Did US Astronaut land on the moon for real?

[soldar]

We went to the Moon.

Who’s “We,” Paleface?

[MrW0lf]

So you were saying that believing in something for which there is no proof is crazy or at least irrational. I'm glad we agree.

I expressed no direct opinion on the subject. However I do find little funny how worldview of space aces and some of their fans seem to be quite different.

https://noetic.org/earthrise/about/overview

EarthRise at IONS is a conscious living center that provides a gathering place to explore ancient wisdom traditions, supports experiential learning, and engages in modern scientific inquiry. EarthRise at IONS has become a place where psychologists, educators, leaders, philosophers, frontier scientists, and spiritual masters conduct their work.

/.../

The vision for creating the Institute of Noetic Sciences came in 1971 when IONS’ founder Dr. Edgar Mitchell landed on the moon as one of the Apollo 14 astronauts. Space exploration symbolized for Dr. Mitchell what it did for his nation as a whole—technological triumph of historical proportions, unprecedented mastery of the world in which we live, and extraordinary potentials for new discoveries.

On the trip home Dr. Mitchell sat in the window seat of the cramped cabin of the space capsule; and as he saw Earth floating freely in the vastness of space, Dr. Mitchell was engulfed by a profound sense of universal connectedness. He stated, “On the return trip home, gazing through 240,000 miles of space toward the stars and the planet from which I had come, I suddenly experienced the universe as intelligent, loving, harmonious. My view of our planet was a glimpse of divinity. We went to the Moon as technicians; we returned as humanitarians.

https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/sensorium/201803/real-magic

Dean Radin, Ph.D., has pursued the most mind-boggling fringes of science — ESP, telepathy, and other wonders — earnestly and with excellence for decades. He is the chief scientist at the Institute of Noetic Sciences (IONS) in Petaluma, CA, a next-level research and educational organization founded by the late astronaut Dr. Edgar Mitchell. Dr. Radin also worked on the United States government's top-secret psychic espionage program, known as Star Gate.

Since already established that Cooper, Aldrin, Mitchell were responsible adults - heres some more:

http://freemasoninformation.com/masonic-education/famous/masonic-astronauts/

[Mr. Scram]

I expressed no direct opinion on the subject. However I do find little funny how worldview of space aces and some of their fans seem to be quite different.

Since already established that Cooper, Aldrin, Mitchell were responsible adults - heres some more:

Don't worry, your intent was clear. The omission of something is an expression too.

[MrW0lf]

Don't worry, your intent was clear. The omission of something is an expression too.

My intent was correct lack of basic knowledge about the people involved and event - it was not endeavour of purely technical importance. Not to mention some here calling responsible people under obligations crazy... clearly points to some grave misunderstandings about to world we live in.

[Mr. Scram]

My intent was correct lack of basic knowledge about the people involved and event - it was not endeavour of purely technical importance. Not to mention some here calling responsible people under obligations crazy... clearly points to some grave misunderstandings about to world we live in.

So, once more. Is believing in something for which there is no proof crazy, or at least irrational?

[Mr. Scram]

We went to the Moon.

Who’s “We,” Paleface?

If you worked on the lander, you were part of the team that got to the Moon and get to say "we". I loathe people who didn't contribute anything talking about "we", but if you were on the actual team I'd say you've earned it. This isn't exactly a sportsball fan claiming a victory he did nothing for to include himself.

[MrW0lf]

So, once more. Is believing in something for which there is no proof crazy, or at least irrational?

Can you prove that no one has proof or at least no rational motivation to oblige people with responsibilities to believe?

[daqq]

But think about the odds. What if something went wrong and they got stranded there, without any possibility of rescue? Do you think the US would risk turning the moon forever into a tomb? Into the place of a tragic historical event?

The moon, let me remind you, is not a distant land or a lost point in a starry night. It appears prominently in the sky and is visible around the whole world.

If you really want to play this card, then:

Do you really think that the US would risk the creation of a totally fake space program that would be pretty much instantaneously found out by the USSR (and/or others eventually)? The USSR would rub the US nose in it for decades and US citizens would be too ashamed to even look up during the night.

[Mr. Scram]

Can you prove that no one has proof or at least no rational motivation to oblige people with responsibilities to believe?

Please take a moment to evaluate what you're trying to ask me and rephrase it in a sensible way. Ambiguous and confused questions lead to answers of the same nature.

Meanwhile you keep dodging a very simple and unambiguous question, probably because you don't like the answer to it. Is believing in something for which there is no proof crazy, or at least irrational?

[MrW0lf]

Please take a moment to evaluate what you're trying to ask me and rephrase it in a sensible way. Ambiguous and confused questions lead to answers of the same nature.

Do you have access to full knowledge of whole humanity?

Meanwhile you keep dodging a very simple and unambiguous question, probably because you don't like the answer to it. Is believing in something for which there is no proof crazy, or at least irrational?

Thing is question is not simple at all. Simplest answer is perhaps it depends on that something:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jungian_archetypes

[Mr. Scram]

Do you have access to full knowledge of whole humanity?

