newspaper templates - theme rewards

.

Moon Landing – Fact or Fiction

February 18, 2013 Debunkings, Missions 1361
Share!
Photo Credit: NASA - Apollo 15

Photo Credit: NASA – Apollo 15

 Between 1969 and 1972, the Apollo program flew six successful missions, putting man on the moon in one of the greatest moments in American history and in the 20th century. Or, so the story goes. Did NASA and the United States stage the moon landing? Is there any way to prove beyond reasonable doubt man went to the moon? Or, was the ‘moon landing’ instead the greatest hoax of all time.

I will be strongly referencing this website for the anti moon landing claims, specifically the ‘documentary’ called “Moon Landing Hoax” aired by the Fox network in 2001 (you can watch it on that website). The website itself is long and hard to read, but you’re welcome to check it out.

For the record, I cannot possibly cover every claim out there. For the sake of brevity, l will only cover some of the more well-known claims. For further reading, please see the websites I have listed below.

Let us begin:

Proving the Moon Landing was Real:

Test: surface reflection illuminates toy astronaut in shadow.  In second image, foreground reflection is reduced with black paper.

Image Credit: Ian Goddard

Claim #1: The pictures are backlit.

The sun is the only source of light so the shadows should be completely dark. You can clearly see objects in the shadow; this requires additional light.

Well, that is almost right. Yes, being able to see objects in shadows require additional light, but the sun isn’t the only light source on the moon. The lunar surface provides this backlight by reflecting the sunlight that hits it.

Ian Goddard set up a series of experiments to test this backlighting effect. In the top image, we see the iconic photograph of an Apollo astronaut descending the ladder onto the lunar surface, dramatically lit so the television audiences can see him preparing to take the first human steps on the moon.

Below it, are the experiments. The picture on the left uses a more reflective surface (I believe plain white paper. The astronaut is, as you can see, lit while the shadow remains in place. The picture on the right, however, has black paper concealing the surface, which prevents light from reflecting off the ground and lighting the astronaut’s suit.

Claim #2:

You cannot see the stars in pictures taken by Apollo astronauts. Without air, the stars should be more visible.

There are two things to consider with this. The atmosphere actually helps scatter the light from stars. This makes them more visible for Earth observers. In comparison to the objects close to us, the stars are dim. The Apollo missions are no different. If the astronauts had cameras on tripods set to have long exposure times, the stars would become visible. Instead, the cameras were set up to take pictures of the bright astronauts with the bright sun and the bright lunar surface. This means the shutter time was much faster and the stars didn’t have time to get exposed on the camera.

shuttle-endeavour-space-station-sts134

Image Credit: NASA
See more

As a proof of concept, this image was taken by an astronaut leaving the International Space Station on a Russian Soyuz spacecraft. It shows the Space Shuttle Endeavour docked to the ISS during it’s final mission on May 23, 2011. This image is special in the sense that it’s one of the first images ever taken of a shuttle docked to the ISS. It too was taken with a low exposure rate making the background stars appear invisible.

Image Credit: Ben Coffman

Image Credit: Ben Coffman

In contrast, a host of astrophotographers take images known as “nightscapes.” These images are able to reveal brilliant color and texture of the sky that you can’t get with the unaided eye (because the long exposure allows the camera to record more than a fraction of a seconds worth of data). An example can be seen in this picture of the Mt. St Helen’s region in Washington, USA by Ben Coffman.

Claim #3:

The shadows in the moon pictures are cast in different directions. This means there must be at least two light sources.

Anyone who has ever walked outside at night under street lamps will notice multiple shadows cast from various street lamps. As a good rule of thumb, one light source equals one shadow. If there were multiple spotlights in use, we should see more than one shadow for each object. If you look at the pictures, you will see one shadow. The reason the shadows appear in different directions is an effect caused by the uneven lunar surface and the 2-dimensional nature of photographs.

Again, a mock-up of the lunar landing site was set up by Ian to see if there was any merit to this myth  His picture is surprisingly accurate, but almost does a better job at dispelling the myth. It so happens the the three cast shadows all point in different directions from one another in the recreation whereas there are only two directions seen in the Apollo picture. All created with a single light source.

