12 ms·
Neil Armstrong's reply to a Moon landing skeptic
- jussij 6y agoArmstrong's reference to the moon reflectors brought back memories of this classic Big Bang clip: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-e5CtbbZL-k&feature=youtu.be https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-e5CtbbZL-k&feature=youtu.be In this context I can easily imagine that Zack is the teacher.
- gbil 6y agonot sure why I feel the urge to reply :) but Zack is the very opposite of that teacher. Zack is asking questions and wants to learn. That teacher just tries to push her opinion on someone, leaving to room for reply, no room for a conversation, exactly what no teacher should do, no one in general but especially someone who should promote discussions, questioning and argumentation
- jussij 6y agoThe way I look at this is Zack reminds me of the collective group of people who truly struggle with basic science. As Armstrong points out in his reply, it only takes a very basic level of scientific/forensic examination to easily prove the moon landings happened. But all of that falls on deaf ears (much like in the clip) when you are responding to someone with a Zack level of scientific ability.
- hodgesrm 6y agoThis is the sort of craziness that led to the Dark Ages after the fall of the Western Roman Empire. We humans are pretty much our own worst enemies.
- goldenchrome 6y agoOf course we’re our own worst enemies. At least now that our technology allows us to overcome all our non-human enemies.
- ARandomerDude 6y ago> technology allows us to overcome all our non-human enemies Like hurricanes and COVID.
- boomboomsubban 6y agoI can't see the parallel between the willful ignorance displayed and the "Dark Ages." Do you think the migrating tribes just refused to believe those aqueducts existed?
- coliveira 6y agoThe rise of the Church made most of the ancient culture to be believed false of demonic. Philosophers were the first put to the fire. Temples were destroyed, along with the books inside them. With the end of the Roman state, there was nobody left in Europe to maintain the engineering knowledge acquired by the ancient.
- steamedhams 6y agoThat doesn’t really sound like a good summary of centuries of Roman and post-Roman history. History is complicated, but I would say that the Western European dark ages of 500-1000AD were caused neither by moon landing skepticism (or the 6th century equivalent thereof) nor its opposite.
- boomboomsubban 6y agoWhile there was some persecution of the pagans, they mostly just gradually became Christian. The West lost it's Greek tradition, and with it much of the millennia of knowledge it contained.
- hodgesrm 6y agoI'm thinking of things like the destruction of the library of Alexander, the religious fanaticism of the late Empire, and the destructive effects of continuous wars from the mid-200s AD. It's pretty easy to wipe out scientific progress if you put your mind to it. It was not just invading Germans, though that certainly did not help.
- boomboomsubban 6y agoThe first two really didn't happen, and though the Crisis of the Third Century hampered Rome, it wouldn't wipe out knowledge. Plus, who wanted to wipe out progress? The West lost their connection to Greek, and the knowledge was largely Greek.
- sm4rk0 6y agoI get your point, but actually this (volcanic eruption) led to the Dark Ages: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23565762 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23565762 (another HN front page story)
- hodgesrm 6y agoNo single event led to the Dark Ages. It was the result of centuries of economic and intellectual decay, combined with catastrophic invasions and wars. By 536 the Western Roman Empire was already some 60 years in its grave. (Though some argue about the actual end date.) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Romulus_Augustulus https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Romulus_Augustulus
- api 6y agoIf the Roman Empire had collapsed without the volcanic eruption, would it have led to anything as deep as the "dark ages" or just a political reshuffle? France has been through like four governments in the past 200 years. The US is only 200 years old and has endured one civil war.
