Insofar as I believe only what I am confident is factually correct, absent your representation that reality is different than what can be supported with empirical evidence, as I did when confronted with evidence that SARS2 was not a fatal plague, I will maintain my skepticism of all narratives.
I do not cling to beliefs that are contrary to verifiable evidence, as you have seen. Neither do I consider evidence to be proof. Science depends on falsifiability, not proof. Newton's cosmology was unfalsified for centuries, and many rational people accepted it had been proved - until Einstein's relativity disproved it.
That does not mean Einstein's theory is proved. Merely that it has not been falsified yet. This is what I mean when I say proof is not a scientific concept.
So, what are the evidence because of which you believe that NASA put the man on the Moon?
Oops. I replied to me rather than you on accident.
Sorry.
Sagan stated well the observation that extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. There is voluminous evidence of the Apollo program. As you note, not all of the evidence supports every aspect of the official story. I am aware of none that falsifies the central thesis of the moon landing.
What I do believe is that evidence provides clues to events people did not personally participate in, and that's all we can form opinions on. I am confident that I am incapable of stating with certitude this or that thing I did not participate in personally did or did not happen in thus and such a way. However, despite that there is evidence that falsifies some claims made by NASA, there is no evidence that all claims made by NASA regarding the Apollo missions are false. While this does not prove we landed on the moon, neither does it disprove it, and the preponderance of evidence is that we did.
Sadly, almost all that evidence comes from NASA, which seems to me to be shown to be duplicitous, and their claims to be strongly deprecated as a result. Basically, if someone described human anatomy precisely but stated we had six toes and fingers on each appendage, I would only be able to discount that latter claim partially, and not dismiss the anatomical description entirely, and that for something of which I have very personal familiarity, unlike the Apollo missions.
Further, I have very little reason to care if we did or did not land on the moon. I am content to lay this issue to rest as unresolved as is, and find the evidence the CIA assassinated Kennedy of far more significance to me personally than whether NASA completely forged evidence of Apollo missions - which I am sure even you will grant is almost inconceivably impossible, given the almost 100% certainty that they did launch Saturn V's repeatedly, with people in them.
I hope this explains my reticence in declaring certitude regarding this matter.
You are basically saying that a massive false info is enough for you to believe that something impossible is actually possible.
And in this movie “What Happened on the Moon?” you have a fact that with the photo equipment and film presented, it was not possible to make a single quality photo on the Moon surface.
Even without a film you have a fact that NASA today is searching a way to go through the Van Allen Belt… And all the fantastic technology that made them doing it in 1969 is now destroyed?! Even blueprints for a ‘second ignition engine’, so Elon Musk must do everything from the scratch?
You have just found your limit, @valued-customer. Just as I did believing in that famous sentence “If they hadn’t landed, the Soviets would have announced it!”.
And then, I’ve start learning from my limitations. Will you be able too?