Claim #4:

There is no blast crater under the Lunar Module. The Lunar Module should have created a blast crater as it landed.

When landing, the Lunar Module only exerted a pressure of about 1.5 pounds per square inch (that isn’t a lot).

Claim #5:

The Lunar Module should have kicked up dust as it landed, that dust should be visible on the feet of the Module.

Again, the Module did kick up a little dust, but not anywhere near that much. Why? Simply because there is no air on the moon. When, a rocket blasts off from Earth, air pressure helps kick everything around. On the moon, however, only dust that touched the exhaust was displaced.

Claim #6:

Flag Waving

Image via NASA

As the flag is deployed, it waves due to a rogue breeze.

Firstly, it depends on how you want to define ‘wave’. If a wave is defined by the astronauts planning the flag (which is held in place by both a horizontal and vertical bar) twisting the poll to get the flag to stand upright. Then yes, the flag waved. But, it wasn’t due to a breeze. The reason the flag has ripples in it is because the horizontal bar didn’t fully extend on the Apollo 11 landing. NASA thought it looked cool and designed the other flagpoles to follow suit.

Claim #7:

The Van Allen Belts (radiation belts above earth) would kill any astronaut passing through it.

I think Phil Plait at BadAstronomy puts it best: “The van Allen belts are regions above the Earth’s surface where the Earth’s magnetic field has trapped particles of the solar wind. An unprotected man would indeed get a lethal dose of radiation, if he stayed there long enough. Actually, the spaceship traveled through the belts pretty quickly, getting past them in an hour or so. There simply wasn’t enough time to get a lethal dose, and, as a matter of fact, the metal hull of the spaceship did indeed block most of the radiation.”

Claim #8:

The ‘moon rocks’ were meteorites from Antarctica or were manufactured in a lab.

Moon Rocks

Image via NASA

As for the manufactured approach, we have moon rocks from Antarctica that fell as meteorites. The samples from the moon were tested against the samples from Antarctica and proves they are from the moon. As for the claim that all of the moon rocks came from Antarctica, that’s also incorrect. As any meteorite falls through the atmosphere, it gets scorched and oxidized. The Apollo samples do not possess those same qualities.

Bonus Proof:

It’s important to remember the politics surrounding the moon landing. While the Apollo astronauts were talking to NASA, the Russians, radio astronomers, and ham radio operators from around the world were tuning in. Third party observatories, such as the Alfred Lovell, were able to confirm the authenticity of the moon landing. If the USA had faked the landings, the Russians would have been the first to call them on the bluff.

In conclusion: the moon landing was real.

In the end, many of the claims come from people not understanding the principles of photography or physics. That’s ok, some of these conspiracy claims had me scratching my head. Hopefully, I’ve managed to clear them up for y’all.

I will conclude this article with a quote from Stephen Hawking that I think sums up the whole mystery quite nicely (even though Hawking was talking about aliens, the same principle applies). “If the government is covering up knowledge of aliens, they are doing a better job of it than they do at anything else.”

Write a Comment

186 Comments

  1. Nigel B September 17, 2013 at 3:27 am -

    Mythbusters also disproved many of the hoax claims in an episode.

    Reply
  2. Walid Jarrar October 2, 2013 at 3:08 pm -

    FACT FACT FACT!

    The flag is made of a metal sheet which was designed to make it look like a waving flag. If you watch the video of the moonlanding you can see that the flag is not moving and it’s normally shaped like that

    Reply
    • Mac Mill October 2, 2013 at 3:18 pm -

      Though I agree the moon landing is a fact, you are wrong about the Flag. The Flag(s) are made of nylon. In fact the flags no longer bear the colors of the U.S. Flag. They are white due to the radiation of the sun.

      Reply
    • Mac Mill October 2, 2013 at 3:19 pm -

      They did have wires inserted to make the appearance of “waving,” though.

      Reply
    • Mac Mill October 2, 2013 at 3:42 pm -

      And, as someone in another comment stated I have to somewhat correct what I said. The wires were because of the gravity of the moon. Not necessarily to give the appearance of waving. More for a practical purpose.*

      Reply
    • Walid Jarrar October 2, 2013 at 3:59 pm -

      mitcio kaku said that it is designed to make a wave like appearance

      Reply
  3. Walid Jarrar October 2, 2013 at 3:08 pm -

    FACT FACT FACT!