- hodgesrm 6y agoYou never know with history because it's not possible to conduct experiments. However, I'm very sceptical of arguments about the lasting effect of volcanic eruptions on world history during the last 2000 years. Known eruptions last 2-3 years, which is bad but of limited duration. [1] Pandemics and disease in general have had far greater impact on humans. The Bubonic Plague epidemic of 1348-1350 wiped out at least 1/3 of the population of Europe according to reputable sources. [2] It affected medieval societies for decades by changing the cost and availability of labor. Destructive wars like the 30 Years War had effects of similar magnitude. (This relevant for the Roman Empire, which suffered continuous invasions starting from 406AD onwards in the West.) [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Year_Without_a_Summer https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Year_Without_a_Summer [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Death https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Death
- finolex1 6y agoI would think that the craziness that led to the Dark ages would be the polar opposite - an unquestioning acceptance of all dogma, or at the very least, being scared to question
- dreamcompiler 6y agoWhat gets me most about these fools is they completely ignore how much such a huge fake job would cost. It would be so expensive that you could cut the budget in half and just...go to the moon.
- jwilber 6y agoWhat it really comes down to is these people severely lack in critical thinking, so while it is surprising that they fail to account for other, seemingly obvious externalities, it really shouldn’t be.
- gameswithgo 6y agoThis critical thinking critique is pretty tautological. In effect we are saying "these people with wrong ideas, the problem is they are not good at getting ideas right". But that isn't useful/actionable knowledge. WHY are they bad at getting ideas right? Is it innate to the average human biology? Is it something that has gotten worse as more people have gotten onto the internet where they are exposed to non-curated data more? Whatever causes this we need to fight it.
- JoeSmithson 6y agoWhat causes it is people have a gnawing sense of inadequacy, and conspiracies give them a sense of superiority. It's incredibly seductive to be in on a secret. It makes you feel special and boosts your self esteem.
- zuminator 6y ago> Is it innate to the average human biology? I think it is an natural personality trait gone haywire. Just as there are some people who are pure herd creatures, completely trusting of authority, there are others who are inherently skeptical as a genetic trait. Humanity benefits from a certain degree of skepticism but since it's a spectrum, some people possess it in excess. In antiquity such people may have been heretics who questioned the Church, and they led us to the Reformation and to scientific progress. In the more recent past, they believed in alien landings and the Bermuda Triangle. Nowadays they're anti-vaxxers or flat Earthers, viewing the government or scientific orthodoxy as windmills to tilt against. Perhaps our current environment is to some extent conducive to runaway skepticism. Consider, obesity is rampant because human beings evolved in relative caloric scarcity, but in today's plentiful, carbohydrate rich diet, we find it hard to self-regulate our food intake. Perhaps conspiracy-theorism is rampant because humanity evolved in an environment where people were much less free to pursue their "alternative" urges, but the shackles have been loosened in the modern world. Freedom for better or worse also means freedom to hold fringe points of view.
- akhilcacharya 6y agoThe letter is great, but it doesn’t have the same impact Buzz Aldrins reaction to the skeptic had.
- vages 6y agoFor those who haven't seen Aldrin punching a conspiracy theorist in the face: https://youtu.be/jc7gsdonMHw https://youtu.be/jc7gsdonMHw
- jacquesm 6y agoThere is something extremely funny about someone wanting an accomplished astronaut to swear that the most important event in their lives actually happened on a Bible, which we all know is an accurate representation of historical facts...
- vikingcaffiene 6y agoSaw a video of him responding to another skeptic by beating the shit out of him [0]. Honestly when people are that deluded a good knock on the head might be a more persuasive argument... [0] https://www.floridatoday.com/story/tech/science/space/2019/07/19/lunar-landing-denier-we-never-went-moon/1702676001/ https://www.floridatoday.com/story/tech/science/space/2019/0... [Edit] Mixed up Neil with Buzz... oops. -_-
- Trasmatta 6y agoThat was Buzz, not Neil...
- WalterBright 6y agoI'd imagine Buzz would be pretty mad if he found out you were mistaking Neil for him, given that Buzz has lived most of his life in Neil's shadow. As for me, I credit them both equally for being the first men on the moon. They both landed at the same moment. Whether the bootheel or the landing gear hit is not relevant.
