Debate: Was the moon landing fake?

Question

Arguments for (yes! it was fake):

- The flags were moving in the films, but the moon has no air!!

- The shadows were all in opposite directions in the pictures, but the sun was supposed to be the only light source!!

- If Neil Armstrong was the first man on the moon then who filmed him?

- Why were all the astronoughts who "knew too much" "killed" before the moon-landing?

- The radiation - humans wouldn't have been able to survive it!!!

- Why have there been no other trips to the moon. This is 2008. If they could do it in 1969 they surely could do it now!!!

Arguments against the fact that it was fake:

- Sorry I don't have any. If you know any please tell me!!!

So, was it fake???

Answer 1

>>Arguments for (yes! it was fake):

- The flags were moving in the films, but the moon has no air!!<<

The flags moved ONLY when being moved by an astronaut. Once they are deployed and the oscillations die away the flags remain *totally* static unless touched again. This is next t impossible to achieve in anything *but* a vacuum.

But answer me this: who would be so unbelievably *stupid* as to have a wind blowing across a set they were trying to fake an airless environment on?

>>- The shadows were all in opposite directions in the pictures, but the sun was supposed to be the only light source!!<<

There *is* only one light source in all the photos. Multiple light sources cast multiple shadows. The effects of a wide angle lens as wasused on the camera, perspective and the fact that the ground was not flat and level are all the explanation needed for the shadows. Go out and look at the shadows one evening and see if you can find any that are actually parallel, especially if, for example, you happen to stand between two large posts. See how their shadows converge just light railway lines as they go into the distance?

>>- If Neil Armstrong was the first man on the moon then who filmed him?<<

The camera was mounted on the outside of the LM on a sprung arm that Armstrong deployed when he was just outisde the hatch. It snapped into position aimed at the ladder and Aldrin switched it on from inside the cabin. A TV camera does not need a person behind it to operate.

>>- Why were all the astronoughts who "knew too much" "killed" before the moon-landing?<<

Which astronauts would these be? Gus Grissom, perhaps, killed in the Apollo 1 fire? If you were trying to silence a amn would you do it by destroying a multi-million dollar piece of equipment in an 'accident' that creates a PR frenzy and brings a full public enquiry onto the project you're trying to fake? Why not just kill him in the street or sabotage his jet?

>>- The radiation - humans wouldn't have been able to survive it!!!<<

Unprotected, maybe, but they *were* protected. The main radiation danger in space is particle radiation (that's what the van Allen belts are), and that is best shielded by materials lke aluminium and plastic. Guess what the spacecraft was made from.

Additionally, if the radiation was so intense that Apollo could not have happened then *someone* would have noticed by now. NASA does not have a monopoly on information about space. Billions of dollars of revenue in private enterprise rely on accurate data about the van Allen belts (that's where most communications satellites spend their entire operational lives). If it was too much for a manned vehicle to traverse someone would ahve said something.

You might also look up the Russian Zond 5 mission, which sent live animals round the Moon, none of which suffered any ill effects from radiaiton.

>>- Why have there been no other trips to the moon. This is 2008. If they could do it in 1969 they surely could do it now!!!<<

Money and political will. NASA was funded by the taxpayer, who agreed to foot the bill as a means of beating the evil commies to the Moon and proving their superiority. Once that was achieved with Apollo 11 the interest waned. The budget was being cut even before the first manned Apollo flight left Earth. Once the missions sent back lots and lots of TV of men digging up rocks in a grey landscape interest waned still further. NASA has never had the money or the mandate to do it, and no other country has even wanted to until now.

>>Arguments against the fact that it was fake:

- Sorry I don't have any. If you know any please tell me!!!<<

The arguments against it being faked are the hours and hours of film and TV, the thousands upon thousands of photographs, the surviving hardware, the documentary paper trail, the existence of facilities that are still used today (Mission Control in Houston and the Launch Complex 39 did not exist until Apoll and are still used today for the shuttle), the personal testimonies of the people involved, and the hundreds of kilos of lunar rock and soil samples that have been unanimously agreed by geologists the world over did not originate on earth and are definitely not meteorites.

