It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Moon landing anniversary: 10 reasons the Apollo landings were 'faked'

page: 1

log in


posted on Jul, 16 2009 @ 10:21 AM
This article was today published in a British newspaper. It gives the 10 most common reasons why conspiracy theorists think that the moon landing was faked. It also gives plausible explanations for each of those 10 points.
1) When the astronauts are putting up the American flag it waves. There is no wind on the Moon.

The flag is held up by a horizontal bar and simply moves when it is unfurled and as the pole is being fixed into position by the astronauts. The flagpole is light, flexible aluminium and continues to vibrate after the astronauts let go, giving the impression of blowing in the wind.

2) No stars are visible in the pictures taken by the Apollo astronauts from the surface of the Moon.

The Apollo landing takes place during lunar mornings, with the Sun shining brightly. Exposure time on the cameras is set very rapid so as not to let in too much light and obscure detail. The stars, whilst being visible to the naked eye on the Moon, are not bright enough to be captured in the photographs.

3) No blast crater is visible in the pictures taken of the lunar landing module.

The landing module touches down on solid rock, covered in a layer of fine lunar dust, so there is no reason why it would create a blast crater. Even if the ground were less solid, the amount of thrust being produced by the engines at the point of landing and take off is very low in comparison to a landing on Earth because of the relative lack of gravitational pull.

4) The landing module weighs 17 tons and yet sits on top of the sand making no impression. Next to it astronauts’ footprints can be seen in the sand.

The layer of lunar dust is fairly thin, so the landing module sits on the solid rock. The dust, whilst blown away by the blast from the descent engines, quickly settles back on the ground and is under the astronauts when they begin their moonwalk.

5) The footprints in the fine lunar dust, with no moisture or atmosphere or strong gravity, are unexpectedly well preserved, as if made in wet sand.

The lack of wind on the moon means the footprints in fine, dry lunar dust aren’t blown away in the way they would be if made in a similar substance on Earth.

6) When the landing module takes off from the Moon’s surface there is no visible flame from the rocket.

The rockets in the landing module are powered by fuel containing a combination of hydrazine and dinitrogen tetroxide, which burn with no visible flame.

7) If you speed up the film of the astronauts walking on the Moon’s surface they look like they were filmed on Earth and slowed down.

The best you can say is: yes, a bit, but not really.

8) The astronauts could not have survived the trip because of exposure to radiation from the Van Allen radiation belt.

This claim is largely based on a claim from a Russian cosmonaut. The short time it takes to pass through the belt, combined with the protection from the spacecraft, means any exposure to radiation would be very low.

9) The rocks brought back from the Moon are identical to rocks collected by scientific expeditions to Antarctica.

Some Moon rocks have been found on Earth, but they are all scorched and oxidised from their entry into the Earth’s atmosphere as asteroids. Geologists have confirmed with complete certainty that the Apollo rocks must have been brought from the Moon by man.

10) All six Moon landings happened during the Nixon administration. No other national leader has claimed to have landed astronauts on the Moon, despite 40 years of rapid technological development.

This is a favourite among conspiracy theorists because it needs no evidence but points the finger at the presidency of Richard Nixon. The fact is that after the Apollo landings, the race had been won and the money dried up. The USSR has no interest in coming second, and politicians on both side realised that lower-orbit missions had much greater commercial and military potential.

What do you guys think? Were the Moon landings faked? Do these answers satisfy these accusations. Are there any other reasons why ppl think that it was faked?


[edit on 16-7-2009 by Rigel Kent]

Mod Note: External Source Tags – Please Review This Link.
Mod Note: Starting A New Thread – Please Review This Link

[edit on Thu Jul 16 2009 by Jbird]

posted on Jul, 16 2009 @ 11:23 AM
thought i would star and flag you because your about to get some heavy duty responses here, so good luck and hold on tight lol

posted on Jul, 16 2009 @ 11:52 AM
For a more comprehensive look at the moon landing hoax. Go here:

posted on Jul, 16 2009 @ 03:06 PM
reply to post by Rigel Kent

Even if the landings were fake it's kinda like a "white lie" or make believe. To me it's in the same category as the easter bunny, santa claus, the tooth fairy.

As long a people aren't killing others they can say what they want. They can say they went to mars as far as I care.

posted on Jul, 16 2009 @ 05:58 PM
This is a fantastic article. S&F from me.

I have always believed that we went to the moon, and have always kind of giggled inside at the people who thought otherwise. 99% of people who claim the landings were faked couldn't tell you a single fact about astronomy, astrophysics, jet propulsion, etc.

The part with the stars has always made me laugh the most, i couldve figured out why there were no stars in the photos when I was five years old. Maybe common sense is a disappearing quality in people. Either that or nobody has an extremely basic understanding of photography.

However, I will admit I didn't know what fuel they used. That is new to me, and interesting.

posted on Jul, 16 2009 @ 07:51 PM
reply to post by Rigel Kent


The flag does not wave:

It shakes as the man moves by and the extremely light air osculates a bit.

The moon does have some air

Any body of gravity will have an atmosphere of some kind, simply by the rules of physics. When the astronaut moves, the flag moves a tiny bit. But it does not move when the astronaut moves further away.

2.) Why would stars be visible as the sun glares? No, air is not needed.

Even in a vacuum, photons will be less, or not at all, visible if a bright light is there. The sun is that source. Sorry, but you're not going to see stars.

A while back, some Spaniards sent a balloon into the very upper limits of the atmosphere. Where the blackness of space is visible. There were no stars.

They were also specialized to only pick up certain kinds of light, as without an atmosphere, you're getting full exposure to the sun.

No stars would be seen

3.) Without a heavy atmosphere to carry gaseous osculation, why would there be? There's a crater enough.

The landing didn't really require a whole lot of rockets

And the take off was from a platform on the landing wheels, not the surface.

As you'll see here.

4.) The lander floated down. The people bounced around.

5.) Welcome to the world of high contrast photography.

6.) Why would there be? You just need an explosion, as seen in the above video.

7.) If you do this in the ocean, the same is true. Looking like is not justification. All low gravity does is reduce the speed of the rate of fall, which is the same rate. Learn calculus.

8.) Pills now a days, but back then.

Also, they made it so they avoided the worst.

Also radiation does not instantly kill.

Also most life forms survive this, without protection.

Such as:

9.) Because they came from the same environment.

The moon had has a lot of impacts and volcanic eruptions.

10.) No need nor want. Without a superpower to compete with, there's no reason to. Now that China is doing it, we are doing it too.

Welcome to the wonderful world of capitalistic competition.


posted on Jul, 18 2009 @ 08:30 PM
The simplest way to debunk the moon conspiracy crowd is simple. Too many people would have to be involved to pull off the conspiracy. The truth of a conspiracy this big would have leaked if it actually happened. I don't like this moon conspiracy crap because the people that believe it are spitting in the face of the men and women who made the moon landings happen....some of whom gave their lives for the cause.

posted on Jul, 18 2009 @ 09:21 PM
Don't think all the video was possible, it was too much of a
big production than an adventure in gravity sailing.
I would rather be in control of gravity.
Since I figure the control of gravity does exist and that von Braun
would also know I wondered why rockets were used.
I'm aware of quickly traversing the van Allen radiation belts but
there should be high levels on the Moon.
I just read how UV locks up DNA and the cure from 1967 might
be now touted as a radiation cure in an electrical engineering book.
If there is more than UV on the Moon the whole Moon Mission plan
night have been curtailed.
Lets see if we go to Mars.
The Russians are set to go with some great plans but no one
goes out of an enclosed cherry picker.

new topics

top topics


log in