I believe that if we follow the correct rules of critical thinking we should all arrive at the same conclusion with regard to a major event for which there is a huge amount of evidence to base judgement on. I believe these are the correct rules. If anyone thinks they’re not or they have better ones glad to hear them.
Hi Petra. I appreciate your invitation to engage in a discussion. I think there are many things about the moon landing narrative that are ridiculous. If nothing else, the filmed documentation of the supposed landings and exploration is comical. Who filmed and panned up as the lunar module blasted off to meet up with the orbiter? Shadow angles that change as the astronauts move across the surface indicate stage lighting and not a stationary light source from the sun. The lunar module looks like it was made out of cardboard and tinfoil; hardly capable of rocketing through space and maintaining positive pressure in a vacuum without exploding. Here is an interesting video of NASA astronauts admitting we have never left low-earth orbit.
If I'm reading your critical thinking rules correctly, I think you're saying this first rule is simply 'look for anomalies'.
With regards to the alleged moon landings, the anomalies are legion. The continuity errors in the photographic record being the most obvious. Aulis has a lot about that.
Given that there are, indeed, anomalies in the official story, the question then becomes 'what is the explanation for these anomalies?'.
The two hypotheses I can come up with initially are either
1/ The moon landings didn't happen (or didn't happen the way we've been told they did)
or
2/ The moon landings did happen, but they deliberately created a massive amount of fakery - in which case, why? Is this a) to introduce and then debunk the idea of conspiracy theories themselves (there's something in that of course given the history of that decade/1960s, what with jfk and CIA memo 1035-960, if I'm remembering the number correctly)?
Or is it b) to fuck with us and just create so much cognitive dissonance that we can no longer trust anything, whether that be our own common sense or ANY evidence for or against anything. One can see how useful that would be for the controllers, of course.
A combination of the above is also possible, of course.
On another, more psychological note, two things to say:
1/ Whereas the personal attacks on 'conspiracy theorists' are usually 'you're a bunch of right wing bigots', sometimes, as is the case with the moon landing stuff, the personal attack is labelling conspiracy theorists as, ironically, just 'loonies'. This latter projection works really well - it took me quite a long time before I started questioning the moon landings, as, naively, I admit, I must've simply assumed they happened and didn't ever ask any questions. Notwithstanding the fact that I was preoccupied with other stuff, of course.
2/ Maintaining the 'moon landings really did happen' narrative is vitally important for the continuation of the American Hegemony - if the world were to discover that this is myth, then the Empire would collapse, both internally, and externally, because both their own citizens, brought up on the myth of American exceptionalism, and the rest of the world, fearing this Leviathan, would no longer have any respect for the Empire whatsoever. And that really would be fatal.
Ironically, one suspects that removing the Empire at some point may well be part of the endgame (in which case all these anomalies are simply planting those seeds for a later date). It'll be intriguing to find out...
Hi Petra. I appreciate your invitation to engage in a discussion. I think there are many things about the moon landing narrative that are ridiculous. If nothing else, the filmed documentation of the supposed landings and exploration is comical. Who filmed and panned up as the lunar module blasted off to meet up with the orbiter? Shadow angles that change as the astronauts move across the surface indicate stage lighting and not a stationary light source from the sun. The lunar module looks like it was made out of cardboard and tinfoil; hardly capable of rocketing through space and maintaining positive pressure in a vacuum without exploding. Here is an interesting video of NASA astronauts admitting we have never left low-earth orbit.
https://forbiddenknowledgetv.net/nasadmits-we-never-went-to-the-moon/
If I'm reading your critical thinking rules correctly, I think you're saying this first rule is simply 'look for anomalies'.
With regards to the alleged moon landings, the anomalies are legion. The continuity errors in the photographic record being the most obvious. Aulis has a lot about that.
Given that there are, indeed, anomalies in the official story, the question then becomes 'what is the explanation for these anomalies?'.
The two hypotheses I can come up with initially are either
1/ The moon landings didn't happen (or didn't happen the way we've been told they did)
or
2/ The moon landings did happen, but they deliberately created a massive amount of fakery - in which case, why? Is this a) to introduce and then debunk the idea of conspiracy theories themselves (there's something in that of course given the history of that decade/1960s, what with jfk and CIA memo 1035-960, if I'm remembering the number correctly)?
Or is it b) to fuck with us and just create so much cognitive dissonance that we can no longer trust anything, whether that be our own common sense or ANY evidence for or against anything. One can see how useful that would be for the controllers, of course.
A combination of the above is also possible, of course.
On another, more psychological note, two things to say:
1/ Whereas the personal attacks on 'conspiracy theorists' are usually 'you're a bunch of right wing bigots', sometimes, as is the case with the moon landing stuff, the personal attack is labelling conspiracy theorists as, ironically, just 'loonies'. This latter projection works really well - it took me quite a long time before I started questioning the moon landings, as, naively, I admit, I must've simply assumed they happened and didn't ever ask any questions. Notwithstanding the fact that I was preoccupied with other stuff, of course.
2/ Maintaining the 'moon landings really did happen' narrative is vitally important for the continuation of the American Hegemony - if the world were to discover that this is myth, then the Empire would collapse, both internally, and externally, because both their own citizens, brought up on the myth of American exceptionalism, and the rest of the world, fearing this Leviathan, would no longer have any respect for the Empire whatsoever. And that really would be fatal.
Ironically, one suspects that removing the Empire at some point may well be part of the endgame (in which case all these anomalies are simply planting those seeds for a later date). It'll be intriguing to find out...
They reused the original tapes of the Apollo 11 lunar landing, which documented the most amazing achievement in history, "to save money." Is that believable? https://www.reuters.com/article/us-nasa-tapes/moon-landing-tapes-got-erased-nasa-admits-idUSTRE56F5MK20090716
Why would you take a lunar rover on such a trip? What was its purpose?
I think they faked it.