Does anyone think the us moon landing was faked?

Question

I HAVE HEARD SOOOO MANY STORIES AND RUMORS AND WONDERED WHAT OTHER PEOPLE THOUGHT

Answer 1

It wasn't faked. I agree, the technology involved was bare bones but still capable. Here are some quotes that help counter some of the conspiracy theories:

In some photos, the crosshairs appear to be behind objects, rather than in front of them where they should be, as if the photos were altered.

* In photography, the light white color (the object behind the crosshair) makes the black object (the crosshair) invisible due to saturation effects in the film emulsion. The film particles that ought to have been black were exposed by light from the adjacent brightly lit particles. Ironically, this saturation effect would not happen if the crosshairs were drawn on in post, and so is evidence of genuine photos. Attempting to alter photos that already have crosshairs would make the compositing process far more difficult.

The quality of the photographs is implausibly high.

* The astronauts were trained in the use of their gear, and shots and poses were planned in advance as part of the mission. NASA selected only the best photographs for release to the public, and some of the photos were cropped to improve their composition. There are many badly exposed, badly focused and poorly composed images amongst the thousands of photos that were taken by the Apollo Astronauts. Many can be seen at the Apollo Lunar Surface Journal. Photos were taken on high-quality Hasselblad cameras with Zeiss lenses, using 70 mm medium format film.

There are no stars in any of the photos, and astronauts never report seeing any stars from the capsule windows.

*Stars are also never seen in Space Shuttle, Mir, International Space Station Earth observation photos, or even sporting events that take place at night. The sun in the Earth/Moon area shines as brightly as on a clear noon day on Earth, so cameras used for imaging these things are set for daylight exposure, with quick shutter speeds in order to prevent overexposing the film. The dim light of the stars simply does not have a chance to expose the film.

he color and angle of shadows and light are inconsistent.

* Shadows on the Moon are complicated because there are several light sources: the Sun, the Earth, and the Moon itself.

The Moon's surface during the daytime is so hot that camera film would have melted.

* There is no atmosphere to efficiently couple lunar surface heat to devices such as cameras not in direct contact with it. In a vacuum, only radiation remains as a heat transfer mechanism.

The launch rocket produced no visible flame.

* Hydrazine (a fuel) and dinitrogen tetroxide (an oxidizer) were the Lunar Module propellants, chosen for their reliability; they ignite hypergolically –upon contact– without a spark. Hypergolic propellants happen to produce a nearly transparent exhaust. Hypergolic fuels are also used by several space launchers: the core of the American Titan, the Russian Proton, the European Ariane 1 through 4 and the Chinese Long March, and the transparency of their plumes is apparent in many launch photos.

The flag placed on the surface by the astronauts flapped despite there being no wind on the Moon.

* The astronauts were moving the flag into position, causing motion. Since there is no air on the Moon to provide friction, these movements caused a long-lasting undulating movement seen in the flag. There was a rod extending from the top of the flagpole to hold the flag out for proper display. The fabric's rippled appearance was due to its having been folded during flight and gave it an appearance which could be mistaken for motion in a still photograph.

These are only a few quotes. They all seem much more convincing then the arguments the conspiracy theorists present.

Answer 2

I am not 100% convinced one way or the other, although nobody here has YET brought up the argument of the Van Allen Belts.

This belt of radiation lying around 38,000 km (if memory serve's) from earth may or may not (depending which info you read) have caused problems with the ships electronics, through to having serious health effects on the crew.

There are a number of references on the net that state Russia gave up on a moon landing due to not being able to overcome this issue.

There have also been a number of statements WRT the latest Mars mission that they had to produce additional shielding for the electronics to overcome the effects of radiation whilst passing through the Van Allen Belts.

Russia, China & the USA, have all stated that this is an issue for any future moon landing?!?

Now this may be due to "more sensitive" electronics used for the missions, or because NASA (Ahmmm) "Lost" the blueprints for a craft that had previously been through it??

Either way, this is a significant factor to understand if you are going to travel through them.

From a conspirisory POV, the only thing that looked VERY odd to me was when the lander took off from the surface. It wasn't the lack of "Burn" that I found odd, but rather the almost instant acceleration that was seen. I appreciate that the Moon's gravity is only 1/6th that of the earth's, and there is no atmosphere to push through, but the lander shot upwards without any visible acceleration. It was like watching 0-60 in .00001 of a second - More like it was on a winch, than jet propultion! - If this was actually the case, and this did happen, I bet they could have took off with far less fuel on board :-)

Anyway, just my my 2c worth.

Dave

Answer 3

I just find it strange that despite the race between the USSR and the USA, only the USA have been to the moon. Why haven't Russia or China been to the moon yet? Certainly they would love to have a "First Russian" or "First Chinese on the moon" title and certainly they have the techonology to do so. It's not like the moon has become useless after 1972 so nobody wants to land on it anymore. We need to have another moon landing and this time from one of the other countries. Since there is no longer a space race, the results will be much more credible than in 1969.

