I was having dinner with some people from other countries (than the U.S.–two Italians, two Spanairds, a Swiss, and a Kurd), and somehow the topic of the space race came up, and I mention the lunar landing in 1969. Almost immediatesly the Italians said something to the effect of, “But of course, that didn’t really happen, it was just a hoax.” I was quite taken aback. Not just that they would entertain such a notion, but with the conviction with which they held it. The Spanairds agreed, and the Swiss and the Kurd were borderline. I really was dumbfounded.
I know there was a movie premised on this idea, but I’ve always thought that it was generally considered idle, fictional speculation.
Has anyone else come across this? Or was this just a coincidence that most of this group would have this belief?
Everyday public expressions of moon landing doubt usually happen in little waves, following the airing of an infamous Fox TV ‘documentary’ on the subject.
‘Documentary’ in finger quotes, because in fact it’s just an assemblage of pathetic and easily-debunked common arguments, presented in typically sensationalist fashion. It’s not even worth arguing with people who have seen it and were stupid enough to be convinced by it.
I dunno, but you may be thinking of “Capricorn One,” a movie about a faked landing on Mars and what ensued for the participants when the spacecraft accidentally burned up on re-entry. Penis ensued…
I always thought that Johnnie Cochran & Co should have introduced that film as evidence that their client was not – indeed, could not possibly be – acting innocent.
Almost daily you see news articles saying that Americans are stupid, Americans are fat, Americans are lazy while Europeans are smart, fit, cultured. How could they believe that a bunch of fat, lazy, stupid Americans could pull off such a feat if cultured Europeans haven’t?
I admit this is casting broad stereotypes about both Americans and Europeans, using some measure of hyperbole to make the point, and I’m not going to dig up cites showing news reports calling Americans fat and stupid and Europeans as smart and cultured. Just my humble opinion.
When I had the same opinion expressed by some dinner companions to India, I just smiled and said that if they chose to believe it wasn’t real, then they will be one more person who’ll never help their own country to acheive that kind of goal.
No use arguing with people over something that obviously silly.
I could believe the moon landings were faked. The US would have had good reason to fake it, and it’s hard to believe they got there on 60’s technology.
I mean, 60% of me thinks they’re real, but 40% wonders.
The President can’t even get a blowjob in the Oval Office without the whole world finding out about it. What makes people think that a faked moon landing could be kept secret for long?
You’ll rarely get far arguing with a conspiracy theorist, but in this case you can at least mention the lunar retroreflectors. They are then obliged to argure either that the folks with lasers who claim to be able to using these things today are lying, or modify the “Apollo was faked” claim to admit that of course some lunar landings did take place, though naturally these were unmanned, yada, yada …
When asked why an elaborate program of fakery should involve the extraordinary and unnecessary expense of actual moon landings, the typical response is “That just shows how clever they were.”
Unmanned probes, I would imagine. I saw an interview with the guys who shoot the lasers at the moon, they said the conspiracy guys had never come to visit. They made it sound like this was because bouncing lasers off reflectors on the moon was bullet proof evidence that man had been there. I figured it was because the conspiracists would just dismiss the reflectors as having been placed there by probes.
When aksing a HB why we faked the landings, they always claim that it was because we had to beat the Soviets to the Moon. When asked why the Soviets didn’t blow the whistle, they always claim that the Soviets were, of course, part of the conspiracy.
When asked where it was filmed, they claim it was shot in the Arizona desert. They then go on to claim that the fact that boots wouldn’t leave prints in the desert sand, and therefore it was faked. They cleverly ignore the notion that if it wasn’t shot on sand, then it couldn’t have been shot in the desert.
The landings would have been faked with 1960’s technology too.
All the scifi movies I’ve seen from that time period makes me think producing a convincing fake would be more difficult given the special effects of the time.
