaxes: because we could not land on the moon today despite vastly superior technology. Why? Because grand achievements like a Moon landing require a cohesive, highly STEM educated, high-trust society where excellence and achievement are aspired to. In today's America we have none of those: Victimhood is our highest aspiration. Unchecked post-1965 immigration and feminism have destroyed the cohesiveness and trust-levels. It also costs a lot of money and our nation's wealth is being destroyed by forced wealth redistribution (both down to the non-productive poor classes and up to the non-productive uber-wealthy "elites"). And forget about a manned mission to Mars. It will never happen, at least by the United States. That cohesiveness, trust-levels and aspirations are required for grand achievements, and they don't come any grander than a manned mission to Mars.

Blogger ZhukovG December 14, 2018 8:15 AM  

Dark Lord, these two posts have been very entertaining.

My personal take-away is less about the truth or falseness of the moon landings and more about the way people react to your skepticism. That people seem unable to, take a step back, and examine critically, long held beliefs is fascinating.

While lean toward being a 'Moonie' myself, I always try to apply the following rule:

'Trust your Mother, but always cut the cards.'

Blogger David The Good December 14, 2018 8:17 AM  

Doktor Jeep wrote:It is almost as bad as questioning the holocaust.....

6,000,000 astronauts died so we could go to the moon.

Blogger basementhomebrewer December 14, 2018 8:18 AM  

The other thing to consider is that perhaps Apollo 11 was faked but one or several others of the missions were successful. It was awfully convenient that they hit Kennedy's time line. They would have to fake all of the surface shots subsequently because it would look too different, but all the space footage could then be real and they could place the reflectors and artifacts they said they had placed on the Apollo 11 mission.

Blogger bobby December 14, 2018 8:22 AM  

But when have I ever indicated that I give even the smallest of damns in that regard? If I wanted to be popular . . ."

I know, but it still gets frustrating. You have things to say that I think ought to get a wider audience, but sometimes it seems that you revel in pushing away possible readers. Someone who balks when they read a post title of "No one went to the moon" isn't automatically someone you shouldn't care about educating.

But, like I said, that's my issue, not yours.

Blogger tz December 14, 2018 8:26 AM  

I don't want to see you moon, but I really don't want to see uranus.

I'm generally skeptical of anything anyone in power says. The Bereans verified everything.

The current thing is 9/11 and building 7 and there were explosives (that no one noticed planting with the complex wiring or strange people there). Some think the 4th plane was kidnapped instead of crashing in PA.

What is worse is the inconsistencies in the official narrative are taken and an entire completely absurd counter narrative built atop the inconsistencies. And if you don't believe the entire counter narrative you are stupid or with the enemies.

It also happens with extra-terrestrial aliens, the patent office or something else not approving some magic tech.

Note that 1/3 of the American People still believe Russia stole the election (rather than an electoral majority didn't want Hillary). Right now we can see the Union and Confederate narratives over the war between the states that happened a long time ago and we have contemporaneous documents, diaries, letters, etc. from the era! Secession (opposed to the war) about tariffs? Why can't I find one declaration of secession mentioning tariffs? Maybe it was a very complex series of events?

The first thing any wise person learns is to say "I don't know". Basically to know the limits of their knowledge. How do we know what we THINK we know? And when you go there you find your percieved world may be a fantasy land.

Another example is rejecting the bodily ressurrection of Jesus. We have more documentary evidence on that than Caesar. Yet compare the reaction if I said "Jesus never existed" v.s. "Caesar never existed". And the miracles? If you believe in God, they are easy, if you don't you would dismiss a true miracle to your specifications in front of you as a conjuring trick or hallucination.

Blogger Redpill Angel December 14, 2018 8:30 AM  

The astronauts do sound very cautious, even subdued. Sad? Very odd. In the past, I always chalked this up to the sometimes extremely phlegmatic personalities of men who succeed in very risky endeavors: You could call it the Captain Sully Syndrome. But the astronauts sound weird and rehearsed.

Blogger VD December 14, 2018 8:32 AM  

That's it? A video with Armstrong being awkward?

I correctly identified Jordan Peterson on the basis of even less information. And no, obviously, that's not it, which you would know if you had actually read the post instead of reacting like a mindless moron.

You have things to say that I think ought to get a wider audience, but sometimes it seems that you revel in pushing away possible readers.

The more readers and viewers, the more stupid questions and stupid gamma posturing. Yes, I am most definitely ambivalent about possible readers.

Blogger Mr.MantraMan December 14, 2018 8:37 AM  

What #79 said, the space program should be dissected each year for practice, but that won't be done by the USA for that political entity has become a matriarchal shithole that can't fill potholes much less explore space.

Blogger OGRE December 14, 2018 8:39 AM  

Christmas has come early I see! Thanks VD, there are few things more enjoyable than watching the self-proclaimed 'rational skeptics' fail at both skepticism and reason.

I fucking love skepticism!

Blogger Nate December 14, 2018 8:41 AM  

Engineers... and boomers in general... have such a giant emotional investment in the moon landings... they just cannot let it go. As kids they were just blown away by all of it... and they cannot let it go. Their whole world view collapses if NASA lied.

Blogger Mr.MantraMan December 14, 2018 8:48 AM  

Nate, it's easy to attack the skeptics, but the Moonies know deep down that the Mule Team of the Team D-party would absolutely destroy the Moonies politically and run circles about them if they tried to increase the budget for space exploration in any fashion.

So the Moonies just engage in the usual ego boosting charade instead of marching out there and subduing the effeminate savages of the Prog movement, because they ain't no Alphas among them.

The "Fucking Love Science" crowd taunts the Moonies and the Moonies being the usual low SMV conservatives attack an easy target the skeptics.

Blogger Azure Amaranthine December 14, 2018 8:56 AM  

It's very, very, very easy to provide tidbits, conjectures, or tiny slightly irrelevant tails and have people jump any distance to a conclusion based on them, often without even trying to misdirect.

As always, if uncertain in any way whatsoever, parse more finely.

It's simple, people. Vox has only really said he thinks there's at least one lie somewhere in the official story. Given how many thousands or tens of thousands of details involved, this is all but certain even with a much less corrupt gov't than ours.

The guys taking up a pose opposite Vox's, on the supposition that absolutely everything is true about the moon landing? Being called no more than Moonies is coddling you as far as I'm concerned.

I'm gonna say it again about this thread. Deluge of idiots, interspersed with good shit from their more clever counterparts. Need alcohol to read this for any length of time.

Blogger Michael Buck December 14, 2018 8:57 AM  

C'mon, Vox- Your credibility is taking a huge hit because of this. Skepticism will indeed be required going forward- but mostly with respect to your assertions and ideas.

Blogger Azimus December 14, 2018 9:01 AM  

Too much rhetoric vs rhetoric in this conversation. I'm more interested in dealing in facts, since we are trying to arrive at the truth. There were a lot of very good facts brought up in the previous post, many by trained engineers.

That doesn't make them right or wrong, but listening to Owen compare the temperature in the Van Allen Belt to the melting point of aluminum showed a lack of depth in his understanding of thermodynamics that was not compelling. I don't know if the landings happened or not, but claiming the moon landings were fake under the umbrella of "everything the government says is a lie" feels like a loyalty test when the conversation could make so much more progress if we stayed in the realm of facts and left implication and inference behind.

Blogger Azure Amaranthine December 14, 2018 9:03 AM  

"What I am much more interested in knowing is why so many Moonies are so passionately attached to the complete truth of the narrative. That makes no sense at all to me."

A sibling substance to hopium, though more destructive for less potential benefit.

I dub thee, Vanium!