- vikingcaffiene 6y ago> I'd imagine Buzz would be pretty mad He's already knocked one dude out. Might as well add me to the list ;) I agree with your sentiment. My mind honestly can't wrap itself around the terrifying sense of wonder and vulnerability those guys must have felt being up there and looking back at earth. Incredible.
- Konohamaru 6y agoMost men would have soiled myself if they were put into a position of having to reboot the rocket and make it back to Earth. And then seeing how one of the astronauts kept his cool when one of the components for redeparture failed. Just incredible!
- th0ma5 6y agoThe whole thing seems like instant death every moment. Perhaps as test pilots they all got used to just trying to get on with things, but maybe they really did soil themselves like us mortals?
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- ciarannolan 6y agoHe was a famously cool customer. >Two men were about to land on the moon, and Mission Control in Houston was thrumming with tension. In the science-operations room, Gerald Schaber, a geologist, needed something to do while he waited for the lunar module to touch down. Schaber had come from northern Arizona, where engineers had warped the desert with dynamite to make a cratered landscape where the astronauts could train. His job didn’t start until Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin stepped out of the lunar module and began to explore the slate-colored surface. And the wait was getting to him. >“Our hearts were beating [fast], of course, everybody’s was,” Schaber told me recently. “So I figured I might as well watch theirs.” >Schaber switched his monitor to the channel displaying biomedical data for the astronauts. Armstrong seemed calmer than some of the folks in Mission Control. The commander’s heart was ticking along at 75 beats per minute, a remarkable rate for someone who was about to, you know, land on the moon. An adult’s normal resting heart rate is between 60 to 100 beats per minute. My heart rate right now, writing this story, is 75, according to a fitness tracker. https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2019/07/apollo-11-moon-heart-rates/593971/ https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2019/07/apollo-1...
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- irjustin 6y agoI think the sad part is there are people who still fall prey today to this and many other conspiracies, anti-vaxx just to name one. But this is a core tenant of freedom of speech and information, so not matter how objectively wrong, I'll defend the teacher's right to say it. There will always be those who fall into fringe ideas regardless of how disprovable they are because they choose to believe the moon is made of cheese. The tool of critical thinking not being applied well can easily end up here.
- ceilingcorner 6y agoThey would have you believe that the United States Government perpetrated a gigantic fraud on its citizenry. Well, it certainly wouldn’t be the first time that happened, by any government. The “Weapons of Mass Destruction” lie could be described using the exact same sentence, and that wasn’t even twenty years ago. Not defending the moon landing doubters, or conspiracy theorists in general, but: the proper response to these things isn’t to point and laugh. It’s to recognize their origins - a (often justified) loss of trust in institutions and governmental narratives - and work on addressing and fixing them. Edit: commenters seem to be focusing on a single example, which I presented as an illustrative point for a much deeper and more important phenomenon. You’re missing the forest for the trees.
- mav3rick 6y agoOh and didn't the WMD fraud come out internally ? Tell me one NASA or JPL scientist officially on the mission who is claiming that it was fake ? Stop being contrarian for the sake of it .
- ceilingcorner 6y agoAs I said, I’m not defending the moon landing doubters. But it seems obvious to me that the recent increase in conspiracy theories is a direct result of unethical institutional and government actions coming to light.
- tgv 6y agoLike flat earth and anti-vax? To me, it seems more obvious that that's the effect of attention and manipulation in media, both "classic" and social. A suspicious attitude institutions has always existed: from the government down to the grocer, who pushes the scales down while weighing. The more the attention is drawn towards it, the greater the suspicion gets, and I feel that especially divisive attention feeds suspicion. When behavior of an institution, such as the Trump administration, is not beyond reproach, it feeds the attention cycle.
