/sci/ - Science & Math

[Anonymous No.14549597]

Hello /sci/ first time posting here.
From time to time I argue with moon landing conspiracy theorists and actual space deniers / flat earthers.
Is there a good comprehensive resource for refuting their claims, something that will make my life easier?
Right now I've got to do it piecemeal argument by argument and look up information on my own to refute them, but I'm sure others have already done the hard work.
Thanks in advance.

[Anonymous No.14549600]

>i argue for a position that i myself am unable to support
unbelievably pathetic. you're the definition of an NPC drone. just kys you fucking moron

[Anonymous No.14549602]

>>14549597
You can't refute faith.

[Anonymous No.14549607]

>>14549602
Yeah, but you don't have these kinds of debates to convince the other side, they're for the benefit of the fence sitters.

[Anonymous No.14549620]

The thing is, you won't change their mind, so you're just waiting your time by entertaining them. You'll show their claims wrong one by one, but then they'll just pull out some six hour long Youtube video and demand that you watch it. Really the only upside is that there might be a third guy watching the argument who might believe the moon hoaxer if you weren't there to explain why they're wrong. But in the grand scheme of things it's a total waste. If they really wanted to know something, they'd have looked it up themselves instead of asking you to refute their werid claims

[Anonymous No.14549632]

>>14549597
check out black soience man, bill nye the soi goy and children's schoolbooks, seems like that roughly your level of discourse. are you sure you're old enough to be using 4chan?

[Anonymous No.14549650]

>>14549620
>there is nothing that could possible every change my mind that the moon landings were real.
>TV said it, I believe it, that settles it.
>my version of the narrative is based on none of my own independent research, i only trust it because it was on TV, i admit to having no unique knowledge of the topic to justify my level of certainty
>people who disagree with my version of the narrative and refuse to change their point of view to match mine are being unreasonable

[Anonymous No.14549653]

>>14549620
That's correct, but from time to time I'm on the mood, and hopefully at least one person will come out learning something new.
They're still hung up on "what happened to the cameraman" or claiming the lunar module is made out of cardboard

[Anonymous No.14549659]

>>14549650
Talking with hoaxers is exactly what has made me believe in the moon landings. There was a time when I didn't really know anything about it, but then I'd look up the claims some hoaxer would make and every time the outcome would be that the hoaxer is making no sense. And then I ended up learning more about the landings in the process and now I can't think of any reason to believe they didn't happen

[Anonymous No.14549669]

>>14549653
Yeah that's the type of stuff it devolves back to. You explain how a thing works, and then they just start posting pictures of the lander like look at it, it's clearly not real because it doesn't look like I imagine a lander should look like. Okay then

[Anonymous No.14549676]

>>14549597
Hello Shill. just find yourself a decent job.

[Anonymous No.14549682]

>>14549669
That's the funniest shit, they have some idea what it "should look like" which comes entirely from sci fi films and media.
Even in their own narrative it makes zero sense.
>Spend billions and years to build a movie set and hire Stanley Kubrick to direct the landings
>Scrap together a papier-mâché craft, because they ran out of money or time I guess

[Anonymous No.14549698]

>>14549659
>muh anecdotal evidence
>no i do not have any evidence that its true
>you just have to trust me
>people who disagree with my version of the narrative and refuse to change their point of view to match mine are being unreasonable
>my unsupported anecdotal evidence PROVES CONCLUSIVELY that i am right about everything
sound, well reasoned logic, your IQ must be at about 1000*


*IQs in this post are expressed in binary

[Anonymous No.14549703]

you should know that most of these are actually just baiting and simply enjoy arguing

[Anonymous No.14549722]

>>14549703
I think the guy above your post is one of those types

[Anonymous No.14549728]

>>14549703
Maybe the flat earthers, but a lot of people sincerely believe we never went to the moon.
Of course they've got until 2025 and they'll either shut up or just pivot and say Artemis is "fake and gay"

>>14549722
That's precisely why I'm ignoring him

[Anonymous No.14549750]

>>14549728
Yea I mean flat earthers mostly, moon doubters are usually not baiting.