Blogger VD December 14, 2018 9:05 AM  

C'mon, Vox- Your credibility is taking a huge hit because of this. Skepticism will indeed be required going forward- but mostly with respect to your assertions and ideas.

Hai, new guy. I was first informed that I had no credibility back in 2001. So, how can nothing take "a huge hit"?

You are obviously unaware that your sort throws that line out EVERY SINGLE TIME I logic-rape one of your narratives.

Rhetoric better.

Blogger Azure Amaranthine December 14, 2018 9:05 AM  

"C'mon, Vox- Your credibility is taking a huge hit because of this."

He dun't care a whit.

Tell me bro, U CONCRND?

Blogger Bastion Harm December 14, 2018 9:06 AM  

Redpill Angel wrote:The astronauts do sound very cautious, even subdued. Sad? Very odd.

Neil Armstrong lived very close to where I live up until his death in 2012. Everyone around here could pick out his house, which was a rather modest one in a nice quiet backstreet out here in the 'burbs.

What I always found odd was that he never left. Nobody ever saw him about. And he lived in that house for years. Total recluse. Now, sure, maybe he was always like that and that was just the way he was wired. Who knows...but it also seems to indicate somebody who would rather not talk about what made him world famous. Did seem a little off. But then again, his sidekick Buzz is the complete opposite, so there's that. As with all of this stuff, who ultimately knows what's going on?!

Blogger Avalanche December 14, 2018 9:07 AM  

@10 "I'll pick and choose those things from this blog in which to delve."

Well written, Al!

I am one such, although I do doubt the "orthodoxy" moon landings and 9/11 and Sandy Hook and the USS Liberty and Waco and Tim McVeigh and and and.... Oh, and climate "change" is flat-out b.s.(but Al Gore is really really rich now!) and I'm tentatively looking at "evolution is wrong" and fighting a rear-guard retreat against "what I know it so"; and the electric universe makes MORE sense than "every single planet in our wee solar system must have had a different/separate 'creation myth'" theory... (Don't know yet what I CAN accept about it -- but the orthodoxy is ... you know, blind orthodoxy and wrong wahy too often!)

I was a kept wife for 17 years, and had tons of time for reading. One has to read pretty much everything out there to have a hope of even tentatively separating out the small bits of wheat from the bushels of chaff. I remind everyone: on any topic, the web is full of solid information, MIS-information, DIS-information, and bat-sh|t-crazy information. The problem, as in dating, is SORTING!

I'd suggest, to those in the same boat, consider the following stance.

A friend, very active (all his long life) in our cause(s), objects when some of us discuss the 9/11 'conspiracy' in front him -- he firmly insists 'it was ragheads.' When I try to show or tell him just the smallest amount of conflicting stuff, he (rightly) insists 'he does not have the time to investigate. He's WAY too busy!'

I answer him:
"I agree! You DON'T have the time! However, when you say in imply that all the thousands, maybe a couple million, of folks all around the planet who are 'winnowing' for the wheat in this area have to be wrong / are crazy, it detracts from your 'apparent veracity' about EVERYTHING ELSE you're doing with ALL of them (us)! You CAN absolutely say: 'I don't know about that. That's not my topic in this lifetime. I am busy handling OTHER topics and fights that are vitally important to saving our nation. My stance is: I don't know."

Try it, see if it fits!

Blogger Avalanche December 14, 2018 9:12 AM  

Oh, should I add as some "orthodoxy" that I challenge: die-ver-city is our strength. And sex is a social construct and men can turn into women and and race doesn't exist and the holyhoax was REAL and jews don't run the country and the world, and pedophilia is NOT a huge problem all across the globe, and Mexicans are natural conservatives and Magic Dirt....

Anyone who does not look askance at EVERYTHING the damned-to-hell govt pushes on us is blind or a child. That does not make everything they say false -- but you're more likely to be right if you question every detail, than not!

Blogger Paul R December 14, 2018 9:15 AM  

Question the moon landings or the holocaust and people lose their shit. This stuff is a religion.

Blogger ZhukovG December 14, 2018 9:18 AM  

@Nate: You have the right of it.

These two posts were an opportunity for personal intellectual development and even some of the ilk missed it. Not being able to see the forest for the trees comes to mind.

Our esteemed Dark Lord, didn't deny the manned moon landings. He certainly didn't ask a bunch nerds to prove they happened. All he correctly pointed out was, that if the Government makes a claim, doesn't matter what, the rational response is skepticism.

Look at it in binary:

0 = The government always lies.
1 = The government is always truthful.

While certainly an oversimplification, ask yourself, which one should I choose to live a longer, healthier life?

I propose that 0, the government always lies, is the only correct and rational choice.

Blogger Damelon Brinn December 14, 2018 9:25 AM  

I was listening to a sports show yesterday, and they had some fun laughing at Stef Curry for doubting the moon landings (according to them; I didn't see the original story). Then they talked for a while about how the official story on the Kennedy assassination is nonsense, and the shot clearly came from the front.

It's funny how some Official Stories are sacrosanct and others aren't, and it changes over time. I can remember when anyone who doubted the Oswald-single-shooter explanation was seen as a conspiracy nut; but now, thanks to some movies and the passage of time, doubting that one is fine now, even the norm.

Blogger rondolf December 14, 2018 9:25 AM  

Just as the govt doesn't really know what the GDP is due to a number of factors, do you think it is possible many in the govt have no idea what happened regarding the moon landing, including those who were supposedly witnesses?

Blogger Avalanche December 14, 2018 9:26 AM  

@54 CD: It may be X+Y, it may be X-Z, it may be Q.

I'll bet most of your Ilk see what you did there! (wink)

Blogger Crush Limbraw December 14, 2018 9:31 AM  

Even at my own level of commenting on Disqus mostly, I have discovered that reading comprehension is a lost art. If more than 10 percent of the participants are at least adequate, I would be surprised.
The 8 second attention span or less has become the norm and most of the flak flying in these 'conversations' is going past the target.

Blogger veryfunnyminion December 14, 2018 9:37 AM  

C'mon, this isn't rocket science.

Three white dudes and one of the first words out his mouth was privileged.

White Male Privilege is what got them to the moon. Obviously this is bad, m'kay?

That's why the photos came out gray instead of brown.

It's also the cause of the global warming on Venus which killed off the life Carl Sagan figured was there.

And of course it's caused the hole in the ozone layer, global warming, and every other evil on Earth.

So obviously it's not an engineering issue keeping missions to the moon from happening, it's the fact that you can't use the White Male Privilege to get there, cause evil. The Mars rovers alone turned 6,000,000 space-frogs gay, and much less White Male Privilege was used.

Therefore we can only do space travel when we can do responsibly, by using organic vaginal yeast from black lesbians for example.

Pigs in Space was prophesy.

Blogger Weak December 14, 2018 9:40 AM  

This is infinitely more entertaining, thought provoking and informative than the beating of the dead Peterson horse or some of the other tired subjects that devolve into the same comments over and over again. Thanks Vox, this has been tremendous. I mean that sincerely.

Blogger freddie_mac December 14, 2018 9:47 AM  

Two things that I've learned since reading this blog:

1. think critically
2. when Vox says something outrageous, take a deep breath and step back for a few minutes, then go to step 1.

When I was in high school/college, I tinkered on the edges of the JFK assassination. Never did a deep dive, but the limited tinkering that I did left me with enough questions to wonder what the complete story was.

I hadn't even looked at the space program, but now I'm wondering why the high profile missions stopped after Challenger. I think there's a Mars rover either in transit or on the surface, but when's the last time we sent a manned mission out? I've never understood how the Russians could build the space station and send up regular missions but we couldn't (& wasn't the space shuttle fleet destroyed?).

