do you think the 1st moon landing was fake?

Answer 1

Yes, notice how their was no stars. Plus they were trying to compete with Russia.

Answer 2

No. I know that it was real. This isn't a matter of subjective, biased opinion; it's a matter of incontrovertible scientific fact. Opinions on this issue are irrelevant because there is an absolute mountain of scientific evidence that proves, to the highest standard, that we went to the Moon. The only "evidence" - and I use that term very lightly - in favor of a conspiracy is bad science and innuendo.

Consider the following:
1) Apollo 11 left a reflector on the Moon that astronomers have detected thousands of times.
2) Independent radio telescopes were able to monitor the transmissions coming from the spacecraft. The observers found that the transmissions were coming from the Moon. If there hadn't been a ship on the Moon to send these transmissions, the telescopes wouldn't have detected anything.
3) The Moon rocks have been positively identified as being of lunar origin. Geologists explain that there's no way to falsify the rocks.
4) No reputable scientist rejects the landings. Would it not be scientists would would be the first to pick up on something fishy about the landings? Instead, scientists vigorously defend the landings.

EDIT: As I look over some of the pro-conspiracy answers, I can't believe the level of scientific ignorance that I see. There aren't stars in the lunar photos because they're too faint to show up (photography 101). And honestly, does everyone believe whatever they see on TV? And so what if we haven't returned to the Moon? That means absolutely nothing. Nuclear weapons haven't been used in war since World War II. Does that mean that Hiroshima and Nagasaki are conspiracies? Of course not.

Answer 3

I don't believe the moon landing was a hoax, however I am open to the possibility that the photos and such were staged or edited. It is possible, even likely that the equipment was damaged, overexposed due to ambient solar radiation, or simply not good enough to take quality pictures. At the height of the cold war, America needed the moon landing to look good, and NASA may have fudged the pictures a little bit to do just that.

Answer 4

Yes, because the government never shows any after the fact pictures of any of the 6 landing sites to the American public! You never hear anything about making any of these sites federally protected monuments to man's technological achievements! Why haven't they traveled to the moon many times in between then and now? Why is now so special to go to the moon? I would like to see pictures that aren't from the US government!

Answer 5

what about the next 5?
no, they were all real girl, sorry
to the idiots that believe they were faked : I've got some awesome beach front property in New Mexico I'd love to see ya! Its right on the Atlantic Ocean!! A must see, and cheap prices too!

Answer 6

This is not a question of opinion. All six Moon landings did occur, and there is a mountain of evidence to prove it. Only people who are totally ignorant of science would question this.

Answer 7

Love, there were thousands of people involved--in Texas, California, Florida, Washington, D.C. A fake? Wouldn't someone among the thousands have blabbed? You know how people are--talk, talk, talk.

Answer 8

I know it wasn't. It is only the gullible and the idiots who think it was faked. Feel free to put yourself in either category if you don't accept one of the great achievements of the 20th century.

Answer 9

If it had been fake, the Russians would've ridiculed the Americans for years.

Answer 10

No; if it were one of the *hundreds* of people needed to make it work would have come forward by now.

Answer 11

God I'm sick of this question.

I was there. It was real.
Wht would anyone build a rockey with 160,000,000 horse power and then not go somewhere with it.