- 6y ago
- Buildstarted 6y agothis is my favorite site that debunks all the moon landing conspiracy theories. http://www.clavius.org/ http://www.clavius.org/
- squarefoot 6y agoDidn't they come back with lunar soil samples? Armstrong reply was brilliant, but I would have also added: "here's some samples we took by ourselves, feel free to meet us at xyz lab and analyze them". And btw, who the heck allows a negationist like that one to teach children?
- WalterBright 6y ago> who the heck allows a negationist like that one to teach children? Heh, I strongly disagree with a lot of what is taught in public schools. I even got some Fs in high school for telling teachers they were wrong.
- mkl 6y agoHe did add that. Second to last paragraph.
- iainmerrick 6y agoWell, they could easily just claim that the samples are fake. If you try to rebut that, there’ll be further nit-picking arguments, ad infinitum. I don’t think that’s the route to convince a true conspiracy theorist.
- iLemming 6y agoYou know that they are people who dismiss the theory of evolution and say something like: "God sprinkled the Earth with the dinosaur bones to test our faith"...
- WalterBright 6y agoWhile we laugh at skeptics, often they serve a valuable purpose. Skeptics have often revolutionized our understanding of the universe. Like Galileo. We should be careful of unquestioningly believing "established" facts.
- throwaway2048 6y agoDo you really think lunar landing conspiracy theorists are going to "revolutionize our understanding of the universe"? There is room for subtly in these arguments, it is not an all or nothing proposition of listen to everyone, or listen to no one.
- WalterBright 6y ago> Do you really think lunar landing conspiracy theorists are going to "revolutionize our understanding of the universe"? No. But just be aware that ideas people laughed at as clearly wrong and absurd have sometimes turned out to be the truth. Some examples: 1. heliocentric solar system 2. evolution 3. Titanic breaking in half on the surface 4. quantum mechanics 5. all men are created equal
- throwaway2048 6y agoAgain, there are specific, identifiable evidence based reasons you should listen to those theories, and you can do so without equating every lunatic with a pet theory to the popular image of Galileo.
- WalterBright 6y agoPeople at the time thought the geocentric model was obviously, irrefutably true.
- 0x264 6y agoThere is a difference between, on one side, questioning one's understanding of the universe, which is how science works and progress and, on the other side, being unable to accept facts, which is where moon landing skeptics are.
- mullingitover 6y agoArmstrong's exact argument about the vast numbers conspirators that would be required to keep perfect secrecy is exactly what I use when people try to claim that the coronavirus is some kind of hoax or that there's some kind of conspiracy about vaccines. Have you ever tried to get thousands of people to cooperate on anything, let alone perpetuate a massive lie, when they have nothing to gain personally from doing so?
- desikoder 6y agoYeah, people have been selling an invisible product since thousands of years (religion), so it is quite possible to get billions of people to lie to themselves and to others.
- mhh__ 6y agoParent comment said nothing to gain from. Pascal's wager (at least) would suggest some kind of logic to it
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- fauigerzigerk 6y agoPascal's wager never made sense to me. There are infinitely many possible belief systems. The odds of picking the right one are infinitely small. Picking the wrong one may even come with greater loss than picking none of them, because praying to false gods may bring upon me the wrath of the true gods more so than simply keeping an open mind.
- avmich 6y agoI take issue with your "quite". Did you try to establish a new religion? Star Wars had some success on that, but even them - with all modern might of persuasion - didn't get billions - or tens of millions - of followers, and those who they did are arguably at least partially follow in jest. You can't apply "religion" argument that easily.
- koevet 6y agoThe saddest and most worrysome aspect of the exchange is actually the sender of the letter being a teacher. "As a teacher of young children, I have a duty to tell them history..."
- gorgoiler 6y ago“Yourselfs” 3/10, could try harder.
- wintorez 6y agoI read it somewhere that the best way to respond to conspiracy theorist is to make a more outlandish claim: - Moon landing was fake. - You believe in the Moon?!
- gorgoiler 6y agoHave you used this in real life, and how did it go?