Were the moon landings, or elements thereof, faked? *shrug* not sure, but as with JFK there's enough questions that I'm not entirely sure what to believe.

Blogger Spud December 14, 2018 9:49 AM  

This is a great thought experiment for a number of different reasons. The first is the rhetoric of "Moonies". It is quite brilliant to malignantly label the position that has always been looked upon as more "sane" as it will drive them absolutely mad (and at the same time quite confused!). The good thing is that they will be fervently researching, perhaps finding evidence they didn't expect.

The second point of brilliancy is the honey pot. I'm sure it worked out as planned. Let's see who will take the bait. I believe the moon landing was a reality because I have researched it with a passion quite a few years ago. I'm quite confident in the revelations I had found, but I love being proven wrong, which I have before (just not this time). If you find the moon landing conspiracy to be a catalyst for jumping off of the Vox ship then bon voyage.

Bonus: When I find that I covet something to be true (moon landing, global warming, etc) I try and play devil's advocate and passionately prove my original theory incorrect. So far I have only found one single conspiracy theory in which my mind was totally blown and my position changed. I believe it is a theory that most wouldn't dream of touching but crumbles to the smallest amount of scrutiny.

Blogger S1AL December 14, 2018 9:53 AM  

Alternative explanation: Armstrong, never a particularly social or public person, having recently screwed up a defining life quote, is trying very hard not to say anything mockable, especially since he clearly doesn't have prepared notes.

Blogger S1AL December 14, 2018 9:56 AM  

Any prepared lie would have been much more cogent than the bumbling in that clip.

Blogger Weak December 14, 2018 9:58 AM  

JFK - shot by the Secret Service guy in the front seat. Either intentionally or accidentally. Like the assymetric Bears logo, once you're aware of it, you can't unsee it.

Moon - all the coded references to aliens (there is a Santa Claus, pair of beady eyes, etc) make me think that the Apollo weirdness is to hide evidence of extraterrestrial activity. But that's the movie I choose to watch about the moon landings

Blogger Donnie December 14, 2018 10:04 AM  

The hardcore moonies should at least familiarize themselves with Jack Parsons, his occult beliefs and motivations behind space exploration. The occult roots of NASA run pretty deep. It's certainly not Jesus, mom, apple pie and America.

Blogger The Cooler December 14, 2018 10:09 AM  

Vox goes full fish-in-a-barrel when he gets these wild hairs up his ass. Fuckin fuuuuuunny.

Blogger The Greay Man December 14, 2018 10:17 AM  

Anyone with a kneejerk reaction doesn't understand what Vox is saying at all.

Sometimes, Vox, I wonder if you post these things for fun to see what lurkers will get riled up.

Then I realize you really don't care what they think, and if you do for one moment, you will write a book like Jordanetics to completely and utterly demolish their faith.

Blogger Ken Prescott December 14, 2018 10:22 AM  

Generational change enters into it as well.

We can't build battleships any more because the skill sets in their construction are gone. We stopped making foot-plus-thick Class A armor plate and large-bore naval rifle components when we cancelled the Montanas.

(I would have liked to see Montana.)

Only 25 years later, we decommissioned USS New Jersey despite a sterling record in Vietnam because the Navy thought they were out of liners for the big guns. After the ship went back to mothballs, they found a huge stockpile of the things out at Indian Head. They'd literally lost something like 200-plus barrel liners because of a clerical error.

But even in 1969, they couldn't order up another batch of barrel liners, the knowledge of how to make them was gone. Much of it had been in the minds and eye-hand coordination of skilled artisans who were long retired or doing something else.

Blogger Azure Amaranthine December 14, 2018 10:22 AM  

This comment has been removed by the author.

Blogger freddie_mac December 14, 2018 10:26 AM  

@115 Ken Prescott
We can't build battleships any more because the skill sets in their construction are gone.

And I used to laugh at the idea that we couldn't replicate Roman-era concrete or medieval stained glass windows -- not laughing now.

Actually, I'd rather believe that we faked the moon landings entirely instead of facing up to the fact that we're too stupid to go back.

Blogger Mr.MantraMan December 14, 2018 10:26 AM  

The Moonies do have Richard C Hoagland on their side, for years I worked the night shift and once in awhile I could tolerate Art Bell's bullshit. So one night old Art the BSer hosts a debate between a skeptic and the nutsack conspiracy theorist Hoagland over the moon landings.

It was actually interesting the skeptic brought up all the usual points, radiation, stars, size of the lunar rover, pictures of dust from the wheels of said rover and Hoagland for once tried to sound like a normie not a nutter.

Blogger Mr.MantraMan December 14, 2018 10:30 AM  

Good lord people, they can put spaceships on Mars, send them to the far reaches of the solar system, land on comets and meteors and this in the American Idiocracy and resupply the ISS.

A few craftsmen can make a Kentucky Long Rifle and bless their hearts, but I want an AR-15 Freedom Dispenser more than I need a replica of a historical firearm.

Blogger Up from the pond December 14, 2018 10:31 AM  

There is more evidence for the moon landings than there is for the existence of Christ.

Blogger FP December 14, 2018 10:32 AM  

Moonies? Meh. The Mooninites are real. They created the Litebrite and were last seen in Boston a decade ago. Damn moon people.

Anyway, a real conspiracy is that Riker gave up command of his own ship to lead an invasion of the west coast.

Blogger S1AL December 14, 2018 10:35 AM  

"Actually, I'd rather believe that we faked the moon landings entirely instead of facing up to the fact that we're too stupid to go back."

Regardless of your views on average intelligence, this isn't a function of stupidity - it's a function of money. There's no real reason to go back to the Moon, and even if we did there's no reason to send people, except maybe for personal (rather than national) bragging rights.

Mars - that's a different story. It's also way, way more complicated.

Blogger Ominous Cowherd December 14, 2018 10:37 AM  

If every employee in a large bureaucracy, top to bottom, had truthful reporting as their highest personal goal, do you think the Official Narrative would be the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth? I don't. Truth can't get through the filters intact. Now add in the fact that most bureaucrats are more interested in ass-covering than truth-telling.

``We went to the moon'' and ``the government lied about going to the moon'' are not mutually exclusive. Of the two statements, the first is possibly, even probably true and the second is unavoidably, certainly true. I think that's what Vox set out to point out.

Blogger Jake December 14, 2018 10:39 AM  

Vox,
First of all, thank you for the recent correspondence - you were very generous.

Regarding the Moon Landings (tm): I recently visited the NASA center at Cape Canaveral. We took the tour, and saw actual examples of the various rockets and craft. One observation:
There is literally no room in the LEM for anything other than two astronauts (barely) and their supplies. Where in the name of all that's holy would a supposed Lunar Rover be kept? There is no space, at all, for one.
Now, a placard next to the LEM on display claimed that it was the LEM that was going to go with Apollo 15, but that this one was not sent, because they sent one that was modified to hold a rover.
Oh come on - you can't suddenly switch out a major piece of equipment like a LEM with a new, barely tested version. That would take literally years of testing and analysis. And they did what to the LEM - put in a mini-garage for the rover, which nobody can see in the photos of any LEM?

That's just one observation. There are many other inconsistencies and flat-out scientifically/technologically impossible or improbable things that supposedly happened. This can't be denied. It's shocking, and it causes people terrible cognitive dissonance, and it goes against our lifelong programming about American exceptionalism. But these anomalies exist.
Truth is more important than our need for belief in a national mythos, particularly when the nation itself is dying due to losing the dominance of the founding stock.

You are very courageous to dare to question basically... anything.

Blogger Francis Parker Yockey December 14, 2018 10:41 AM  

The fact that you bring up "flat earthism" is self-discrediting. You should know better than to rely upon that sort of inept rhetoric here, Moonie

Did it in the other thread, too.

