I can already hear the conspiracy theorists... Mythbusters IS PART OF THE HOAX!!!

Bokusatsu_Tenshi

@badhatharry:
Staten Island? Wrong!

@cudthecrud:
Buy a new telescope then. Getting MIRRORS to the moon is a different story. Getting PEOPLE to the moon is the issue.

This was from 2002

[www.smh.com.au]

Still no pictures.

JEmlay

I agree there's no way in hell we went to the moon on the technology we had then. You cannot convince me it took less than 10 years back then to go from conception to moon landing and all we've done the past 40 years is launching space shuttles to just circle the earth. I was born in 1969. If our technology was so outstanding back then then why will I have lived 2/3 of my life before I can see us land on Mars? With enough time and resources, anything can be faked almost perfectly.

MichelleDatsun

Moon-shmoon, i wanna go to the sun.
Ya here that NASA get to work!

mr30gZune

@Blue Oyster Cultist:

Word! I mean, who knows, maybe a cow CAN sleep standing up but the fact is, they choose to lay down. Anyone living near Chino in SoCal that drives the 15 HWY knows that!!!!

JEmlay

@JEmlay: You must have good eyes. I can see the whole moon, sometimes even the face, but I have trouble seeing the rocks.
We bounce lasers off of mirrors left by some of the moon missions daily to determine the precise distance away it is.

cudthecrud

@JEmlay: Because the rock is probably either A) Bigger than Staten Island, or B) In a display case right in front of you in a museum.

Also, we did it quickly because we were in a race against Communism. If al-Qaida had a space program, then that'd be a different story.

badhatharry

@dorylomorphs: As Blue Oyster Cultist said, cows don't sleep standing up is the big issue. The thing is, they have tested plenty of animal myths on the show and it would be very easy to test this one without hurting a cow. First they go to a farm, find some lovable milk cow and push on her. Realizing that a standing cow is just going to a: push right back and look at you like you are nuts or b: run away, they decide to do it in a lab. They build some contraption/robot that has the came center of mass, balance point and weight of an average cow and figure out what it would take to tip it over (assuming that cows slept standing up). It would be a perfectly serviceable episode.

Sorry for rambling, but this is one of those things that just aggravates the hell out of me. I grew up on a ranch and I don't know how many people who have asked me about cow tipping or have claimed to have done it.

dry-roasted-peanuts

There is no way in hell we went to the moon with the technology we had then.

Even today it's proving to be a challenge. It took decades for them to approve a rocket for the "next" moon mission and they still have a million miles of ground to cover before they even THINK about starting the next mission.

Plus, if we went to moon then why can't I SEE the crap left behind? Isn't there a moon rover sitting up their somwewhere? A flag? If I can see a ROCK on the moon then why can't I see our equipment?

JEmlay

So they're going to recreate the Moon landing scene in miniature and take photos to show that the Moon landing was real because their mock up of the Moon landing photos look just like the "real" Moon landing photos....

Does anyone see where I'm going with this?

se7a7n7

@VakeroRokero: You're assuming the Chinese moon rocket will be of any better quality than anything else produced over there lately (besides the Olympics). ;-)

Sean Robertson

@badhatharry: we shall be known by our garbage.

Sean Robertson

No need for these guys, the chinese are planning a landing on the moon in 2 years and are aiming for the same spot americans say they landed, so They are going to look at the stuff they left up there.

And don't say the stuff is not there anymore or it flew off, there a moon rover parts that were too heavy to bring back "supposedly"...

IN 2 YEARS WE WILL KNOW IF THIS WASN'T FAKED IN HOLLYWOOD.

VakeroRokero

I really want to beat the hell out of people pushing the idea that the landing was a hoax. Quit being useless idiots! Maybe you'll live long enough to see the evidence in person one day. ;-)

Sean Robertson

@CaptLonestar: By seeing what we left there (mirrors, half of several lunar landers, the dune-buggy thing, our credibility on the world stage, etc.)

badhatharry

@mor10: though i believe they went to the moon, the discovery channel did not prove unequivocally that it would be impossible to fake the moon landing.
the landing could be faked. why couldnt it?
what discovery did was dispel the theories presented.

sluzzuls

@Margatron: how so?

CaptLonestar

@brother9: We had a cow pasture behind our backyard when I was a kid. The real myth is that cows sleep standing up.

