The Instigator
luqmaan
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
DoubtingDave
Con (against)
Winning
20 Points

NASA is a dishonest organization

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 3 votes the winner is...
DoubtingDave
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 8/19/2013 Category: Science
Updated: 4 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,145 times Debate No: 36832
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (2)
Votes (3)

 

luqmaan

Pro

NASA is a dishonest organization as it has shown us many types of flaws for eg when Neil Armstrong returned from the moon and the photo which was shown to the world in which the astronaut was standing with the american flag and the flag was waving but how is it possible ? there is no air on the moon and the shadows of both the flag and Neil Armstrong was casted whereas as far as i know a shadow cannot be cast on the moon
DoubtingDave

Con

Welcome to Debate.org.

The moon was not actually flapping in the wind. Rather, "The flag is held up by a horizontal bar and simply moves when it is unfurled and as the pole is being fixed into position by the astronauts. The flagpole is light, flexible aluminium and continues to vibrate after the astronauts let go, giving the impression of blowing in the wind."

http://www.telegraph.co.uk...

Why are shadows impossible?
Debate Round No. 1
luqmaan

Pro

luqmaan forfeited this round.
DoubtingDave

Con

Since my opponent failed to explain why moon shadows are impossible, here is why it is possible:

"The astronauts were taking their photos on a hilly, brightly-lit landscape while the sun was close to the horizon. Imagine taking a photograph of someone on a rolling, uneven field of snow during a full, low-hanging moon. The contours of the ground would produce shadows of many different lengths."

http://www.space.com... (See number 7)
Debate Round No. 2
luqmaan

Pro

luqmaan forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
2 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Posted by bladerunner060 4 years ago
bladerunner060
Also, to be more technical, I think it was because of how they put it in the ground, too, wiggling it to do so in an airless and low-gravity environment.
Posted by bladerunner060 4 years ago
bladerunner060
i'm afraid bothering to take this would just be noob sniping.

However, the flag wasn't fluttering in the wind, and even a cursory search on the subject explains that it's actually a bunching up caused by the rod that was intended to get the flag to extend fully.
3 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Vote Placed by bladerunner060 4 years ago
bladerunner060
luqmaanDoubtingDaveTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Reasons for voting decision: While this was a full forfeit, of special note I think is that Pro specifically set this debate up with incredibly short rounds...makes me think it was a purposeful move in hopes of obtaining a forfeit from an unwary opponent that bit him in the butt. Of course, Pro is new to the site, however, usually a person who doesn't understand the setup will not change anything; in this case, the rounds were specifically set up as quite short (something around 20 minutes at most, I think?). Conduct for the forfeit, arguments for both the forfeit and Con's rebuttal of what little Pro put forth, sourcing for the fact that Con actually had some, and S&G because, in what little Pro actually typed, there were numerous errors, whilst if Con had any at all I didn't happen to notice.
Vote Placed by imabench 4 years ago
imabench
luqmaanDoubtingDaveTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Reasons for voting decision: I think the pro gave better arguments in the rounds he forfeited then the ones he didnt.
Vote Placed by Subutai 4 years ago
Subutai
luqmaanDoubtingDaveTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Reasons for voting decision: FF.