How is the moon landing not fake?

Question

1) There were no stars in the sky because of the Sun. But we CAN'T even see the Sun in the picture! Show me ANY picture of moon landing with the Sun in the sky. It was actually night because the sky was black. If the Sun was the sky wouldn't be black. Blackness is when there is lack of light.

2) It is said that over 500 million people witnessed the event on TV. That's ridiculous. Televisions were not even that common in 1969 to let over half a billion people see the event!

3) How can they reach the moon if the rocket is going in ONE direction and Moon is rotating the Earth at the same time? The rocket was going at 7 miles per second but the Moon's orbital speed is 1,023 miles per second!!! It is clearly impossible to catch up to Moon let alone land on it.

4) The Moon's gravity is 1/6th of the Earth's. This mean you can jump 6 TIMES higher. Yet if you look at the videos of the Astronauts jumping, you can clearly see that they are jumping just as high as anyone would on Earth. PROOF: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=efzYblYVUFk

5) Why did Neil Armstrong, a very religious fellow, refuse to swear on the Bible that he in fact landed on the Moon. He didn't even swear for $5,000 dollars! What is the reason behind this?

6) In 1969 computer chips had not been invented. The maximum computer memory was 256k, and this was housed in a large air conditioned building. In 2002 a top of the range computer requires at least 64 Mb of memory to run a simulated Moon landing, and that does not include the memory required to take off again once landed. The alleged computer on board Apollo 11 had 32k of memory. That's the equivalent of a simple calculator.

I'm sorry guys but we're NOT that technologically advanced. It was just a set up to impress the Soviets and even then a whopping 30% still think the Moon landing is BS.

Answer 1

Yes the Moon landing was 100% fake. It is clearly silly to think man could reach the Moon. All your evidences are very true.

Answer 2

1. The sources have many pictures showing the glare of the Sun, or the actual Sun in the picture. And there are many more; I just stopped looking for them at Apollo 12.



2. I was a teenager in 1969 and EVERYBODY had a TV, or several of them.



3. The Moon's orbital speed is NOT 1,023 miles per second!!! A simple calculation from the fact that the Moon's orbit is roughly a circle 240,000 miles in radius and the Moon takes about 29 days to go around once says the orbital speed is about 0.6 miles a second.



4. The space suits weighed 180 pounds on Earth. And they were very hard to move in. Your own video shows him falling more slowly than would happen on Earth when he jumps. OH! And notice that the flag in that video is not waving, which is probably why you didn't use the often mentioned "proof" that it is fake because the flag is waving.



5. You doubt his word? If so, Buzz Aldrin (not Neil Armstrong) will punch you.



6. I am a computer professional and worked in computer chip manufacturing for over 20 years and I can tell you that computer chips were invented well before 1969. The wikipedia page in the sources says that the integrated circuit market in 1962 was already $4 million, and was up to $312 million by 1968. I once wrote a very nice Apollo landing simulation on a TRS-80 computer with 4K RAM. In those days programmers knew how to do a lot with small amounts of memory. Programs today are extremely bloated memory hogs. It is shameful in my opinion. Never the less, most of the Apollo computations were done on the ground with large mainframes and the results sent up to the space craft as needed.



EDIT:

OK, I have more time and answered all your points above. Also, I have found some more pictures with glare from the Sun or even with Sun actually in the picture. I put the ones with the Sun actually in the picture first in the list. As you can see they are all terrible pictures.



Now go through all your home photographs and find out how many of them have the Sun in them. I suspect very few or even none of them show the Sun. Having the Sun in the picture is always bad photography, except maybe sunset pictures.

Answer 3

1) They didn't aim the camera at the sun, that would have overexposed the film and made a crappy picture. Try it sometime. The sky is black because there is no atmosphere to disperse the light like you see on Earth during the day. There are no stars because stars are relatively dim compared to what they were photographing. Go out on a clear night and stand under a street light and see if you can see any stars. It's the same concept.



2) Simply not true.



3) Thankfully, the moon has followed a very predictable path for the past billion years. With a little math, they were able to point the rocket not where the moon was, but where it was going to be. Also, I think your numbers are off.