Blue Oyster Cultist

uhhh... can't anyone do this by using a high-end telescope?

Margatron

So now you allow ads to be posts Giz? Boo on that, you'll just be the next sell out problogg site if you start doing this.

BB7

Conspiracies are so easy to keep secret especially when you need to involve 100,000 people or so. It's when you only involve six or so people (like Watergate) that you get caught.

Julien321

@J0hnP: Douché.

bobdobbs

@J0hnP: Damn you beat me to it :P

BanMeAgainBrianLam

@dry-roasted-peanuts: I can answer that one for you.

1. They cant hurt animals on the show.
2. Its almost impossible. Have you tried sneaking up on a cow? Cant do it.

dorylomorphs

@dry-roasted-peanuts: No kidding! I have yet to find anyone who can prove they knocked over a cow. It's always drunk stumbling 130 pound fools who claim success knocking over a 1 ton animal.

brother9

Also, where the hell is my damn cow-tipping episode?!?

dry-roasted-peanuts

I could never figure out why Americans are so insistent on discrediting what is arguably the greatest scientific achievement of the century. Bizarrely the rest of the world believes that they did land on the moon: it's only the Americans themselves that insist it never happened.

Oh, and that documentary FOX aired.... Did We Land On The Moon? .... was a piece of crap - a study in how creative editing can make people sound like they say the most outrageous things. It's about as credible as Loose Change.

mor10

There is no point in getting into an argument with a conspiracy person. Any evidence you offer against the conspiracy is just you falling for the conspiracy; the ol "that's what THEY what you to think". Hell, the Loose Change people basically called Popular Mechanics an arm of the 9/11 cover up.

dry-roasted-peanuts

Because of course the only way to fake something is with miniature models....or course.

MarkB

I can prove that the moon landing was a hoax by going to the smithsonian

dorylomorphs

Pssh. Next they're going to "prove" that Global Warming and the Holocaust are real, too. Those Godless Hollywierd freaks with their computer sorcery can get you to believe anything.

But, um, that Kari girl needs to call me. I'll jump her shark.

badhatharry

@bobdobbs: "jumped the shark" jumped the shark a long time ago. ;-)

J0hnP

Interesting seeing as Discovery Channel aired a show a couple of years ago that proved unequivocally that it would be impossible to fake the moon landing. The show picked apart every single conspiracy theory bit by bit and showed through science and common sense that all the rubbish these naysayers have been spewing for years is nothing but paranoid drivel.

For those who still think it was fake, read this article and go buy yourself a new brain:

[www.braeunig.us]

mor10

I think that they're tackling the *myth* that the moon landing was a hoax. So, they're undoubtedly in the camp that believes that it wasn't a hoax, and are setting out to prove it. Looks like a fun episode!

J0hnP

Mythbusters jumped the shark a long time ago.

bobdobbs

@@Margatron: Ummm.... not really... You'd have to build one that could track REALLY fast. To see that much detail on something that close, moving that fast would be a Bee-otch to keep anything in frame. As for Hubble, you'd burn out the CCD in the camera if you pointed it at the sunlit moon.

@JEmlay: Ummm... I don't know about you, but what we did didn't require alot of technology. Big rocket engines require precise machining, not super-computers. And the math to plot the course, time engine burns and etc. can be done by humans... on paper... with a pencil. Ask any science major student.

The only reason we can't get a trip back to the moon in less than 8 years is because our politicians are to short-term-minded to fund it, especially since we don't have the big bad USSR pointing nukes at us any more (or at least not as many). And of course, we're not scared of China because we ant to keep our shiny gadgets (not to mention the economy...).

drfaustus71

I still want last weeks new episode that never aired! I had it schedualed to be recoreded and all I got was the pirate special and I've recorded every episode since then and got nothing new. :(
Hopefully they'll have something new on tonight.

gamecrazychris

"They hang some lights from the girders and set up some big spots, and they got a control booth in a corner. Then they bring in the machines - the lunar lander and the L.E.M. And that's when they set up the cameras, shout 'Action!' and make a movie.

Think about it."

(Tales of the Lost Formicans - By Constance Congdon)

Monty

@sluzzuls: The main argument all these nutcases present is the video footage - specifically that it would be easy to fake by playing it back at half speed. The problem is if you actually do that, the result looks downright moronic and nothing like the moon footage. The fact remains that the only way of creating the skipping-across-the-moon-surface footage is through CGI (which they didn't have back then) or by filming in a low-gravity environment. So unless NASA has an anti-gravity machine stashed away somewhere, the whole thing is just bull from end to end.

