Has man really landed on the moon?

Answer 1

Trust me they did, but how bout I give you some ideas that are out there from people who try to disprove they did and then the explanation for them hey. I have picked 4 big ones that are fairly typical. Its a bit long, but please stick with me :)

1) No stars in the photos:

The real reason is that when contrasted with the brightness of the astronauts and the lunar surface, the stars are just too dim to register on the photographic emulsion of the camera film. If the camera shutter were held open long enough for the stars to register, everything else would be over-exposed into a white featureless glare.

You cannot have both visible on the one photograph, so the camera was set for the correct exposure for Buzz Aldrin and the lunar surface, not the stars. When standing on the lunar surface the astronauts could not visually observe the stars in the dark sky, because of the surface glare, they could only see them when standing in shadow. By the same token, if we take a photograph outdoors at night from a brightly illuminated surface, our photograph also would not show any stars in the sky.

2) The flags waving.

The flag is out and appears to be waving by an extendable rod running through the top of the flag, so that it can be viewed unfurled, and you can see the unnatural rigidity this gives to the top of the flag in the picture. The rod creates the effect of a breeze blowing the flag into that position. Without the supporting rod the flag would just hang limply down and would not reveal the stars and stripes. The rod is not extended the full width of the flag and it looks like a breeze is causing a ripple in the flag.

It has also been claimed that some video clips show the flag waving in the breeze when it was planted. Not so. The movement of the flag is only because when astronauts were planting the flagpole they rotated it back and forth to better penetrate the lunar soil.

3) 'Wrong' shadows

The simple fact is that there is more than one light source. The light does not come directly from the Sun and illuminate only the one object in question, as a narrow beam spotlight would in a dark room. It shines on the entire daytime surface, just as it does here on Earth. Therefore it also illuminates the surface, the astronauts themselves, rocks, mountains, the Lander and all the other objects on the surface.

The reflections from these objects is why there is more than one light source, it is not because there was more than one spotlight used on a film set. It is also worth noting that on the lunar surface the reflected sunlight from the Earth is 68% brighter than that of the full Moon as seen from Earth.

For more on this question check out badastronomy.com/bad/tv/iangod...

All the other fake photographs are explained just as easily with a little knowledge, and an understanding of how conditions on the Moon are very different to those here. With no atmosphere to scatter the light, things look a little odd on the Moon, we have a very black sky and a very bright surface.

We see strong shadows everywhere, and our sense of distance is also fooled because there is no atmosphere to produce the familiar atmospheric haze that creates a distance perspective on Earth. Furthermore, with the gravity being only a sixth of Earth's gravity, things move and behave differently as well.

It's hard to make straight comparisons between the earth and the moon, we can't, the Moon is just not like the Earth. We have to think differently when interpreting the images from the Moon, and that's what causes the problems, people are not allowing for those differences when looking at the lunar photographs. They are looking at them as if they were taken under normal Earth conditions, and concluding wrongly that there must be something wrong with the photographs.

4) Why doesn't the Hubble Space Telescope provide proof hey
The equipment left over by the astronauts is just too small to be seen with the HST. Even the best image we have of the moon is taken of Copernicus crater. Although it is beautifully detailed it is just impossible to make out anything on the surface.

I realise that these are just a view answers, i could keep going but everyone would complain that im taking up all the space, if they're not already :) I hope this has answered a few off your questions though. Check out this website, it answers alot more: www.braeunig.us/space/hoax.htm

Hope this helped a bit.

