Why I believe the Moon landings may have been faked

a reply to: onebigmonkey


your Apollo 15 lift-off vid on the first page, shows a type of "swinging" motion all through the ascent...., the camera, it's mount, and the vehicle itself, looking out that window, appears to be suspended from something.....I had to watch it twice, and once it initially blasted off, the "swinging" was even more evident to me.

originally posted by: jimmyx
a reply to: onebigmonkey


your Apollo 15 lift-off vid on the first page, shows a type of "swinging" motion all through the ascent...., the camera, it's mount, and the vehicle itself, looking out that window, appears to be suspended from something.....I had to watch it twice, and once it initially blasted off, the "swinging" was even more evident to me.

If you're referring to the video of the lift-off from the moon by the Apollo 15 ascent stage, the swinging / swaying motion is fairly easy to explain, if you look at the way the LM was built. The ascent stage fuel and oxidizer tanks made up a very significant fraction of the ascent stage's mass, and they were filled with liquids of different densities. The fuel / oxidizer mix ratio wasn't 1:1, either. One consequence of that is that the axis of thrust from the engine doesn't pass through the exact center of mass for the vehicle, and as more fuel and oxidizer was consumed, the asymmetric condition only got worse. It wasn't beyond the ability of the guidance system to correct for, but those corrections are what caused the swaying.

a reply to: jimmyx

That's why there was a lunar module pilot.

The camera, by the way, is in a fixed position and not being held by someone so any motion of the LM would be captured by it, whether that is caused by movement of people within it or by the processes described by the previous poster. Did you notice the ASLEP equipment exactly where it should be? Did you see the bits of foil go flying in zero atmosphere?

If you think they are suspended on something they must be suspended pretty high up given how much of the ground they get to see. If you watch the Apollo 15 video you can see them pass over Hadley Rille, and the rocks and craters within it can be matched exactly by photographs taken by India's Chandrayaan probe. Those features were not known about before the mission because the Lunar Orbiter photographs of the Rille were not of a high enough resolution and one side of it was completely in shadow.

At the end of my page here:

onebigmonkey.com...

I overlay what you can see from Apollo 17's window mounted camera as the flight continues on the ground and the coverage gets progressively larger as it ascends and again showing details not available in images available before Apollo.

I like to think its real

a reply to: dylanispower

I'm not sure that we (the public) know absolutely 100% of the story, but I can find no solid reasons to suspect that the landings did not occur as history recorded them.

Maybe it's just not that difficult to travel to the Moon, and back...six times.

Never mind.

originally posted by: FlyingFox
Maybe it's just not that difficult to travel to the Moon, and back...six times.

Never mind.

9 times.

I am not for a moment suggesting it didn't happen (landing on the moon) because I believe they did, but it wouldn't have been particularly difficult to fake parts of it. Here are a couple points to ponder...

1. Russians - The Russians would have absolutely loved nothing better than to prove a hoax by the USA, and believe me, they were watching VERY carefully for just such an attempt at trickery. This is about as good a proof as any that we did actually go to the Moon. However, it is not necessarily proof that "man" landed on the Moon. There are many objects on the surface of the Moon which weren't physically placed there by human beings (but remotely). Even back then, technology was such it would have been easy to prove man wasn't "at" the Moon, but far more difficult to prove man was actually "on" the Moon.

2. Photos - Nothing to see here, move along. This subject has been hashed and re-hashed so many times it's no longer even hash-able. Photographs have been touched up and doctored since the invention of the camera. Making any sort of a truly 'scientific' observation based solely on a photograph is a fools errand.

3. Laser / Microwave reflector - Yes, it was put there, no doubt, but it doesn't mean a man set it there necessarily.

4. Secrets (that many people couldn't keep quiet) - True, but only a handful would have really had to (i.e. the astronauts themselves and a very few others).