4) Well, first of all, they never tried to jump as high as they could. The suits had huge backpacks which made them back-heavy. If they jumped too high, there was a real risk of them falling over backwards. Armstrong and Aldrin did try a few jumps to test the gravity and decided that it was a bad idea when they almost fell over. Given the stiffness and bulkiness of the suits, they weren't entirely sure they would be able to get back up again. I guess they figure laying on your back until your oxygen runs out to be a stupid way to die on the moon. Not to mention the risk of puncturing the suit if they did fall, which would have ended the trip real quick. The astronauts decided to play it safe. Oh, and like I said, the suits were bulky, stiff, and heavy. This made jumping difficult.



5) He didn't have to. He knows what he did, as does anyone with a brain. Making him swear on a bible or take a bribe is actually pretty insulting. It wouldn't have proven anything anyway, and he knew it.



6) Well, a simulation also has to, you know, simulate the environment of the moon. That takes a lot more computing power. You don't need that in the real world, since the laws of physics take care of that part for you. Did this 2002 simulation have killer graphics too? That's where your computing power is going. The Apollo computer was only needed to make relatively simple trajectory calculations and was nothing fancy by today's standards. So your assertion that it had as much power as a simple calculator is actually correct. That's all they needed. Actually, I take that back. They didn't need it. Each of the astronauts were quite capable of making the necessary calculations with a slide rule and sheet of paper (and in same cases, such as during the Apollo 13 mission when the computer had to be turned off to conserve power (look it up), that's exactly what they did). The computer just made things easier.



If there were any evidence that the landings had been faked, the Soviets would have been all over it. They have never said anything other than a begrudged congratulations. The "fact" that 30% of the population thinks it was faked does not prove anything other than that30% of the population doesn't know how to think.

Answer 4

You "rock solid" evidences that the moon landing is hogwash is themselves hogwash.



1) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Examination_of_Apollo_Moon_photographs. Check the link for refutation of your point.



2) World population in 1969, 3.6 billion people and TV's are actually pretty common in 1969. The US along had 44 million TVs and considering a family of four then the US alone accounted for 176 million. Not to mention that people without TV could have gone to a neighbor with a TV or perhaps stand in front of a store that sold TV to witness such an historic event. Either way, the number is just an estimate. I doubt somebody actually chronicled the exact number of people who saw the event.



3) I think you need some lesson in astrodynamics. google Hohmann Transfer



4) they were walking and never actually tried jumping. If they would have tried jumping they would have indeed jumped much higher than they would on Earth. By the way, the suit they are wearing is 60lbs. did it look like they are stressing? No, because to them, the suit is only about 10lbs.



5) Source?



6) Not everything needs to be computer controlled. Most of the stuff on the command module and lunar lander are done manually, including the whole landing sequence on the moon. The only thing they would have needed a computer for is navigation and the computer basically acted as a fancy calculator.

Answer 5

1) There are. They're not great pictures, though. Stand outside and stare directly at the Sun for several minutes. The effect upon the film is kind of like that.



2) Why would that number matter?



3) You lead your target. It's called a transfer orbit. Also, you seem to have included an incorrect value for the Moon's orbital velocity.



4) Well, no, they wouldn't be able to jump six times higher because they're wearing their own weight in spacesuit. For that matter, why would they WANT to jump six times higher?



5) Probably because asking him to swear on the Bible is kind of insulting, particularly when the party asking has made a business of slandering you. For that matter, what makes the Bible special anyways? When I took my oath of service, I declined the option of swearing on it, giving the justification that I didn't need the assistance of any deity to keep my word to Her Majesty.



6) In 2002, your computer burns a lot of memory with fancy graphics just to navigate your file system. Strip that away, and stick to basic calculations, and 256k will work just fine. Heck, the Commodore 64 had a pretty detailed space shuttle simulator on 64kb of memory. It looked like crap, but it used realistic math.



