To the moon, Alice!

[Ghoulish Delight]

Anyone catch the Mythbusters lunar landing episode yesterday?

They busted a few of the most common conspiracy theory claims. Nothing amazing, all stuff you can find refutations of online easily. But it was good to see them actually do it.

Of course, using NASA equipment to support the veracity of something that NASA is supposedly lying about isn't likely to appease many conspiracy theorists, but that's another story.

What I love is that the one that I see pop up most often, the "how can the flag be waving with no atmosphere!" turns out to be all but definitive proof that it DID happen. Turns out, the flag is MORE likely to wave with no atmosphere since, without air resistance against the surface of the flag, it oscillates back and forth much more easily. Hah!

It was also great to see what a HUGE moon-landing/NASA geek Adam Savage is. Major geek, he was in freaking heaven.

But the real takeaway was the discovery that the Zero-G airplane thingy doesn't do only weightless. They also do moon gravity. That had me WAY more excited than weightlessness. The thought that I'd get to feel what it's like to walk at 1/6th gravity? OMG that's so freaking awesome!! And I was shocked to learn that it only costs $5000. $5K. I'm not going to go out any time soon and do it, but that's bloody attainable! I could put moon gravity on my Discover Card.

And with Virgin Galactic set to debut at a mere $200K, it became suddenly very clear to me last night that there is a shockingly good chance that I will make it into orbit in my lifetime. Without a shadow of a doubt, the moment the ability to get into space is priced to where it's equivalent to a slightly spendy vacation, I'm there. $200K is well out of that range, but not so far out that I can't imagine it dropping into that range in short order.

So freaking exciting.

[Alex]

I recorded it and will eventually watch it. Phil Plait of the Bad Astronomy blog (and long time battler of the moon hoax believers) was involved in the show to some degree (so that'll just strengthen the argument that it doesn't mean anything since the results were pre-determined).

I must admit, though, I am concerned about the topic getting the shows standard levity and semi-shoddy procedures. To me this is a vastly more important issue than "will a plane take off on a treadmill." But then, it's all probably moot for when they show is over, half the audience probably switches over to one of the alien or ghost or magical ancients shows that flood The History Channel.

But it is good to have the occasional show on the right side.

[Pirate Bill]

Originally Posted by Alex

Phil Plait of the Bad Astronomy blog (and long time battler of the moon hoax believers)...

Penn Jillette used to have a radio show and would podcast the episodes. During one episode (actually I think it stretched to two) he had Phil Plait on to help debunk Joe Rogan and his conspiracy theories of the moon hoax. From listening to that debate I learned 2 things: 1) Rogan is a lunatic, and 2) these moon hoax believers cannot be convinced, because they don't appear to be looking for actual truth. Like you guys said above, they must have some other agenda.

Everytime Plait gave a great rebuttal to some of the "evidence" Rogan presented, Rogan would start throwing out even more absurd questions and myths. And in true Joe "I can't shut-up for 10 seconds" Rogan fashion, never really gave Plait much time to complete a thought. This gave the appearance of Rogan having more ammunition and "proof" than Plait and it almost seemed like the moon hoax theory had some validity. Penn didn't know what to make of it. He was hoping to shut Rogan up for good but his efforts seemed to be back firing with Rogan winning the debate.

[Ghoulish Delight]

Because Adam is SUCH a moon landing geek, they went to great lengths to be very accurate on this one. Much less silly than normal. No, "Well that didn't work so let's blow it up!" Very precise on exactly what they were proving or disproving.

For example, one of the claims they disproved was that the multi-directional shadows in this photo could only have been produced with multiple light sources (which the moon does not have), and thus it's proof that it must be a set. So they proved that they could recreate the photo with a single light source (the key being that the surface of the moon is not flat and the contours make it APPEAR in a photo that the shadows are at different angles). After which they very precisely said, "Now, we know this doesn't disprove that it was done in a studio, seeing as we just did this in a studio. ALL we were showing is that the claim that the photo could ONLY have been done with multiple light sources if false and is therefore not proof that it IS a studio shot." It puts the burden of proof back on the conspiracy theorists, which is where it should be.

[innerSpaceman]

I base a lot of hoax debunking on common sense via my own personal experience. It took hours and freaking hours for Armstrong to leave the LEM and get down that frelling ladder. We waited and waited and waited.

If it was a hoax, they wouldn't have bothered with such boring realism. 45 minutes would have convinced the world. More than 2 hours was not necessary.



As for Virgin Galactic's eventual price drops, it's too little too late for me. Even at, say, $5,000, I won't pay that for 5 minutes in orbit. I might have when I was younger, but there's a lot of extravagant spending I wouldn't bother with now - even if I had the money.



* * * * *

I've lately become interested in 9/11 hoax theories (by lately, I mean since yesterday). A project I'm working on has led me to a lot of videos of the Trade Center collapse, and there are some very fishy-looking things that I wouldn't mind further tin-foiled and/or debunked.

[Ghoulish Delight]

I'll say unequivocally that the day that I can go into orbit (it would have to be more than the Virgin Galactic suborbital tease) costs $5000 (or the inflation-adjusted equivalent), I will start making arrangements.

[innerSpaceman]

Will you take a dime into outer space for me?

[Alex]

iSm, for your debunking needs I'd start with a very detailed Popular Mechanics article from a few years back that took them on one by one. I'll find the link later if you can't but a quick search will probably turn it up.

GD, good to hear. If you are interested in the debunking in general, do check out the Bad Astronomy site if you haven't, as he's been doing it for years.

ETA: Remembered I still have it bookmarked. Here is the Popular Mechanics article. And if you want to read a pretty good rhetorical trashing of the supposed conspiracy that would have been behind a "the US government did it" then I recommend one of the chapters in The Great Derangement by Matt Taibbi.

[Stan4dSteph]

Did you see the Nova episode "Why the towers fell?" I thought it was an excellent analysis from an engineering perspective.

[Bootstrap Bill]

Originally Posted by Ghoulish Delight

And with Virgin Galactic set to debut at a mere $200K, it became suddenly very clear to me last night that there is a shockingly good chance that I will make it into orbit in my lifetime. Without a shadow of a doubt, the moment the ability to get into space is priced to where it's equivalent to a slightly spendy vacation, I'm there. $200K is well out of that range, but not so far out that I can't imagine it dropping into that range in short order.

So freaking exciting.

I just don't understand how anyone could justify spending $40 million for a week at the ISS.

Do you realize what you could do with $40 million? To throw it away for a weeks vacation in space is totally CRAZY.