- wintorez 6y agoI actually did. Not for the moon landing though. It basically frustrates the person to the point that they begin questioning their own conspiracy theory. Sometimes you need to hold a mirror in front of people to see themselves.
- slazaro 6y agoBut from their point of view, were you totally serious, or was it obvious that you were just taking an absurd stance for the sake of an extreme counter-example, tongue in cheek?
- wintorez 6y agoI had to sound serious. I argued the whole night that New York is not a real city, and is a fictional place created by Marvel, like Gotham is created by DC. Nothing would convince me otherwise. Satellite images? Fake! Maps? Obviously fictional, like maps of middle earth. Videos? All filmed in Toronto!
- wintorez 6y agoIn case you were wondering why? My aim was to make the other person do some actual “research” to prove to me that I was wrong. Once you learn how to do that, you will find your way out of your own conspiracy theories as well.
- 6y ago
- LAMike 6y agoIf Elon can't get us to the Moon by 2030, I'm putting my tinfoil hat on. Does this sound like a group of guys who just accomplished the most impressive feat of human innovation? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XeAGGpRYmKY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XeAGGpRYmKY
- winrid 6y agoWhy aren't they more excited? Professionalism? Tired?
- jakeogh 6y agoHonestly, it really does. Nothing about that suggests they are making up anything. It's throughly organic; off the top of their heads. None of the body language or vocalization suggests deception to me. They include esoteric details and caveats without hesitation. It's fun to watch, thanks for posting.
- stormdennis 6y agoThe worst part about this is that it's a teacher who's believing the fake Moon landing conspiracy theory. I had a teacher in primary school who, one day, filled our heads with nonsense by Erich von daniken. When you're young and a teacher does that it tends to stick in your head.
- jedberg 6y agoThe best argument I ever heard was that it would be more expensive to fake the moon landing than to actually go. Thousands of people saw the Apollo rockets take off. They would have had to do that part anyway, and that was the most expensive part of the mission.
- charliebrownb 6y agoAs he finished up a video call with his parents who were stuck in Europe, he knew he was right. The wold was so naive. He dictated the last few words on his latest iPhone to save time before telling Siri to send the email - magically connecting himself to the fraudulent spaceman, bits of data flying over air in an instant. "We are still thousands of years away from having the technology to fly to the moon", he chuckled. He turned his lights off, sank back into his bed. Content.
- jdblair 6y agoI admire Armstrong for taking the time to write such a thoughtful letter. With the exception of people who are close to me, I usually calculate that it's not worth my time to engage and try to refute a conspiracy theory.
- koonsolo 6y agoWell, here lies the difference between US and EU. In US, you try to reason with lunatics who believe the earth is flat and other nonsense. In EU, we treat lunatics like lunatics.
- adsdentiste 6y agoΚΑΙ ΜΕΤΑ ΑΠΟ ΑΥΤΟ , ΤΙ ΘΕΛΕΤΕ ΝΑ ΠΙΣΤΕΨΟΥΜΕ ? ΕΙΝΑΙ ΔΥΝΑΤΟΝ ΜΟΛΟΝΟΤΙ ΟΙ ΦΩΤΟΓΡΑΦΙΕΣ ΠΡΑΓΜΑΤΙΚΑ ΕΔΕΙΧΝΑΝ ΤΟ ΨΕΜΑ, ΤΟ ΨΕΜΑ ΦΑΝΤΑΖΕ ΤΟΣΟ ΜΕΓΑΛΟ ΠΟΥ ΟΙ ΠΙΟ ΠΟΛΛΟΙ ΤΟ ΘΕΩΡΟΥΣΑΝ ΑΔΥΝΑΤΟ , ΟΤΙ ΔΗΛΑΔΗ ΗΤΑΝ ΑΛΗΘΕΙΑ Η ΠΡΟΣΕΛΗΝΩΣΗ