The show also picked apart all the other arguments leaving the deniers looking like fools. What puzzles me is that they didn't re-air it because it was really good - especially the part about shades in photographs.

mor10

through the Van Allen Radiation Belt is what I'm talking about

se7a7n7

Are they going to subject Adam to high levels of radiation to prove that the Apollo astronauts could have made it through twice with zero signs of exposure to radiation?

se7a7n7

Fuzzy logic can prove anything. I just want the astronaut action figure delivered to my moon address that paid for years ago, when that email came around where you were able to buy moon real estate.

SinAmos

@mor10: Americans are so insistent? You mean there isn't anyone from any other country who's in on the conspiracy theory? [www.ufos-aliens.co.uk]

James

@Sean Robertson: Yeah, like nothing at the olympics was faked...I'm lip syncing this as I generate fireworks on my computer btw.

Actually, despite that, I'm sure that China can competently rival the states with its quality of products, and in any case, when China gets to the moon, how would we know if it really made it to the moon so that it can prove or disprove whether we have been there?

Further, everyone should know that the US landing on the moon was fabricated only to suggest that the earth is not flat. Duh, it is a conspiracy, but really part of a subconspiracy to obscure the truth about the shape of the earth. You science people are morons. I'm going back to my study of intelligent design.

capitalass

@VakeroRokero: Who says the Chinese won't fake it. That's like saying the Chinese wouldn;t fake fireworks. Wait, they did? Shit!

Git Em SteveDave displays attention-grabbing vanity

@GadgetPlay: yeah, or something else that smells fishy.

That's going to get disemvowled, isn't it?

badhatharry

no one goes to the moon now / mars because theres no point, theres nothing there to see

why spend huge cash money that could be better spent blowing people up

and all the hoax believers should get neutered asap

pizzlepaps

Isn't Mythbusters supposed to do a show about this soon?

@badhatharry: "I'll jump her shark."

By "shark," I hope you mean "bones."

GadgetPlay

@JEmlay: I was exaggerating for the sake of humor. But all the same, you realize you're looking for a something the size of a Lexus in an area around 1/2 the size of Africa? You're not going to see it looking at a picture of a full moon. And would that really be proof for you, or would you just cry "photoshop?"

badhatharry

Next think you know they will try and prove the earth isnt flat. Idiots.

Curves

@badhatharry: Yes. Kari Byron is a cute one. I too would like to make sex on her.

crapcakes

Before anyone says it, of course the Soviet Union was in on it too. They couldn't afford to "out" the USA's fake moon landings for fear of reprisals from America's dark masters, the owls. Owls also invented HAARP and secretly developed velcro as a way of controlling the minds of minority groups. I'M ONTO YOU OWLS!!!!!!!!!

Sockatume

@mor10: American's aren't insistent on it, idiots are. There is a difference, since many many MANY American's don't believe conspiracy garbage like that.

krizoitz

@Git Em SteveDave displays attention-grabbing vanity: k, I probably should have refreshed before submitting. You said it first, but I swear I thought of it way before. damn.

capitalass

I love when they cite that the flag was standing up even though there is no wind on the moon as evidence for the landing being fake. First of all, NASA will tell you that there was a stick holding it out like that so that the flag could be seen. Secondly, this is NASA don't you think that they would have thought of a stupid thing like that if they really tried to fake a moon landing.

cartman005

I can't wait till the moon hoax thing goes from an primarily American konspiracy to a global-wide konspiracy! You know, because the moon is right there up in the sky. Not only can you use lasers to prove that we landed on the moon, in the next couple of years the moon is going to get a bit crowded. The idea that its a konspiracy just doesn't hold any water, not to mention science is completely against such insanity in the first place.

bbfreak

@krizoitz: I'm just pointing out that the conspiracy is rooted in the states and not some other country that hates the USA. Which is weird. Usually crap like this comes from people who want to discredit you, not your own people.

mor10

We cant get rockets of the ground without exploding every couple of tries. Why should I believe the we actually landed people on the moon way back then?

nuggetz

@JEmlay: NASATech That should help you understand how they COULD do it, and why they DON'T do it now.

