New Theory About The Moon

Since there are conspiracies, political, criminal or otherwise, at what point  do you discern a conspiracy theory from actual events unfolding and stop belittling people who may be scrutinizing things you feel safer not knowing about?

Was Watergate a conspiracy theory before it broke in the Washington Post?

Do you scoff at so called conspiracy theorists for accusing the elite of secret meetings at Bohemian Grove north of San Francisco? Or do you feel more comfortable with descriptions by people like G Domhoff who in  one breath tell us no business goes on there, no secret deals- and the next describes how Nixon and Reagan conspired there to avoid confrontation in the primaries of the 1968 Presidential election to preserve the GOP's campaign war chest, while agreeing one would bow out if he appeared unelectable in the final race? Yet because of assurances by Domhoff in his academia landmark work "there are no conspiracies" this subversion of our democratic system, which, if not for Robert Kennedy's assasination, would have altered history enormously, remains unknown to the American people.

This is but one example of soundly ridiculed beliefs of "conspiracy theorists" which have factual evidence to substantiate events but remain fodder for smug blinder wearing people.

I don't share the skepticism about us going to the moon. However I take great suspicion in people who express such sneering contempt for anyone who seeks to look past the superficial or accepted historical line, when there are flags begging them to do so.