The Instigator
Dark-Ninja
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
Mirza
Con (against)
Winning
14 Points

There is absolutely no verifiable (a.k.a. "scientific") evidence that NASA landed men on the moon.

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  
Vote Here
Pro Tied Con
Who did you agree with before the debate?
Who did you agree with after the debate?
Who had better conduct?
Who had better spelling and grammar?
Who made more convincing arguments?
Who used the most reliable sources?
Reasons for your voting decision
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 10/22/2010 Category: Science
Updated: 6 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 1,847 times Debate No: 13448
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (11)
Votes (2)

 

Dark-Ninja

Pro

To be clear, I am not arguing that the manned Apollo moon missions were a hoax. Personally, I highly suspect that they were, but that's not the issue here. What I AM saying, is that there simply isn't any verifiable evidence to support NASA's claims, and so they shouldn't be taken seriously to the scientific community (unless we're going to lend equal credibility to "UFO abductees").
Mirza

Con

I thank my opponent for instigating this debate. I find it acceptable that he believes in the moon landing, but I will try to prove that there is, in fact, scientific evidence for a visit to the moon. However, I have to cut this round short and make brief points, then I will elaborate in the next rounds. I hope that the instigator finds that acceptable, too.

-- Arguments --

Although I understand and accept the definition of "scientific evidence" that my opponent has provided, I still question what such evidence involves. Does technology count? Technology is scientific. In fact, technology helps us with scientific progress in too many ways. If my opponent can go along with this, then I have an argument to make which involves technology.

1.1 Laser reflector on the surface of the moon

During the Apollo 11 mission, a laser reflector was positioned. As the first reference says, "Lunar ranging involves sending a laser beam through an optical telescope ... The beam enters the telescope where the eye piece would be, and the transmitted beam is expanded to become the diameter of the main mirror, then bounced off the surface toward the reflector on the Moon."

If such equipment can indeed be used by experts with advanced equipment, how could there possibly not be scientific evidence? This equipment can help predicting eclipses, which automatically puts it into the science category. Moreover, there is other evidence.

1.2 Moon rocks

According to the second and third sources, moon rocks have been brought back to the Earth from the Apollo mission. All in all, 382 kilograms of moon rocks have been brought back during the missions from year 1969 and the year 1972. Numerous geologists have analyzed these rocks and have concluded that it is impossible for them to be anything but moon rocks. Now, some people claim that these rocks could have been found on Antarctica. However, 382 kilograms of moon rock to be found o Antarctica sounds like a fantasy. Moreover, another claim is that robots brought these rocks back. However, such technology was not available during the Apollo missions from 1969-1972. The sources that I referred to explicate on the matter.

-- Conclusion --

Although my arguments in this round are short, there is one great and irrefutable point, and that is the one regarding the moon rocks. It is ultimate scientific evidence supporting the moon landing missions, and the facts are established scientific facts. There is, in fact, no need to make more claims. One strong and irrefutable point is most probably enough.

-- References --

R1: http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov...

R2: http://www.dave.co.nz...

R3: http://science.nasa.gov...
Debate Round No. 1
Dark-Ninja

Pro

Dark-Ninja forfeited this round.
Mirza

Con

There is absolutely no scientific evidence that my opponent forfeited.
Debate Round No. 2
Dark-Ninja

Pro

Dark-Ninja forfeited this round.
Mirza

Con

Moving on...
Debate Round No. 3
Dark-Ninja

Pro

Dark-Ninja forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
Dark-Ninja

Pro

Dark-Ninja forfeited this round.
Mirza

Con

Thank you...
Debate Round No. 5
11 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by Mirza 6 years ago
Mirza
Don't start if you don't want to finish...
Posted by Mirza 6 years ago
Mirza
Thank you.
Posted by Ore_Ele 6 years ago
Ore_Ele
Mirza, you did a great job presenting some of the most notable evidence. Sorry that the debate was a no-show.
Posted by tempus_erus 6 years ago
tempus_erus
what, is america really that stupid or paranoid. first why would spend all that money. two theirs a flag,footprints, a spacecraft on the oon that most people can. acausm razor what sate the most obwww.drbecky.com/lynnmont.html ous why our goverment for that the worlds goverment and nasa and the rest of world space agencies lie and particapate in this elaborate hoax.
Posted by m93samman 6 years ago
m93samman
Define "actual thinking" hahaha
Posted by Chrysippus 6 years ago
Chrysippus
Lol, no. I don't have any.

He's forfeiting his other debate, too. I'm guessing he lost interest in the site when he realized that it would require actual thinking and left.
Posted by m93samman 6 years ago
m93samman
""There is absolutely no scientific evidence that my opponent forfeited."

There is absolutely no scientific evidence that he exists."

Can you provide scientific evidence to prove that?
Posted by Chrysippus 6 years ago
Chrysippus
"There is absolutely no scientific evidence that my opponent forfeited."

There is absolutely no scientific evidence that he exists.
Posted by Chrysippus 6 years ago
Chrysippus
This could be fun to watch, or it could degenerate into a "I dare you to prove to me that the Moon exists!" match. Let's find out, shall we?
Posted by Rockylightning 6 years ago
Rockylightning
DARN IT I WAS ABOUT TO CLICK IT

nooo
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by Lightkeeper 6 years ago
Lightkeeper
Dark-NinjaMirzaTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 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 
Vote Placed by m93samman 6 years ago
m93samman
Dark-NinjaMirzaTied
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