Heyo
Veteran Member
Is there a conspiracy theory you don't believe in? First YEC, now moon landing hoax, what's next?
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Do astronauts believe in God ?
- Thread starter Neuropteron
- Start date
firedragon
Veteran Member
What is a spoiler?
Neuropteron
Active Member
I think it's a small script in the url that has to be removed to access the site
My opinion:
Christians used to believe that they would sail off of the flat earth if they took an ocean voyage. Some were comforted by the thought that they would be eaten by sea monsters long before they fell off the edge of the earth.
Now, some Christians believe that it is a myth (designed to fool them) that astronauts went to the moon (a mere 238,855 miles away). Clearly this is well in the realm of possibility even if it hadn't been televised.
RE: NEIL ARMSTRONG:
I believe that Armstrong was disgusted by liars who tried to promote Christianity by denying facts. So disgusted, that he didn't want to dignify their questions with answers. Also, I believe that Armstrong felt that such liars would try to twist his words and make it seem as though he said something that he did not say.
Fact Check-Neil Armstrong refusing to swear on the Bible is not proof that moon landing was fake
Armstrong says in the video: “Mr. Sibrel, knowing you, that’s probably a fake Bible.”
Armstrong then says: “Mr. Sibrel has made a fool of himself in front of the world…Mr. Sibrel, you do not deserve answers.”
Armstrong said in an interview with Walter Cronkite on CBS’s Face the Nation on Aug. 17, 1969 that he was “certainly not an atheist”
posts claims Armstrong was “a devoted follower of Christianity”, however, this claim is unfounded.
"other false claims about Armstrong’s religiosity, such as the one where he converted to Islam"
"Astronaut Neil Armstrong refusing to swear on the Bible when confronted by a conspiracy theorist is not proof that the moon landing was fake."
Sources for the above quotes are found in the Reuters hypertext link above.
How about the conspiracy theory that Martians planted life on earth? Now we have to look for a bible on Mars????
Neuropteron
Active Member
Hi,
There are plenty of conspiracy theories that are unbelievable, should we conclude that there are no conspiracies ?
I'll let you decide.
The thread was about the reluctance of the Astronauts to swear on the Bible and the reasons for fearing to do it.
Is it possible that it was just a monumental hollywood/Nasa hoax?
I was hoping that people capable of critical thinking, perhaps like yourself, might give me an answer.
ppp
Well-Known Member
We should conclude that there are a great number of people who are willing to believe the unbelievable based on emotion and not evidence. We should reserve belief until there is adequate supporting evidence.
It's not. We could fake it now. Maybe. But we did not have the technology to fake it 50 years ago.
Neuropteron
Active Member
Hi,
When I said unanimous I was referring to the ones being interviewed,
But I stand corrected.
It seems that you did your homework, the question is however still not answered.
Neuropteron
Active Member
Hi,
I don't think anyone has made that claim.
The alleged proof was the "unabridged" recordings made by NASA that was made public by wikileak and other investigative reporters, not the strange (as some see it) response the astronauts made when asked to confirm the fact that they had actually landed on the moon.
On a side note: I find it strange that asking question on this matter is like touching a raw nerve.
One commentator on this thread said that it was nobodies business if they had gone to the moon and should not have to answer question on this matter. Really? I think on the contrary that this world changing event is "everybodies" business and that those having a part in it should be willing to confirm or deny their involvement without attacking the reporters trying to do their job.
Heyo
Veteran Member
I'm an Agnostic and I wouldn't swear on a bible - out of respect for the Christian religion. It would feel sacrilegious to me and I'm not very prissy with those things.
And I guess I'd be a bit annoyed, maybe even angry, if I had been to the Moon, trained for that for years, risked my life for it and then get asked if it really happened, insinuating that I am a liar - together with hundreds of colleges. And possibly by a person who should know better because it had been explained to them a dozen times.
No. And I don't base that on testimony by a few people. There is physical evidence, which, though I haven't seen it personally, has gone through so many hands that it is impossible they are all in on the conspiracy. And some of those people would have had a vested interest in debunking the hoax. Remember that it was during the height of the cold war and it was a prestige project to beat the Russians to the Moon (after they had beat NASA on practically every thing else). If the Russians could have shown NASA faked it, they would have, heck, if they could have made it appear as if NASA faked it they would have.
Neuropteron
Active Member
Hi,
False indignation is a good way to avoid questioning. The fact is that nobody is trying to twist anything but simply ask pertinent questions regarding some incriminating "recorded" -not made up - evidence of the moon landing.
