Not every wacky conspiracy theory is science-based so the problem isn’t an inability to work through the equations, etc.  The problem as you say is fear but also it is an inability to make good judgments about who is worthy of trust. Kaysing isn’t trustworthy.  Sribel isn’t trustworthy.  That isn’t to say that the status quo is always correct.  But any theory which requires us to believe that many thousands of otherwise upstanding people are maliciously lying is a non-starter for me.  That’s not a credible position.

If on the other hand you can show that the existing evidence is being misinterpreted, that’s a completely different situation.  I think evolution is a scientific hoax not because all the scientists are lying but because they have been trained to misinterpret the evidence.  That’s completely different from accusing all the astronauts and nasa engineers and management of being malicious liars.  The theory is complete BS.  Same thing with flat earth.  Everyone isn’t lying.  If your pet theory requires belief that everyone is lying, it’s a sure sign that it is a false theory.

Good point, but "the Astronauts" (which is what, 3 men?) and "management" would only constitute a half-dozen people, not thousands. So your whole premise for embracing the moon landing is flawed and not based in empirical evidence.

It has been repeated many times on CI -- COMPARTMENTALIZATION. Every low-level manager was NOT briefed on the big picture, and the true nature of the "moon landing". Every engineer who put together some circuits or designed some piece of hardware did NOT need to be "in-the-know" about the whole big picture either. 99.5% of the men involved in the "moon landing" would have been in this category. They only worked on their small part.

Why would all of them be let in on the full truth? They were on a Need-to-Know Basis, and they didn't need to know!

But be DARN careful about going with the flow of the masses. Don't ever assume the majority is automatically more likely to be correct. Only when "all other things be equal". For example, the masses of Catholics don't have a problem with Vatican II or the New Mass. We are the small minority in that controversy. Are ALL THOSE Novus Ordo Catholics wicked, malicious, or stupid?

On the other hand, most people don't believe in aliens, and they're right. Most people believe drinking bleach is harmful, and they're right.
The Moon Landing is full of nonsense and things that don't add up from start to finish. Read the other threads, because I can't keep repeating them here.

Buzz Aldrin, the second man on the moon, left the Air Force for a couple of years after his alleged moon venture. He spent time thereafter in a hospital for severe mental illness. They reported publicly that he was being treated for a neck injury.

He left the Service for two years, but came back to the Air Force in 1971. At this time, he was taking one Ritalin tablet a day for a nervous disorder. One has to conclude from some of his own statements that he was struggling with the meaning of reality.

In his book Return to Earth, Aldrin describes an interview he gave to NBC’s Roy Neal at a local Chamber of Commerce banquet near the his new assignment at Edward Air Force Base in CA.

 
Aldrin writes:
“The first question that Roy Neal asked me was, ‘Now that almost two years have gone by, why not tell us how it really felt to be on the moon.?”

At this point, Aldrin nearly falls apart. “My throat went dry and I became dizzy,” he writes. That was, he testifies, the one question he dreaded above all others.

“I remember little more of the interview,” he writes. “When it was all over I stepped down and stood before about 50 Chamber of Commerce members and their wives all waiting for autographs. I signed a few and when the shaking became uncontrollable, I grabbed Joan (his wife) and ran for the door.”

Very strange behavior for an astronaut who had supposedly returned in triumph from the moon’s surface two year earlier.

Aldrin continues: “In the privacy of an alley near the auditorium, I choked back my emotions and quietly wept. Joan stood silently by and when I composed myself, she took me to the nearest bar. I was inconsolable..I was judging myself too harshly… I got rather drunk.”

I think Buzz Aldrin was a West Point graduate. West Point graduates never lie.

 

 

We have photos taken recently of the moon landing sites.  Believing that everyone is lying (many thousands of people) is a form of paranoia.

The conspiracy theory is fake.  Your worst fears have been realized.  You have been duped again.

The pictures are fake.

What's your evidence?

David Percy and Mary Bennett covered it pretty well for me. The radiation on the Moon is intense and would've fogged the pictures up bad. Also the cameras had no view finders and they were wearing those very awkward pressurized gloves, yet all the pictures came out too fine. The shadows at times go at cross angles and there's clear detail evidence of artificial background lighting. Through computer enhancement analysis they even discovered that there was a spotlight in the Apollo Sun. Everything's very tight shots and no pictures of stars or planets either. They say you can't see stars from the Moon!
It's the Freemasons again, hoaxing the folks, imo.

All this has been addressed. Especially the shadows going "different directions" and the lack of stars in the images. You can't get the stars in a picture without a somewhat long exposure, either on the moon or on earth. Try taking a picture of the night sky

https://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/LRO/main/index.html

I’m not talking about photos taken in 1969.  The Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter (LRO) launched in 2009 photographed the sites. So now all of those people need to be lying too.  So the theory requires that massive numbers of people are in on the conspiracy.  I guess I haven’t been “enlightened” yet.

The alleged moon landings are the only technological claim in the entire history of the world, such as the first automobile, airplane, or nuclear power, which was not far surpassed in capability 50 YEARS later, much less not even able to be duplicated by any nation on earth 50 YEARS later. The supposed moon landings are also the only time in history that such claimed expensive technology was deliberately destroyed afterwards (175 BILLION DOLLARS worth), only done so to hide the evidence of the fraud.

I agree 100%, but still, the lie has further problems.  Computers in the 60s were as big as a garage; now they are as small as a wristwatch (and even smaller).  The idea that the destruction of 1960s tech would impede current day tech is ludicrous!  We're not talking about a dying industry, like the making of stained-glass windows, where the destruction of knowledge is damaging because people just aren't making these things anymore.  We're talking about the tech industry; we're talking about NASA; we're talking about the entire industries of the airforce, computing and satellite combined.  These industries have grown exponentially since the 60s.  The tech should be available to where we could build a moon-landing project from scratch, ignoring that the 1960s NASA even existed, and it should be "light years" better.  The tech of the 1960s is so outdated that it doesn't even matter.