How come theres no stars in the famous moon landing video?

Question

Maybe it was fake? Also the flag was waving about in the wind!

Answer 1

No atmosphere to diffract light, and the cameras had to be set with a certain apperature and exposure setting to get the images they wanted. The stars don't give enough light to be picked up on the film, which is what we used then. I often wondered about that myself. You are mistaken about the flag waving in the wind. If it was moving, it would have been in response to the rotation of the moon and inertia, or from the LEM spacecraft's propulsion. I would like to know if the spacewalkers can see the light from stars with their eyes. Oh yeah. If you don't believe we landed on the moon, visit an observatory and borrow a telescope to look at the moon. Our flag is still there, along with other gear like the OHV they drove around in.

Answer 2

There's really no different between the sky on the Moon and the sky during day time on Earth. The fact that the sky on Earth is blue because of the atmosphere and it is black on the Moon makes no difference. You cannot see stars during the day.

The lunar surface is very bright. Brighter than the brightest day in the hottest part of the world. This is obvious when you think about it. There are no atmosphere or clouds on the moon. In comparison to this bright surface, the stars are very dim.

It is very difficult to get a photograph of a very dim object and a very bright object at the same time. If you set the camera to take a photograph of the bright object (using a fast exposure) you won't capture the dim object at all. If you set the camera to take a picture of the dim objects, then the bright objects will appear as very fuzzy and over-exposed blobs.

The cameras and films the Apollo missions took with them were also designed to photograph activities on the moon's surface. They were not designed to take photographs of the stars. It doesn't mean the stars weren't there, just that the photographs did not capture them. The exposures were set to work with the brightly light surface and astronauts.

As for the flag:

Firstly the flag had a horizontal bar attached to it at the top. This was done so that the flag would stand out from the flagpole. NASA appreciated that there would be no wind on the moon, so any normal flag would just hang limply and unattractively down the pole. To make things look better they added a bar that stood out at 90 degrees from the pole. The flag was really hanging from this, rather than from the pole. The bar was also not quite the full width of the flag, so that it was slightly furled to give a 'wave look' to it.

The moon's surface, once you get past the thin layer of dust, is very hard. So getting the flagpole to stick in was a tough job. The footage shows the astronaut twisting the pole back and forth in order to try and get it further into the ground. This movement made the attached bar and flag flutter.

The flagpole itself was light aluminium that is quite springy. Even once the astronaut let go the pole would continue to vibrate. This in turn would shake the bar and flap the flag. Without any air to dampen this it would continue to do so for longer than you might expect.

Answer 3

Friend, get this straight and don't be foolish about it any more, okay? The basic technology required for a manned flight to the moon was developed in Germany in the late 1930s through the mid 1940s. This technology needed a lot of refinement to make a safe manned flight a reality.

We worked on that technology through the 1950s and 60s, and made the first flight in 1969. It all fits together, and if you read all the history and don't let the wackos lie to you, it will be impossible for you to continue to be fooled into believing that the moon missions did not take place.

The American people were much better educated and more intelligent in the 1960s and 70s than they are now, and it would never have occurred to NASA engineers and managers that 35 years later a bunch of ignorant dolts with nothing to do would come up with a stupid conspiracy theory stating that the moon landings were faked.

If that had occurred to them, I suspect they would have gone to the trouble to create a larger and more visible object of proof, to compensate for the decline in the quality of the American mind and its education that occurred during and after the Reagan presidency.

But there is a real physical proof available. The astronauts who landed on the moon left behind reflectors that are used every day by astronomers to measure the irregularities of the moon's orbit. This is done by bouncing laser beams off reflectors at known locations that were left by the astronauts. Ask your science teacher for information about these experiments. You can arrange to see this done with your own eyes.

Let me put the question to you this way: If you think the moon landings were faked, when did they become "fake?" When did the idea become popular that NASA had invented the idea of an imaginary moon mission and created a huge technological empire to fool people? When was all this fakery done? In the 60s? 70s? 80s?

And why? What was the point? And how did they fool all the people that reported the news, operated the machinery, built the moon rockets, and watched them take off and land?

Do you realize that one American in 500 was a part of the Apollo program? Millions of them are still alive. Are they fooling you? Why? If you go out to a football game, look around you. In the stadium there are people who worked on the Apollo program.

Ask around. You are surrounded by people who know for sure that American astronauts stood on the moon more than 35 years ago.

Answer 4

The lack of stars was due to contrast of the camera and the surroundings.The surface of the moon is very bright becuase there is no atmosphere to deflect some of the sunlight.They stars were to faint to be picked up by the camera.
The flag wasn't waving in the wind,it was waving becuase they wasn't any wind to make it stay still.

Answer 5

Because of contrast limitations of TV cameras and film. Even a digital camera behaves that way. You can prove this to yourself. Take your camera into the garage on a clear night. Open the garage door. Turn on the lights in the garage. Have some friends stand on the driveway. Stand in the garage and take a picture of friends. After you develop the picture, email me and tell me how many stars you see behind your friends.

If had actually watched the video, you would have seen the flag start shaking when erected and when bumped. And, you would have seen it stop shaking after a while.

Let me ask your next stupid question for you. Why did it take so long for the flag to stop shaking? Because there's no air on the moon thus the flag had nothing to slow it down other than gravity and gravity on the moon is 0.16G.

Answer 6

Because there was not enough contrast between the sky and the camera due to the light from the sun--how come you cant see the stars during the day on Earth? The flag was waving because, I assume, it was set moving by being planted.

Answer 7

take a picture of the skyline at night. there are no stars. Film doesn't record as much as the human eye does.

The flag wasn't "waving in the wind", it was undulating because there was no air to STOP it. Basic Newtonian physics

Answer 8

I don't recall any flags flying If I remember correctly they had to use some sort of stiffening. As for lack of stars I would think it would be for the same reason as you don't see them in the day. Too much light from the sun and reflected from the earth

Answer 9

The contrast of brightness between the moon's surface (very bright) and the stars (relatively dim) means that the camera would not have picked them up.

What difference would it actually make even if it were fake?

Answer 10

The flag it is assumed is still there . Could not a telescope see it to prove the landing ?