Answer 4

Un-freakin'-believable.

That in this day and age of supposed intelligence and sophistication that this utterly ridiculous question comes up again and again and again.

Your own question should answer itself -- "sooo many stories and rumors". Who is faking it, and who is telling the truth?

Good grief -- yes, the Americans landed on the moon -- several times. We left things behind that are still used today. The flag is ***NOT*** waving in a breeze. The shadows fall exactly where they should fall. The sky is black and starless because we landed in a sunny area, and the aperture of the camera, in order to not overexpose the picture, is too small to let in enough light to show any stars. The objects we left behind are too small to be seen in a telescope, and the Hubble has the wrong focal length to be used for lunar observing.

No, your grandmother could not have watched the moon landings in her telescope, because there isn't one in the entire world powerful enough to resolve that small an object at the distances.

Americans landed on the Moon. Build a bridge and get over it!

Answer 5

Only idiots who rub their hands in glee at every little conspiracy theory because it is exciting to go against the authorities.

yes, there are government cover ups, but it is beyond all reason to even think they could cover up faking a decade of Apollo missions. So many people were involved that it is absolutely ludicrous to think, and only sad people with not much going on in their lives to believe, that the moon landings were fake.

I notice the old flag thing was mentioned again:

Take note people: if you shake a flag and there is no atmosphere to dampen its movement, it will go on waving.

That is not rocket science.

The missions were rocket science, and it is an insult to the thousands of people who put their hearts, souls and long, long hours of stressful work into achieving Kennedy's dream.

I am not American, and there's a lot about their policies I do not like, but Apollo was a triumph of grit and determination for the American people. Don't belittle it - it was the one and only time mankind has been beyond Earth's orbit, and it was over 30 years ago, and still nobody has beaten it.

Answer 6

Consider this.....at the time of all this Lunar activity, the US had no rocket successful enough to leave the Earth without exploding.....all motive power in this instance came from Russia who had by then been very successful. These engines and subsequent technology were passed on to the US in a combined effort ... a secret kept well away from the general public.
Check also the disasterous records of the Lunar landing vehicles which when under test on Earth, exploded each time since they were virtually uncontrollable. Check also, photos of the mounds of moondust beneath these so-called moon landing vehicles and consider that these landers had retro rockets to cushion the inpact of the touchdown, firing a rocket beneath a moon lander would certainly clear any loose dust for at least 100yds in diameter
Check also photos of astronaut shadows on the moon surface...many show divergent shadow tracks meaning that there are at least two sources of light at that particular time....how can that be when only one source was supposed to be available, namely the Sun....check the shadows on earth of a line of trees....you will see that all the shadows are parallel and not divergent........how come the astronauts of the moon landings are still alive and well after travelling through dangerous radiation belts when persons exposed to the Russian Chernobyl nuclear explosion are long gone from similar exposure.....the questions go on ....A few years ago we heard that a Japanese rocket was to be sent up to photograph the moons surface in detail and at close quarters, this camera should therefore be quite capably of spotting these so-called lunar landing sites of 30 years ago and hence be able to settle the matter ....why have the photos never been shown to us ......if the moon landers are there let's see them, why hide it when it would clear up the matter in seconds.................... find your own explanation by reading
"Dark Moon", an interesting book on the theory..see what you think then..

Answer 7

The flag was waving because if you move something in a vacuum there is no atmosphere to stop it. The best wave to prove that the Americans did land on the moon is by realising at the time thee was the "Space Race" between Russia and America !!! Do you really think that if the landing was a hoax that the Russians would have kept quiet ????

Answer 8

No, I do not think that the moon landing was faked. It would take more effort to fake it and cover it up than to just do it. More idle gossip and rumors.

By the way "Big Momma Carnivore," I had no idea that Bush had been President for 20 years. Pretty impressive. Some people just don't think before they speak (or type).

Answer 9

It would have been harder to fake the moon landing (and cost more money) than it would have been to actually go there. But don't take my word for it. Look it up! Find *all* the information, not just from the conspiracy theorists, but from the scientists, too. Here's a good site that explains all those "questions" the conspiracy theorists like to bring up, like why the flag was waving and why you don't see stars in the moon pictures.

http://www.badastronomy.com/bad/tv/foxapollo.html

Get all the information (from many sources) before you make up your mind, don't let others make up your mind for you!

Answer 10

They are constantly tracking the moon's distance from Earth using lasers and a reflector that was placed there by the astronauts.

Also, I'm an alumni of Purdue University and have personally spoken to Neil Armstrong (another Purdue alum.) He must be a good liar, because he told a convining story about going to the moon ;)