Welcome • User Guide
ToS • Privacy • Canary
Donate • Bugs • License

©2026 Poal.co

(post is archived)

You are currently inside a comment thread.
Click here to see all the comments (37).
[–] • 3 pts (edited )

One way to spot intellectual dishonesty is to see who they're pitting their arguments against, whoever that random italian is more than likely not from NASA, it's strawmanning. The lander never encounters atmosphere, the way it looks is irrelevant. The landing sites were always a heritage site, too bad, it's not like people would believe it unless they drove right over the footprints. Who said the rover (edit: rover driving) footage is live? Dust only sticks with moisture? In what world do vibrations do not dissipate with distance?

You wasted 3+ hours of your life on this?

[–] • 1 pt

The content of the documentary was compelling and if you're not willing to watch it, so be it, but you're hardly in a position to say anything about it.

Why open with a counter? A straw man argument is making the value of the content about the fact that the person is Italian and not about whether the series of points the Italian raised make a valid argument based on sound reasoning. I don't view considering opposing arguments a waste of time, I consider engaging with people who talk shit without considering the subject matter on it's own terms a waste of time.

I don't even know what I think on the topic, the doc raises some questions that are hard to get around. I simply asked if there are solid rebuttals to the inconsistencies raised in the video.

[–] • 2 pts (edited )

but you're hardly in a position to say anything about it

Huh? The italian is clearly emotional and has no clue why the insulation is held on with kapton tape (hint: you don't want convection to happen).

I simply asked if there are solid rebuttals to the inconsistencies raised in the video.

I just listed a few, at no point did they try to broadcast from a moving rover, the live broadcasts are stationary, the driving is recorded on film, it takes 5 minutes to check this:

film footage: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bTQ-SmeLTl8 live footage: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=axgp_CDWwMQ

Yet they decided to make a big deal about how they couldn't have possibly kept the antenna pointed at earth while driving.

There seems to be this stupid belief with conspiracy theorists (and no, they don't deserve a better name) that reputation is a one-way street, they don't do any research but somehow are entitled to call the whole Apollo program in question because NASA lost a single tape or a contractor threw out documentation, give me a break.