The problem with arguing against those comes from the fact that every single evidence you provide will be discredited as misinformation from the alleged conspirators.

[Anonymous No.14549782]

>>14549750
In any case do you know of a website I can refer them to that has everything neatly summarized, they always repeat the same "arguments" so I'm sure someone has done it?

[Anonymous No.14549790]

>>14549782
I've considered trying to make something like that, but then again why go through the effort because they don't want to change their mind anyway

And actually now that I think about it, I remember there being a site like that, it had some common moon hoax claims and explained why it's wrong. Don't know if it exists anymore

[Anonymous No.14549795]

Linda Ham is one of the most brilliant space scientists of all time, everything NASA says is inarguably true. Diversity is our strength, women and men are interchangeable equivalents, 95% of of everything is made of invisible, intangible dark matter, covid wasn't a hoax, the government is working in our interests, JWST is worth $88 billion, the moon landings were real and everyone who disagrees is being disingenuous.
>NASA said it, I believe it, that settles it

[Anonymous No.14549810]

>>14549782
>i'm a science expert and i know that the moon landings were real, i am 100% certain
>thats why i need a referance to link people to in order to prove my point.
>i am incapable of making my own arguments >regardless that, somehow or other i am still utterly certain that i am completely correct even though i can't defend my own point of view and need to beg for someone else to do it for me

[Anonymous No.14549820]

>>14549790
>I've considered trying to make something like that
At this point so do I

[Anonymous No.14549844]

>>14549782
These people don't care about logic or proper arguments so why even bother? You have to be a complete dimwit without even a basic understanding of physics to believe this shit

[Anonymous No.14549845]

>>14549790
>why go through the effort because they don't want to change their mind anyway
>moon landings were real, 100% certainty NASA said it, I believe it, that settles it, no argument or evidence can convince me otherwise, no matter how well reasoned and indisputable.

you have no intention of every changing your mind no matter how much evidence is presented to you, you project your own disingenuous, dishonest personality onto others.
an inability to recognize your own psychological projection is indicative of low iq and emotional immaturity.

[Anonymous No.14551381]

>>14549597
Sure, this site:
https://centerforaninformedamerica.com/moondoggie-1/
has the most thorough debunking I've read.

[Anonymous No.14551442]

>>14551381
I'll have a read, thank you.

[Anonymous No.14551458]

>>14549607
Anyone who is fence sitter on either of those issues is stupid. You're doing to world a disservice by letting them cloak their stupidity to a degree. Having them loudly and proudly exclaim their beliefs makes it easier to filter them out in a time efficient manner.

[Anonymous No.14551469]

>>14551458
Most of these fence sitters simply haven't looked into things because they're not interested enough, that doesn't make them stupid just ignorant.

[Anonymous No.14551519]

>>14551458
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Splitting_(psychology)
>Splitting (also called black-and-white thinking or all-or-nothing thinking) is the failure in a person's thinking to bring together the dichotomy of both perceived positive and negative qualities of something into a cohesive, realistic whole. Because it is a failure in thinking, splitting is indicative of low IQ.

[Anonymous No.14551524]

>>14551519
Not that anon, but psychology is a pseudoscience and you're a redditor to rationalize his addiction to low IQ, masturbatory internet "debates".

[Anonymous No.14551540]

>>14549750
>thinking artemis will land in 2025
ngmi

[Anonymous No.14552494]

>>14549597
Generally its a waste of time and believe me I've tried on /pol/

But here's a fantastic resource for Apollo
https://www.flickr.com/photos/projectapolloarchive/albums

[Anonymous No.14552506]

>>14549728
>Of course they've got until 2025
Maybe even sooner, there's talk of at least one private mission for a tiny rover to land near and to visit the Apollo 17 landing site, to photograph and film the rover and LEM descent stage. (Because the GRAIL/LCROSS orbital pics aren't gonna cut it for most)

If that happens especially before Artemis III then all the moon hoaxers will get BTFO, all depends on the success of CLPS right now (Commercial Lunar Payload Services) missions paving the way, first launches this or next year hopefully.

