1) The one making the claim bears the burden of providing sufficient evidence.

2) Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.

3) NASA's claim that "we went to the Moon and returned safely, six times, without a single fatality" is by far the most extraordinary claim in the history of science. It therefore requires a similarly monumental level of totally irrefutable evidence.

4) The scientist's standard of proof is independent reproducibility. Some independent party, using the same methods and apparatus, must produce the same results.

In re the "Moon landings," this means that another entity, not in any way beholden to NASA or the United States, must get to the Moon and back safely using the same rocket, computer, space suits, etc.

5) The historian's standard of proof is independent confirmation. Some honest independent party must irrefutably verify the claim.

In re the "Moon landings," this means that another entity, not in any way beholden to NASA or the United States, and of known honesty, must verify that humans reached the Moon, walked around there, and returned safely.

6) The judge's standard of proof is the testimony, under oath and cross-examination, of multiple honest witnesses.

In re the "Moon landings," this means that the astronauts, engineers, and NASA executives must all testify under oath to their extraordinary claim, with cross-examination by knowledgeable skeptics.

7) NASA has not met any of these standards of proof--not even the last, which is the simplest: Putting the astronauts, engineers, and executives under oath and submitting them to cross-examination by skeptics. It is now too late, of course--too many of them have died, including Neil Armstrong.