    The flag is made of a metal sheet which was designed to make it look like a waving flag. If you watch the video of the moonlanding you can see that the flag is not moving and it’s normally shaped like that

    Reply
    • Mac Mill October 2, 2013 at 3:18 pm -

      Though I agree the moon landing is a fact, you are wrong about the Flag. The Flag(s) are made of nylon. In fact the flags no longer bear the colors of the U.S. Flag. They are white due to the radiation of the sun.

      Reply
    • Mac Mill October 2, 2013 at 3:19 pm -

      They did have wires inserted to make the appearance of “waving,” though.

      Reply
    • Mac Mill October 2, 2013 at 3:42 pm -

      And, as someone in another comment stated I have to somewhat correct what I said. The wires were because of the gravity of the moon. Not necessarily to give the appearance of waving. More for a practical purpose.*

      Reply
    • Walid Jarrar October 2, 2013 at 3:59 pm -

      mitcio kaku said that it is designed to make a wave like appearance

      Reply
    • Mac Mill October 2, 2013 at 4:34 pm -

      I love Dr. Michio Kaku. I will trust his position, given his status and knowledge.

      Reply
    • Walid Jarrar October 2, 2013 at 4:36 pm -
      Reply
    • Mac Mill October 2, 2013 at 4:53 pm -

      He is awesome. I love his books.

      Reply
    • AJ Pthree October 2, 2013 at 4:55 pm -

      oh god that caller on Dr. Kaku’s program is such a fucking idiot.

      Reply
    • Gavin Thompson October 3, 2013 at 6:53 am -

      Don’t tell him that the moon landing is fake, he will make u feel like a dick head that u are…

      Reply
  4. Jason Strachan October 2, 2013 at 3:08 pm -

    I’d like to think it’s true -but I wouldn’t put it past the government lying to US citizens.

    Reply
  5. Jason Strachan October 2, 2013 at 3:08 pm -

    I’d like to think it’s true -but I wouldn’t put it past the government lying to US citizens.

    Reply
    • Leonard Daly October 2, 2013 at 4:07 pm -

      The government can’t keep a secret for 10 years that it was spying on US citizens. Do you even think it could keep a landing hoax secret for 40+ years?

      Reply
    • Pasquale Minichillo October 2, 2013 at 4:14 pm -

      yes

      Reply
    • Meiduanlung Golmei October 2, 2013 at 4:44 pm -

      its really a controversary thing…ya m wid pasquale…its a fake,we did a class with this topic

      Reply
    • Paul Brogan October 2, 2013 at 4:49 pm -

      How about read the article.

      Reply
  6. Jeffrey Ryan October 2, 2013 at 3:09 pm -

    How about all the time & money invested into science and technology to get us there. Obv. we went to the moon. 9/11 tho =x

    Reply
  7. Jeffrey Ryan October 2, 2013 at 3:09 pm -

    How about all the time & money invested into science and technology to get us there. Obv. we went to the moon. 9/11 tho =x

    Reply
  8. Richard Thietje October 2, 2013 at 3:10 pm -

    You can see the landing site with a telescope.

    Reply
    • Raymond Burford October 2, 2013 at 3:17 pm -

      You can’t see Kabyashree’s brain with a telescope!

      Reply
    • Mike Cavanagh October 2, 2013 at 6:06 pm -

      http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20101130140818AACjavc you can’t see it with a telescope. Why lie? I believe the moon landings to be real but there is no need to lie about it to win people over in your favour.

      Reply
    • Brian Peterson October 2, 2013 at 8:44 pm -

      They landed on the opposite, or ‘dark’ side of the moon, and we never see that side, as the moon does not rotate as people assume it does.

      Reply
    • Jon Lockhart October 2, 2013 at 9:13 pm -

      brian, the moon does rotate relative to the sun, but it spins the same speed as earth so it just looks like it doesnt from our point of view

      Reply
    • Adam Klingenberger October 2, 2013 at 9:23 pm -

      There is no dark side of the Moon. All sides receive the same amount of sunlight. If there were a side that is permanently dark, then the phase would never change from our POV.