[Anonymous No.14552507]

>>14552506
>LCROSS
I meant LRO, the only moon orbiter we have right now

Took pics of all the Apollo sites, but of course conspiratards just say they're shooped

[Anonymous No.14552512]

>>14552506
>If that happens especially before Artemis III then all the moon hoaxers will get BTFO
kek we hear that we'll get BTFO for the last 30 years.
another two weeks folks

[Anonymous No.14552528]

>>14552507
I see some white pixels.
Do you mean that they actually went to the Moon on pixels? Nice

[Anonymous No.14552532]

>>14552512
By commons sense and reason you are long BTFO >>14552494
But this will seal the deal even for the most stubborn, I just hope the mission happens before Artemis III so you can't weasel your way out by claiming they planted that there somehow even though Artemis III is landing on the South Pole and Apollo 17 was along the upper north east equatorial ridge (Taurus Littrow valley)

Twelve white men walked on the moon, we're capable of it, we're gonna do it again too but this time at the polar regions where the light is much fainer and we might just see stars too depending on camera exposure settings and you're just gonna have to accept it

[Anonymous No.14552548]

>>14549597
https://mctoon.net/

He has a youtube channel as well as a few others, and you can easily find other resources through him. You can e-mail him or join the discord and ask other participants for further help as required.

>Is there a good comprehensive resource for refuting their claims, something that will make my life easier?

Just... geometry? The thing common to all of these kinds of people, antivaxxers, flat earthers, young earth creationists, is shocking mathematical illiteracy. We're talking "Can't do math above the 3rd grade", and universally below 6th grade.

The simple fact is, and this is evident watching the trolls or people tricked by the trolls, none of the geometry works at all. You can find distances to the moon, sun, and shape of Earth, all using geometry. MCToon also lists some of these, or you can google them, but in every case you'll be ignored with dismissals. They artificially utilize an "epicurean" satire kind of "direct empiricism" demanding "direct sensory experience", but like the other groups do this with immense hypocrisy interposing imaginary problems or lying about how things like refraction work.

You can have fun with them, I guess, but I admit it's a bad habit of mine to do so. They're almost all certainly trolls or people with a low IQ and EXTREME narcissistic personality disorder.

[Anonymous No.14552550]

>>14552532
>Twelve white men walked on the moon
Oh yeah - I forgot that the show was being run by pure Aryans - temporarily on exile because of some failed previous project, but they seemed to kick ass nevertheless.

[Anonymous No.14552725]

>>14552548
Don't forget poor photography understanding too
>WHERE ARE THE STARS HURR

>the cameras Apollo astronauts had
>A silver Hasselblad Data Camera (HDC) with Réseau plate, fitted with a Zeiss Biogon 60mm ƒ/5.6 lens, was chosen to document the lunar surface and attached to astronaut Armstrong's chest. A second black Hasselblad Electric Camera (HEC) with a Zeiss Planar 80mm ƒ/2,8 lens was used to shoot from inside the Eagle lunar module.

[Anonymous No.14552751]

>>14552725
Oh yes, that's always fun. There's a veritable cornucopia of ignorance one can find among the groups I mentioned, or others like them.

The real sad part? You can correct them, even force one to agree to a correction, and the same person will repeat the claim somewhere else as if they never had the conversation.

Brings some fridge horror thoughts on the reality of what "NPC" means. Or life after severe head trauma. If that ever happens to me I want someone to kill me, for I will already be dead.

[Anonymous No.14552753]

>>14549597
Go back

[Anonymous No.14552758]

>>14549597
the only way is to kill them. they're retarded anyways.

[Anonymous No.14552760]

>>14549597
Just don't engage with them, there's no need to deboonk every retarded belief just to be smug about yourself.

