Fetzer/Burton Moon Landing Debate Finale

[James H. Fetzer]

You are so eager to try to demonstrate that you are not an idiot that you
post without reading. I elaborated a few points, where the word "simply"
is missing from the first quote and the entire second paragraph from the
second. I don't know where you grew up or what kind of mind you think
you possess, but anyone who would not regard THE VIDEO YOU CLAIM
TO BE FAKED as evidence that A VIDEO OF THE LANDING COULD BE
FAKED must be missing a few screws. I am sure that you and Burton
are doing your best to try to figure out how to deceive those who are
following these threads with more of your nonsense. No one's buying.

Well, your (h4) is my (h3). I don't see how you could possibly miss that.
Of course you are not only denying that (h2) is the case but also denying
that the missing tracks in moon rover photos, the shadows cast yielding
a close-at-hand source, the use of front-screen projection, the reflections
off the wires and the use of wires to lift an astronaut to his feet and other
evidence I have adduced have logical force, not by offering any arguments
but by SIMPLY asserting they are not persuasive to you! But unless you are
a rational agent in respect to the goal of seeking the truth (which I doubt)
or the formation of rational beliefs that are not overridden by rationality
of action (in posing as disbelieving beliefs that are more likely than any
of their alternatives), your opinion is of no consequence, which appears
to be the case. The clincher, I submit, is that you can't even admit that,
if you were right, this fakery shows how faking the moon landing could
have been done. Each time you show up, you add more nonsense to the
thread. If you have any other purpose, I doubt any of us can discern it.

Words are cheap. To "acknowledge a spoof" is not the same
as proving that a spoof occurred. As I have explained, there
is no good reason to suppose anyone would make a spoof of
the moon landings (given the time, effort, and expense that
would have been involved, not to mention the lack of motive).

Assume the moon landings are real. What possible motive
could drive someone, years later, to recreate the setting on
the moon with a replica of the lander, the astronaut suit, the
angles, the lighting, and all that, with a director and a crew?
Does anyone think that is a reasonable thing to have done?

But if the faking of the landing got out (because of a glitch
that could not be denied), the obvious move would be for it
to be declared to be "a spoof"! It might even be said to be
a spoof that was created on the very set where the faking of
the moon landings took place! That's an explanation I can buy.

You are using footage, which was produced in order to mock people who believe the moon landings were faked, to argue that the moon landings could have been faked. You apparently can't grasp that the argument you are making would be considered preposterous by the scientific establishment, and almost hilarious by most everyone else who has the facts of the matter set forth before them.

Regarding the evidence you refer to, you owe Evan Burton a few responses over at the other forum before you have me repeating the same kind of responses he has made there.