Supplemental: Why would the Soviets be fooled if it was a hoax? Do you think they were unable to pick up Apollo telemetry or triangulate the position of any Apollo spacecraft precisely? Heck. If you're right, all it takes to blow the lid off of this whole thing is a simpleton. Do you think the Soviets didn't have simpletons of their own?

Answer 6

1. [edited] Jason T has given you links to some.



2. Rubbish.



3. With a rocket, launched form a planet which is itself moving very fast.



4. In a bulky suit which weighed a non-insignificant amount and was constructed in a way which did not allow them to move very freely. You're not comparing like with like. Remember that while the astronauts' weight was reduced on the moon, they still had the same mass so momentum/inertia were the same as on the Earth. By the way, did you see John Young's (Apollo XVI) jump to salute the flag? Considering he was in a space suit and hardly bent his knees at all, he jumped pretty high.



5. He wasn't religious, particularly. Buzz Aldrin was. The man who had the Bible had been harassing Apollo astronauts for years. If they did swear on the Bible, he would announce they had just lied on the Bible and were going to Hell for it. You can't win with Bart Sibrel, so why give the little pr!ck the attention?



6. I studied orbital mechanics at Masters level. I could work out the orbital transfers necessary myself, using only a pocket calculator, a pencil and a sheet of paper. They could do it then, too. Also, did you ever see any pictures of Mission Control? Rows and rows of people sitting at screens? COMPUTERS. Built to do ONE job.



By the way - YES, THE DAYTIME SKY ON THE MOON IS BLACK. That is because it does not have an atmosphere like the Earth does.



People like you really get up my nose. How DARE you say such things? Go crawl back under your rock.

Answer 7

1. Stand in front of a spot light in a white suit on a dark night with stars in the background, and take a picture. Do you see them....? (A little issue called "contrast" - it's why, when we take pictures of stars, we have to leave the shutter open for several seconds to see them on film...)



2. That's crap. The number is more than *600 million* people witnessed it on TV. Between Russia,

Europe, Japan and the US, there would easily be that many TVs in the world.



3. Try understanding physics. Look up the mission profile. They sorta *calculated* where the moon was going to be ahead of time...



4. Those space suits weigh 200 pounds on Earth, and very inflexible. If they were bouncing around in a jogging suit, I'd agree, but they weren't. Your proof - isn't.



5. He didn't need to.



6. Again - read the mission profile.... the computer was more of a *timer* than anything. When the radar data was feeding into it - it gave two program alarms *during* the landing. Armstrong during the last 65 seconds of the flight actually took over from the computer for the landing.



Believe what you wish... It affects me not at all. But... isn't it difficult to breathe with your head so far down in the sand?

Answer 8

>>There were no stars in the sky because of the Sun.<<



The reason the Sun stops stars from showing up is because it illuminates everything else brightly, so to photograph the sunlit surface you need very short exposures. Stars don't show up in very short exposures.



>>Show me ANY picture of moon landing with the Sun in the sky.<<



http://www.lpi.usra.edu/resources/apollo/frame/?AS12-46-6739



There's one of about 30 from Apollo 12.



http://www.lpi.usra.edu/resources/apollo/frame/?AS14-66-9305



And there's a rather well known one from Apollo 14. Thrity seconds it took me to find those. Still need more?



>>It was actually night... If the Sun was the sky wouldn't be black.<<



You didn't pay attention in school, did you? The sky here is blue during the day because the air scatters the sunlight. There is no air on the Moon, and therefore no light scattering, hence a black sky. Do you think it is always night in space, since the sky is always black out there?



>>2) Televisions were not even that common in 1969<<



You have some figures to back that up? In the UK alone in 1969 over 18 million homes had televisions. With an average family of four, that's over 70 million people watching just here in the UK. And the UK isn't that big really...



>>3) How can they reach the moon if the rocket is going in ONE direction and Moon is rotating the Earth at the same time?<<



Ah, you don't know how it was done therefore it is impossible? What arrogance. So can we assume you think ALL space probes are fake? Are the Mars probes fake? Voyager? Pioneer? Galileo? Cassini?



