OK, I watched the first half of the press conference but since I can't see the supposed pictures that they must be looking at, so it's hard to even know wtf they're talking about and I lost interest very quickly. As far as their demeanor, I will say that I find it rather odd, considering the supposed accomplishment and experience that these men had just had. The guy on the left just keeps fumbling with his papers with very little facial expression or emotion. The middle guy at least seems to crack a smile or looks as if he's recalling something. The guy on the right... he just sits there and looks to his left (I guess this is a screen with pics that don't show on the video) as if he's paying attention.

It's not at all what I would expect from 3 very well trained men in the military. They're body posture is even a bit sloppy for someone in the military, let alone men in front of TV cameras. It also seems totally unscripted but I can't tell. Either that or it's totally scripted and the guy in the middle is having some difficulty keeping with the script without constantly having to recall every word.

I also found it unusual that they didn't call it a "mission" in the begining when talking about it. The choice of terminology is not what I would have expected, nor is their lack of proud body posture.

I'd say that something isn't as it should be here but I couldn't tell you what it is beyond the above few particulars what it might be.

Stop being in denial. Watch it again:

I still like the John Lear theory about Alan Bean. After Bean retired from NASA he took up painting, everytime he painted an astronaut on the moon he would put a big old shiny sun in the visor of the astronauts helmet. Lear's theory was the only way that you would see a bright shiny sun in the visor was, if there was an atmosphere on the moon.

How can a sun burn brightly in the VACUME of spac? As far as being an idiot that is a little harsh. You may disagree with him but he does have an intelligence. He also pointed out the neutral gravity zone between the earth and moon is not what was origanally stated bt NASA. Just saying.

Movie directors in 1974 had already known about this but were too scared to point it out.

All the photographs brought back from the moon are correctly exposed, correctly framed, and crisply in focus. This seems suspicious. [Ralph Rene]

It would be suspicious if it were true. As a matter of fact, a significant percentage of the lunar surface photographs are blurred, unfocused, incorrectly exposed, or otherwise flawed. These photos weren't generally known to the public until recently because they weren't interesting to editors and publishers of popular works and therefore not cost-effective to duplicate. But now that it's possible to efficiently digitize the many thousands of photographs taken on the moon (even the bad ones) and distribute them cheaply via the Internet, we can see the full gamut of lunar surface photography. Below are a few unintentional photos that appear on the Apollo film rolls. These typically occur at the beginning of a new roll when the astronaut has to advance a few frames to get to fresh film. They're usually out of focus and badly exposed.