5. S-Band - The first S-Band antenna wasn't deployed on the Moon until Apollo 12 (not 11). Therefore, any transmissions from the Moon's surface on Apollo 11 had to be relayed through the CM and then back to Earth. From Earth, it would have been impossible to determine if man was actually "on" the Moon during Apollo 11. Though it would have been easy to prove the CM was orbiting the Moon.

One of the biggest proofs that man actually DID go to the Moon can be found in the world public's reaction around the time of Apollo 17 (the final mission). The reaction was one of apathy and almost boredom. In just four short years man had gone to the Moon (6) times...by then it was 'old hat'. And then, on Dec 14, 1972 at 17:55 EST, man left the Moon for the very last time never to return (yet).

Was there incentive to conduct a hoax? You bet there was! The irony, looking back now, is; the political backlash (loss of national pride, bragging rights, etc) wasn't really all that great had a hoax been exposed. In fact, it's probably greater now than it was then. Back then they would have just said ...juuuust kidding...and everyone would have moved along with their daily lives after a while. There was so much political BS going on back then, a Moon hoax would have just been another example of the same. I believe this is even further proof it really DID happen.

Could it have been faked? Perhaps...or parts of it anyway. Was it (faked)? Nope, it all happened...just like they said (and we saw).

originally posted by: Flyingclaydisk
I am not for a moment suggesting it didn't happen (landing on the moon) because I believe they did, but it wouldn't have been particularly difficult to fake parts of it. Here are a couple points to ponder...

1. Russians - The Russians would have absolutely loved nothing better than to prove a hoax by the USA, and believe me, they were watching VERY carefully for just such an attempt at trickery. This is about as good a proof as any that we did actually go to the Moon. However, it is not necessarily proof that "man" landed on the Moon.

I've gone over this point many times before, but it doesn't sink in yet, obviously...

The USSR said nothing about the JFK assassination.....years before to the Apollo moon missions...

Many Americans did not believe their own government, saying it was a 'lone nut' (Oswald) that shot and killed JFK...

The US government didn't blame anyone else, not another country (ie: the USSR) was even implied in any way...

If the USSR was such a great enemy of the US, as you claim, they'd have jumped in delight, at finding a near-perfect opportunity to prey on their arch-enemy...

But they didn't, so that shows us they were not the great enemy, as we've always been told ....


No case for saying Apollo was a hoax, since they weren't really 'great enemies'..

But why do you think they would have faked it?

(Please exclude some kind of international/Russian competition as a reason because there is an untransparent global government that has been in power for longer than the late 1960s.)

originally posted by: Flyingclaydisk

One of the biggest proofs that man actually DID go to the Moon can be found in the world public's reaction around the time of Apollo 17 (the final mission). The reaction was one of apathy and almost boredom. In just four short years man had gone to the Moon (6) times...by then it was 'old hat'. And then, on Dec 14, 1972 at 17:55 EST, man left the Moon for the very last time never to return (yet).

This is your idea of proof?? It became almost boring, by the time of Apollo 17??

I'm lost for words, actually....


We know that it isn't proof, let's move along now...

a reply to: turbonium1

And your point is...what exactly???

Do you have a counter-point, or are you just throwing #### out there for the sake of being antagonistic?

originally posted by: MotherMayEye
But why do you think they would have faked it?

(Please exclude some kind of international/Russian competition as a reason because there is an untransparent global government that has been in power for longer than the late 1960s.)

Only they would know the specific reason(s) would have been, obviously.

So, we can only speculate on this matter....

Money would be enough reason, alone. They said a manned moon landing can be done, but only with a huge budget can it ever succeed..

More missions would follow that, and so on...

If they said there's no chance in hell of ever doing a manned moon landing, and returning safely to Earth...they'd never get $billions, which they (obviously) did

Several factors could also have played a part, also...


If they had stopped the hoax after Apollo 11, they'd get no more money..and their plans were a sham, to have several more lunar landings after the first, being a success.

originally posted by: Flyingclaydisk
Was there incentive to conduct a hoax? You bet there was! The irony, looking back now, is; the political backlash (loss of national pride, bragging rights, etc) wasn't really all that great had a hoax been exposed. In fact, it's probably greater now than it was then. Back then they would have just said ...juuuust kidding...and everyone would have moved along with their daily lives after a while. There was so much political BS going on back then, a Moon hoax would have just been another example of the same. I believe this is even further proof it really DID happen.

