So was it wrong then to assume that by “living memory” you meant the definition of living memory? A definition I gave above, as per your own request? When it came to that, the only thing I asked was about the differentiation between directly and indirectly, otherwise I was going by said definition. I was also going by the definition of “scientific”, whilst anyone who says a “feat of engineering” does not fall under “scientific” is not. Neither did I say the scientific shortcomings were technological in nature.

To not believe something does not necessitate being a positive claim, it is the aversion to one, as per the OP’s question, which nobody else has issue with seeing as fitting their criteria, and neither am I out to convert anyone to the belief, it’s a simple example of me disagreeing with the scientific community (in this case NASA) on something, so you asking me for proof provided by me and then being dissatisfied when it doesn’t meet your standard of what constitutes proof is your problem, not mine, which negates and perhaps even reverses your last sentence, especially as that too is not outside the criteria of the OP, which not only doesn’t exclude even subjectively concluded answers but openly condemns what you are doing right now with singling me out when it requests everyone be chill towards each other.