      Furthermore, no, you can’t see the landing sites with any ordinary telescope or even the Hubble. You can, with a powerful enough laser, receive a reflection signal from the mirrors intentionally left there for measurement purposes.

      Reply
    • Adam Klingenberger October 2, 2013 at 9:25 pm -

      The reason we can’t see the landing sites is because we can’t resolve images that small with current (or near future) telescope technology. We have seen the landing sites via a lunar satellite called the Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter, though.

      Here’s Apollo 11 as seen from LRO: http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/files/2009/07/lro_apollo11site.jpg

      Reply
    • Jesse Blevins October 2, 2013 at 10:30 pm -

      Russian scientists compared moon rock samples to the ones brought back on the Apollo missions and confirmed they were real. Sorry if someone else stated this already, I didn’t read all the replies.

      Reply
    • Torin Sarasas October 3, 2013 at 12:30 am -

      Sounds like a solid proof there, Jesse. Good info.
      Just want to make sure: The Russian scientists did confirm the moon rock that was brought back by the first team (Armstrong) correct?

      Reply
    • Jonny Broun October 3, 2013 at 4:58 am -

      I’m pretty sure that was found to be petrified wood.

      Reply
    • Justin Eagle October 3, 2013 at 12:19 pm -

      the moon receives light to all sides but to us the moon doesn’t turn because it’s tidally locked so we only ever see one side! and that’s why there is a dark side the side we’ll never see!

      Reply
    • Shaun Clark October 3, 2013 at 3:37 pm -

      The Moon completes its orbit around the Earth in approximately 27.32 days the same time it takes to spin on it’s axis too. FML. Lol!

      Reply
    • Shaun Clark October 3, 2013 at 3:41 pm -

      If you looked down on the Earth-Moon system from the north celestial pole, from the perspective of Polaris, the North Star, you’d see that the Moon actually does rotate on its axis. In fact, as the Moon travels around the Earth in a counter-clockwise orbit every 27.32 days, it also completes one full rotation on its axis once every 29.5 days – also moving in a counter-clockwise direction.

      Reply
    • Brian Peterson October 3, 2013 at 10:11 pm -

      That’s what I meant by ‘as people assume it does’, Jon. I often decline to elaborate on things, as people who know don’t need to be told, and people who don’t believe they know everything anyway, and can’t be told. Their opinions are facts in their world. :/

      Reply
    • Adam Apollo October 4, 2013 at 12:49 am -

      @Adam Klingenberger: Proof? LOL!

      Reply
  9. Richard Thietje October 2, 2013 at 3:10 pm -

    You can see the landing site with a telescope.

    Reply
    • Raymond Burford October 2, 2013 at 3:17 pm -

      You can’t see Kabyashree’s brain with a telescope!

      Reply
  10. Alexander James Codilla Anton October 2, 2013 at 3:12 pm -

    the only thing we can do to prove if its fact or a hoax is to go to the moon and experience the evidence first hand.. agree?

    Reply
    • Mark Nezic October 2, 2013 at 3:35 pm -

      The evidence can actually be seen from Earth via telescope.

      Reply
  11. Alexander James Codilla Anton October 2, 2013 at 3:12 pm -

    the only thing we can do to prove if its fact or a hoax is to go to the moon and experience the evidence first hand.. agree?

    Reply
    • Mark Nezic October 2, 2013 at 3:35 pm -

      The evidence can actually be seen from Earth via telescope.

      Reply
    • Leonard Daly October 2, 2013 at 4:05 pm -

      No, we can bound lasers off of the mirrors placed on the surface. Using a sufficiently powerful telescope you can see the sites and other artifacts. The time delay in the radio broadcasts give further evidence that it wasn’t done on Earth.

      Reply
  12. Frank DiCostanzo October 2, 2013 at 3:13 pm -

    Why is this controversy still necessary to debunk? If we want to consider “huge conspiracies,” let’s talk about 9-11…

    Reply
    • Lena Parent October 2, 2013 at 3:24 pm -

      you’re an idiot

      Reply
    • Lee Wayne Ryder October 2, 2013 at 3:26 pm -

      Can we just block/ban all the conspiracy loonies please? this is a place for critical thinking.. not drooling monkeys.