Answer 2

Amazing to see some of the misconceptions and misunderstandings about the Apollo moon landing missions!
Let's go through a few of the most obvious reasons that we did land on the moon.
1- Moon rocks. All terrestrial matter has been affected by the presence of oxygen and water. Any geologist can tell you this. Why then does Nasa have hundreds of pounds of moon rocks, made available to research teams the world over, which clearly show to have been formed without the presence of water. Can't happen on this planet. That alone can prove we landed on the moon.
2- What about our "enemies" at the time, The Soviet Union and China? Why have they, as quick as they are to attack American acheivement, never questioned the moon landings? The Soviets were the first to put a lander on the moon, so they knew a vehicle could be placed on the surface. Both the Soviets and Chinese tracked the moon missions, as did several friendly nations, including Australia, and no one ever stepped forward with questions regarding their surveillance.
3- As Mr Sceptic alluded to, why so many missions? If, as near impossible as it would be, we did fake a moon landing, why go back several more times? To pull it off once, 99% impossible, 6 times, 100% impossible.
4- Why has no one directly involved in the missions (and this would number in the thousands) ever come forward with any credible evidence that it was a fake. It would be worth a boatload of cash to the person who did.
5- Why haven't we gone back? Easy, diminishing returns and lack of public support. There's only so much crap you can pull up off the surface that is of any use. Six missions was easily enough to accomplish Nasa's goals. Also, the cold war drove Americans to acheive what was viewed as the "ultimate goal" in proving supremacy over the Soviets, they were willing to accept almost any cost. Rising costs, less pressure to outshine a crumbling empire, and a "been there, done that" attitude are the reasons we've never been back.
Need more reasons? I don't.

Answer 3

Argghhh...

yes, its well known we landed on the moon. We left the flag and some footracks there, and if a probe was to be launched there again, it would see them, guarenteed. You ccould also watch it launch into space for proof. And dont pull up the "but we cant see a flag on it, even though a telescope." The flag at max was probably 4 feet six kinches high. In comparison, the smallest Maria on the moon visible though a telescope is about 200 miles long...about the size of Los Angelas. So its plain out obvious you can see it. Beleive what you want. Your not gonna sway me to beleive no one landed on the moon. You may also be asking "cant you just launch men to the moon tomorrow then?" The answer is no, since the saturn V rocket is the only such rocket powerful enough. and only 3 exist, all in museums, so they are out of the picture. Even if you did have them, the hard ware on them is over 40 years old. PLEASE tell me you DONT actually want to use a 1960's computer to go to the moon. I didnt think so. And its costing huge money to go there. so thaats why we arnt going back... for now, anyway... :)

Answer 4

You have two alternatives, either believe what other people and the government tell you, or not believe anything.

Most of those that disbelieve the moon landing publicly have very little crediblity.

The best proof that the moon landing happened is the fact that it was during the cold war. The Soviet Union would have been happy to use some of their spies to catch the USA in such a big lie. They never made such a claim, hence the Soviets believed us (and they certainly did some checking to verify the facts).

Not only that tens of thousands of people were employed in the effort to get a man to the moon. If it was a hoax, thousands would have had to have been in on the secret. How come none of them have come forward and written books, movies etc about the "lie".

The only people that write such books are generally lonely nutcases who had no connection to the project (or had a cousin who worked as a janator at the project at best). The other people that write stories about a hoax are in Hollywood and that is called FICTION.

Answer 5

It never ceases to amaze me how uneducated some people can be. Instead of asking such a fundamentally obvious question why didn't you do some research on the subject instead of declaring to the world how ignorant you are on this particular subject?

Of course man landed on the moon. Six missions went to the moon and returned safely to the Earth. Apollo 13 did not reach the moon because of all the problems it had but did return safely to the Earth.

It's part of our American history. Spend the time to learn about it.

Answer 6

The general sentiment is that yes, man has landed on the moon. In July of 1969, American astrounauts landed on the surface on the moon and explored. There have been several other landings, I think, since then.

However, think there has been a bunch of contreversy too, including, but not limited to: Space radiation killing the astronauts, area 51 actually being a movie studio where they taped the landing, and the actual landing video being doctored ti be fuzzy to hide the studio equipment.

What people choose to believe is up to them. I believe we actually landed there- if we didn't, well, the government lies about a bunch of stuff, I'm sure, so it doesn't really matter anyway.

Answer 7

I'd know if you know.

There is proof, but as proven before as well, it could have been easily forged. So basically it's one word against the other, and to be honest, I stopped wondering about it.

One thing is for sure; if you yourself make a trip to the moon and set foot on it, you can say for a definite that man has been on the moon. But until then... don't worry about it.

Answer 8

Of course it happened.

Which do you think would be harder - sending 6 missions to the moon, or faking 6 missions to the moon and keeping it a secret for over 30 years?

Answer 9

they did land on the moon

Answer 10

Neil Armstrong