On Sun, 2 Nov 2003 13:00:59 -0500, "ralph sansbury"
wrote:

I read your thoughtful discussion of Collier's points and
they do point to the conclusion along with the decision made
after the disasters and supposedly because of them, to stop such
manned missions.
Opponents of the hoax view are the ones that sound like cranks
an crackpots.
Maybe I too am just trying to be politically correct. I like
to think that it was not a complete hoax, that unmanned missions
were made to retrieve moon rocks as
in the ussr case, and that other good science and aeronautic and
communications techniques came out of this 30billion dollar
effort.

You see that's the mental gymnastics that shows why Moon conspiracy
proponents shouldn't be taken seriously:


Moon Conspiracy Proponent "Apollo didn't go to the Moon"
Critical Thinker: "but what about moon rocks and laser reflectors?"

MCP "Oh, yeah, they sent sekrit unmanned probes to land and retrieve
rocks"

CT: "what about the transmissions, and the tracking stations such as
Parkes"

MCP: "Oh yeah, there was special built in delays in the radio, just
like on radio delays"

CT: "but what about doppler effects?"

MCP: "ahh, they were all part of a conspiracy

CT: "but the number of people involved must have been huge"

MCP: "well, there was a watergate and Irangate conspiracy, and that
was only a few people, so there!"

CT: "But watergate and Irangate leaked like a sieve"

and so it goes.






(formerly)" dlzc1.cox@net wrote in message
news:F7apb.131690$gv5.88164@fed1read05...
Dear Nathan Jones:

"Nathan Jones" wrote in message
...
...

The disinformation and lie source! For your personal favorite
anti-knowledge, come to Nathan Jones! He's right on the price,
right on
the corner of sci.astro and alt.moron.

David A. Smith




--
For the Truth about Planet X,
Phil Plait's excellent summary:
http://www.badastronomy.com/bad/misc/planetx/index.html