      Reply
    • Damion Drew October 2, 2013 at 3:32 pm -

      I love how this person gets called an idiot for speaking the truth, hence the problem with humanity. As if someone who classifies themselves as a “domestic diva at home” is in any position to call anyone else an idiot.

      Reply
    • Pasquale Minichillo October 2, 2013 at 3:46 pm -

      I love when someone says 9 11 “loons” are not critical thinkers. There is so much evidence yet people just choose to believe what the government tells them to believe.

      Reply
    • Sander Schilder October 2, 2013 at 3:50 pm -

      Because some people prefer the moon to be either a hole in the sky or an object of cheese-like substance… people are strange

      Reply
    • Frank DiCostanzo October 2, 2013 at 3:57 pm -

      Domestic Divas Unite! It is nigh time to thoroughly smash the well-informed heads of critical thinking who dare suspect our own government of plotting black flag events on our own soil to promote their own political and economic interests abroad! Wait a minute…What’s a black flag event? Where are my bon-bons? :O

      Reply
    • Gus Stone October 2, 2013 at 4:18 pm -

      In defense of Frank, this page seems inhabited by the faithful, the scientism faithful. No opposing views are to be tolerated – the QtQ tablets are set in stone are immutable. Besides, most here in spite of the arrogance and bravado appear to be scientifically illiterate. Just read Lee and Lena and you get the picture. Basic physics to you two- answer this: how do two towers fall at the speed of free fall? since you know everything, you most certainly must know this.

      Reply
    • Tesseract Orion October 2, 2013 at 4:28 pm -

      What a bunch of morons on here, seriously *sigh*

      Reply
    • Lrak Efie October 2, 2013 at 4:29 pm -

      Are the admin of this page conspiracy loonies or something? Why do they keep posting this material?

      Reply
    • Bryant Baker October 2, 2013 at 6:00 pm -

      Don’t you guys watch south park the 911 conspiracy is a conspiracy by the government so people think there more powerful than they are duh

      Reply
    • Bob Benson October 2, 2013 at 6:01 pm -

      Conspiracy loonies? So if I called you a faggot, we can just dismiss everything you post?

      Reply
    • Adhi Nugraha October 2, 2013 at 7:24 pm -

      And WTC building 7 just fall but strangely there is no plane hit it and many others strange issue on 2 building

      Reply
    • Zach Cox October 2, 2013 at 7:36 pm -

      I think it’s funny when 9/11 conspiracy theorists call people who believe the official account without question sheep (or any other similar term), when they believe everything they heard in Loose Change without question, even though virtually every claim in that documentary has been disproved.

      Do your own research, folks. Learn about engineering, learn about skyscrapers, learn about the effects of fire on steel, and then with that knowledge, look at the events of that day and draw your own conclusions. More than likely, you’ll realize there IS NO conspiracy.

      Reply
    • Zach Cox October 2, 2013 at 7:40 pm -

      @ Gus – case and point about not doing your own research. The towers did not “fall at the speed of free fall.” If they fell at free-fall speed, answer me this: why, in every video of both collapses, is debris clearly visible peeling away from each building and FALLING FASTER THAN THE SPEED OF THE COLLAPSE? Seriously, go watch a video of either collapse. You can see debris peeling away from the facade and falling to the street below. If the buildings collapsed at free-fall speed, the collapse would remain level with the debris it was generating, but instead you can see that the collapse is a good ten to twenty stories above the falling debris at any given time.

      Reply
    • Zach Cox October 2, 2013 at 7:48 pm -

      @ Adhi – there is nothing strange about the collapse of the original 7 World Trade Center. It caught fire, and firefighters were unable to extinguish the blaze because local water systems were damaged in the collapse of the towers. This allowed the fire to burn past the limit of the building’s fireproofing (something that doesn’t normally happen, hence why steel frame buildings don’t often collapse because of fire), crippling the building’s internal structure on the east side. This caused a chain reaction that pulled the rest of the internal structure down with it, and with nothing left to support it, the perimeter structure collapsed several seconds later. If you don’t believe me, go watch a video of the collapse (one that shows the building for at least 20 seconds or so before it collapses). You can clearly see the mechanical penthouse on the roof collapse down into the structure several seconds before the rest of the building comes down.

