📢
16
c/conspiracy-debates•jason112jason112•2mo ago

A guy at the Denver meetup said my moon landing proof was weak

He pointed out my main source was a 2004 documentary, not primary footage. I switched to checking NASA's own mission logs instead. Anyone else had their go-to evidence shot down like that?
3 comments

Log in to join the discussion

Log In
3 Comments
brown.reese
That's a tough way to learn, but switching to primary sources is the best move. It makes your argument way stronger for next time. Happens to everyone when they dig deeper into a topic!
2
julia622
julia6222mo ago
Wait, you were using a documentary from 2004 as your main proof? Seriously? That's like trying to sell a house with a blurry photo from a flip phone. Of course it got shot down. Primary sources are the only thing that holds up in a real argument. Good on you for switching to the actual mission logs, that's the only way anyone will take you seriously. Never lead with the re-enactment stuff.
0
dylanbarnes
My buddy tried citing a 1998 History Channel special in a geology debate and got laughed right out of the thread.
1