Well it shows a round earth, so I guess the whole mission

Also tried to characterize anyone who questions any aspect of the officially-endorsed 9/11 narrative as a believer in muh holographic planes.

as gay as 9/11 truthers who think the airplanes were superimposed on video feeds in real time in 2001

Clearly, anyone who doubts any aspect of the official moon landing story is a flat-erfer/ plane hologram believer. And a Russian bot, of course.

Deal with it, bigots.

Blogger nbfdmd December 14, 2018 10:44 AM  

@22:

Please, VD, write a book on the Moonies. You'll have to make your position very clear: either you believe the landings happened but the story is wonky in some other way, in which case it would be a very boring book, or you claim that the landings never happened. If you go full retard and claim the landings didn't happen, it will be the end of your public credibility the same way that Kavanaugh was the end of Peterson. I just hope you see that.

Blogger The Greay Man December 14, 2018 10:46 AM  

https://gizmodo.com/5242736/how-an-intern-stole-nasas-moon-rocks/amp

This was very interesting.

There are rumors of unsolved mysteries. Supposedly, two significant pieces of NASA history went missing during the time of the crime, and have not been recovered: The original video tapes of the 1969 Lunar Landing, and six folders of more mysterious content that were supposedly stored in the safe. Thad claims to have never seen them.

Blogger FUBARwest December 14, 2018 10:54 AM  

Has anyone addressed why we were able to deal with the Van Halen Belt in '69 but cant do it in 2018? I get demographics and all that, but that's not really a satisfactory argument for something like materials.

Blogger One Deplorable DT December 14, 2018 10:54 AM  

@54 - Not at all. I have been perfectly clear. If the U.S. government says X, the truth is not X. Period. It may be X+Y, it may be X-Z, it may be Q. But whatever it is, it is not X.

That is a blatant fallacy Vox. An error in reasoning.

Do I believe X because the government said it's true? Of course not. I would argue that it's prudent to be very skeptical of X if X came from the government.

Would I believe X given hard evidence that X, and nothing but X, is true? Yes. If you can't say the same then you are going to come to false conclusions on some issues regardless of your IQ or experience. Even FedGov doesn't lie all the time about every single thing.

Blogger S1AL December 14, 2018 10:56 AM  

"Has anyone addressed why we were able to deal with the Van Halen Belt in '69 but cant do it in 2018? I get demographics and all that, but that's not really a satisfactory argument for something like materials."

1) Sensationalism ("Oh, no, this is so hard")

2) Modern electronics are much more susceptible to the forms of radiation in question than the ones we used in the 70's.

If you want more details, see the previous thread on the topic.

Blogger cheddarman December 14, 2018 10:59 AM  

Damn lyin' yankees

Blogger Nate December 14, 2018 11:01 AM  

I love all the exasperated noobs... We've been bitching about the moonlanding for going on 20 years people.

Blogger Nate December 14, 2018 11:02 AM  

"2) Modern electronics are much more susceptible to the forms of radiation in question than the ones we used in the 70's."

Wrong. the problem is people. And the issue is not how can we deal with it today. The issue is... if it is this hard to deal with it today... there is no damn way we did it back then.

Blogger Nate December 14, 2018 11:03 AM  

I know it hurts all your feelings to hear this... but compared to today... machining and tooling and manufacturing was completely shit compared to today. Cars from back then were shit. Planes from back then were shit. compared to modern firearms... most of them back then were shit as well.

Blogger Phelps December 14, 2018 11:03 AM  

Ignore mountains of data, which were produced in the other thread, and instead hone in on odd phrases by astronauts, many of which were awkward people who didn't seek fame?

There is no mountain of data. There is a small trickle of actual data. When you start looking for primary sources, all the wells dry up.

NASA affirmatively destroyed all of the telemetry. Every bit of it. They degaussed all the tape so they "could reuse them." The only tapes that are left are a few canisters from Apollo 9.

Apollo 9 never claimed to leave Low Earth Orbit.

Blogger Azure Amaranthine December 14, 2018 11:05 AM  

"If you go full retard and claim the landings didn't happen, it will be the end of your public credibility the same way that Kavanaugh was the end of Peterson. I just hope you see that."

The burning question has been answered at long last. Yes, concern trolls can get even dumber, such as pointing out that they realize they have nothing to be concerned about, and then rolling with it anyway.

Just had to virtue signal, didn't you?

"Has anyone addressed why we were able to deal with the Van Halen Belt in '69 but cant do it in 2018?"

Van Halen's belt got fatter, because Van Halen got fatter.

Blogger M. Bibliophile December 14, 2018 11:06 AM  

If you couldn't tell what Vox was doing by the end of the post, I've got nothing for you.

Here's a hint: Vox means precisely what he says. Sometimes he's rhetorical or sarcastic, but the rest of it he's precise to just this side of pedantry. Also, he occasionally enjoys chumming the waters here to see what shakes out.

Learn to tell the difference before you freak out. And while you're at it, maybe reconsider why you're freaking out over a blog post you possibly disagree with.

Posts like these are half the fun of coming here: it's a test of whether or not I can keep up with someone I'm perfectly willing to admit is smarter than I. Best part? The veracity or lack thereof of the actual moon landing is probably the least important aspect of this and the other post.

Blogger S1AL December 14, 2018 11:10 AM  

"Wrong. the problem is people. And the issue is not how can we deal with it today. The issue is... if it is this hard to deal with it today... there is no damn way we did it back then."

No, it isn't. Who told you it was?

Blogger Damelon Brinn December 14, 2018 11:11 AM  

Also tried to characterize anyone who questions any aspect of the officially-endorsed 9/11 narrative as a believer in muh holographic planes.

Yes, you see a similar pattern there. Raise any questions about the official story on 9/11, even having nothing to do with the towers, and you're guaranteed to hear "dur hur holograms" soon. It's almost like some truly nutty theories are planted in the mainstream consciousness so they can be used to discredit other theories on the same topic by association.

Blogger nbfdmd December 14, 2018 11:14 AM  

@129:

Well said.

I wonder if VD uses GPS? After all, GPS is a government program, and one that operates in space, no less. Surely he can't rely on its positioning?

The problem here is that VD is guilty of his own confirmation bias, in this case biased towards seeing government conspiracy. The difference between a cloak-and-dagger assassination plot and building a Moon rocket is like saying Chrysler didn't produce any real cars because a Board member had a back room deal with someone. It's a total non-sequitur.

Blogger Tino December 14, 2018 11:15 AM  

Is the Official Narrative corrupted? Of course it is. The US went sideways when we pulled in the SS and German intelligence operatives via Operation Paperclip. Plus NASA is a military org whose purpose was creating all the tech for effective ICBMs.

Those of us who have fallen behind the curtain of US instrumentalities know the lying. Example: Publicly the Fed says the written paper is ~20T. Reality is that it is closer to ~10 Quads. If you put this out folks go ballistic saying it is impossible that an institution exists that could have an indebtedness that is 200-fold world GDP. That doesn't change the facts on the ground. The net result will be a relaunch of the dollar via a Treasury Reserve Note replacing the Federal Reserve Note.

Back on topic. Did the moon landing happen? Yes. Did it happen as the US Gov says it did? No. Speaking purely as doctor, the post-mission public press with the astronauts in the immediate aftermath were psychologically completely wrong. The men were both humbled, distressed and quiet- probably lying by omission. They should have been tired and elated and bubbling. If I had to guess, they saw a reality that they couldn't share. Purely speculating, they saw conclusive evidence of either ET or that we are not the first evolution of Man on the planet.

