pull down to refresh

I think it is primarily because there was incentive to do so. To be clear, I do not think it was faked. However, I think the conspiracy is more believable given that we were in a race with the Soviet Union during the cold war to get there.
reply
People feel invigorated when baseless conspiracy becomes legitimized by politics. Same logic that drives "masks/vaccines don't work" mentality.
reply
Contrarianism. They want to be above other people, aren't above their peers in terms of knowledge and then create a narrative where they are above their peers in terms of knowledge.
reply
This may definitely be a lot of it.
But also, it never happened.
reply
Disclaimer: I have very little faith in the majority of conspiracy theories. Most are stupid and the people believing in them are even stupider.
These stupid people provide perfect ammunition for malicious governments though.
The advantage of having "stupid" conspiracy theories prevail (such as this one) is that some of the other conspiracy theories that are rooted in some truth can be brushed off as mere conspiracy theories. Governments have little incentive to prove beyond doubt that the moon landing was real as they can use this to hide other things they actually covered up.
reply
Because it was.
reply
They didn’t DYOR and have a thin grasp of the science involved and resulting tech that infiltrated our lives.
Also, we haven’t been back to see the landing site.
Soon ™️
reply
Obviously, there are a bunch of different answers to this question and, as someone who thinks the moon landing did happen, I'm not exactly the right person to answer this. However, two of the oddities that make people suspicious are that the original footage was deleted and one of the space walk photos was clearly an edited training picture that was taken in a pool.
We discussed this in the recent conspiracy theory post. My view is that some (maybe all) of the promotional material was faked. That might have been because they realized (or worried) that radiation (or some other technical issue) would mess up real pictures and video, but they knew the public demand for documentation was enormous.
reply
So they couldn't leave one beacon or reflective surface or radio relay device up there that we could use to verify the landing site?
Plus they deleted all the telematic data and admit that the Van Allen radiation belt is a barrier?
I'm wearing a NASA shirt as I type this.
#OperationPaperclip
reply
I hadn't heard the point about the telemetry data. I'll have to look into it.
However, they did leave reflective surfaces there. A very common college physics lab exercise is to bounce a laser off of the corner reflectors on the moon and record the reflection.
How do you feel about the idea that only the pictures and video were faked? I think there's really good reason to believe that.
reply
“However, they did leave reflective surfaces there. A very common college physics lab exercise is to bounce a laser off of the corner reflectors on the moon and record the reflection.”
You sure about that? Is there a study somewhere that shows this? Would be a game changer for me.
reply
You sure about that?
No, but you can bounce a laser off of the Moon and that's the explanation we got.
reply
It's not the kind of thing that would have a study, since no one in academia has any doubts about the Moon Landing, but you can read a description of them here.
reply