Thing is question is not simple at all. Simplest answer is perhaps it depends on that something:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jungian_archetypes

The answer to your question is obviously "no". The answer to my question is obviously "yes". It seems you insist on doing what you did in the water dowsing thread not all that long ago. You bob and weave and throw up smoke screens and distractions, everything and anything to avoid answering questions you know would hurt your narrative or world view. It's possible we'll see the same outcome here too.

After nearly a dozen posts we finally have answer.  Believing in something for which there is no proof is crazy, or at least irrational. It's nearly the exact definition of the word "irrational": "not endowed with reason or understanding, lacking usual or normal mental clarity or coherence, not using reason or clear thinking".

[tggzzz]

Please take a moment to evaluate what you're trying to ask me and rephrase it in a sensible way. Ambiguous and confused questions lead to answers of the same nature.

Do you have access to full knowledge of whole humanity?

Why answer a question when you can ask another one?

Meanwhile you keep dodging a very simple and unambiguous question, probably because you don't like the answer to it. Is believing in something for which there is no proof crazy, or at least irrational?

Thing is question is not simple at all. Simplest answer is perhaps it depends on that something:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jungian_archetypes

Presumably your Jungian archetype is the trickster https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trickster

[tggzzz]

Do you have access to full knowledge of whole humanity?

Thing is question is not simple at all. Simplest answer is perhaps it depends on that something:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jungian_archetypes

The answer to your question is obviously "no". The answer to my question is obviously "yes". It seems you insist on doing what you did in the water dowsing thread not all that long ago. You bob and weave and throw up smoke screens and distractions, everything and anything to avoid answering questions you know would hurt your narrative or world view. Maybe we'll see the same outcome here too.

After nearly a dozen posts we finally have answer.  Believing in something for which there is no proof is crazy, or at least irrational. It's nearly the exact definition of the word "irrational": "not endowed with reason or understanding, lacking usual or normal mental clarity or coherence, not using reason or clear thinking".

In this thread I am having difficulty distinguishing MrW0lf from a timewasting troll; maybe others have less difficulty. Talking of "same outcomes", ISTR a MrWolf was previously banned from this forum.

[MrW0lf]

The answer to your question is obviously "no". The answer to my question is obviously "yes".

Now if you think about it a little might find that you have no real proof of most things you believe in, yet believe in contrary.

BTW heres interesting viewpoint on belief in God

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pascal%27s_Wager

Pascal argues that a rational person should live as though God exists and seek to believe in God. If God does not actually exist, such a person will have only a finite loss (some pleasures, luxury, etc.), whereas he stands to receive infinite gains (as represented by eternity in Heaven) and avoid infinite losses (eternity in Hell).

[Mr. Scram]

Now if you think about it a little might find that you have no real proof of most things you believe in, yet believe in contrary.

BTW heres interesting viewpoint on belief in God

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pascal%27s_Wager

You tried arguing something very similar in the infamous water dowsing thread without much success. Casting doubt on everything because you can't convince people of your convictions due to lack of any real evidence isn't a viable strategy. It's essentially the "fake news" approach repackaged. Let's not get into the same fruitless discussion again and let's not devolve this thread into the same mess that one was.

https://www.eevblog.com/forum/profile/?u=124811

[MrW0lf]

You tried arguing something very similar in the infamous water dowsing thread without much success.

Sometimes even little success maybe be of use for something. Anyway, if mindgames are too stressful for you  then fine by me. And no need to mix it all up. Banning was due to "scope wars" 2 years ago. Story long forgotten since even Rigols now have "useless" full memory measurements and decoding.

[james_s]

Not really. Billions of people believe in a supernatural being they call "God". That is clearly crazy. Usually people use the term "crazy" to mean an irrational belief not shared by the rest of the population.

So Cooper and Aldrin are crazy and irrational? I doubt that even most rabid flat earthers would imply something like that.

On that particular topic, yes I would say they are. There are a very large number of intelligent and otherwise quite sane people who earnestly believe there is a magical man in the sky who created everything, and that their magical man in the sky is real and every one of the hundreds of other magical beings other humans have earnestly believed in are not real. And that this magical man has to exist because the universe is far too complex to have been spontaneously created, and yet a magical being capable of creating everything was spontaneously created, it's pretty hard to call this rational with a straight face. It certainly seems to be hardwired in the human mind though.

[bsfeechannel]

I think you might be missing a big point about the culture of the US.   

We are a country of risk-takers.   And it used to be that it was expected that lives would be lost in the pursuit of progress  (nowadays, it's not expected, but we still understand that sometimes it happens in the pursuit of progress).   We lost 3 astronauts in the Apollo 1 fire, and it only strengthened the desire to go to the moon.   We lost the crews of Challenger and Columbia.  And throughout it all, it only caused a harder push to do things better and persevere.

To get a glimpse of this, please read Nixon's prepared speech another poster linked to:  https://www.space.com/26604-apollo-11-failure-nixon-speech.html   

This shows the attitude which is prevalent in the US.   

