6

In this video around 2:25 on programmer stereotypes it is mentioned in the part named female programmers that the code Margaret Hamilton wrote for the Apollo mission was so flawless that some use it as evidence that the moon landing never happened.

Is it that true was code quality ever used as moon landing denial fodder? Seems a bit odd to me. I realise that video is satirical in nature. It may be hard to take it seriously by that part really did make me wonder.

Improve this question
7
  • Dear commenters, welcome to Skeptics! Please note that we don't accept speculation, discussion and pseudo-answers in comments here. Please use the answer box below, and be sure to provide references to support your claims.
    – Oddthinking ♦
    Jun 7 at 23:08
  • 1
    Was the code flawless? There's the infamous 1201 and 1202 alarms.
    – Schwern
    Aug 7 at 15:56
  • 1
    @Schwern: The software reacted perfectly to a situation caused by the hardware. The software did all that it was intended to do - and more. Its resiliency handled a hardware error that no one had expected.
    – JRE
    Aug 7 at 16:27
  • @Schwern, there was a long discussion about this in comments a couple of months ago. I argued that the code worked as intended, detecting and reporting a situation that it knew it couldn't handle. Others argued that since it couldn't handle it, the code wasn't perfect. That discussion has since been deleted, and it looks like it's about to start up again.
    – Ray Butterworth
    Aug 7 at 16:42
  • 4
    I think the answer is "yes, everything has been used to deny the Moon landing, often in contradictory ways". This question seems to ask us to hunt for a "notable" claim which I don't think we do here; this isn't a conspiracy finding service. A more interesting question might be about the premise: is the "flawless" code execution proof against the Moon landing? Was it really flawless?
    – Schwern
    Aug 9 at 17:30

0

Reset to default

You must log in to answer this question.

Browse other questions tagged .