      Oh, and in case you’ve been told this lie: no, 7 World Trade Center was NOT the only steel-frame structure to collapsed because of fire. A good example is the Windsor Tower in Madrid. It was a steel-concrete composite structure with no sprinkler system. The steel part of the structure collapse in 2005 after the building caught fire. No aircraft hit the building, or for that matter, any other surrounding buildings.

      Reply
    • Zach Cox October 2, 2013 at 7:51 pm -

      Here are some good videos explaining things better than I could. I suggest you guys watch the whole thing, you might find it informative.

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mmIjDfpTeMc

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7PpsCCTMP8w

      Reply
    • Gus Stone October 2, 2013 at 7:51 pm -

      The towers feel in about 10,5 seconds, that means there was no resistance to any of the supporting structure. Each tower had 18 inner columns which apparently offered zero resistance to collapse. I don’t know what happened, all I know is the official version and the available data do not match. Since you claim to be very well informed, are you aware of the seismic signature for the two towers…it barely registered. Can you answer why? each tower weighted about 500 thousand tons….How is this possible.

      Reply
    • Gus Stone October 2, 2013 at 8:00 pm -

      Obviously you are just parroting stuff, use your own words and deductions before you start engaging in that tired lecturing on conspiracy. OR better yet study history and abandon bling faith as a tool to assess the world.

      Reply
    • Luke Nichols October 2, 2013 at 8:12 pm -

      This video is the truth about 9/11/01

      Reply
    • Zach Cox October 2, 2013 at 8:38 pm -

      Several problems with your argument, Gus:

      1. You completely failed to address my point about debris falling faster than the structure that was allegedly falling at “free-fall speeds.”

      2. No they didn’t. It took about twenty seconds for each tower to collapse. This is a FACT. If you don’t believe me, click the first of the two links I posted. Skip to 8:25. The North Tower begins collapsing at 8:27 in the video. At about 8:38 (11 seconds after the start of the collapse, about the time, according to you, the building should have totally collapsed), you can see the top of a large, still intact part of the facade emerge from the smoke. Now look directly beneath this. You can see the structure CONTINUE TO COLLAPSE for another solid five seconds after that, roughly sixteen seconds after the start of the collapse – AND THE BUILDING STILL HASN’T REACHED GROUND LEVEL. The camera is roughly level with the 40th floor (give or take) of the Woolworth Building, and since the World Trade Center is some distance behind the Woolworth Building and had slightly taller floors, we can say the building still had at least 20-30 floors left when the point of collapse reached the bottom of the frame. Based on the rate of collapse in the video, this works out to roughly twenty seconds – about twice as long as what you claim. And that’s not even counting the parts of the facade left standing for several seconds after that, if we get into that it’s more like thirty seconds.

      3. Wrong again. Both buildings featured 47 columns in the inner core, not 18. Furthermore, the core of the building supported 50-60% of the gravity load of the structure (I’ve heard varying accounts), with the perimeter columns taking the remaining 40-50% and all of the wind load. To say that they offered no resistance is factually untrue. They weren’t designed to take the dynamic loads of a progressive collapse, no, but that doesn’t mean they didn’t offer any resistance. This is what I’m talking about when I say that you people A, need to check your facts and not just regurgitate everything you read on conspiracy websites (I’ve seen the 18 column figure before, and the ONLY place that number ever appears is on conspiracy websites. Simply looking at a blueprint of the structure is enough to disprove this), and B, learn about structural engineering. Do you know the difference between a wind load and a gravity load? Or the difference between a static load and a dynamic load? Because if you’re going to debate this subject, you should.

      4. Seismic equipment is designed to register the movement of tectonic plates weighing trillions of tons. The collapse of the towers didn’t really register because 500,000 tons hitting the ground – even *at* freefall speed – is negligible in geologic terms.

      5. I’m sorry, “tired lecture?” Gus, you’re the one regurgitating conspiracy theories that were disproved back around 2006. The only reason people like me have to keep repeating themselves is because people like you keep asking the same questions over and over, because you don’t like the fact that the answers don’t point to a conspiracy. You made up your mind that there was a conspiracy and THEN you try to twist the facts around to suit that position (even when they don’t), rather than gathering the evidence FIRST and drawing your own conclusions based off of that. If you want me to come up with some new counter-arguments, I suggest you first come up with some new arguments for me to counter.

