I have a student who claims that a "coworker" read an article about a big coverup regarding large glass buildings on the farside of the Moon. The article claimed that Apollo 8 actually ran into these glass buildings and increased the altitude of its orbit to compensate. According to the article, all images of the farside of the Moon are actually of a small region repeated over and over again.

Upon further questioning, the student said that the article never really got published, but that the magazine was not allowed to publish that issue under threat from the Feds.

So, let's summarize my situation: I have been asked to refute a magazine article that never existed. And the student still clings to the conspiracy. This despite showing him several different images from different spacecraft at different resolutions of the farside of the Moon. This despite informing him that the magazine in question did not exist yet when this article was supposededly published. This despite the fact that glass would reflect quite brightly. This despite the fact that the Russians orbited the Moon first (unmanned, of course) and our two countries would have had to collaborate on a conspiracy at a time when the goal was to defeat the other.

So, what more could I do? I basically entered into a contract with the student, which should go unstated, but I guess I have to state the obvious with this guy. "You may ask me any question. If I don't know the answer, I'll admit that. I'll find out the answer if I can. But, if I do know the answer, respect me as a content expert and accept my answer as the truth." We shook hands on the deal. I'll be interested in how he likes lab this week - we'll be looking at the Moon.