If they'd hoaxed the moon landings, exposing it at the time....wouldn't have been a major scandal? Unlike today, when exposing a hoax would (probably) cause a greater backlash....
Back then, the government would say 'juuust kidding', about hoaxing the moon landings, 'let's all move along now, folks!'..
This was the best time to expose a hoax, but they didn't expose it as a hoax at the time, which they would have, if they ever HAD hoaxed it..so this further proves it DID happen!!

Yikes!

They hoax the moon landings, expose it when it would have the least 'backlash'!

originally posted by: CB328
4. Nasa didn't provide a feed of moon landing video, the news media had to film it from a TV screen!

Ever bother to find out why?

www.clavius.org...

originally posted by: Flyingclaydisk
5. S-Band - The first S-Band antenna wasn't deployed on the Moon until Apollo 12 (not 11).

Wrong actually.

www.ab9il.net...

www.parkes.atnf.csiro.au...

www.parkes.atnf.csiro.au...

originally posted by: Flyingclaydisk
I am not for a moment suggesting it didn't happen (landing on the moon) because I believe they did, but it wouldn't have been particularly difficult to fake parts of it. Here are a couple points to ponder...

1. Russians - The Russians would have absolutely loved nothing better than to prove a hoax by the USA, and believe me, they were watching VERY carefully for just such an attempt at trickery. This is about as good a proof as any that we did actually go to the Moon. However, it is not necessarily proof that "man" landed on the Moon. There are many objects on the surface of the Moon which weren't physically placed there by human beings (but remotely). Even back then, technology was such it would have been easy to prove man wasn't "at" the Moon, but far more difficult to prove man was actually "on" the Moon.

Apart from the broadcasts intercepted by radio hams though.

2. Photos - Nothing to see here, move along. This subject has been hashed and re-hashed so many times it's no longer even hash-able. Photographs have been touched up and doctored since the invention of the camera. Making any sort of a truly 'scientific' observation based solely on a photograph is a fools errand.

Up to a point, but the capability of doctoring photographs is no proof that they were. All sorts of things are possible without actually happening. The photographs and 16mm video footage have been publicly available for decades, and some of the techniques require were not around. The first images from the missions were released just a few days after returning to Earth, and those featuring Earth are an exact match for weather satellite images taken at the same time. Zooming in to the Earth where it appears it's quite clear that they are genuine images, not paintings or touched up versions. You also have the issue of live TV, of which there are many hours of footage, and again they show time and date specific images of Earth and surface details that were not known about prior to the missions.

3. Laser / Microwave reflector - Yes, it was put there, no doubt, but it doesn't mean a man set it there necessarily.

But the fact that they are at exactly the locations of the Apollo lunar modules, and that we have photographs of them in situ again with details not known about prior to the mission, kind of supports the fact that people put them there.

4. Secrets (that many people couldn't keep quiet) - True, but only a handful would have really had to (i.e. the astronauts themselves and a very few others).

It would have needed to be a lot more than a handful. Stage sets don't build themselves, Film doesn't magically end up in the can by accident. Not one single person genuinely involved in the missions has ever come forward, despite the millions they could make. People have come out and claimed sort of sort underhand behaviour, but those people always end up being a little vague about their CVs, and invariably were never actually involved as closely as they claim.

5. S-Band - The first S-Band antenna wasn't deployed on the Moon until Apollo 12 (not 11). Therefore, any transmissions from the Moon's surface on Apollo 11 had to be relayed through the CM and then back to Earth. From Earth, it would have been impossible to determine if man was actually "on" the Moon during Apollo 11. Though it would have been easy to prove the CM was orbiting the Moon.