>>the Moon's orbital speed is 1,023 miles per second!!<<



I suggest you recheck your sources. You've inflated the Moon's speed by a factor of 1,000. Look at the decimal point...



>>4) if you look at the videos of the Astronauts jumping, you can clearly see that they are jumping just as high as anyone would on Earth.<<



How high can you jump in a spacesuit with a pack on your back? More to the point, if that suit and pack were the only thing keeping you alive, WOULD you jump around like a loon? There are plenty of other examples of the low gravity. And at the end of the Apollo 11 moonwalk Neil Armstrong jumps to about the fifth rung of the ladder.



>>5) Why did Neil Armstrong, a very religious fellow, refuse to swear on the Bible that he in fact landed on the Moon.<<



Because he knows who the man asking him to swear is. Bart Sibrel makes a living calling the astronauts liars. He asked ALL the men who walked on the Moon to swear they did so. Three of them actually did. Sibrel just accuses them of commiting the blasphemy of lying in the face of God. He is not interested in truth, he is interested in getting publicity, even if he has to denigrate those people who have achieved more than he ever cold to do so. He is a fraud and a liar, and i know that from personal contact with him.



>>6) In 1969 computer chips had not been invented.<<



Yes they had.



>>In 2002 a top of the range computer requires at least 64 Mb of memory to run a simulated Moon landing.<<



Now consider what you DON'T need to use memory for on a real landing that you do for a simulated one. No memory needs to be devoted to simulating the gravity because the gravity is really there. no memory needs to be devoted to simulating the effects of firing the egnines because those effects really do take place. You don't have to simulate a nice picture for the person doing the landing because there is an actual moon out there. How much computer memory is required to run an arcade game simualting a car race? And how much computing power is needed for a real car to run? Do you see how flawed the comparison between the requirements of a simulated landing and a real one is?



>>The alleged computer on board Apollo 11 had 32k of memory. That's the equivalent of a simple calculator.<<



And that's all it needed. it also had two men on board who could fly the craft, and it had a bunch of people back on Earth using those big computers that take up whole rooms to do the really complex calculations to provide the data it needed. It didn't fly the whole craft on its own, and was more than capable fo doing the job.



>>I'm sorry guys but we're NOT that technologically advanced.<<



What wonderful technological arrogance. Do you know we had mach 3 capable jets, probes to Mars, nuclear bombs, ICBMs, and Boeing 747s and Concorde in 1969. What's so hard about landing on the Moon that made all that capability inadequate?



>>It was just a set up to impress the Soviets<<



A feat achieved just as well by a real landing.



>>JUST tell us how the Apollo 11 had 32k of memory!<<



Would you even understand it if he did? What are your qualifications to judge the capability of 1960s computer technology anyway?



Apollo was real. People worked damn hard to achieve something amazing. Deal with it.

Answer 9

It was real. All of the supposed "evidence" has been countered, many many times. Faking it would not have been possible with the knowledge and technology of the times, nor would such a fake have stood up to modern forensic analysis. Plus, the more people are involved in a hoax, the more likely it is that the information will leak or one of them will admit it outright. The number of people needed to fake a moon landing, including multiple launches that hundreds of people witnessed (unless everyone who went down to watch them was a hired patsy-including the news media people) would have assured that a leak would have happened somewhere along the line.

Answer 10

Every one of your statements is TOTALLY WRONG and can be disproved.

The Apollo landing takes place during lunar mornings, with the Sun shining brightly. The stars are not bright enough in this light to be captured in the photographs.





There were 6 manned missions to the moon. 12 Men have walked on the moon:

Neil Armstrong

Buzz Aldrin

Charles Conrad

Alan Bean

Alan Shepard

Edgar Mitchell

David Scott

James Irwin

John Young

Charles Duke

Harrison Schmitt.









The most compelling evidence is the Russians. If the Moon Landings had been faked, don't you think the Russians would have said something?



There is so much overwhelming evidence only an idiot would believe the landing were faked.