[Anonymous No.14552762]

>>14549597
>The government wouldn't tell lies, would it?
Sorry to disappoint you, but the government lies all the time, about any and every topic. They even legalized this practice during the Obama era.
>picrel, obama is capable of hiding his own deceptive nature somewhat effectively, but his genetic lineage reveals his true character. check out the epic trollface on his kid.

[Anonymous No.14552763]

>>14552751
>>The real sad part? You can correct them, even force one to agree to a correction, and the same person will repeat the claim somewhere else as if they never had the conversation.
Happens all the time on /pol/, I just gave up, after the same threads, the same retards, the same flags and the same arguments even after being BTFO on them literally the previous day

Ironic because they like to post that one quote
>"gradually I began to hate them"

They pull the same shit, the level of cognitive dissonance and low IQ is off the charts there

[Anonymous No.14552791]

>>14552763
I mean, I do it when the mood strikes for fun anyway. I am pretty sure in the case of chans they're almost all trolls, and the ones who are tricked by the trolls are too busy joining in on the "group hooting" to stop and think about what they're saying.

Just sayin, I've seen so many /pol/tard memes over the years that are blatantly false... which people blindly parroted to me with all genuine belief the meme is true. When the source in the image itself contradicts the image, or is a deliberately broken link. People troll the fuck out of /pol/ all the time. It's so sad to see so many people fall for it when such minimal effort could spot it.

[Anonymous No.14552828]

>>14552791
Given the amount of fakery you've noticed, just think about all the trolling you've been subject to that you didn't notice. I hope you aren't arrogant enough to assume that nothing can ever fool you, leads to bad end.

[Anonymous No.14552836]

>>14552828
Why would I make assumptions about it? My reasons for engaging have nothing to do with it. On the contrary, if a troll is clever enough they might push me to attempt to solve a much harder problem. That is the fun in it for me.

Basically, trolls are wasting their time. The better the troll the more fun I have. The worse the troll the more obvious it is, as they can't produce an argument. Either way it does not matter to me. So where does arrogance come in? I just don't care.

[Anonymous No.14552840]

>>14552791
Are the trolls with us in the room right now? How about flat earthers and creationists?

[Anonymous No.14552996]

>>14552763
You need first to understand what led them to their beliefs. I dont mean the "pEoPlE wAnT tO bE rIgHt" bullshit. I mean, you need to recognize that the western scientific-political complex has been lying wholesale to the global public for one hundred years. "Agent Orange is Safe", "Benzos are safe", "there is no link between CFCs and Ozone depletion", etc. And it continues to this day, and fuckers like you, devoted to "the" science, continue to shout whatever the current paradigm insists, ignoring potentially subversive findings - the effects of fluoride on brain development, for instance.

[Anonymous No.14553322]

>>14549597
You could take a flat earther into space and show him the Earth's shape, let him see it with his own eyes, and he still wouldn't believe you. He'd say that NASA hacked the window of the spacecraft, or his spacesuit visor, or his eyes, or that the curvature is an illusion caused by curved space or whatever bullshit he can think up. These people are not sane and cannot be swayed with logic. Any 'fencesitters' are equally insane for entertaining the idea beyond basic scrutiny. And the moon landing one just doesn't matter. Don't waste your time. It will never matter that these people believe dumb shit, they will never have a job where the shape of the Earth or the moon landings affect their work. Let them live in their fantasy and focus your efforts on something productive.

[Anonymous No.14553334]

>>14553322
Being entertained has value too. And disrupting fantasy can be very entertaining.

[Anonymous No.14553476]

>>14549597
For moonhoax stuff check this out:
https://www.moonhoaxdebunked.com

Mctoon and flatearth(dot)ws for the other stuff are good starting places

[Anonymous No.14553491]

>>14549597
Fuck off pajeet

[Anonymous No.14553517]

>>14549653
You actually make flat earth more legitimate by arguing with them, it turns it from something that is obvious to something that can be argued about.

[Anonymous No.14554215]

>>14549597
A reminder that they cannot build a lunar lander to this day kek:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LM1wjs5nWXQ
but no worries, just call everybody "flat earther" and announce victory