Fetzer/Burton Moon Landing Debate Finale

[Peter Dawson]

As I have observed elsewhere, if I were working their side of the street, then I would also try to turn
"proofs" of fakery into "spoofs". This one is funny either way. Too much of it fits the official footage
to be dismissed and the "can toss" is an odd thing to do with such impressive, valuable equipment.
The NASA "truth squad" seems to amuse itself by coming up with incredibly outrageous explanations.

I'm guessing you went public as a moon hoax proponent after you retired, and not before. Am I right, Professor Fetzer?

Because I'm sure you'd be laughed out of every university in the land - except the mail-order ones - for posting this response, at this point in time, given the information we have all been provided with on this thread. And doubly so for the way you presented easily confirmed fake footage to us earlier on, as if it might be serious evidence that the missions were faked.

...follow Dave Guyatt and my suggestion that you present your best case for moon landings.

The best evidence I have that the moon landings happened as claimed is the fact that, with just a small amount of pertinent information, the majority of hoax claims can easily be dismissed.

It takes a certain level of dishonesty, or stupidity, for the moon hoax community to persist in presenting newcomers with arguments which have already been debunked. I'm not one to bow to authority for the sake of it, but on this issue I'll throw my lot in with a bunch of elite mathematicians, physicists and chemists any day, rather than follow a bunch of clumsy/incompetent/dishonest/disgruntled websurfers. 40 years on, tell me why exactly is there no Physicists and Mathematicians for Moon Hoax Truth dot com around?

Also, since we're setting assignments, why don't you check over your figures, and get back to us with an estimate of how high a fairly athletic 40 year old male should be able to jump, fully suited up in an Apollo outfit, on the surface of the moon?