Concerning the moon landing hoax, what are the arguments for and against the united states landing on moon?

Question

I am trying to find out what truth conspiracy theorists are saying, or are they just trying to get attention? I'm open to the idea that is was a hoax. But I'd like to see evidence. I was looking for something similiar to this:
Arguments for landing:
1)creating a vacuum like the one on the moon is not possible
2) second argument

Argument for hoax:
1)no wind on moon, there is wind in videos
2) second argument

If you cannot do that, that is fine too. Just give me an opinion, I suppose. Thanks a lot.

Answer 1

Although my wife's father performed fuel calculations for the original Apollo landing, I'll spare you that speech. Instead, I will encourage you to watch two programs. The first show is called Conspiracy Moon Landing that it currently showing on the National Geographic Channel and it pretty much obliterates all of the popular conspiracy theories.

I would also encourage you to watch a movie called Capricorn One. Made it 1978, it is a fictional story about a fake mission to Mars. Although it is a science fiction story, it is a good example of how utterly impossible it would be to fake a moon landing for any length of time.

12 men walked on the moon from 1969 to 1972 and we have neither the resources nor the technology to pull off that big of a hoax for so long. Hundreds of thousands of people have worked on the space program. It would be far easier to put someone on the moon than to try and fake it and keep it secret for nearly 40 years.

The landings came at a time when our space program was ultra competitive with the former Soviet Union. Remember how big of a deal it was when Sputnik was put into orbit? They had the technology to monitor our moon shots and transmissions. Don't you think they would have called us out if they had evidence that it was all fake?

Perhaps the most definitive proof of our trip to the moon is what we left behind. For the last 35+ years, scientists have been beaming lasers to the moon and measuring the return times. How are they doing this? The beams are reflected back by equipment left on the moon on at 3 different locations.

Case closed.

Answer 2

Actually, there appears to be wind in the videos but that is caused by the flag moving. If there was wind, it would stir up all of the dust on the ground. That is some fine granular stuff. When the astronauts are moving around, you can see it getting tossed about. Notice that it never hangs in the air like dust would do on the planet.

One of the biggest arguments against a hoax is that the Russians did not catch on. It would have been simple to figure that out. The radio transmissions could be measured and their source have been calculated. The the astronauts did not go to the moon, then their transmissions would have been from a much closer location. NASA and the US government did not hide these transmissions. They were open for the entire world to listen to. Even if they were not, the Russians still would have been able to intercept them. If the transmissions were coming from Earth orbit or from the Earth then they would have figured that out and then told the world that the moon landing was fake. It was an ebarrassment to them and they would have been checking every detail to make sure the US was actually doing it. However, they could not find any evidence to support that it was a fake mission.

Answer 3

The landings were real. This is not a subjective opinion, but rather an incontrovertible scientific fact. There is absolutely no legitimate evidence of a hoax, unless you accept bad science and lies as evidence.

The landings were a lot more than just pictures and videos. Conspiracy theorists are unable to explain the following:
1) Radio telescopes across the world, when pointed at the Moon, were able to detect the Apollo transmissions. If there hadn't been a ship there, they wouldn't have detected anything.
2) Apollos 11, 14, and 15 left retroreflectors on the Moon that professional astronomers have detected thousands of times. These reflectors are used to measure the precise distance to the Moon.
3) Geologists have carefully examined the Moon rocks and have concluded that they could only have formed on the Moon; there's no way that NASA could have faked them on Earth.
4) No scientist questions the lunar landings, and yet conspiracy theorists try to cite science as their primary evidence. Is the average Joe really going to notice a scientific irregularity that the world's greatest scientific minds are going to miss? I don't think so.

As for the "evidence" - and I use that term lightly - in favor of a conspiracy, such as the 'waving flag' and the lack of stars in the sky, these feeble arguments have been demolished by scientists. Read my source for a detailed refutation of the conspiracy theory.

Answer 4

Arguments against hoax:
common sense. Really, there is SO much information out there that 99.99% of the people don't know about. Like the source for example.

Another argument against the hoax is that many of the hoax claims are just lies! One example is the false claim that the videos show wind on the Moon. Only people who have never seen the videos believe that. Look at the videos in the source, especially the ones that show the flag, and you will see that they do NOT show any wind.

Arguments for hoax:
If we did it in 1969, why can't or don't we do it now. In my mind that is the ONLY possible reason for doubt. But it is obvious why if you know all the facts. It is the continuing high cost due to lack of technology progress in rockets (which unlike computers have seen very little progress), and the fact that there is no good reason to go to the Moon.

Answer 5

If the moon landing was a hoax, then was Apollo 13 a hoax?

Were all the unmanned lunar orbiters and landers also hoaxes? what about the thousands of photos these pre-Apollo craft sent back to earth? Also hoaxes, complete with appropriate graininess and lousy contrast?