I have personally met Buzz Aldrin. In answer to the question of aliens Buzz answered with a question of his own: You don't think we went just to get a bunch of rocks do you?

Hopefully Buzz will give a deathbed confession as one of the last men standing of that incredible era.

Blogger VD December 14, 2018 11:16 AM  

That is a blatant fallacy Vox. An error in reasoning.

Really... which logical fallacy is that. Name the specific one or retract.

If you go full retard and claim the landings didn't happen, it will be the end of your public credibility the same way that Kavanaugh was the end of Peterson. I just hope you see that.

So, I'll make tens of millions of dollars and tens of thousands of gullible morons will defend my every lie and mistake? You're right, I probably should write that book.

Blogger Meimou December 14, 2018 11:19 AM  

Interesting video. At 2:43 you can see something fly over the astronaut l.

Blogger VD December 14, 2018 11:20 AM  

The problem here is that VD is guilty of his own confirmation bias, in this case biased towards seeing government conspiracy.

You're a moron. You don't understand that the U.S. government, by definition, is a conspiracy. Every single classified program and top secret activity is quite literally a conspiracy.

CONSPIRACY:
1. an evil, unlawful, treacherous, or surreptitious plan formulated in secret by two or more persons; plot.
2. a combination of persons for a secret, unlawful, or evil purpose:

Blogger westernman December 14, 2018 11:21 AM  

I have no idea whether or not men have landed on the moon. What I do know is I guarandamntee you the United States Government lied about the moon landings and the apollo program in some fashion or another.

Blogger Meimou December 14, 2018 11:21 AM  

Reading fail. He didn't make an opinion the whether the moon landing happened or not

Blogger FUBARwest December 14, 2018 11:21 AM  

"If you want more details, see the previous thread on the topic."

Did that, one response is "Maybe the NASA guy is lying for more money?" which doesnt exactly help the case for NASA telling the whole truth and nothing but the truth concerning said moon landing.

The other response was "I know about the radiation and its not as hard as they make it out to be". That was it. Not the most convincing stuff.

Blogger nbfdmd December 14, 2018 11:21 AM  

@142: >So, I'll make tens of millions of dollars and tens of thousands of gullible morons will defend my every lie and mistake?

So something is worth doing if it makes you money and fame? Sounds like someone found a new definition of "truth"...

Blogger Phelps December 14, 2018 11:22 AM  

The other thing to consider is that perhaps Apollo 11 was faked but one or several others of the missions were successful. It was awfully convenient that they hit Kennedy's time line. They would have to fake all of the surface shots subsequently because it would look too different, but all the space footage could then be real and they could place the reflectors and artifacts they said they had placed on the Apollo 11 mission.

The Apollo 11 site was no where near any of the others. If we didn't go at all, then they would have had to have been placed by a probe (which is well within our capabilities.) We know that at least some of the footage is fake. There are documented instances of using the capsule windows to simulate a distant earth when it was in fact at orbital distance. Hell, in one instance, an astronaut ended up getting an arm in the way of the camera when it was allegedly pressed up against the glass to get the shot.

So if they are faking some of the footage, it leads to the question of how much was faked? 10%? 90%? Why would you fake some but not go whole hog? Once you know someone is lying, how much of the rest of their story do you choose to believe?

If you were going to hoax it, you would have to do it from orbit. There were too many foriegn powers and even amatuer radio folks who would have instantly known that the signals were not coming from space. But once you are up there, if you went with a pile of prepared footage and a small telecine machine, it's all just a long orbital mission.

The part that infuriates me the most is knowing that the whole Apollo 13 crisis was likely a lie, and that they DID have the problems, but it was all in low earth orbit and that they could have been recovered at any time. I become coldly angry when I realize that the powers behind this forgery would have decided to let them die (or affirmatively kill them) rather than admit that they could just land back on Earth.

Blogger Meimou December 14, 2018 11:23 AM  

The astronauts were not acting sullen. They were acting apprehensive and nervous.

Blogger One Deplorable DT December 14, 2018 11:26 AM  

@54 - Now, what you are too autistic to see is that the behavior of the Apollo 11 astronauts is entirely incongruous with the putative situation.

Debated commenting on this but what the heck...

This press conference was nearly 90 minutes long all segments included. (Have you watched the entire thing, or just the clip skeptics don't like?) It was filmed two months after they returned to Earth. The initial euphoria of the accomplishment would be gone. Heck, by that point they may have all been in a bit of a down phase which naturally happens in the shadow of something exciting.

And this was a press conference 'for the record', not a purposely hyped up emotional show like we have in the modern 24 hour news cycle.

They loosened up quite a bit as the press conference progressed. They also effortlessly answered questions and discussed a range of topics, including some very technical ones, without any hint of struggle or incongruity.

They seem very much like three USAF pilots who were asked to field press questions for 90 minutes about a mission which concluded two months prior. The event being discussed may have been exciting. That doesn't mean yet another press conference about it is.

Blogger The Greay Man December 14, 2018 11:27 AM  

I wonder if VD uses GPS? After all, GPS is a government program, and one that operates in space, no less. Surely he can't rely on its positioning?

The problem here is that VD is guilty of his own confirmation bias, in this case biased towards seeing government conspiracy. The difference between a cloak-and-dagger assassination plot and building a Moon rocket is like saying Chrysler didn't produce any real cars because a Board member had a back room deal with someone. It's a total non-sequitur.


Are you for real right now?

GPS can't be accurate because the government lies about other things.

That's your argument? Are you 13? Is your IQ 13? I cannot comprehend the stupidity.

Blogger nbfdmd December 14, 2018 11:30 AM  

@152:

Nope, this is the argument VD made. If government says X, X must not be true. His IQ 13 argument, not mine.

The government also says gravity exists.

Blogger Meimou December 14, 2018 11:30 AM  

You moonies don't believe there is any reason to the skeptical of the OS including this one:

Apple Moon Hoax: Sound in a vaccuam?
https://youtu.be/w5O43FkzYZc

Bonus: at 2:43 something passes by overhead.

Look forward to your inane explanations on both

Blogger Jill Domschot December 14, 2018 11:31 AM  

I had a lot of friends in the 90s who got together and talked about the government's lies and official positions. Gen-Xers and a few youngish boomers. We watched a VHS tape about how, at the very least, the moon landing promo video had been produced in a studio. I'm not sure anyone was 100% convinced, but skeptical of the official story, sure. I'd have a hard time believing the entire event was fake due to the number of people involved, but re the government's unreliability, yes, I definitely believe that. Also, history is full of government conspiracies. I don't know why we are so inclined to believe otherwise. I guess it's just easier.

Blogger S1AL December 14, 2018 11:34 AM  

'Did that, one response is "Maybe the NASA guy is lying for more money?" which doesnt exactly help the case for NASA telling the whole truth and nothing but the truth concerning said moon landing.

The other response was "I know about the radiation and its not as hard as they make it out to be". That was it. Not the most convincing stuff.'

You skipped the part where multiple people discussed why the Van Allen Belt is more dangerous for modern electronics compared to what we used at the time. Search the page for "weaving".

Blogger Meimou December 14, 2018 11:35 AM  

Another poster I never heard of was his finger at us crazies...

Very clever. Lump in those who question official narratives with flat earthers. No one could possibly see through that.

Blogger Dangeresque December 14, 2018 11:35 AM  

What is the standard of proof here, then? Would pictures of the landing site suffice? NASA's Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter has taken pictures of the landing site, but they are still from pretty far out and are something that could be easily photo-shopped... They are also taken by NASA themselves, so if you don't believe the rest of the story, that already calls them into question. It might be one of those things that can never be known for sure because so much evidence either no longer exists or could've been planted later, and new evidence can't be gathered. It's like the JFK assassination. Endlessly disappointing.

