Nah. Easy way to see this is to derive (or look up) the expressions for the gravitational potential due to a sphere and due to a uniform plane. Then, fit the actual gravitational potential using known weights and simple gear to the same nonlinearities found in the two derivations. The spherical expression should be a much closer match. My undergraduate college physics course actually had a unit where we fit the gravitational potential, so it’s extremely technically easy to do. In particular, the plane expression does not change with height. If you’re very careful, you can probably measure the difference between performing the experiment at sea level versus at high elevation. This difference is predicted in the spherical expression.
Also, if the Earth was flat, then straight lines would be the shortest trajectories (geodesic lines) along the Earth, and airliners would fly these trajectories, modulo war zones and other no-fly zones, to save money. In fact, airliners fly long haul flights in patterns that “look curved” on any flat map. These are the shortest paths on the sphere of the Earth. This is because topologically speaking, a flat plane surface has one global chart, whereas there is no global chart for the sphere, so any chart map will distort the true distances compared to the original sphere. (The neat thing about the theory of manifolds is that all these words have technical mathematical definitions that basically line up with their plain English usage.) This shows that, at least when it comes to flying airplanes, i.e. what ways you are allowed to traverse the sphere as a two-dimensional manifold, the Earth is topologically equivalent to a sphere.
This one is harder to demonstrate without a bit of money.
But also…if it never happened, why would the Soviet Union have let the government win the Space Race? There was enough historical and scientific evidence at the time for all world powers to conclude that it must have happened.
You believe it but you can’t rely on the USSR for a disproof. The USSR has an advantage if the US population doesn’t push for the technological progress to be able to do spaceflight. Then there are no ICBMs and the USSR is more secure.
I think ICBM’s predate the moon landing, e.g. the Minuteman I. Like if faked the moon landing, I’m not sure why it would make sense for the USSR not to have taken advantage of that, because it would have been an excellent opportunity to embarrass on the world stage.
Also, that’s more of a “side quest”. IMO the fact that you can physically verify that we have been to the moon is more important to me personally. Better evidence still is the abundance of third-party evidence, since neither the USSR nor is trustworthy IMO.
Nah. Easy way to see this is to derive (or look up) the expressions for the gravitational potential due to a sphere and due to a uniform plane. Then, fit the actual gravitational potential using known weights and simple gear to the same nonlinearities found in the two derivations. The spherical expression should be a much closer match. My undergraduate college physics course actually had a unit where we fit the gravitational potential, so it’s extremely technically easy to do. In particular, the plane expression does not change with height. If you’re very careful, you can probably measure the difference between performing the experiment at sea level versus at high elevation. This difference is predicted in the spherical expression.
Also, if the Earth was flat, then straight lines would be the shortest trajectories (geodesic lines) along the Earth, and airliners would fly these trajectories, modulo war zones and other no-fly zones, to save money. In fact, airliners fly long haul flights in patterns that “look curved” on any flat map. These are the shortest paths on the sphere of the Earth. This is because topologically speaking, a flat plane surface has one global chart, whereas there is no global chart for the sphere, so any chart map will distort the true distances compared to the original sphere. (The neat thing about the theory of manifolds is that all these words have technical mathematical definitions that basically line up with their plain English usage.) This shows that, at least when it comes to flying airplanes, i.e. what ways you are allowed to traverse the sphere as a two-dimensional manifold, the Earth is topologically equivalent to a sphere.
Also nah.
https://wtop.com/science/2019/07/the-experiment-still-running-on-the-moon-and-tv-re-runs-50-years-later/
This one is harder to demonstrate without a bit of money.
But also…if it never happened, why would the Soviet Union have let the
government win the Space Race? There was enough historical and scientific evidence at the time for all world powers to conclude that it must have happened.
If it never happened, wouldn’t the Soviet Union be the winner? Why disturb the propaganda of the US?
Yes, exactly. I’m trying to say the moon landing did happen.
You believe it but you can’t rely on the USSR for a disproof. The USSR has an advantage if the US population doesn’t push for the technological progress to be able to do spaceflight. Then there are no ICBMs and the USSR is more secure.
I think ICBM’s predate the moon landing, e.g. the Minuteman I. Like if
faked the moon landing, I’m not sure why it would make sense for the USSR not to have taken advantage of that, because it would have been an excellent opportunity to embarrass 
on the world stage.
Also, that’s more of a “side quest”. IMO the fact that you can physically verify that we have been to the moon is more important to me personally. Better evidence still is the abundance of third-party evidence, since neither the USSR nor
is trustworthy IMO.
If the moon landing is fake then the ICBMs can be fake, too.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third-party_evidence_for_Apollo_Moon_landings
That’s an interesting site.
God I wish ICBMs were fake 😞