Ephemera

Every single aspect that conspiracy theorists claim show the moon landing was a hoax can be debunked using common sense and science. We should celebrate one of Man's greatest technical achievements instead of denying it.

jimbowyer

@mr30gZune:

shhh. don't tell. we went to the sun in '98. it didn't work out so good.

[blog.makezine.com]

mcdj

@nuggetz: What are you talking about? We launch rockets successfully all the time. Its just you hear about the failures more often. Try hanging out in Cocoa Beach for a year, you'll see how many rockets go up without incident.

dr_lha

Wow, there are quite a few morons that read and comment on Giz.

drummerjoe

I'm watching mythbusters right now. I can't wait, I get really pissed when people claim that and usually mythbusters can help set the public straight with a good ol' fashioned slap in the face (the conveyor is moot, anyone?)

they also just used the phrase "more bounce than a kangaroo on a trampoline"

jakebathman

I guess they don't watch the National Geographic channel. They've already done a show about moon landing conspiracies and rebutted them with cold, hard facts and testimonials. It was actually a pretty funny show, watching all the half baked ideas get shot down.

justhesh

@DozeUser:
only the word is should be italicised in that statement

DozeUser

It is a conspiracy, just like the mind controlling drugs they are putting into our water supplies to keep us from knowing the truth.

Honestly though i really don't believe that, any time anyone brings this up as a hoax, i treat it as if they just brought up the illuminati, i think they are insane and stop listening

DozeUser

@MichelleDatsun:
"You cannot convince me" is the dumbest statement anyone can ever utter. It shows you do not care about evidence or truth, but intend to stick with your current belief whether or not it is correct.

xenth

@JEmlay: Plus, if we went to moon then why can't I SEE the crap left behind? Isn't there a moon rover sitting up their somwewhere? A flag? If I can see a ROCK on the moon then why can't I see our equipment?

It's not like it's all that hard to find out.

[science.nasa.gov]

So no, you wouldn't see anything even if you pointed the Hubble at the moon, but the Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter (currently slated for a March 2009 launch) will be able to.

someToast

The irony here - no wait, this is good - the irony here is that shark week was like two weeks ago. Get it? But it's only now, like in a totally unrelated episode, that they're JUMPING the shark. Did you all see how I did that?

Actually all I wanted to say that you lunar landing infidels are a bunch of asshats.

mildretard

either they sent someone to the moon or they sent a radio transmitter to the moon. there's enough proof for that as different radio telescopes on earth received the signals from moon before NASA did (cause they were closer).

krom

I believe it was a hoax. I've done a lot of reading, video watching, examining of everything I could find, and that's my opinion. I believe they've gone there later on, but at the time I think they wanted to beat Russia to it, and they faked it. Either that, or they went and the video feed was so bad that they made up footage to replace it and tried to pass it as the real deal. You can see a wire in one of the videos.

kylo4

There is NO WAY you can prove to a moon hoax nut's satisfaction that it wasn't a hoax. You could methodically go through every single one of their stupid claims about so-called issues in photos, shadows or whatever and debunk them in embarrassing clinical detail. And by the time you got to the end the nut would be already be back at the start of their schtick.

Look at Philip Plait's efforts of Bad Astronomy where he does just that. Has it dampened the moon hoaxers? No sirree! In fact they are still bringing up the same old nonsense even when it has been exposed as complete lies by this point.

Moon hoax nuts are nuts because they are a combination of gullible, stupid, paranoid, mentally unbalanced, drunk and / or in it to make a fast buck. They have bought into their delusions 100% and they're not going to let pesky old facts or reality get in the way of their "conspiracy". Same goes for the 9/11 "truth" fruitcakes. It's funny how these people style themselves as "truthseekers" when then actively go out of their way to avoid any contact with evidence or reality.

DrXym

@kylo4: Seems you think one should not believe all ones sees. Then, how come you believe you see a wire?

jige

these guys couldn't prove that their anus existed and that their own poo wasn't fake.

rjupiter

@kylo4:

If we had faked it, Russia would have been quick to point it out. They tracked our progress the entire time, as did many independant research facilities. If we had faked it many of our enemies would have been all over it.

groovyone

@MichelleDatsun:

It is called BUDGET. The amount of money allocated to the Constellation program is less than Apollo had. Back then, funding was almost unlimited since it was an issue of national pride.

groovyone

Whatever the reality i'm more interested in what would happen if the Mythbusters couldn't conclusively prove the landing wasn't a fake. We know they are good, but what if the results were different than expected? Would Discovery allow them to present their findings?