The video of the press conference is interesting though. I would say Armstrong is displaying what is referred to as stilted speech. This is fairly common among various disorders like autism spectrum, schizophrenia, or narcissistic personality disorder, and I certainly wouldn't put someone who chose to be an astronaut for a living past having one of those... Either that or he was wearing an earpiece and they were feeding him what to say which I also wouldn't put past the US government...

Blogger Damelon Brinn December 14, 2018 11:36 AM  

Has anyone addressed why we were able to deal with the Van Halen Belt in '69 but cant do it in 2018?

The belts were known then, but we didn't fully understand how dangerous they were yet. So NASA wrapped the module in an extra layer of aluminum foil (shiny side out for better reflectivity), flew through where it looked the thinnest, and just got lucky that nothing bad happened. Now they understand the belts better, and realize they need to do a lot more to be safe next time.

That's pretty much it (minus the joke). Whether that makes you more skeptical, or more impressed by the American badassery of it, is up to you.

Blogger Meimou December 14, 2018 11:42 AM  

If you want people to click on a link, tell us what it is

Blogger Xiety December 14, 2018 11:45 AM  

nbfdmd wrote:So something is worth doing if it makes you money and fame? Sounds like someone found a new definition of "truth"...
This is your second bit of JBP-related snark. Did something about Jordanetics upset you?

Blogger One Deplorable DT December 14, 2018 11:45 AM  

@142 - Really... which logical fallacy is that. Name the specific one or retract.

Poisoning the well.
"FedGov says X happened."
"Yeah but FedGov NEVER tells the truth."

Has no bearing on whether or not X is actually true.

If you go full retard and claim the landings didn't happen, it will be the end of your public credibility the same way that Kavanaugh was the end of Peterson. I just hope you see that.

I did not make this statement. Just being clear, to everyone here, since you replied to two different people in one post.

@144 - Every single classified program and top secret activity is quite literally a conspiracy.

OK, let's throw an example out there: what was unlawful or evil about the Key Hole reconnaissance satellites? To my knowledge the U-2 and SR-71 broke laws governing airspace, but those laws don't cover satellites. Is it evil to observe a potential adversaries' activities from a safe and lawful distance? Or to keep those capabilities secret?

Blogger Theo C. December 14, 2018 11:45 AM  

This is the TRUE story about man going to the moon

Blogger The Greay Man December 14, 2018 11:48 AM  

@ 153:

Nope, this is the argument VD made. If government says X, X must not be true. His IQ 13 argument, not mine.

The government also says gravity exists.


You are truly delving into territory you can't comprehend.

You did not trap Vox here. At all.

The government does not "say" gravity exists. We are talking specifically about the Official Story, whether it is the JFK Assassination or the Moon Landings or 9/11.

None of this has anything to do with GPS or gravity.

If you truly believe that you are as dense as a log. Please quote Vox's full statement (I saw it earlier but cannot remember where). I would encourage you to re-read it slowly and realize where you're making a mistake.

Blogger Damelon Brinn December 14, 2018 11:49 AM  

If it was fake, why bother with five landings?

Dave McGowan's theory in his series "Wagging the Moondoggie" mentioned above is that each mission followed soon after particularly bad news from Vietnam, so they were distractions, and probably a method of covert funding for the war. Once they signed the peace agreement, the Apollo missions stopped. Dunno, it's a theory.

Blogger VD December 14, 2018 11:51 AM  

This is your one warning, nbfdmd. In your last comment you lied AND you told me what to do.

Do either again and you'll be nuked.

You can disagree. You can criticize. You can argue as ineptly as you like. But if you lie or if you tell me what to do, you will never comment here again.

The road from "no Moon landings" to "flat Earth" is not, "in truth", a short one as you claimed. The majority of people around the world do NOT believe that the USA landed anyone there. Very, very few people around the world believe it to be flat.

Do not lie here.

Blogger FUBARwest December 14, 2018 11:52 AM  

"why the Van Allen Belt is more dangerous for modern electronics compared to what we used at the time."

Issue is humans not electronics. Most of the contention seems to be actual people on the moon, not whether or not people were in space or things were placed there.

"So NASA wrapped the module in an extra layer of aluminum foil"

Owen mentioned something about 4k degree heat and aluminum foil melting. I'm guessing thay has been debunked?

"Whether that makes you more skeptical, or more impressed by the American badassery of it"

America! F--- Yeah!

Blogger VD December 14, 2018 11:54 AM  

Nope, this is the argument VD made. If government says X, X must not be true. His IQ 13 argument, not mine.

See, there you're just being stupid, rather than dishonest. This entire discussion is taking place in the context of the government narrative known as the Official Story. To substitute an explanation of a thesis for the thesis itself is neither correct nor is any argument derived from doing so relevant.

Blogger S1AL December 14, 2018 11:56 AM  

"Issue is humans not electronics. Most of the contention seems to be actual people on the moon, not whether or not people were in space or things were placed there."

You're conflating two issues:

In 1969, the Van Allen Belts were a small concern and were navigated at the thinnest, outer section. Astronauts tested fine for radiation, no biggie.

Modern day, our electronics are much more susceptible to VAB radiation than in the 70's (see previous thread for comments on that).

Blogger Meimou December 14, 2018 12:01 PM  

The current thing is 9/11 and building 7 and there were explosives (that no one noticed planting with the complex wiring or strange people there).

1. You don't know whether or not people saw strangers in the building. That information wouldn't necessarily filter to you, theallthesepeoplecantkeepa secretaguruement people assume that any information woukd automatically get to you

Rodriguez said he saw strange activity in the Twin Towers before 9/11.

2. WTC1 and 2 exploded. That is not up for debate. Steel and concrete were pulverized and ejected outward.

3. Wires? Still with the wires? It was 2001, not 1951.

Blogger nbfdmd December 14, 2018 12:01 PM  

My apologies, VD. I think I've made my arguments clearly enough over these two threads so I'll just lurk this discussion going forward.

Blogger L December 14, 2018 12:07 PM  

This comment has been removed by the author.

Blogger Nate December 14, 2018 12:08 PM  

"In 1969, the Van Allen Belts were a small concern and were navigated at the thinnest, outer section. Astronauts tested fine for radiation, no biggie."

/facepalm

Read this again. slowly.

Blogger FUBARwest December 14, 2018 12:14 PM  

""Issue is humans not electronics. Most of the contention seems to be actual people on the moon, not whether or not people were in space or things were placed there."

You're conflating two issues:

In 1969, the Van Allen Belts were a small concern and were navigated at the thinnest, outer section. Astronauts tested fine for radiation, no biggie."

Not sure how I'm conflating two issues. Based on the (limited)info I have the radiation is an issue for the people today as well as the electronics.

I'm not sure NASA saying they passed the radiation test for a trip that may or may not have occurred means anything.

I'm not sold one way or the other, since finding Vox I've found out that almost everything I've been taught is a lie. Evolution, free trade, immigration, diversity, etc. The landing being potentially fake as well is the least impactful falsehood revealed so far.

Blogger S1AL December 14, 2018 12:19 PM  

'Not sure how I'm conflating two issues. Based on the (limited)info I have the radiation is an issue for the people today as well as the electronics.'

I'd have to see a statement of concern about human radiation poisoning. As far as I'm aware, nobody who has any knowledge of the levels involved has expressed that concern beyond "there's always a chance of a freak accident".

Nate, don't be coy. Given that you've already claimed humans are the primary radiation concern, I have absolutely no idea what you're seeing in that statement.