One other way to think about this is to replace the word 'Tomb' with 'Monument' in your question. That is:  "Do you think the US would risk turning the moon forever into a monument?"  This is probably closer to what most Americans would have thought about the moon if it had ended up being the final resting spot of one or more Astronauts.

Thank you for enlightening me about the culture of the US. By the way, according to the dictionary a tomb is a monument.

Semantics aside, finally someone decided to answer one of my questions without quibbling. Of course, I have a lot more.

If the astronauts where expected to die on the moon, why bother bringing them back?

As for the Challenger accident, which I also saw live and is not a particularly pleasant memory, why did an investigation ensue? Why not just erect a mausoleum to their memory and let it be?

Why did Richard Feynman, member of the Rogers Commission entrusted with the investigation, attack NASA's "safety culture" by concluding that the estimates of reliability offered by NASA management were wildly unrealistic, differing as much as a thousandfold from the estimates of working engineers, and "For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for nature cannot be fooled."?
Source: Wikipedia, Space Shuttle Challenger Disaster.

Did he say that because NASA lost an expensive spacecraft? What did he mean by "reality must take precedence over public relations"? Did he mean that at NASA there is a precedence of bullshit over engineering? What did he mean by "nature cannot be fooled"? Did he imply that since NASA can't fool nature, they fool people instead, just to appear fanciful in the eyes of the public? Since he mentioned "culture", and Neil Armstrong was the vice-chairman, did he hint us that this is an ongoing practice since the times of the landings on the moon?

Something is rotten in the state of Denmark.

[Mr. Scram]

Sometimes even little success maybe be of use for something. Anyway, if mindgames are too stressful for you  then fine by me. And no need to mix it all up. Banning was due to "scope wars" 2 years ago. Story long forgotten since even Rigols now have "useless" full memory measurements and decoding.

I'd say we've played enough "mindgames" for a couple of lifetimes.

[Simon]

In this thread I am having difficulty distinguishing MrW0lf from a timewasting troll; maybe others have less difficulty. Talking of "same outcomes", ISTR a MrWolf was previously banned from this forum.

For clarity MrW0lf = MrWolf (same guy). MrWolf remains a banned account.

[Tomorokoshi]

Why did Richard Feynman, member of the Rogers Commission entrusted with the investigation, attack NASA's "safety culture" by concluding that the estimates of reliability offered by NASA management were wildly unrealistic, differing as much as a thousandfold from the estimates of working engineers, and "For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for nature cannot be fooled."?
Source: Wikipedia, Space Shuttle Challenger Disaster.

Did he say that because NASA lost an expensive spacecraft? What did he mean by "reality must take precedence over public relations"? Did he mean that at NASA there is a precedence of bullshit over engineering? What did he mean by "nature cannot be fooled"? Did he imply that since NASA can't fool nature, they fool people instead, just to appear fanciful in the eyes of the public? Since he mentioned "culture", and Neil Armstrong was the vice-chairman, did he hint us that this is an ongoing practice since the times of the landings on the moon?

Something is rotten in the state of Denmark.

Start here:
"Truth, Lies, and O-Rings: Inside the Space Shuttle Challenger Disaster" by Allan J. McDonald.

https://www.amazon.com/Truth-Lies-Rings-Challenger-Disaster/dp/0813041937

[bsfeechannel]

Start here:
"Truth, Lies, and O-Rings: Inside the Space Shuttle Challenger Disaster" by Allan J. McDonald.

https://www.amazon.com/Truth-Lies-Rings-Challenger-Disaster/dp/0813041937

Thank you. That answers a lot of questions, but one still remains unanswered. If the astronauts where expected to die on the moon, why bother bringing them back?

[Simon]

who said they were expected to die on the moon. It was simply a distinct possibility. You don't get international credit for sending people on a pointless one way mission.

[bsfeechannel]

Ah! So, their lives matter, don't they? (I was afraid of concluding, by the posts on this thread, that the US was a nation of "kamikazes" and "suicide bombers", and no regard for their safe return was considered.) This is in total accordance with the memories I had about the Apollo missions way back then. Particularly striking to me at the time was this photo, showing commander Philip Eldredge Jerauld (at microphone), ship's chaplain for U.S.S. Iwo Jima, offering a prayer of thanks for the safe return of the Apollo 13 crew members (the three guys in the center of the picture) soon after they arrived aboard the recovery ship.


Source: Wikipedia

[Nusa]

Instructions for adding someone to your ignore list:
1) Scroll to the top if needed, and click on "Profile"
2) Hover over "Modify Profile", go down to "Buddies/Ignore List...", then click on "Edit Ignore List"
3) Click on the entry field under Add to Ignore List
4) Type a name until it matches a unique member, then click on that name
5) Click Add.

Yes, it's awkward enough that someone has to be a consistent and active troll for me to go to the effort.
It's also hidden enough that many people don't know it's there.
Just thought you'd like to know.