The fact that they are either running away or attacking anyone asking questions should ring alarm bells to any neutral bystander.
One Astronaut (I think Buzz Aldrin) attempted to obfuscated by saying "we were only passengers, and we don't know anything.Ask the ones in charge"
Now we have one of these "passengers" going on his high horse and complaining that he is disgusted with anyone questioning his involvment.
Don't get me wrong, it took me a long time to come to therms with the facts that there is something very suspicious going on.
Nonetheless, I'm not making any claims here, just asking questions and taking into account the recorded evidence.
I think everyone should, and importantly should not reach a conclusion before seing the recording from wikileak for themselves.
[Mat 5:34-37 NIV] 34 But I tell you, do not swear an oath at all: either by heaven, for it is God's throne; 35 or by the earth, for it is his footstool; or by Jerusalem, for it is the city of the Great King. 36 And do not swear by your head, for you cannot make even one hair white or black. 37 All you need to say is simply 'Yes' or 'No'; anything beyond this comes from the evil one.
Some Christians refuse to swear because of the above passage in Matthew 5, particularly because they feel that this is an injunction against swearing in the very Bible that they are being asked to swear upon.My understanding of swearing: Swearing is similar to when you sign an agreement to be bound be specific rules similar to signing a contract. It it means "Let this be enforced and I be punished and/or caused to repay appropriately if I do not fulfill my end of this contract," however the entity you call upon to do the enforcing is that thing you swear upon. If you swear "Upon the temple" then that has one meaning. If you swear upon "Israel" that is another; but here in Matthew 5 Jesus could be saying that no matter what one swears upon it is an attempt to lie. Why? You have placed the responsibility of your actions upon another to enforce them. They are cosigning. He says to simply say 'Yes' or 'No' both of which can incur much higher debts and responsibilities if the person fails to fulfill their agreement. It is a higher standard, not a lower one.
Psalm23
Well-Known Member
It still says site cannot be reached.
If someone says they don't believe in God or the Bible, I think it is best to believe their word. If some of the NASA astronauts reacted with violence, that doesn't prove faith. More likely such reaction would indicate anger and feelings of being insulted from insinuating they wouldn't believe their word on going to the moon unless they swore on the Bible.
It's not about the Bible; it's about indulging cranks and fools calling the astronauts liars.
Sue for what damage? Pretending to land on the moon? Financing a trip to the moon though they didn't go?
Actually, they did go to the moon, and the requirement to swear that on the bible seemed unnecessary. This is likely why Armstrong refused to swear that he went to the moon. The man seemed so silly, denying the truth to further his religious zeal, that Armstrong refused to have discourse.
I agree.
My opinion:
The FBI had a conspiracy to deny the existence of John Doe II of the Oklahoma City (Murrah) Federal building bombing of 1995. Even Terry Nichols tried to testify about that, and was denied. The retired FBI agent said that Nichols was only trying to plea bargain for a lighter sentence. At least 25 people identified John Doe II with McVeigh, and the FBI preferred to tell a fairy tale about McVeigh doing the bombing all alone. So what about the 25 witnesses? Did they share a common delusion?
So, real conspiracies exist. We just have to tell the difference between the real conspiracies and the false ones.
A Vestigial Mote
Well-Known Member
It looks like the domain in the links he keeps providing has what RF is determining as a swear word. Hmmm... 5 asterisks. Which curse word(s) could that be? Maybe the "B" word? Followed by "ute"... so that's not making particular sense.
Not sure a website with a swear-word in the domain name is the place I'd go for the most reliable information. Not that there is anything objectively wrong with that... would just relay a sort of juvenile and unprofessional mindset of the creator for me.
Not sure a website with a swear-word in the domain name is the place I'd go for the most reliable information. Not that there is anything objectively wrong with that... would just relay a sort of juvenile and unprofessional mindset of the creator for me.
Altfish
Veteran Member
Not that I'm likely to go to the moon, but if I did I'd refuse to swear on the Bible.
Why does swearing on the Bible validate the trip? If they are atheists it would be hypocritical to swear on a religious book
exchemist
Veteran Member
The answer is obvious, if you are not some kind of halfwit.
They were annoyed that some damn fool was demanding that they swear they had been to the moon, in effect suggesting they never went and made it all up.
If you had devoted years of your life to a challenging and demanding enterprise like this, risking your life, all in the full glare of worldwide publicity, and then some idiot demanded you swear it was not all made up, you would be very angry too.
"Investigative journalist", my arse!