Blogger One Deplorable DT December 14, 2018 12:36 PM  

Discussing the Van Allen belts is pointless without numbers. The official numbers say the Apollo transits of these belts...the entire trips in fact...exposed the astronauts to enough radiation to slightly increase their cancer risk.

Anyone who thinks that's false and they couldn't survive the trip due to acute radiation poisoning: post your numbers. How radioactive do you think the belts are, and what is your evidence?

I realize no one here can launch a satellite to measure the belts. But if you accept their existence then you accept the fundamental reasons why they exist and should be able to model them apart from direct observation. Do you have a model that suggests radiation belts so incredibly powerful that they will kill you out right in the time it took for the Apollo missions to transit them? Let's see it.

Same thing for cosmic radiation.

This is one major problem with a lot of evidence from skeptics. The complete and total lack of any numbers or mathematics. Vox is coming at this from a point of skepticism of anything the government says. I understand and appreciate that angle. I simply find the physical evidence for the landings to be conclusive, hence I partially disagree with his position on this topic. (Partial because I cannot prove that nothing additional happened which was subsequently kept secret. I don't see any convincing evidence of such. But if Vox thinks he has picked up on something then maybe it did.)

But arguments like "couldn't happen because radiation stronk!" drive me up the wall. How strong do you think those belts are? What evidence supports that? And if they're that much stronger, then how do the satellites which regularly transit them survive? Hubble is one of those satellites.

@154 - You moonies don't believe there is any reason to the skeptical of the OS including this one:
Apple Moon Hoax: Sound in a vaccuam?
https://youtu.be/w5O43FkzYZc


Because sound ONLY travels through a gas. NEVER through a solid or liquid. If you're in a spacesuit and hammer something your glove cannot possibly vibrate transmitting sound waves through your suit...both the air inside and the suite itself and your own body...that are picked up by your microphone.

head smack

Blogger FUBARwest December 14, 2018 12:48 PM  

"But arguments like "couldn't happen because radiation stronk!" drive me up the wall. How strong do you think those belts are? What evidence supports that? "

Touched a nerve? I never said the trip couldnt happen due to the radiation, I'm asking a question as to how something that appears to be a problem now in 2018 was not a problem in '69.

And the info saying its dangerous is from NASA. And the astronauts in Owen's video clip reporting from the ISS. We arent capable of leaving Low Earth Orbit right now due to the belt.

Google "Van Halen Belt radiation lethal" the first hit goes to a NASA pdf showing you how dangerous it is. Now the end of the pdf says that radiation shielding protects astronauts from it but that doesnt jive with what the aforementioned astronauts in space have said.

Blogger ArtH December 14, 2018 12:54 PM  

OK, I get it. You are preaching to a choir who needs to be constantly reminded to be skeptical of anything government. And using a headline “No one went to the Moon,” is certainly an invitation to read what the hell is in this piece. However, when you seriously say “I tend to assume that the landings were faked…” does make one tend to think that’s what you believe, that the moon landing was faked. Of course you can describe your skepticism as not excluding the landing as exactly described by NASA, but the above phrase does place you in the small crowd of more public disbelievers, which I know won’t upset you given your disdain of lower than low media or social media distribution. As for me, plenty of evidence abounds that the moon landing did take place despite all of our acquired skepticism of government. IMO, NASA was a lot more pure then than now; besides, the technical abilities to fake such an operation were more limited than the abilities today of exposing such fakery. Nevertheless I agree with you that Jordan Peterson was a resident of the Moon brought back to Earth as the Stranger in a Strange Land he pretends to be.

Blogger Meimou December 14, 2018 12:55 PM  

Joseph H Cater, the author of The Awesome Life Force believes we went to the moon using anti-gravity and Zero Point Energy, and that the moon has an atmosphere comptable to Earths. He believes the no moon landing theory was misdirection.

This would explain a lot.

But...but... "all those people couldn't keep a secret!" The nosecret fallacy never fails.

1. Compartmentalization. People only had the information they need to do to their very specific job.

2. Social conditioning, people involved in these kind of projects are subjected to social conditioning to make sure they don't exposed to Secret. It can't be 100% effective but you don't need to be because...

3. People chosen for black projects are chosen specifically because they can keep secrets.

And...

4. Even if one of the person involved in the black Black Project leaked, why the hell with the information automatically get to you?

Let's say two hundred men are involved in a Black Project, one of them tells his girlfriend, well it's no longer a secret among those 100 men, but why would the secret filter to you? To the rest of us? Is the girlfriend compelled by some mystical force to go to the media, to tell anyone else?

Even if half the people in the Black Project tell people they're not supposed to, the legacy media or the the alt media A) wouldn't find necessarily find out. B) necessarily tell you.

Unless you're a pseudoskeptic, please stop using the nosecret fallacy.

Blogger Servant December 14, 2018 12:55 PM  

Since I started looking into this myself a couple years ago after that kerfluffle with the flat earthers and the eclipse popped up on my radar and my roommate was watching videos about that and a video ofthe moon lander taking off was on screen when I was walking by. I laughed out loud and asked what is that that was fake as shit. He said the moon lander. It took him a bit to even convince me that was the actual video of the moon lander.

Clearly a model
Clearly some kind of pyrotechnic with the overlarge sparks that are much too sparse to be from anything big enough to move the lander
The wire work was poorly done lifting the model

Maybe they did land on the moon. They sure didn't film it.

Blogger Ingot9455 December 14, 2018 12:58 PM  

As an additional heuristic, a member of the Kennedy clan was behind setting the moon landing as a goal. Therefore. The strongest correlation must be with some profoundly evil purpose.

Blogger ar10308 December 14, 2018 1:00 PM  

The Van Allen Belts as reasoning for the the faking of the Moon Landing are among the weakest arguments for why it didn't happen.

One video with a guy dramatizing the dangers of the VAB radiation isn't sufficient evidence as to why a path that reduces exposure wasn't found and taken.

If you observe the supposed Apollo path through the VAB, then you'll note that Apollo would have passed through towards the "top" of the belt where the radiation is lower and time spent in it is reduced.

The other factor that isn't being addressed is how much radiation the VAB delivers and what impact it would have on humans. Based on the models, the radiation looks relatively moderate compared to high radiation emitting materials like Uranium or Plutonium, so sending the astronauts through it was not akin to sending Russian Nuke workers to the Elephant's Foot in Chernobyl as it is being made out to be.

Blogger Laramie Hirsch December 14, 2018 1:03 PM  

So cool to be in the OP today. So happy Friday.

Again, happy to adopt the agnostic attitude on this matter. That said, two questions arise in my mind:

1. @75 points to something interesting. What do we make of those overhead views of the site?

https://www.nasa.gov/sites/default/files/images/515418main_020411a.jpg

2. What shall we think about all those blotted out pictures that NASA doctored up? Those pictures that implied structures, towers, etc?

Blogger Meimou December 14, 2018 1:09 PM  

Sound doesn't travel through liquid?

Yt won't let me copy/paste a comment from that video thread so read the responses there.



You skipped the part where a object passing over at 2:43.

Blogger Mr. Bee December 14, 2018 1:12 PM  

Here's my conspiracy theory: Just as the digital oligarchs are mass deplatforming anyone on the hard right who ever mentioned anything about race and white nationalism, the same are in a panic and looking to represent themselves as simple cranks and therefore not threatening to the giants wandering the landscape looking for something to smash with their clubs. Moon landing conspiracy theory is perfect to the task.

Blogger English Tom December 14, 2018 1:13 PM  

@Brad Richards

Are you claiming the official story of 9/11 is the true story? Christopher Bollyn at Bollyn.com and zioncrimefactory will disabuse you of your delusions.

