Is it true that the 'first' and the historic landing on moon by Neil Armstrong is all cooked up?

Question

Recently I got some really intriguing evidence which proves that it's all fake!

Answer 1

No, it was not faked.

Go to www.badastronomy.com to see a debunking of that "intriguing evidence" you saw.

Answer 2

The original "evidence" for a hoax is very weak. For example pictures of astronauts did not show stars in the background. But you need a time exposure of over 10 seconds to get stars, and the exposure time to photograph a bright object like a person is a fraction of a second. This showed me that the author didn't know anything about photography, or felt his readers (or the Fox TV viewers) wouldn't.
Other evidence is just as weak.
Consider:
-The radio telescopes around the world tracked the Apollo spacecraft. They had to turn and aim the dishes at the spacecraft all the way.
-The TV and movies that came back showing behaviour of dirt in low-gravity are very "accurate". (Sure, we can fake it now, but not as easily in 1969: look at the original Star Trek episodes! Even "2001", the best, most accurate sci-fi depiction of spaceflight up to the time, isn't as accurate depicting on the moon scenes).
-Also, three mirrors were left on the moon so that we can shoot lasers at them, see the returning light pulse, and compute the exact distance to the moon (which is changing.) If we never went to the moon, who left the mirrors?

Answer 3

My father thought that this was the case, but he was nuts. Yes, they landed on the moon. It's important to recall that the operation was essentially a military one, and that there was a serious race with the Soviets to get there. The military aspects were downplayed in speeches and writings even then, but everyone at the time understood the military aspects of the work.

I suppose it's not unreasonable that kids nowadays might choose to believe that it was all a conspiracy. It's sad, because those were exciting times, and we thought that the manned space program would progress farther than it did. But as subsequent work has shown, robots do a far better job, and what has happened is that the astronaut's job has been essentially automated out of existence.

The satellite network that transmits your WWF and NASCAR broadcasts isn't fictional, is it? If not, then why is a trip to the moon so much harder to accept?

Perhaps you don't believe that there are man-made transistors as small as bacteria functioning inside your computer, millions of them, each made by people, inside your microprocessor. It has to have been all made up, no?

Answer 4

We are in big danger of people thinking that everything is "fake," and I think I know what might have started this. It was probably that lunatic Al Gore, who got everyone believing in global warming.

Consider - people believe a ridiculous lie about global warming, but disbelieve the truth about the moon landing.

LIberalism is a mental disorder, and these are the types of symptoms associated with the disease.

Answer 5

The way I think about it is the difficulty of pulling off and guarding the secret for that long versus the difficulty of just going. They went.

Answer 6

No. It really happened. Your "evidence" is all fake.

Answer 7

Just like believing in the bible, you either believe...or you don't believe.

I belive in the bible 100%. No doubts whatsoever.

I choose to believe that the moon landing never happened. Not that first time, and not any subsequent times.

I think they kept the money and used it for the military.

Answer 8

it is not fake

Answer 9

No, it is not fake.

Answer 10

You and your information are full of crap !