EVERYBODY KNOWS THAT MEN HAVE BEEN TO THE MOON BECAUSE THEY HAVE BEEN TOLD THIS IS SO. That Is Until People Begin To Investigate The Facts. When people investigate the facts and ask the hard questions, a different view begins to form.

What is a good way to refute moon landing doubters?

I'm sick of hearing conspiracy theories that the Apollo lunar landings were just an elaborate hoax by the U.S. Govt. What are some good comebacks to statements like, "all the original copies of the films have been destroyed to hide the fact they were shot in a sound stage," etc?

 Happy Riches Answers

The best way would be to fly to the moon today and demonstrate to the world that this is so.

Another way would be if a thousand people were given telescopes powerful enough to see the objects that were supposedly left on the moon. The thousand people would have plenty of supporters who can vouch for them and not be NASA controlled, or paid to say what NASA wants them to say.

The problem begins with the fact that Lieutenant Colonel Virgil “Gus” Grissom was saying that the moon project was a lemon. Then a few days afterward Edward H. White II, Gus Grissom, and Roger B. Chaffee were killed under suspicious circumstances at NASA.

You have to quash interviews like was published by Star Magazine.

Gus Grissom’s wife, Betty, and his son, claim he was murdered.

Virgil I. "Gus” Grissom, the astronaut slated to be the first man to walk on the moon, was murdered, his son has charged in the Feb. 16 edition of Star magazine.

In another stunning development, a lead NASA investigator has charged that the agency engaged in a cover-up of the true cause of the catastrophe that killed Grissom and two other astronauts.

The tabloid exclusive by Steve Herz reports that Scott Grissom, 48, has gone public with the family’s long-held belief that their father was purposefully killed during Apollo I.

The Jan. 27, 1967, Apollo I mission was a simulated launch in preparation for an actual lunar flight.

NASA concluded that the Apollo I deaths of Grissom, as well as astronauts Edward H. White and Roger Chafee, were the result of an explosive fire that burst from the pure oxygen atmosphere of the space capsule. NASA investigators could not identify what caused the spark, but wrote the catastrophe off as an accident.

"My father’s death was no accident. He was murdered,” Grissom, a commercial pilot, told Star.

Grissom said he recently was granted access to the charred capsule and discovered a "fabricated” metal plate located behind a control panel switch. The switch controlled the capsules’ electrical power source from an outside source to the ship’s batteries. Grissom argues that the placement of the metal plate was an act of sabotage. When one of the astronauts toggled the switch to transfer power to the ship’s batteries, a spark was created that ignited a fireball.

Clark Mac Donald, a McDonnell-Douglas engineer hired by NASA to investigate the fire, offered corroborating evidence. Breaking more than three decades of silence, Mac Donald says he determined that an electrical short caused by the changeover to battery power had sparked the fire.

He says that NASA destroyed his report and interview tapes in an effort to stem public criticism of the space program.

"I have agonized for 31 years about revealing the truth, but I didn’t want to hurt NASA’s image or cause trouble,” Mac Donald told the paper. "But I can’t let one more day go by without the truth being known.”

Grissom’s widow, Betty, now 71, told Star she agrees with her son’s claim that her husband had been murdered.

Once a person becomes aware of this and the numerous anomalies that have been pointed out regarding the Apollo missions, it is difficult to convince people that the moon landings actually happened.

Unfortunately, now NASA is conducting tests to see if it is safe to send people through the Van Allen Belts and this has blown many believers away. They now doubt that Armstrong, Aldrin and Collins went the moon. From this point the problem gets worse. For too many people, the lack of jubilation of Armstrong, Aldrin and Collins for having flown to the moon and returned safely, is a psychological giveaway that they were lying.

Because the evidence for not going to the moon outweighs the evidence for going to the moon, convincing unbelievers will require something that is absolutely undeniable, such as sending a thousand people to moon and back on a commercial flight.

People Want To Believe That Man Has Been To The Moon Rather Than Truth