What reason would there be for pointing out that the Russians have reflectors on the moon?

Question

There is one person whose answer is of particular interest to me.

Amansscientiae, I would agree with you, but this is better than the average troll.

Inquisitive, it would seem to do just that. You do realize that this does not provide evidence that the landings were hoaxed. But my real reason was to find out why you dispute the achievement of the Apollo program. Unlike many others, it's not because you are lazy, gullible, or dumb. It is because you are bigoted against Americans. That's the real reason, isn't it?

Bobby, he called me dumb. What am I supposed to do???

Yes, folks, the person who posted those questions has answered. True, it does undermine on of the proofs of the landings. Now if he, or they, can undermine about another thousand good arguments in defense of the achievement, then I might just join them.

Answer 1

Don't feed the trolls, Brant. Just walk away and don't feed the trolls.

:-)

Answer 2

I think of people who try to argue that we didn't land with a grain of salt. They want proof, proof, proof, yet can offer no testable proof that their arguments are of value, all they can provide is conjecture. I've seen some great answers to this question, that if the Russians could put a reflector out with an unmanned craft, then how can anyone argue that the reflectors are proof that we have landed. It isn't a great argument. But that doesn't mean anything when we have mounds of other arguments that we can not only proof, but back up with hard science.

It gets annoying to argue with hoax believers, but as long as we can prevent them from influencing others towards their ideas, than it is a good fight.

I'd be interested in seeing what sparked you to ask this. The person would have a good arguement in pointing it out, even if their overall message is wrong. Yet if they are relying on that as their only arguement, then they aren't too bright.

Answer 3

Maybe the reflector is a weak argument. Personally the conspiracy people haven't come up with any good arguments that make me question that the US went to the moon and landed live men on its surface. Maybe the conspiracies know this and therefor instead are attacking other areas of the proof that we did go.

Answer 4

The Russians got them there on Lunokhod, which is an automatic vehicle rather than going there in person, so it could be used to undermine the opinion that people really went to the Moon.

Answer 5

Wow, it's getting a little tense in the space and astronomy section.

Maybe the russians are somehow responsible for the spread of the moon hoax theory, along with 2012, and the flat earth theory... lead by john slayers research.

haha.


__________________
Hey Brant, wanna be a pal and give me best answer. I really wanna get those ten points so I'm not such a peon.
Consider it a christmas gift.

Answer 6

Brant.... between you & me, I worked in aerospace & for a time under Pete Conrad. He was crass, rude, and a general ******. He didn't just tell the truth, he rammed it down your throat. If things went right, he never said anything.

To think that this man lied about walking on the moon is unthinkable.

While that won't be 'proof' to any non-believers out there... *I* know it happened. Anybody questioning it simply isn't smart enough to read the data. And they certainly didn't know the men who did it.

Answer 7

H. From the web "French-built reflectors were also left on the moon by the unmanned Russian Lunakhod 2 mission."
It would seem that someone wanted to remind us that the Russians have yet to land on the Moon and that they used 'store bought' reflectors rather than make it themselves. Just my opinion.

Answer 8

Moon hoaxers will continue to believe what they want in spite of mountains of evidence to the contrary. They keep saying they want proof but the truth is, they are not interested in proof. If we built a powerful enough telescope to actually take photos of the moon landing sites, they'd just say the photos were faked.

Answer 9

You're feeling a little testy today, aren't you, buddy?
I hope that this one person answers...
I'm dying to know where all of this started!

BTW, check out the question I posted in 'Computers and Internet', and see if you can think of anything I may have forgotten...
Thanx,
Bobby

******EDIT******

Brant, sometimes you just have to roll with the punches, buddy!
It always seems to work out pretty well for me!
Don't take it personally...
If I did that every time I got calle 'dumb' or 'stupid', I wouldn't still be here, gracing the pages of this great forum...

***EDIT***, part deux...
or, nuke him where he sits...
It's up to you!

LOLLOLLOLOLOLOL..... LMFAO!!!
Bobby

Answer 10

Thanks for your question. It proves that you can't use the mirrors as evidence that some American men were once driving around on the moon surface on their buggy.

"You do realize that this does not provide evidence that the landings were hoaxed"

Answer: It doesn't. But when you take into account all other oddities, yes it does.

"But my real reason was to find out why you dispute the achievement of the Apollo program"

Answer: I don't dispute it because it is American, but simply because all evidence raise more questions than it proves.

Brant: You are not dumb, you are intelligent :)

Answer 11

This guy reminds me of John D Slayer from flat earth group.Hey, maybe it's him with a new profile he has done it before.....Brant, he is not worth your energy.... You can't fix stupid no matter how hard you try.......