People don't understand that the majority of scientists and engineers hired by the government are employed in the short term to work on a project, and then they are released and go back to universities or the private sector. When Apollo ended, that's what happened to most of the folks who worked on that program.

What possible motivation could all these people have for participating in a lie? They were not "government lackies"....they simply had temp jobs with the government! If it ever came out that their job resumes were padded with a big hoax, their careers would be ruined!


And much of the work is subcontracted to private companies , whose workers are not government employees at all! My father worked for Grummann Aerospace Corporation, the company that bulid the lunar modules. He was a manager for that program, and he got to go into the "clean rooms" to see these ships being built. The engines were real. Why would the goverment spend huge amounts of money to pay a private corporation to build functioning spaceships if all that was planned was a movie filmed on a set?

How did the government hoodwink all those people who actually worked on the spacecraft? Or did these workers all conspire with the government to keep the secret? (Not just Grummann.The Saturn booster was built by North American Rockwell, another private company)

Grumann had massive layoffs after Apollo....my father saw the handwriting on the wall and switched careers altogether. Why would these people remain silent about this supposed hoax after they got layed off? They were PISSED to lose their jobs!

If the government had wanted to fake a moon landing, there would have surely been an easier and cheaper way to do it, with fewer potential whistle blowers.

Answer 6

You don't need evidence to support a hoax. All you need is a serious charge.

Columbus didn't ever set foot in the western hemisphere,

Flight 800 was NOT shot down by a missile. It was simply a fuel tank explosion.

JFK is alive at Parkland Memorial Hospital, where Jackie visited over 100 times in the 20 years after his "death".

Space aliens have abducted over 100,000,000 people.

Darth Vader shot JR Ewing

The government planted explosives in the World Trade Towers to cause the buildings to collapse after the empty planes, remotely flown by Dick Cheney, flew into the precise positions pre-determined by the government conspiracy group.

Speaking of which, there is a budget item with no name that gives over 25 billion dollars a year to the people that keep government conspiracies quiet.

Now, PROVE to me that all these things are false.

Get the idea. Anyone can say anything. Sometimes it even gets written into history books as "gospel".

Answer 7

I actually took the whole issue with an open mind, just as you are. However, after almost no effort whatsoever, I located several extensive rebuttals to these theories. Item by item, they pick apart the so-called 'evidence' that the landings were faked.

It became quite obvious to me that the hoax proponents are either the paranoid type who need to go take another dose of their meds, or else snake oil salesmen making a lot of noise to sell books and videos. None of them seem to understand photography, gravity, perspective, or any other simple things. They present their evidence in a convincing manner, but it's all a straw man. They're hoping you won't open the hood and see that there's no engine in their car.

Once one, and definitely two of their so-called 'photographic experts' are proven wrong, it casts their entire argument into doubt. It didn't take me long to dismiss the claims. If you're really interested in this subject, then spend some time reading the debunking links that others have posted here. It will all make perfect sense to you. Then armed with doubt and skepticism about the hoaxsters' claims, read them and you'll see how outlandish they seem. Critical thinking puts them down quickly.

Answer 8

The moon landings have been real. putting aside each and all of the "info" to the different for a 2d, basically evaluate this: so very many human beings might have had to be in on the conspiracy that there's no way that the secret might have been stored. in spite of if specific brokers went around to anybody engaged on the undertaking and threatened to kill them and their finished family contributors in the event that they blabbed, somebody might have enable the secret slip, rather after 30+ years. guy hasn't long previous lower back to the moon because of the rate and for the easy certainty that there's no reason to.

Answer 9

There is no reason to post arguments. It happened. I watched rockets lift off from cape kennedy from our dock on the St. Lucie river, 100 miles away. Millions of others saw the things from considerably closer up.

If you absolutely insist on questioning historical events, why not something like the Thiry Years War. Or the Mongol Invasions. Or World War I. ( I wouldn't recommend doing WWII quite yet. A veteran might take offense to your claiming that war didn't exist and he would probably make sure you didn't exist ) I'm sure if you put your mind to it you can find some way to prove these so-called historical events never really happened, and that they are all part of a government plot. You'll be famous.

Answer 10

The Apollo Moon landings are a matter of historical fact, not opinion. The evidence is overwhelming: thousands of pictures, hours of video, 800 kg. of Moon rocks, and millions of witnesses. The arguments in favour of a hoax have been repeatedly demolished on sites such as these:

http://www.uwgb.edu/dutchs/PSEUDOSC/ConspiracyTheoryDidWeGototheMoon.htm
http://www.badastronomy.com/bad/tv/foxapollo.html
http://www.braeunig.us/space/hoax.htm
http://www.clavius.org/