PSEUDO SCIENCE TUESDAY:MOONLANDING HOAX

last night over many beers, my British physicist friend and I discussed the moon landing hoax theory. I brought it up last night because whenever I really dive into a subject that is pseudo science, he's usually there to bitch slap me back down to reality. Plus, since his mother passed away this week, I thought it would get his mind off grieving. He basically called me an idiot when I asked him if America had really landed on the moon, though I didn't state whether I actually BELIEVE the whole thing was staged. Not a good start, but more beer was soon delivered to our table.

He continued:

"Some things are odd, agreed. But then again, the reality of the situation probably isn't as fascinating as the conspiracies. Classified things are usually kind of boring in my opinion. I watched the landing when I was a child and guess what, this theory has not enough water to support itself."

Sound like something you'd say?

There are scores of conspiracy theories. It's a huge industry and I could probably write a book about how the Cool Aid Man was really behind the Jamestown massacre and I'd probably wind up with a NY Times best seller. But this particular conspiracy has some force behind it's odd premise. When an investigation is finalized, you expect the facts to have been put forth in their entirety and the mystery is dissolved and any furthur conjecture would make you seem like a paranoid android, but here there are really loads of officially unanswered questions.

Reality is where we call home. Everything that happens in reality is almost always better than any of the made-up crap.

Similarly, I wonder (while the moon landing conspiracy tale hasn't quite made me a believer) should it shock me if there was much if there was hidden information with evidence the moon landing never happened? Hell yeah it would blow all our minds if evidence ever were to be made public to the contrary of what we have perceived as truth since 1969. There is an unpredictability of reaction, so I'd settle for some answers to some reasonable questions before ever jumping to conclusions. First off, I wasn't even born when Apollo first landed people on the moon, so right there a red flag is raised. Durrr! My questions are completely founded, just like my questioning of anything historical. Most historical incidents satisfy my curiosity. As a space information freak since childhood, I enjoy studying the space programs. There is soo much information, and I am a believer in the missions as being quite successful in helping humans to better understand the universe despite all the times I am left feeling disappointed at the lack of information.

Meanwhile, answers to some interesting questions deserve to be provided publicly with proper explainations. There is no reason astronauts should bear the burdon of such responsibility for explaining all the details to the masses. Such responsibilities leads to strange press releases, mysterious suicides (most recently NASA's Charles Brady), blow ups (remember when Buzz Aldrin attacked that cameraman?) and most importantly, unanswered questions to some of the pictures and video released to media. These of course are sidenotes to the questions directed at the pure science of the task of getting a man on the moon which is more complicated than I can comprehend on a Monday evening.
Were the stars able to be seen? Why didn't the astronauts cook from radiation? Shouldn't more dust have kicked up upon landing on the moon? Were all the pictures real? All those involved remain silent? Are questions are answered differently depending on what website you go to.

Reading articles of the moon landing is fun. Google "moon landing" and the 4th or 5th item down begins the moon hoax theory.