Did man land on the moon?

Pudding Time said:
Valid point. Yet nothing to immediately discredit all conspiracies..


My problem is people claiming conspiracies are unture and stupid just because they are conspiracies.. How can one believe someone with such a closed mind?
Click to expand...
True, but on the other hand the ones with the conspiracy theories are usually equally closed off to reason.
 
Pudding Time said:
And that's stereotyping... And stereotyping is a form of being closed minded..
Click to expand...
You assume that people who discredit conspiracy theories are close minded. Which is stereotyping.

I've looked at the evidence presented in the thread, and I've made a decision that I don't believe it to be true. Just because I reach a certain conclusion after rational consideration doesn't mean I'm close minded.
 
dt3 said:
You assume that people who discredit conspiracy theories are close minded. Which is stereotyping.
Click to expand...

No. Calling someone closed minded because they disbelieve something without logic is pretty accurate.

dt3 said:
I've looked at the evidence presented in the thread, and I've made a decision that I don't believe it to be true. Just because I reach a certain conclusion after rational consideration doesn't mean I'm close minded.
Click to expand...

If you've thought rationally about both sides of the argument, then you could form a logical reason as to why you disbelieve the conspiracy, thus not being closed minded.
 
Pudding Time said:
No. Calling someone closed minded because they disbelieve something without logic is pretty accurate.



If you've thought rationally about both sides of the argument, then you could form a logical reason as to why you disbelieve the conspiracy, thus not being closed minded.
Click to expand...
Then how about you consider this: The Apollo Lunar Module did have a throttle, capable of going anywhere between 10,125 lbs of thrust and 1,250 lbs of thrust.

Throttling Back To The Moon

http://web.mit.edu/digitalapollo/Documents/Chapter8/setplem.pdf

Apollo Lunar Module - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I've been an absolute space junkie since I was about 5 years old. I've read numerous arguments both for and against the moon landing. Believe me, my opinion is not based in one internet thread.
 
All Else Failed said:
No, you just made an outside observation on technology we both have very little knowledge about. I doubt anyone here knows the fine specifics of rocket boosters and throttles.


Plus, the whole throttle thing doesn't make the moon landing fake.
Click to expand...

You are right, it doesn't make the moon landing fake. But what it does it tarnish that guys credibility.

You don't need to know much about rocket science to know that rockets don't have throttles. This is something you learn in high school. I dunno, maybe you took different classes than I did, or maybe you were away for that part of class.

I even linked you to a source, talking about how NASA are still trying to get throttles on rockets.

All this I provide to you, yet you still brush it aside for no logical reason.
 
dt3 said:
Then how about you consider this: The Apollo Lunar Module did have a throttle, capable of going anywhere between 10,125 lbs of thrust and 1,250 lbs of thrust.

Throttling Back To The Moon

http://web.mit.edu/digitalapollo/Documents/Chapter8/setplem.pdf

Apollo Lunar Module - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I've been an absolute space junkie since I was about 5 years old. I've read numerous arguments both for and against the moon landing. Believe me, my opinion is not based in one internet thread.
Click to expand...

I was never talking about YOUR opinion donnie..


And this is absolutely amazing! NASA have no idea that they already had this technology! They can't be all too bright over there huh?
 
Back
Top