But most tellig of all, in my view, is that the NASA version of events is consistent, coherent and progresses logically from design through contruction, test flights and finally manned ,unar landings. No conspiracy theorist has yet been able to offer a credible alternative. It is not enough to pick holes in the story. If you cannot provide an alternative version of events then there is nothing to argue about.

Answer 2

Luna 2 was the first spacecraft to reach the surface of the Moon, and it impacted the lunar surface west of Mare Serenitatis near the Aristides, Archimedes, and Autolycus craters.[1]

Organization Soviet Union

Mission type Lunar Science

Lunar impact

Launch September 12, 1959 at 06:39:42 UTC

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luna_2

The Soviet spaceprobe Luna 3 (E-3 series) was the third spacecraft sent successfully to the moon and was an early triumph in the human exploration of outer space. Though it returned rather poor pictures by later standards, the historic, never-before-seen views of the Moon's far side caused excitement and interest when they were published around the world.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luna_3

Luna 9 (E-6 series), also known as Lunik 9 (internal name E-6 N. 13), was an unmanned space mission of the Soviet Union's Luna program. On February 3, 1966 the Luna 9 spacecraft was the first spacecraft to achieve a lunar soft landing and to transmit photographic data to Earth.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luna_9

Luna 13 (E-6M series) was an unmanned space mission of the Luna program, also called Lunik 13. The Luna 13 spacecraft was launched toward the Moon from an earth-orbiting platform and accomplished a soft landing on December 24, 1966, in the region of Oceanus Procellarum.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luna_13

Not until 7 years after the Russians had already made several spaceship landings on the moon did the Americans finally make their first one.

Surveyor 1 was the first lunar lander in the American Surveyor program that explored the Moon landed June 2, 1966

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Surveyor_1

Answer 3

Yeah, the moon landing was faked.

So were the Challenger and Columbia Space Shuttle Explosions, along with all the other excursions into outer space, the Mercury program, Gemini, Voyager probes, the Hubble Space Telescope, the International Space Station, all fake. Area 51 is fake also, NORAD under Cheyanne Mountain in Colorado Springs never existed.

Sarchasm Intended, get a life.

Answer 4

There HAVE been other trips to the moon.  In all, 12 brave Americans walked on the moon...the evidence is overwhelming:

Yes, it really happened. The fact that there's even a question is both an insult and a tribute to the hundreds of thousands of scientists, engineers, contracters, and sub contracters as well as the brave astronauts that made it all happen...(by the way, not ONE of these people have come forward to say it was faked).

It is difficult to summarise the evidence in support of the landings because there is so much of it. However the following points cover the main bodies of evidence:

Moon Rocks

The most compelling evidence is the 382 kilograms of moon rocks brought back to Earth by the Apollo missions. These samples have been independently analysed by geologists from all over the world for more than thirty years. The conclusion is basically 100 percent unanimous - these rocks could not have originated on Earth and must have come from the moon.

Perhaps these rocks were brought back by robotic missions? Not possible - the technology was not available at the time.

What about moon rocks found in Antarctica? Finding 382 kilograms of diverse rocks - exactly the kind geologists would have chosen to study - seems somewhat unlikely.

Film and Photographs

There is a massive repository of film and photographic evidence. Although many of the hoax theories attempt to discredit this evidence, none succeed. In any case the sheer volume of photographic evidence is staggering.

Witnesses

At the peak of the Apollo program, nearly half a million people were directly involved. Although most were far from mission control, it seems highly unlikely that a hoax could have been kept secret from them all. Notably, not one single employee has come forward with any credible hoax evidence.

Laser Reflector

The Apollo 11 mission left a laser reflector at its landing site. This reflector has been used ever since to measure things such as the precise distance to the moon. Anyone with the correct equipment can use it.

Russia

The Russians were watching the USA space programme like hawks and analysing everything the Americans did. If there was the slightest suggestion that a hoax was happening, the Russians would have been falling over themselves to tell the world about it.

Future Plans

In January 2004 President Bush announced a new initiative to return to the moon, and called on other nations to become involved in the project. Why would he do this (especially the part about inviting other countries to participate) if the landings had been faked?