Back to io9!

MarlboroTestMonkey7

@Zeasar:
Then you haven't applied the same standard of objectivity to the issue of the moon-landing as you have toward Creationism. The claim is that we haven't landed on the moon. All of the popular arguments in support of this idea have been refuted. Therefore, unless better evidence or argument is presented, we must conclude that it is reasonable to assume that the moon-landing happened.

s8ist

@MichelleDatsun:
"There's no way in hell you can convince me..."
Well, then you've already established the criteria for being intolerant to objective evidence... which is the required mentality of a conspiracy theorist or religious fundamentalist. They share the same distaste for objectivity and rational thought.

I'm not keen on our government. They are scheming, war-mongering, money-grubbing, disingenuous pricks. But my distaste for the government is tangible, not based on imaginary crimes on our collective perception. Perpetuating these myths detracts us from addressing the real problems because it paints the opposition as looneys. If everyone just took the time to read REBUTTALS of popular misconceptions (like 9/11 truth claims and moan-landing hoax) with an equal standard of critique, these silly myths would disappear (as they should). Our political situation has proven we need critical thinkers not only at the top but also as our peers.

s8ist

@drummerjoe: "Wow, there are quite a few morons that read and comment on Giz."

Yes, there are.

@badhatharry: "That's going to get disemvowled, isn't it?"

Apparently not!

GadgetPlay

I believe the moon landing was real the same way I believe my Christian science teacher who told me the earth is flat and was made 6000 years ago.

Zeasar

@JEmlay: Um, the moon isn't a million miles away over ground. It's 250,000 miles away in space. Sheesh!

jswilson64

The truth of an idea isn't inversely proportional to how many people accept it. Religion may be a good example, but how many people still believe the earth is flat? The OP's attitude as well as many of the conspiracy theorists' seems to be "Oh, look at me, I'm so subversive." Actually, you just look like irrational tools.

s8ist

@dry-roasted-peanuts: I know! I've been literally ACCOSTED by conspiricists who discount Christ's birth, life, death, and resurrection, even though it was all witnessed by many people and accounted in multiple literature. Not to mention the incredible staying power of His Church, which in itself is pudding proof.

On the other hand, schools teach that simple amino acids, simple carbs, simple lipids in the primordial soup, bombarded by conductive/radiative heat, alpha/beta/gamma/photon particles, interacting RANDOMLY through finite time, suddenly gave birth to a fully functional prokaryotic cell, even though VISUAL evidence, as well as COMMON SENSE, tells us that such incredible structure (far rivaling that of our beloved iPhone, people - FAR!) has to have been designed/created/thought out/through then built using CHANNELED/DIRECTED energy -- well, methinks me've said too much already. Perchance they'll put THAT on one of their shows someday (don't hold yer breath)!

banmojo

@s8ist: This thread jumped the shark a long time ago, but I just wanted to say thanks for sharing a bit of light. You single-handedly kept me from gouging my eyes out.

mildretard

@banmojo:
The problem with that is that you must contend that the masses of people behind other religions are validated on the same premise. In other words, based on your logic, all religions are true. Since they contradict each other (and many times even themselves), you have seriously faulty reasoning at play. Just as I said that the number of people who subscribe to an idea is not inversely proportional to its truth, the opposite is the same. Just because a large number of people subscribe to it, that also doesn't make it true. It's called 'argumentum ad populum'. Look it up.

iPhones are actually a better design than human life, if we consider your assumption that we were designed by the most intelligent and powerful being ever to exist. Why? Because the iPhone works within the bounds of physical and natural laws that the designers had to consider and make sacrifices while still coming up with a product that isn't perfect, but reasonably close enough for us to enjoy. We all know it can break and be prone to error, whether by design or the inevitable drop. If "God" invented all of the natural law in the universe AND the universe itself, then there really is no excuse for AIDS, cancer, famine, diabetes, mental retardation, multiple personality disorder, diabetes, congenital heart disease, sudden infant death syndrome, autism, sickle cell anemia, hemophilia, epilepsy, schizophrenia, crippling physical birth defects, conjoined twins, ... I mean, really... the list goes on. This is the design from the best and most powerful designer of all time?