Third-party evidence for Apollo Moon landings is evidence, or analysis of evidence, about Moon landings that does not come from either NASA, the U.S. government (the first party), or the Apollo Moon landing hoax theorists (the second party). This evidence serves as independent confirmation of NASA's account of the Moon landings.

A total of 382 kilograms (842 lb) of Moon rocks and dust were collected during the Apollo 11, 12, 14, 15, 16 and 17 missions. Some 10 kg (22 lb) of the Moon rocks have been destroyed during hundreds of experiments performed by both NASA researchers and planetary scientists at research institutions unaffiliated with NASA. These experiments have confirmed the age and origin of the rocks as lunar, and were used to identify lunar meteorites collected later from Antarctica. The oldest Moon rocks are up to 4.5 billion years old, making them 200 million years older than the oldest Earth rocks, which are from the Hadean eon and dated 3.8 to 4.3 billion years ago. The rocks returned by Apollo are very close in composition to the samples returned by the independent Soviet Luna programme. A rock brought back by Apollo 17 was accurately dated to be 4.417 billion years old, with a margin of error of plus or minus 6 million years. The test was done by a group of researchers headed by Alexander Nemchin at Curtin University of Technology in Bentley, Australia.

"For those few misguided souls who still cling to the belief that the Moon landings never happened, examination of the results of five decades of LRRR experiments should evidence how delusional their rejection of the Moon landing really is.

Answer 11

We brought back rocks that have different isotopic content than Earth and no water content at all, not even water of crystallization. The sample returned by a Soviet automated probe matched the composition of the American samples, are you saying the Soviets were in on it with us? The Soviet Union sent even sent congratulations, would they have done that if it was a fraud?



Every radio engineer on Earth was capable of detecting TV and radio signals from the direction of the Moon in 1969. Not to mention radar. Does it ever occur to you that there were scientists and engineers in dozens of other countries who would have spotted a fraud immediately?



Some 40,000 people, thousands of whom were not even American who worked on the Moon landings, I guess you're saying they have kept quiet about this hoax for 43 years? Somebody must be paying them quite well to keep quiet. Newsflash, secrets with more than 10 people don't remain secret for very long.



Not to mention that we left behind a Laser Ranging Retroreflector that we still use today, and the lunar reconnaissance satellite recently took photos of the landing site. Don't be so damn gullible. We went to the moon.



1. Simple photography, you can't take pictures that come out with a light source like that behind them, so those pictures are less common, but they do exist and they're public record. Clearly you haven't searched.

2. What does that have to with the actual landing? Not to mention, you're wrong. By the end of the 60s nearly 95% of the US population had TV, the US population was 200 million, you're trying to say that there wasn't 300 million people in all other countries with a world population of 3.6 billion that watched?

3. Are you serious? It's called aiming at the right place to arrive at the right moment. Simple math.

4. I'd like to see you walk around on Earth like they did in the video. Try it.

5. Because that's blasphemy for a very religious person. Quote from Jesus: "You have heard that it was said to the men of old, 'You shall not swear falsely, but shall perform to the Lord what you have sworn.' But I say to you, Do not swear at all.... Let what you say be simply 'Yes' or 'No'; anything more than this comes from the evil one."

6. Integrated computer chip invented in September of 1958, SSI (small-scale integration) invented in 1962, by 1968 they only cost $2.33



Is that all you've got? If you're so easily duped, I think I might have a bridge for sale if you're interested.

Answer 12

Lol, what an awful arguments. Back to the drawing board.



1st, the moons reflection of the suns light made the space black



2nd, people around the world watched landing and guess what there were that much tv's in the world Europe, Japan, Australia (my father tell me he watched it here Croatia, ex Yugoslavia)



3rd, Lol, they did it doing better calculations then you do.



4th, they weren't jumping, they were walking. So compare that to regular walk here on earth.



5th, source?



6th, "Early developments of the integrated circuit go back to 1949, when the German engineer Werner Jacobi (Siemens AG) [3] filed a patent for an integrated-circuit-like semiconductor amplifying device[4] showing five transistors on a common substrate in a 2-stage amplifier arrangement. Jacobi disclosed small and cheap hearing aids as typical industrial applications of his patent. A commercial use of his patent has not been reported."



