My Opinion on the Moon Hoax
A conspiracy theory has existed for years now stating that the Moon landings of the Apollo missions were faked by NASA. A television program presented this theory and convinced many people that it was true. Its very easy to show that all the evidence presented to support the theory could be explained without having to resort to the extreme explanations shown in the program.
Here's a list of the "evidence" and my explanation of it...
Evidence: No stars appear in the background sky of photos.
Evidence: Camera cross hairs appear behind bright objects being photographed.
Evidence: Some photos show shadows from different objects at different angles. If all the
light comes from the Sun shouldn't they be parallel?
Evidence: Why can we see objects in shadow if the Sun is the only source of light?
Evidence: The flag waves in the breeze (there is no air, therefore no breeze, on the
Evidence: The photograph of Aldrin by Armstrong shows the top of his head. How was this
Evidence: Who photographed Armstrong during his first descent of the ladder to the Moon?
Evidence: The Moon photographs are too good, especially considering the camera was attached
to the front of the astronaut's suit. How did they frame them so well?
Evidence: Some of the video is faked because you can see right through the astronauts.
Evidence: Why is there no communications lag during radio transmissions?
Evidence: The "moon buggy" was too big to fit in the lander.
Evidence: The lander was filmed during takeoff. No one was left on the moon so who could have
Evidence: The slow motion effect of walking and driving on the Moon is simply normal motion
run at half speed.
Evidence: During takeoff from the Moon there is no flame from the lander engine.
Evidence: The dust on the surface of the Moon clumps like it is wet. There is no water on
the surface of the Moon. How is this possible?
Evidence: Why is there no dust on the lander's feet?
Evidence: The dust should stay in the air longer because of the lower gravity.
Evidence: Why is there no crater caused by the rocket engine under the lander?
Evidence: The computers available at the time weren't sufficient to control the mission.
Evidence: Why can't we see the parts of the landers left on the Moon through telescopes?
Evidence: Why do objects in the background of photos re-appear in different photos?
Evidence: Two videos of astronauts on the same hill are presented by NASA as if they
are different hills when they obviously aren't.
Evidence: Why weren't the astronauts killed by the radiation in space?
Evidence: The heat on the lunar surface during the day is too much for the astronauts to
Evidence: A rock photographed on the Moon has a "C" written on it? Is this fake?
Fact: Rocks from space have been analysed by many geologists and have been confirmed as not being from Earth.
Fact: Many scientific experiments on Earth have used mirrors left on the Moon to bounce lasers. How did they get there if the Apollo missions never happened?
As you can see, none of the explanations are particularly complicated. Its hard to see how the conspiracy theory believers and the TV show producers couldn't have discovered at least some, if not all, of these. I am forced to conclude that they either didn't try to find an alternative explanation, or conveniently ignored any that were produced.
Comment by Anonymous on 2007-04-27 at 03:19:31: Or another angle, if they did go there and after 8 years of planning did someone on the team ever have the notion that people might not believe it a suggest leaving a radio transmitter (or something other than mirrors) for the waiting world? (Separate discussion on how mirrors large enough to be used from earth were left on the moon, when we can't even see the whole moon lander vehicle?) If you go to GoogleMoon and see the swiss cheese photo then you have to start questioning this whole thing...
Comment by OJB on 2007-04-27 at 15:51:06: I don't think the problem of whether people would believe they had been there or not was a high priority in planning the missions! How would a radio transmitter have been any more credible than mirrors? Bouncing a laser off a carefully positioned mirror and imaging the lander are two entirely different things. There's nothing particularly strange in that. Yes, that cheese is suspicious all right. There's obviously a cover up there. Google are involved in the conspiracy by refusing to provide high definition photos and substituting cheese instead! So much for “Don’t Be Evil”!
Comment by Alex on 2011-05-30 at 16:56:02: The nature of discussing the “Moon Hoax” evidences is that both sides are wrong and right sometimes. It is the whole picture that really counts. (Having sad that I will not attempt to give my view of the whole picture – would be to long - merely one topic.) NASA images: AS15-87-11695, AS15-87-11696, AS15-87-11697, AS15-87-11698, AS15-87-11699 http://history.nasa.gov/alsj/a15/AS15-87-11696HR.jpg http://history.nasa.gov/alsj/a15/AS15-87-11695HR.jpg http://history.nasa.gov/alsj/a15/AS15-87-11...
Comment by OJB on 2011-05-30 at 22:45:00: At least one of those photos is from Apollo 10 which didn't even land on the Moon. It was used for testing docking near the Moon. Nothing too mysterious there then. Here's a reference for photo AS15-87-1169: http://www.daviddarling.info/encyclopedia/A/Apollo_10.html
This discussion has been shortened. View the full discussion, or add your own comments here.