So no, I don't think Mythbusters would damage their reputation by attempting to bolster Creationism. That would be beneath them, even taking into consideration their frozen chicken cannon episode.

s8ist

Back in '78, I and a friend were going to see "Capricorn One," a film about a faked Mars landing somewhat based on the conspiracy theories against the moon landing. However, my friend's father, a Christian who just happened to work for an aerospace defense contractor (ITT), nixed our plans. I think it went against his sense of pride in America's achievement and other core values. He no doubt thought he was doing the right thing by prohibiting us. However, my friend and I just wanted to go fun, not due to a lack of pride in our country. To this day, I still haven't seen that movie, although I wouldn't be surprised if my friend's father has seen it. Well, perhaps he saved us a few bucks....

Regarding the conclusion that there's no excuse for God creating a universe with laws that allow disease to exist, who's to definitely judge? Of course we can think about it (and it's based on a valid question), but, in short, that seems to be a conclusion extended without proof that doesn't necessarily follow. Has the concluder actually spent any time at all trying to think of ways in which such a universe would be justified? For example, we're learning every day how fearfully and wonderfully made the human body is, such a delicate balance of control systems such as the immune system to keep us running. And without bacteria, viruses and so on, we clearly wouldn't be here in this form, even though those entities can also be our enemies. Sure, I, too, am still looking for a significant purpose for mosquitoes. While it's possible that we'll learn that they have an important immunizing function someday, I won't hold my breath. Who knows, maybe they just exist in the grand scheme of things that allows all the other things to exist. Anyway, based on the Biblical account (I know, just one view), you're right, a better universe existed in the past and will again in the future. But as to judging the Judge, that's a bit far for me, although we all have our bad days. Still, by asking questions, we can learn if we really think about them from all angles. And sometimes, it's enlightening to just think about all the things that we don't know to give perspective to the things that we think we do know.

J_Retsapdoog

@jswilson64:
As with the link I posted, where are the pics? Sure, all the pics would prove is that we dropped equipment on the moon. But at least if it all coincided with that was supposed to have happened it would be more believable.

Providing proof shouldn't be this hard...

JEmlay

Seems more like a Penn & Teller: Bullshit (ShowTime) topic to tackle, rather than Mythbusters...

distortedloop

@J_Retsapdoog:
On "judging" the 'designer':
I'm not so much judging "God" as I am saying how implausible the concept of intelligent design is. Whatever character allegedly allows such pain and torment to living things is beyond my comprehension as a being of compassion-that's another discussion. The whole crux of the ID argument is that living things are too complex, too harmonius given their structures and interaction in their environments to have come from chance. There are a couple of assumptions there that simply don't make sense. If we can prove that there are any situations where the design could be improved, or better suited to its environment, the argument for ID unravels. Clearly, the appendix is more of a hassle than it is a service to us. At best, it is useless. At worst, it is fatal. An all-knowing, all-powerful designer could clearly have designed something better. How do I know? Because this being is all-powerful. To indicate, as you have, that some external purpose exists undercuts this being's ability to design, and therefore undercuts this being's power. Bacteria and viruses do have purpose in our world, as some are beneficial. But this isn't because it couldn't be any other way. If we assume it couldn't be, then we are saying the designer isn't all-powerful or not as bright as we'd imagine. I know you don't think that. By your own admission, you state that without bacteria and viruses we wouldn't be here in this form, but that doesn't mean we couldn't be here in another form in a world that exists without them. And so by knowing that the world we live in could have been designed better but was not, this idea of 'the ultimate designer' is only defended by means of rationalizing the necessity and unknowable nature of a designer rather than providing an example (any example) of intelligent design that can't be supported through natural processes.

s8ist

@bobdobbs:

How dare you use the image of our BOB and blaspheme his name as yours? Bob will seek vengance upon you!!

Dr.Remulak

oh for goodness sake. This was the space race against the Russians. Do you really think that the russians just accepted they went to the moon without investigating it at all, looking at the technology they had.. ect. If they had shown it was fake to Russia and the american people, it would have destroyed american creadability and the american people would hav lost a lot of faith in the government.

freo

Are they also going to be doing a segment on time travel? It would work out nicely since the spot says the episode will be airing on August 6th!

Standybyon2

@MichelleDatsun:
No kidding! Because if we could fly to the moon in 1969, we should have also had "stealth" planes that could fly at, say, three times the speed of sound at 85k feet or so while taking accurate photographs of the places they flew over. And we all know we didn't have that.

stormsweeper