As has been pointed out, not true. You could not have relayed all LM surface comms through the CM, because it was only above the LM for a few minutes at a time. You can indeed prove the CM was orbiting the moon, largely through the thousands of photographs they took in so doing. I've plotted all of the vast majority of them on Google Moon, and you can see the orbital paths each mission took (see the link in my sig).

One of the biggest proofs that man actually DID go to the Moon can be found in the world public's reaction around the time of Apollo 17 (the final mission). The reaction was one of apathy and almost boredom. In just four short years man had gone to the Moon (6) times...by then it was 'old hat'. And then, on Dec 14, 1972 at 17:55 EST, man left the Moon for the very last time never to return (yet).

Was there incentive to conduct a hoax? You bet there was! The irony, looking back now, is; the political backlash (loss of national pride, bragging rights, etc) wasn't really all that great had a hoax been exposed. In fact, it's probably greater now than it was then. Back then they would have just said ...juuuust kidding...and everyone would have moved along with their daily lives after a while. There was so much political BS going on back then, a Moon hoax would have just been another example of the same. I believe this is even further proof it really DID happen.

Could it have been faked? Perhaps...or parts of it anyway. Was it (faked)? Nope, it all happened...just like they said (and we saw).

I get your point, but as with the photography angle, an incentive to hoax is not proof of one, and the fact remains that the number of things that would have to be brought together absolutely accurately (including making sure that geeks like me don't start looking at historic weather satellite data, or the location of the sun's reflection on images of Earth, or the movement of shadows on the lunar surface etc etc etc) means it was easier to just go!

originally posted by: turbonium1
Only they would know the specific reason(s) would have been, obviously.

So, we can only speculate on this matter....

Money would be enough reason, alone. They said a manned moon landing can be done, but only with a huge budget can it ever succeed..

More missions would follow that, and so on...

If they said there's no chance in hell of ever doing a manned moon landing, and returning safely to Earth...they'd never get $billions, which they (obviously) did

Several factors could also have played a part, also...


If they had stopped the hoax after Apollo 11, they'd get no more money..and their plans were a sham, to have several more lunar landings after the first, being a success.

They were cutting budgets even before 11 landed, so the money was drying up already and programs had to be altered and cut to cope with it. Many astronauts scheduled for later flights never got off the ground.

originally posted by: onebigmonkey

2 hits with an improvised golf club dangerous? Running and jumping potentially lethal? Read up on the suit construction.

Unless the Apollo astronauts were complete morons, nobody would ever act so foolishly while on the actual lunar surface.

Look at how the astronauts move outside the ISS, which show how real movements are done...

The ISS astronauts move extremely carefully, very slowly, throughout their entire EVA's...all of them move in this fashion, in all of their activities outside the ISS..

Their movements are all precisely planned out, and practised for, well in advance, long before they ever do the real EVA's...

This is just common sense, right?

Sure, it is.

They have better spacesuits, which offer greater protection, than those old Apollo suits.

And the most crucial difference to Apollo - the ISS astronauts already know every inch of their environment, outside the vehicle, whenever they go into EVA's!

All that, yet they all move slowly, and carefully, all planned out in fine detail beforehand, and performed with total precision, throughout the entire EVA!


Space is not a play zone. Apollo-land fun and games don't extend into these harsh environments, such as the moon...

One Apollo 'astronaut' goes off at full speed, running and bouncing downhill, over yards and yards of 'alien' terrain!

This stunt serves no actual purpose, no worthwhile goal, no possible reason, to warrant this act...

Don't tell me it's 'just some harmless fun, on the moon!' - that is a load of crap..


This can't prove a hoax, of course. But it certainly shows us that it was a hoax.... without a doubt.

I had the pleasure of meeting some Russian cosmonauts, one of which Valeri Polyakov, spent 437 days in space on Mir.

Was able to ask him two questions and my first was did America land on the moon.

He said yes they did and they went back 5 more times.

As pointed out previously, Russia would have blasted the US if they had a sniff it never made it to the moon.

I think its just such a mind blowing journey some people cannot accept it happened.

Just wish we kept going and coming back...sad.