News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Neil Armstrong's reply to a Moon landing skeptic by iainmerrick on Friday June 19, 2020 @02:33AM (#23571638)
The fact that it’s the US government isn’t the important bit; Armstrong isn’t asking you to trust the government, and his entire argument is explicit, no reading between the lines required.

What’s important is the “gigantic fraud involving 400,000 people” part -- clearly establishing that it would have had to be a pretty extreme effort. And rather than just saying “trust us”, he explicitly suggests asking people outside that group, such as scientists from other countries, who would be able to verify whether the moon landing was real.

Re:Neil Armstrong's reply to a Moon landing skeptic by lixtra on Friday June 19, 2020 @02:53AM (#23571776)
How many people work in the homeopathy industry?

You can create that kind of group think were many do believe in what they are doing.

Re:Neil Armstrong's reply to a Moon landing skeptic by blaser-waffle on Friday June 19, 2020 @11:30AM (#23575438)
How many people are standing up and saying it's a scientific truth? How many actually-qualified scientists are backing it up?

No one outside of the people shilling those oils, and the fools buying them, think they're real.

The fact that you can point to it as an example implies that most people know it's hokum.

Re:Neil Armstrong's reply to a Moon landing skeptic by wilt on Friday June 19, 2020 @03:28AM (#23571976)
It all depends how much you dilute them in water i guess :p
Re:Neil Armstrong's reply to a Moon landing skeptic by Falling3 on Friday June 19, 2020 @10:40AM (#23574975)
And I completely agree with all of that. That doesn't change the fact that "the government wouldn't defraud you" is a horrific argument. And that is one of his points.
Re:Neil Armstrong's reply to a Moon landing skeptic by iainmerrick on Friday June 19, 2020 @02:14PM (#23577293)
I think you need to point to the sentence where he says or even implies that. I can’t see it and neither can the other people responding here.

Three of us (when I last looked) pointed out, independently, that he has two main arguments, and “trust the government” isn’t one of them.