One of the most successful ways to emotionally discredit something is to parody it in a way that makes fun of it.

I've seen some interesting stuff regarding the moon landing and official documents (primarily photos) to "prove" that it occurred. It's possible that the moon landing happened (as originally described by "official" sources) but that they decided to use faked photos taken from a studio because they were more "appealing" from a PR standpoint to encourage further exploration into space (and consequently, more money toward NASA).

I've seen arguments suggesting that NASA lacked the technology necessary to survive travel through the radiation belt covering the earth (at least at the time).

I've seen arguments suggesting that even if the original NASA moon landing was faked, that we've been to the moon (and perhaps other planets) since then, perhaps via assistance from extra terrestrials that several world governments have been in communication with for some time.

Lots of different ways to slice that one. But it could fall under "Planetary History".

That vague argument could easily go both ways. If the earth is indeed flat, then there should be a comprehensive "Flat Earth Model" which is able to explain all of the flat earth theory phenomenon simultaneously without any one aspect of it discrediting another. If you know of such a model, please let me know.

I'm not sure that a scale of "the more vilified a conspiracy theory is, the more likely it is true" is a good way to determine the truthfulness of the theory. The theory, if true, should be able to stand on its own regardless of how much or how little emotionally charged criticism is thrown its way.

Thank you for the link, currently watching it. Biggest issue I'm noticing is that the assumed perspective of gravitational direction is totally off. It's attempting to project a flat-earth model of gravitational direction to a spherical body of mass (south pole always being "down", and where everything should be "falling off" the earth). Stopping to consider the gravitational direction of a spherical body of mass (one as large as a planet anyway), the "down" direction is always towards the center of the planet, whereas "up" is always away from the center of the planet. All things that are affected by gravity (such as water) would form a "spherical shell" around a spherical planet in this particular model of gravity. Still watching.

Edit: Finished watching. The biggest (and most glaring) issue I see is that there is no singular, all-inclusive "Flat Earth Model" which simultaneously explains all "Flat Earth Phenomenon". Seasons, daylight cycles, astrology, cyclonic weather patterns, eclipses, etc. There is no comprehensive "Flat Earth Model", inasmuch as I have seen. But if you can find one, please let me know.