Motive

Finally, did NASA actually have a motive to attempt a hoax? If not, the rest of the argument is irrelevant.

Answer 5

Allow me to debunk each of your complaints seperately:

1. The flags were supported by stiff wires, which, when bumped, oscillated back and forth.  With no air to damp the vibration, it went on for some time.

2.  The shadows are all aligned with a single light source.  I don't know what picture you were looking at...

3.  Armstrong got out of the lander, set up the camera, climbed back in, then filmed himself getting out again.  It was all for dramatic effect.

4.  Three astronauts were killed in a fire on the Apollo 1 launch pad.  No astronauts have been assassinated.

5.  You obviously don't understand what radiation is.  Radiation is light, whether it's radio light, microwave light, infrared light, visible light, ultraviolet light, x-ray light, or gamma ray light.  It's all light.  Plus, the astronauts were wearing tinted visors that blocked the harmful ultraviolet light.  You can find similar technology on your car windshield and sunglasses.

6.  Going to the Moon is expensive, and administrative and public interest was low.  It was deemed that there was nothing of interest left to explore.

Arguments against the landings being a hoax:

1.  The astronauts set up retroreflectors on the surface of the Moon on four different missions that can be seen TO THIS DAY by any amateur astronomer with a powerful laser and a telescope.

2.  It would be impossible to conceal such a hoax from the public, given the thousands of people that worked to build the Saturn V rocket and lunar lander.

Answer 6

Q) The flags were moving in the films, but the moon has no air!!

A)  What the deniers fail to mention is that there is a solar wind in space, it is not dead still.  Space like the Earth is always in motion, nothing stands still and there is no such thing as "calm."  There's been talk for years about solar sail equipped vehicles.  

Q)  The shadows were all in opposite directions in the pictures, but the sun was supposed to be the only light source!!

A)  Stand with your back to the sun and hold a broom stick straight up.  See where the shadow is?  Tilt the broom stick to the side and away from you.  Which way is the shadow going now?  It's not going to running directly opposite the sun. A long straight object can be oriented so its shadow is parallel to the light shining on it.

Q)  If Neil Armstrong was the first man on the moon then who filmed him?

A)  It's possible he was filmed a second time, but this does not detract from the fact we landed on the moon.

Q)  Why were all the astronoughts who "knew too much" "killed" before the moon-landing?

A)  Conspiracy theorists unite!  

Q)  The radiation - humans wouldn't have been able to survive it!!!

A)  The Van Allen radiation belts are at inconsistent depths, and the moon missions went through the thinnest areas at 30,000+ miles per hour.  

Q) Why have there been no other trips to the moon. This is 2008. If they could do it in 1969 they surely could do it now!!!

A)  Loss and lack of money.  NASA's budget has been consistently cut year after year to pay the welfare recipients and illegal aliens on the dole.  After the first few moon landings, people quickly lost interest and were very upset when the afternoon soap operas were interrupted to show man's achievements in technology and science.   Shame on them!

Answer 7

its amazing that they only landed once (why), also apperently the rocket that went to the moon only had a computer the ecvilent to the power of a calculator. if they cant land now with all the computers onboard now what chance did they have then.the usa was in a fierce battle with russia at the time for supremecy and claiming the moon landing was a major coup.sorry about the spelling mistakes but the word check box wont come up

Answer 8

Grow up. Wish I had your time to come up with this c**p!. the reason we stopped going was the cost. We could set down on the moon anytime we want. But just how much moon dirt do we need to know its a dead planet?

Answer 9

1. the flag wasnt moving, the astronauts bumped the pole and twisted it around. it never moves when they dont touch it, this shouldnt even be an argument

2. the shadows are not in opposite directions, never once. occasionally they dont seem parallel, but that is for several reasons. a) the lunar surface is very reflective. b) all the equipment was very reflective. and most of all c) the lunar surface is horribly uneven.

3. the camera on the leg of the lunar lander

4. no astronauts were killed. some NASA personnel died, but none of them were murdered. most were in traffic accidents involving drunk driving.

