Scientific logic

Over the past several decades, the 1969 moon landings have raised significant arguments over the idea that they were faked. I shall explore the knowledge issues and different theories in considerable depth to acquire both an understanding and opinion over this issue. It is a difficult matter though, in fact the moon landing conspiracies could be considered as a pseudoscience. A pseudoscience can be defined as a theory, methodology, or practice that is considered to be without scientific foundation. This relates to the moon landings as numerous conspiracy theories do use “faulty” science to justify that they were hoaxed, thus they have been labeled as pseudoscientific claims.

An example of these pseudoscientific claims would be that a flag is planted by the astronaut and from our sense perception (from images, videos ect.) it looks as if it is blowing in the wind, as a flag would on earth. Yet there is neither atmosphere nor air on the moon, so how can this be? From deductive reasoning we can apply the principle that for a flag to wave the general rules of physics and aerodynamics apply; that airflow can potentially give any object lift, for example a plane. As there is no atmosphere on the moon there is therefore no weather, so the flag cannot wave. So from both deductive reasoning and our sense perception this theory seems entirely logical. We cannot imply inductive reasoning to this matter because only a few selective people have travelled to the moon; therefore we cannot judge by experience.

If we look deeper into the issue though we can use our sense perception and scientific knowledge to identify that the cloth of the flag isn’t waving. We perceive it like that because of the way the flag was deployed. The flag hangs from a horizontal rod which telescopes out from the vertical one. According to NASA, the flag did not seem to fully extend, the result was that it looks as if it is waving.┬áThis agrees with scientific logic the air isn’t moving the flag but the cloth is itself after reacting to the movement of the horizontal rod. On the moon there is no wind vacuum yet it is still possible to react from the movement of another object. NASA is the company whom planned and initiated the space program, so this could be made up and therefore unreliable. For this reason we cannot entirely trust language as a reliable source of information. Yet there are many other sources that agree with is.

Although the ultimate way to prove that the moon landing isn’t a hoax through simple logic. Why would NASA invest millions, maybe even billions of dollars into sending people to space even after it had been done once? From simple logic that would seem simply ridiculous. Why take the risk of faking other moon landings if they did fake the first one, it simply increases the chances of people find. It seems that little supporters of conspiracy theory raise this point in their arguments.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *