From: E.L.DAHLSTROM@LaRC.NASA.GOV (Eric Dahlstrom)
Newsgroups: alt.sci.planetary
Subject: Re: MOON LANDING is a lie ?
Date: Fri, 17 Feb 1995 20:08:16 -0500
Organization: NASA Langley Research Center, Hampton, VA USA

Obviously I am convinced that the Moon landings were real. (I'm afraid I don't have as much personal evidence for the existence of Belgium, though. I visited Belgium once, but it could have been faked. :-)

It can be surprisingly difficult to prove something like the Moon landing if you cannot agree on some basic assumptions and what will be valid evidence. I am sure there is nothing I could type into this computer that would convince that fellow.

THE EARTH IS INSIDE OUT
Another interesting example was the cult in the late 1800's to early 1900's that believed the Earth was inside out, and that we lived on the inside of a hollow Earth. Apparently, some physicists tried to counter their arguments - but they could not win. All evidence (like the horizon, the sun, stars) was "just an optical effect caused by the atmosphere". How do you win an argument like that?
These crazy ideas are good for amusement. But they can also make us think about how we decide what to believe.

CONSPIRACY IS COMPLEX
Conspiracy theories are always more complex in that they require the appearance of all the other activity, plus extra coordinated activity kept secret by large numbers of people. You could apply a kind of 'Occam's razor' to say that the simpler theory (no conspiracy) is probably right. There have been some big conspiracies, but they also did not last too long before they were exposed.

FAITH IN SCIENCE
I think there are many areas where we rely on some kind of faith in the scientific process. In theory, scientists base their ideas on direct evidence - but who has time to check everything? In most scientific studies we cannot check the results ourselves.
E.g. many of us are happy to accept statements like 'the age of this star cluster is 5 billion years' but how many of us can check the stellar evolution theory - or take the time to do so?

COMPETITION IN SCIENCE
To support our faith in generally accepted views, I think we rely on the existence of competition and a kind of scientific 'market system'. If something important is incorrect, we need to believe that someone would benefit by pointing this out.

RADICAL IDEAS
I think the free and open discussion of ideas - no matter how radical - is very important to our society. More important than we realize. If we suppress radical views, we can end up losing the mechanisms that help us make progress.
There have been cases of long lasting incorrect theories when dissent was suppressed. For example, politically based genetic theory in the 1950's Soviet Union contributed to many crop disasters.
But even if we encourage discussion, that still doesn't mean we have to believe the crazy ideas. The burden of proof is on the person with the radical idea. Good luck with the lunatic.
- Eric
* E.L.Dahlstrom@LaRC.NASA.GOV * +1 804-766-9635 * ISU'91 USA * * Lockheed Eng & Sci Co, 144 Research Drive, Hampton, VA 23666 * * home: 6314 Auburn Lane, Hampton, VA 23666 * +1 804-838-4797 *