5. the radiation in the van allen belt consists of alpha and beta particles. alpha particles cant make it through a piece of paper (literally) so why would they be able to make it through the hull of the space shuttle. the same is true for beta particles, although they can penetrate slightly more. overall, the astronauts were exposed to the belt for 30 minutes and went through the least powerful part, they received about the same amount of radiation you get from a chest x-ray.

6. um, it costs billions of dollars to go to the moon. can you please tell me why we need to go back now? NASA underwent massive budget cuts, they dont have the money to go to the moon for absolutely no reason. why would we go back to the moon? what do you propose we do there? the same stuff we did the other six times we went?

argument for:

thousands of people worked on the mission, none of them claim that it is fake (except for a LIBRARIAN who worked for a company that was AFFILIATED with nasa). there are thousands of pages of documents on the landing. there are hundreds of hours of video. the radio signals were monitored by countries around the world, all of them say it was legit. we brought back tons of moon rocks. sure we could have done that with robots, like the soviets did. but they brought back pounds, we got tons. the astronauts placed mirrors on the moon that even amateur astronomers can use. sure, we could have done that with robots like the soviets did. but their mirrors were placed incorrectly and never functioned.

THIS IS THE FOURTH QUESTION IN THE PAST 10 MINUTES! GIVE IT A ******* BREAK!

Answer 10

The only real proof is still on the moon.  Unfortunately, we don't have any telescopes that can see our litter on the moon.  

Answer 11

Which is more probable?

We went to the moon with less computer power than a modern digital watch, and we're going back. Then off to Mars, and later Zeta Reticuli.

or

Your government has sold you out and plans to force this on you soon:

http://www.verichipcorp.com/

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f0gXGTcd6...

Answer 12

It would be a waste of money to go back to the moon. What is there to see? They are trying to go to mars now! It was not fake.

Answer 13

Those arguments were stupid 30 years ago, and they are no less stupid today.  The moon landing hoax has been debunked a million times, but here are links to some of the refutations.  Start with the first one

Answer 14

The SIX moon landings weren't faked. 400,000 people were involved in making the Apollo 11 moon landing happen. The Apollo Moon landings were among the most completely documented and observed events in history. The conspiracy "theories" that claim otherwise are a bunch of nonsense without even a single compelling piece of evidence. Most of the questions raised are based on ignorance of basic physics and optics. Video special effects were in their infancy in the late 60's so that faking a landing on the Moon would probably have been more difficult than actually going there, and it seems highly unlikely that the hundreds or even thousands of people who would have had to be involved in such a conspiracy would have kept it a secret for so long. Ultimately you'll have to decide for yourself if the marginal evidence offered to show this was all a hoax is compelling enough to overturn the overwhelming evidence that it actually occurred, but make sure you check the facts carefully, you need to be a little skeptical of the skeptics, too. For more detailed debunking of this ill-conceived notion, see sources.

Flag Waving

The answer is, it isn't waving. It looks like that because of the way the flag was deployed. The flag hangs from a horizontal rod which telescopes out from the vertical one. In Apollo 11, they couldn't get the rod to extend completely, so the flag didn't get stretched fully. It has a ripple in it, like a curtain that is not fully closed. In later flights, the astronauts didn't fully deploy it on purpose because they liked the way it looked. In other words, the flag looks like it is waving because the astronauts wanted it to look that way. Ironically, they did their job too well. It appears to have fooled a lot of people into thinking it waved.

Shadows Not Parallel

the Sun really is the only source of light. The shadows are not parallel in the images because of perspective. Remember, you are looking at a three-dimensional scene, projected on a two-dimensional photograph. That causes distortions. When the Sun is low and shadows are long, objects at different distance do indeed appear to cast non-parallel shadows, even here on Earth.  If seen from above, all the shadows in the Apollo images would indeed look parallel. You can experience this for yourself; go outside on a clear day when the Sun is low in the sky and compare the direction of the shadows of near and far objects. You'll see that they appear to diverge. Here is a major claim of the HBs that you can disprove all by yourself! Don't take my word for it, go out and try!

Who Filmed Neil Armstrong

A Lunar Module camera provided live television coverage of Armstrong setting foot on the lunar surface at 10:56 p.m. EDT.

