>>20354798Logical Fallacies:
Appeal to Incredulity (Argument from Incredulity):
This fallacy occurs when someone concludes that something must be false because they find it difficult to believe or understand. In this case, the argument hinges on the disbelief that a less powerful computer could manage the task of guiding a moon landing, without considering the broader context or understanding how the technology was applied.
False Equivalence:
This fallacy involves equating two things that are not really equivalent. Comparing the guidance computer of the moon lander to a kids' toy from the 1980s is misleading because the functions, requirements, and contexts of these devices are vastly different. The guidance computer was designed specifically for the task of navigating space, with different engineering principles, software, and redundancy measures.
Historical Ignorance:
The argument ignores the historical context and the ingenuity of the engineers and scientists of the 1960s. The Apollo guidance computer was a marvel of engineering for its time, designed to perform specific tasks with the available technology. Advances in technology often make previous accomplishments seem less impressive, but this does not mean they were not possible or real.
In conclusion, the moon landing was a remarkable achievement that involved the best technology and human ingenuity of the time. The relative computational power of the AGC compared to later devices does not diminish its capability or the success of the Apollo missions. The argument against the moon landing based on this comparison misunderstands the broader context and the nature of technological progress.