Blogger RusticFederalist December 14, 2018 1:16 PM  

The Human brain is very good at generating a river of information for the subconscious mind, and it takes a lot of effort to swim against that stream. When that effort is questioned the reaction is like sacrilege, heresy, blasphemy, or treason. I may not notice a lie, but when I observe that reaction it merits further investigation into the subject.

For those interested in Occult Rocket Science, I second Donnie's suggestion to read about Jack Parsons. The Johnson Administration is infamous for its lies and evil. Why were the three men clasping their hands infront of their chests, and fidgeting with their fingers during the posted interview?

VD wrote:Keep it up and you know what my next book will be....
Have your enemies ever tried to use this behavior against you by directing your efforts into a less important matter when you were putting attention on a more important matter?

Blogger Tars Tarkusz December 14, 2018 1:19 PM  

ar10308 wrote:The other factor that isn't being addressed is how much radiation the VAB delivers and what impact it would have on humans.

We are talking about a program that strapped men to some of the largest conventional bombs ever made. The risk that these men might get sick later on is really not that big of a risk compared to being attached to a Saturn 5 rocket.
My guess is that the VAB is just an excuse as to why we no longer have a capability which we had 50 years ago.`
It's pretty funny when you read the Sci-fi of that time and all of the capabilities we were supposed to have by now and everyone is so impressed by Twitter and Facebook, which is what we actually got. Not only can we not get astronauts into space or even LEO, we cannot even fly commercial MACH 1 anymore.
I have to wonder where we would be if nuclear energy had turned out the way we were promised, which was basically virtually unlimited power which was almost too cheap to meter.
The goalposts are always shifting.

Blogger DonReynolds December 14, 2018 1:22 PM  

The great statesman, Otto von Bismark, said that those who like laws and sausages, should never watch them being made....to which I add, government statistics.

Working as an economist from 1978 to 2008, I can say with some certainty that government reporting is tainted and different agencies will not even use each other's official numbers internally because they know it is "tainted" with all kinds of close calls and compromises and court orders. Everyone must make their own decision whether to borrow existing data, and use a fine toothed comb to remove the irregular items and errors, or collect that information directly.

Blogger Francis Parker Yockey December 14, 2018 1:25 PM  

"Has anyone addressed why we were able to deal with the Van Halen Belt in '69 but cant do it in 2018?"

Van Halen's belt got fatter, because Van Halen got fatter


I heard it was because of problems between Eddie and David Lee Roth.

Blogger Scott December 14, 2018 1:26 PM  

I've seen enough hard evidence to rest any doubt men walked on the Moon. But the Moon race was not an academic venture, it was a climactic cold war battle with the Soviets. Secrecy and lies are paramount in war, why would you expect any different?

The alien question is another issue. There is also no doubt in my mind we are being visited by extraordinary craft from some unknown origin:

USS Nimitz UFO incident

There are several other cases, including the Montana missile silo incidents, that leave little doubt that 1. military personnel regularly encounter unidentified craft performing impossible maneuvers 2. the U.S. government covers up these events.

Blogger steve December 14, 2018 1:31 PM  

Moon hoaxes are thinly disguised forms of anti-Americanism. You can be skeptical of your government without denying a great (and verifiable) American achievement.

Blogger lowell houser December 14, 2018 1:34 PM  

These men are obviously being deceptive. There are two possibilities. 1) They faked massive portions of the mission and whatever they were really doing on the moon is still classified, or 2) they faked the entire mission and for whatever reason the Russians haven't spoken up in the forty years since. How long has Russia Today been broadcasting? If they had the photos of the moon's surface without the Apollo artifacts then why haven't they broadcasted them? And they would have those photos:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lunokhod_programme?fbclid=IwAR1koNFOCjYoJ5R2z4qdKLfUF18M24rVutUU_s-5Xqg2mGcDcoH7DEicZmU

Would the Soviets let the US continue to lie so that they could take credit for sending a remote controlled golf cart to the Luna? That is so much glory to bask in, after all.

VD, you keep mentioning this argument as a ringer, but it ain't. If I were going to subvert America by subverting the American government, the moon landing is the very first place to start. If you can convince normies that they would lie about this, you can finally convince them that a bureaucrat behind a podium fielding questions from human dictation machines would lie about absolutely anything(which they would, for the record). And you are absolutely correct to distrust the American government, in fact your default position on the American government is that you should start at exactly the opposite of what you are being told and work your way back because in general you will arrive at the truth much sooner.

With all of that being said, currently the evidence points to option 1).

Blogger One Deplorable DT December 14, 2018 1:35 PM  

@177 - Touched a nerve?

The same argument has come up repeatedly by different people in both threads. That's why my post wasn't address to you specifically.

It does touch a nerve. Same as when yet-another-liberal claims we can pay for universal healthcare by trimming Pentagon waste because they've never run the numbers. Run the numbers and see if they add up before running with the claim.

I'm asking a question as to how something that appears to be a problem now in 2018 was not a problem in '69.

It was a problem, hence the course they took through the belts and the additional shielding.

The belts haven't changed. Our beliefs regarding the risks of radiation exposure have changed, as have our electronics. It's not an insurmountable problem by any means. But if NASA were to do a moon mission today they would use extra shielding...relative to Apollo...both for the longevity of the astronauts (no one wants cancer after retirement) and for modern electronics.

And the info saying its dangerous is from NASA. And the astronauts in Owen's video clip reporting from the ISS.

It is dangerous. But understand what dangerous means: if you lived in the belts you would soon die of acute radiation poisoning. If you transit them a few times at high speed you are playing with your long term risk of developing cancer. If you transit them using computers built to Apollo standards your risk of error is low. If you transit them with an iPad your risks run from flipped memory bits and crashes to actual chip damage and no ability for the computer to run.

All problems that can be addressed if/when we decide to build a new spacecraft for leaving LEO.

We arent capable of leaving Low Earth Orbit right now due to the belt.

We don't have a working spacecraft that can leave LEO period. That's not because of the belts.

Blogger FUBARwest December 14, 2018 1:39 PM  

@One Deplorable DT

Thanks for explaining.

Blogger Cloom December 14, 2018 1:41 PM  

A heuristic is not meant to be a logical proof.

Blogger Latigo3 December 14, 2018 1:49 PM  

While I do not have time to dig into all of the info that has been presented, I am reminded of a movie back in the day that was about faking a landing on Mars, it was called Capricorn One.

One can never underestimate individual human nature when it is gathered together on a corporate level.

Blogger One Deplorable DT December 14, 2018 1:49 PM  

@195 - Sorry if I seemed frustrated or like I was picking on you at any point. Like I said, the VB argument has appeared over and over and over again. Your post asking about it was not what set me off.

Blogger Were-Puppy December 14, 2018 1:51 PM  

@80 David The Good

6,000,000 astronauts died so we could go to the moon.
---

6 Gorillion Astronauts! There's a Planet of the Apes joke in there somewhere.

Blogger ar10308 December 14, 2018 1:58 PM  

@188 TARS:
"We are talking about a program that strapped men to some of the largest conventional bombs ever made. The risk that these men might get sick later on is really not that big of a risk compared to being attached to a Saturn 5 rocket."

Completely agree.

I meant the comparison of whether the radiation exposure it kills the human in 20mins vs 20hours vs 20days vs 20weeks or 20years. They would still have gone if they were told that it would kill them in 20days time.

Hence why they used Test Pilots for these missions. They were all quite comfortable with the risk that the closing of the cockpit was potentially the closing of their coffin.

1 – 200 of 276 Newer› Newest»

Post a Comment

Rules of the blog
Please do not comment as "Anonymous". Comments by "Anonymous" will be spammed.

<< Home

Newer Posts Older Posts