Was the 1969 Moon landing a giant HOAX?

Question

Hey Korky, so you watched that on TV?!
The Jurassic Park is real too! I watched it on TV!

Answer 1

Hi,

I used to think that the idea of it being a hoax way ridiculous, but I saw a programme not long ago where they were asking questions of the guy who designed the photography system for the suit, and he admitted that he couldn't explain the lighting conditions that are present in almost every shot, I think there seems to be multiple light sources so the astronauts are lit up even when standing in an obvious shadow cast by the lander. Also, there is no disturbace to the dust in some of the photos undeneath the lander which slowed down on descent by firing a thruster directly at the ground. There must be questions in everyone's minds when there are inconsistencies, but I guess we'll never be sure unless NASA and the US government admit to it, which I doubt they will any time soon!

Oh yeah, ceiling cat, I've never seen a picture from a telescope that shows the lunar lander, are you sure you didn't make that up?

Answer 2

Here we go again... Let's start with the fact that if you sent three guys on a mission and two of those guys failed to land the Lunar Module on the Moon because it fell over sideways, It would mean that two guys would die almost straight away and the third guy spinning around the Moon would not be able to get Home, certain death as well !!! Then when you consider that NASA could not control a vehicle that was based on the Lunar Module in the Earths atmosphere...
what hope was there of them doing it first time on the moon, Slim to None !
Why has the Hubble telescope not been turned towards the moon to get images of the landing sites...Ohh yeah, can't do that because the reflection from the Sun on the Moon's surface would damage the telescope, more excuses !!!
Then there is the matter of the amount of radiation that the astronauts would have absorbed once the Apollo 11 had passed through the Van Allen Radiation Belt, put simply, the Lunar Module's wall was so light and thin that the guys in there would have been Nuked !
Why didn't the Russians do it then, because the risk to a small team of cosmonauts did not justify the journey, when you cosider that a team climbing Mount Everest has a back up rescue team all the way up it and down.
You have to remember that pocket calculators and digital watches were not invented in '69 and a Timex or Sinclair L.E.D. watch had more memory than the whole space ship put together, and that was not till '73. Then there is the US economy to consider, they were still at war with Vietnam which cost Billions, plus it's home economic growth and then to have aspace program which cost Billions...It just does not add up !!! The war happened,people died, the US home economy stood it's ground, so what about the space program to the Moon ? I don't think so.
Ask yourself this, if we can't built the pyramids the way they were built, would you think that today's scientists would send a three manned mission to the Moon with modern technology to support them. The answer is no, Why, because they is nothing in it for them, no oil, no useful minerals and too costly to maintain.... BUT they can still afford to go to war !

Answer 3

hey edc2007 I watched it all happen on tv too and I also watched jarrassic park but the big difference ie the jurassic park was a all made up where the moon landings were not, besides it would have costed nasa more money to hoax apollo 11-12-14-15-16 and 17 more money to fake it than to just do it,, i will never understand why so many people listen to the small amount of those who say hoax as compared to the entire world who knows it happened,,

Answer 4

The truth of the moon landings is not in any doubt. Many thousands of people were involved in the project, and many millions witnessed it. Clearly it happened.

For some incomprehensible reason, some are trying to pretend it did not. Now, it's very healthy to question authority, and what you have seen on television. It's okay to CONSIDER the possibility that the moon landings were a hoax. However, once you've considered it, and listened to the evidence, the only sensible conclusion is that the landings really did happen.

The evidence for the landings consists of the testimony of the 12 men who walked on the moon, the six who accompanied them into orbit, the many astronauts in earlier stages of the space programme, the personnel at Mission Control, the engineers present at the launch, and many, many others. Then there's the 400kg of lunar rock brought back (confirmed as genuine by geologists who were independent of NASA). The people who tracked the craft by radio telescope - again, independent of NASA. The hundreds of photographs and film footage, freely available to the public. The laser reflector. And much else.

The "evidence" that the landings were a hoax is, by contrast, pathetic. "The film in the cameras would have melted." (Says who?) "The astronauts would have been fried by the radiation in the Van Allen belts" (or Van Halen belts according to one hoax believer! Again, says who?) "The astronauts walking look a bit like slow motion shots of people running." (So what?) This is feeble stuff.

Check out a website called BAUT if you're still in doubt. They are very polite and helpful, but do read the FAQ and the rules first.