Radiation Hazard

The time on the moon was limited to avoid radiation effects.  Armstrong and Aldrin spent less than 3 hours on the Moon.  

According to the Vision for Space Exploration, NASA plans to send astronauts back to the Moon by 2020 and, eventually, to set up an outpost. For people to live and work on the Moon safely, the radiation problem must be solved.

"We really need to know more about the radiation environment on the Moon, especially if people will be staying there for more than just a few days," says Harlan Spence, a professor of astronomy at Boston University.

"The first global mapping of neutron radiation from the Moon was performed by NASA's Lunar Prospector probe in 1998-99. LEND will improve on the Lunar Prospector data by profiling the energies of these neutrons, showing what fraction are of high energy (i.e., the most damaging to people) and what fraction are of lower energies.

With such knowledge in hand, scientists can begin designing spacesuits, lunar habitats, Moon vehicles, and other equipment for NASA's return to the Moon knowing exactly how much radiation shielding this equipment must have to keep humans safe."

"The recent Fox TV show, which I saw, is an ingenious and entertaining assemblage of nonsense. The claim that radiation exposure during the Apollo missions would have been fatal to the astronauts is only one example of such nonsense." -- Dr. James Van Allen

Yes, there is deadly radiation in the Van Allen belts, but the nature of that radiation was known to the Apollo engineers and they were able to make suitable preparations. The principle danger of the Van Allen belts is high-energy protons, which are not that difficult to shield against. And the Apollo navigators plotted a course through the thinnest parts of the belts and arranged for the spacecraft to pass through them quickly, limiting the exposure.

Men Who Knew Too Much Killed

We landed on the moon 6 times.  Twelve astronauts walked on the moon, while 6 more orbited.  In addition, Apollo 10 and 13 orbited the moon (with 3 astronauts each) without landing.  From the total of 24 astronauts who went to the moon with or without landing, only 3 have died and these men are mostly in their 70's now.

Men who walked on the Moon

Name Mission Age Now

Neil Armstrong Apollo 11 77

Buzz Aldrin Apollo 11 78

Pete Conrad Apollo 12 died 7/8/99 age 69

Allen Bean Apollo 12 76

Alan Shepard Apollo 14 died 7/21/98 age 74

Edgar Mitchell Apollo 14 77

David Scott Apollo 15 76

James Irwin Apollo 15 died 8/8/91 age 61

John Young Apollo 16 77

Charles Duke Apollo 16 72

Eugene Cernan Apollo 17 74

Harrison Schmitt Apollo 17 73

Men Who Orbited the Moon Without Landing

1.  Frank Borman - Apollo 8 age: 80

2.  Jim Lovell - Apollo 8, Apollo 13 (intended to land) Age:  80

3.  William Anders - Apollo 8 age:  74

4.  Tom Stafford - Apollo 10 age:  77

5.  John Young - Apollo 10 (later landed on Apollo 16) age:  77

6.  Eugene Cernan - Apollo 10 (later landed on Apollo 17) age:  74

7.  Michael Collins - Apollo 11 age:  77

8.  d**k Gordon - Apollo 12 (had been slated to land on Apollo 18) age:  78

9.  Jack Swigert - Apollo 13 age:  77

10. Fred Haise - Apollo 13 (intended to land; had been slated to land on Apollo 19) age:  74

I would say that 3 men having died, out of 24 who went to the moon, is not outside the normal death rate for any group of men.  In addition, these men died in 1991, 1998, and 1999.  This ranges from 19 to 27 years after the last moon mission.  If they wanted to keep them quiet, they certainly would have done it much sooner.

Answer 15

With the radiation, not only was there a great deal of shielding, but the route was planned so that minimal exposure would be made. It's harmful if you linger, but the trajectory of launch and return was such that the Van Alan belt radiation was only exposed for a short time.

All your questions have detailed answers at the sites in my source.

At least you're not calling a hair on a film negative a C prop marking.

Answer 16

I must admit I don't really care. It is not like I'm going up there any time soon. There was that whole thing about wind on the moon, well lots of people are saying there is no wind, but what if there was? you can't say there is or isn't if you have never been to experience it.