Bad Astronomy: Misconceptions and Misuses Revealed, from ...
Bad Astronomy: Misconceptions and Misuses Revealed, from ...
Bad Astronomy: Misconceptions and Misuses Revealed, from ...
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
172 ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE<br />
The same thing is happening in the lunar photographs. The<br />
shadows don’t appear to be parallel because of perspective. When<br />
comparing the directions of shadows <strong>from</strong> two objects at very different<br />
distances, perspective effects can be quite large. I have seen<br />
this myself, by st<strong>and</strong>ing near a tall street lamp around sunset <strong>and</strong><br />
comparing its shadow to that of one across the street. The two<br />
shadows appear to point in two very different directions. It’s actually<br />
a pretty weird thing to see.<br />
Again, this is something that can be investigated quite literally<br />
in your front yard, <strong>and</strong> is hardly evidence of a multibillion-dollar<br />
conspiracy.<br />
PPP<br />
There’s an interesting lesson here about the claims of the hoaxbelievers.<br />
In many cases they use simple physics <strong>and</strong> common sense to<br />
make their points. Usually their initial points make sense. However,<br />
they tend to misunderst<strong>and</strong> physics, <strong>and</strong> common sense may<br />
not apply on the airless surface of an alien world. Upon closer<br />
inspection, their arguments invariably fall apart.<br />
I could go on <strong>and</strong> on with more examples. Debunking the<br />
hoax-believers’ claims could fill a book. That’s not surprising, considering<br />
several books have been written by them. I have no doubt<br />
the books sell well. Conspiracy books always do. I also have no<br />
doubt that a book dedicated to debunking them would not sell<br />
well. A whole book pointing out the believers’ errors would be<br />
tedious, <strong>and</strong> it isn’t necessary. The examples above are the strongest<br />
they can muster, <strong>and</strong> they fall apart easily when shaken. Their<br />
other arguments are even weaker.<br />
But the interesting part is the seeming simplicity of their claims.<br />
Not seeing stars in the Apollo pictures is so obvious, so basic a<br />
mistake. The other arguments they make seem obvious as well.<br />
But let’s a have small sanity check here. Let’s say NASA knew<br />
it couldn’t put men on the Moon, <strong>and</strong> knew it would lose all its<br />
money if it didn’t. They decided to fake the whole lunar project.<br />
They built elaborate sets, hired hundreds of technicians, cameramen,<br />
scientists knowledgeable enough to fake all this, <strong>and</strong> eventually<br />
spent millions or billions of dollars on the hoax. Eventually,