Answer 5

why should NASA spend money proving past achievements the Hubble telescope is not at every ones disposal you have to pay for its use and the only people able to do that are legitimate research teams who already know better, Hubble's movement are already plotted out in advance because it take a full two weeks to move because of the insane amount of maths involved.
Hoax theory's exist so people can make money selling books about it the media is often wrong hell some space based disaster movies make incredibly stupid mistakes like declaring that the pentagon is in Washington D.C and yet despite living in England I know it is actually in Arlington Virginia.
Fake moon landing ideas work because people forget that the moon is unlike earth and things work differently again even one of my Friends who is very well educated believes that the Coriolis effect mean that at the equator water just drops down plug holes without any rotation despite that fact that the Coriolis effect doesn't have any effect at all on your bathroom sink much less the toilet where the water rotates bcause the pipe is at an angle.

Answer 6

There are two questions that determine the unlikelihood of something being a "hoax".

1. How many people had to be in on it?

2. What did *each* of them have to gain?

The most elaborate "hoaxes" in history have involved no more than a handful people ... precisely because the more people involved in a hoax, the more likely it is that *somebody* will divulge the secret and out all the others.

The moon landing "hoax" would have had to involve *hundreds of thousands* of people. Three different Presidents (two Democrats, and one Republican) and all their top administrations, members of the military, tens of thousands of technicians at NASA, astronauts and their families, radio-telescope operators around the world, and, oh, the governments of the Soviet Union and China.

And lets not forget the camera crews, special effects creators, radio-transmission engineers, and (as the moon hoaxers sometimes include) the press and news outlets, television stations, etc. that were also "in on it".

And for what? What did *each* of these people have to gain by participating ... and continues to gain *today* by continuing to keep it an absolute secret ... not a single leak ... for 37 years?!

Nixon couldn't even keep a handful of tapes secret ... a fact that was known by less than twenty people inside the trust of the White House. And yet we are to believe that this same administration was able to keep a *MASSIVE* secret, begun by Kennedy (who Nixon didn't exactly love), and continued by Johnson?!

Anybody who believes, repeats, or even *considers*, that the moon landing is a hoax, is a complete and utter IDIOT!

Answer 7

If it were a hoax then it would truly be a giant one. The chinese, the russians, the europeans and the australians would have had to be in on it see. Juuust to confuse little ignorant you... Who would be left that would not have had to be in on it? The africans and the southamericans and the penguins of antarctica. And of course the american public. Except the 400000 americans that at some point worked on the Apollo missions that is. And yet no one has spoken about it. Why is that exactly? Don´t think the US communist enemies would have had some kind of reason to say something? Oh yeah. The cold war was a hoax too. After all there is no place called the soviet union...

Answer 8

No, it wasn't a hoax, despite the number of people who confused it with a film with a similar story line about a faked Martian landing, and despite anybody claiming to "know Neil Armstrong" and such nonsense. It is still possible to bounce signals from earth off the laser reflectors left there as part of the lunar experiment pack. Universities around the world do this routinely.

And yes, the flag looks like it's waving in a 'non-existent' lunar breeze. It was made to look that way by making the flag of metalised material to give the appearance of movement, though it is 'still', even in motion shots, and you can see the rod through the top side of the flag from which it hangs down. And rocks brought back from the lunar surface have been distributed to geological research facilities all around the world. A very dumb manoeuvre for a hoax.

Given the enormity of the conspiracy of silence that would be required, in a country where the president himself cannot keep his extra-marital dalliances in the privacy of a room in the White House out of the news within days of it happening, one would have to be virtually bereft of critical thinking faculties in order to believe tosh of such monumental proportions as this hoax about it being a hoax.

EDIT:

"You have to remember that pocket calculators and digital watches were not invented in '69 "

Utter bilge. Electronic calculators appeared in 1963. I had one of the first, the best being the Anita. Apollo astronauts used powerful Hewlett-Packard HP-65 programmable calculators, which used 'wafer' stored program memory cards.

Answer 9

Nope that was a good golf strike !!

If the moon landing is fake then the earth must be flat too.

Men being in space was common in the mid 60's. The trip was only 3 days there which is not that hard at all considering a trip to Mars.

But no you cannot see the lunar lander or moon rover with a telescope on earth - that is a myth. It would be too tiny from a quarter million miles away and no telescope has that resolution.

Answer 10

No. Neither were the probes to Mars. Neither was the Russian satellite that radioed back images of the Moon's far side. Nor the spectacular Apollo views of the Moon from low orbit. How about Earth orbit--that isn't amazing enough for you? That looks easy?

edc200720007: you are a bedwetter.