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Integrated_circuit



I think I just did.





You can't be serious. It caused the space to seem starless.

"The sun in the Earth/Moon area shines as brightly as on a clear noon day on Earth, so cameras used for imaging these things are set for daylight exposure, with quick shutter speeds in order to prevent overexposing the film. The dim light of the stars simply does not have a chance to expose the film. (This effect can be demonstrated on Earth by attempting to view stars from a brightly lit parking lot at night. Only a few of the brightest stars are visible, and shielding the eye with one's hands only marginally improves the view."



And what do you mean by 32k memory? It was plain computer with 64Kbyte of memory and operated at 0.043MHz. It had only controlled stop/start/defrost buttons.

Answer 13

The 9/11, Iraq/Afghanistan war, and stolen 2000 and 2004 elections conspiracies are much more compelling and frightening than this one. I suggest you focus your efforts on something important, whether our entire system is broken, whether we're even citizens of a country anymore, rather that merely slaves to corporate interests and the military-industrial complex. Anyway, the moon landing wasn't fake, several other landings took place, the "space race" ended AND there were no valuable resources there worth going back for and that's why we haven't been back. And there are now new photos of the landing site.

Answer 14

It is not fake because it actually happened. Your ignorance of the facts is stunning, as is your arrogance regarding your pitiable opinion. I despair for this generation!

There is actually MORE evidence of the six successful Apollo moon landings than there is for the Allied invasion of Normandy in 1944. Do you also deny THAT event?

Answer 15

You're dishonouring the first (and only human) to First step on the moon who just died 5 days ago.



NASA investigated three main methods of getting to the moon:



Direct Ascent - big rocket up to moon, lands on moon, rockets from moon to earth. Impractical, ginormous fuel consumptions.



EOR - Earth Orbit Rendez-vous - rocket out of earth atmosphere, orbit earth, land on moon, rocket back to earth. better, but similar problems.



LOR - Lunar Orbit Rendez-vous - rocket out of earth atmosphere to the moon, then orbit the moon, deploy module, land on moon, module reconnects with orbiter, use lunar orbiter to float back to earth.



If you are genuinely interested in this (and not trolling), I strongly recommend 'In the Shadow of the Moon', a a superb documentary where real astronauts are interviewed. It was in that that I first learned about Direct Ascent, EOR, and LOR considerations and then read about those in more detail later.



Cheers.

Answer 16

so about the 1023 miles per second. m/s is meters per second not miles per second. m = meter, mi = mile. a meter per second is FAR slower than a mile per second. Also, 1023 miles per second is not only faster than the earths escape velocity, and the suns escape velocity, it is actually over three times faster than the escape velocity of the galaxy at the suns orbit. Meaning if it were going that fast, it would promptly go rocketing into intergalactic space.

Answer 17

There are mirrors, left on the moon by our astronauts, we can beam lasers up to them and get a signal back, showing that we did in fact leave something up there, and the rest of the lunar lander is still up there on the moon, and is visible with a powerful telescope.

Answer 18

In common with all the other scientific illiterates your side of the fence, you trot out all the same old tired excuses, every one of which has been debunked over and over again. Some people HAVE achieved things in their lives, whereas I suspect yours is horribly empty. Either get on and actually do something or learn to live with it!

Answer 19

"HOW IS THE MOON LANDING NOT FAKE",,,,,,,,,,Which Moon landing are you talking about ?as there were 6 of them!!!!



The trouble with this very flawed assumptions of questions is that you are not going to any intelligent person to agree with you.

.......I think this is making you mad about now ha,ha,ha,...........



The Moon landings were very real ,All of them!!get an education.

Answer 20

How very uninteresting.



Now please give me your arguments on why the earth is flat and being supported by a giant turtle. Actually, I don't wanna know.

Answer 21

Someone's tin foil hat is on too tight.

Answer 22

its possible its fake and its possible its real myth busters proved it plausibly and so did fact or fake i believe its real

Answer 23

BY NOT BEING--impossible.