Some people seem to forget that this site is based on refuting crazy ideas, and that without those ideas this site wouldn't even exist, and, most important, that without talking about even the craziest ideas, those ideas will never go away. I'm really disappointed that some of you make such a big deal out of this, when I simply wanted a few opinions, opinions from people who I am beginning to trust that they know what they're talking about, and that are more experienced in some domains.
I understand that some of the responses may seem antagonistic. But some people may have read the question as directly promoting a lunar hoax conspiracy. I don't think that you intended to give that impression, but I can see how some may have interpreted it as such. Therefore, some people may have responded defensively to what they perceived as promotion of an old conspiracy theory. Yet another instance highlighting the wondrous ambiguity of internet communication. :)
But I also do think that there is a fundamental difference between questioning religious assertions and questioning scientific assertions. The former are based entirely upon metaphysical claims, while the latter are firmly rooted in empirical evidence. NASA's claim of having visited the moon is supported by a wealth of evidence, while religious claims for the existence of God are precariously spun upon slippery philosophical conundrums.
In short, the lunar landing is supported by material evidence while the existence of God is supported by immaterial arguments. Questioning the lunar landing is done by examining the evidence that supports the claim. Questioning the existence of God is done by examining the arguments that support the claim. To date, no serious flaws have been found with the evidence supporting the lunar landing while innumerable flaws have been found with the arguments supporting the existence of God.
Nonetheless, it is an interesting topic. I mean, I wouldn't have sat through the entire hour that Mythbusters spent debunking it if it were boring. But I have always had a soft spot for conspiracy theories. Next to apocalyptic scenarios, I think that they reveal fascinating tendencies of the human psyche.
It mostly seems a little odd to ask for opinions on a matter where we have well-established facts.
Is this site about refuting crazy ideas, or is it more about reinforcing rational ones?
"To the rest, shame on you."
Shame has never really been my strong suit.
There seem to be like 425,000 results for 'proof that god exists' too. I'll still choose a topic over here first than anything else.
Like I've said before, I was interested in opinions, and mostly in opinions why haven't we been back there. I'm not from Jehova's Witnesses going door-to-door and actually wasting people's time. I'm going to assume that you have reached a certain phase that you don't do anything you don't want to do. Nobody twisted your arm. I really can't understand where you get that 'wasting everyone's time' from. There are a lot of topics on this website. Do you feel that you have to be a part of every single one? No. You are a part of those you want to be a part of. It can't be any simpler than that.
Am I going to go crazy because someone else started a new topic about the fear of death, just because the last post in my own topic about the fear of death was made less than a month ago? Or that people have been talking about the fear of death for a very very long time? No. I did point the creator of that new topic to my own discussion and gave him one advice about the whole fear of death thing that was given to me and that I found useful. But that's all I am going to do, because nobody can force me to do anything I don't want to do. And I really hope that everybody in this website feels the same way.