      Reply
    • Brian Peterson October 2, 2013 at 8:39 pm -

      Those who do not understand such things probably never will.
      It is a fact that Muslim extremists did not fly planes into the twin towers, or crash a plane into the Pentagon, or crash one into the ground.
      Our governments have been doing these things deliberately for very specific reasons for hundreds and hundreds of years. It is textbook, and it works like a charm.
      The Diocletian Paradigm.
      The Hegelian Dialectic.
      Laymen call it problem-reaction-solution.

      Those who believe the official story of 9-11, and believe it because they were TOLD to by their ‘news’ also think they elect the President..and actually think that they have a Constitution. Wrong, and wrong again.

      It isn’t even a secret how these things work-those who don’t see it have zero understanding of how those in control truly operate, or how they always have, and people even do not try-they are still under the impression that ‘the news’ is there to inform and educate them. They are lost.

      9-11 was literally a 2,000 year-old mind trick, and the vast, vast majority fall for it hook, line, and sinker-every time.
      It’s going on constantly-because it works that well.
      The people behind those kinds of things have even been literally telling all of us, openly and publicly, that they’re doing them, and even why- because they know the average person is so lost they will actually FIGHT to believe the lies that are spoon-fed to them.
      It’s extraordinarily sad.

      Anyone who disagrees knows nothing of what they speak, and until they understand the paradigm.. the dialectic, should spare themselves looking foolish, keep their mouths shut, and stick their faces back into their TV.

      Reply
    • Pablo Robinson October 2, 2013 at 8:41 pm -

      When someone brings the 911 conspiracy theory, the ones who want to debunk the theorists talk about the towers and how they collapsed, but the real question is: ” what really happened inside of those planes?”

      Reply
    • Brian Peterson October 2, 2013 at 8:48 pm -

      …and the guy sits there trying to ‘reason’ that an office fire..burning papers and the like, completely destroyed the third tower.
      Case in point, and ’nuff said. Hopeless.

      Reply
    • Gus Stone October 2, 2013 at 8:57 pm -

      Zach, when you answer my question on the seismic signature I’ll respond to your copy and paste bit. BTW I made a mistake, the towers weighted a million and a half tons each, answer why the seismic signature barely registered……crickets.

      Reply
  13. Frank DiCostanzo October 2, 2013 at 3:13 pm -

    Why is this controversy still necessary to debunk? If we want to consider “huge conspiracies,” let’s talk about 9-11…

    Reply
    • Lena Parent October 2, 2013 at 3:24 pm -

      you’re an idiot

      Reply
    • Lee Wayne Ryder October 2, 2013 at 3:26 pm -

      Can we just block/ban all the conspiracy loonies please? this is a place for critical thinking.. not drooling monkeys.

      Reply
    • Damion Drew October 2, 2013 at 3:32 pm -

      I love how this person gets called an idiot for speaking the truth, hence the problem with humanity. As if someone who classifies themselves as a “domestic diva at home” is in any position to call anyone else an idiot.

      Reply
    • Pasquale Minichillo October 2, 2013 at 3:46 pm -

      I love when someone says 9 11 “loons” are not critical thinkers. There is so much evidence yet people just choose to believe what the government tells them to believe.

      Reply
    • Sander Schilder October 2, 2013 at 3:50 pm -

      Because some people prefer the moon to be either a hole in the sky or an object of cheese-like substance… people are strange

      Reply
    • Frank DiCostanzo October 2, 2013 at 3:57 pm -

      Domestic Divas Unite! It is nigh time to thoroughly smash the well-informed heads of critical thinking who dare suspect our own government of plotting black flag events on our own soil to promote their own political and economic interests abroad! Wait a minute…What’s a black flag event? Where are my bon-bons? :O

      Reply
  14. Paul Green October 2, 2013 at 3:13 pm -

    Of course they went there. Fuck’s sake. What a shite thing to post.

    Reply
  15. Paul Green October 2, 2013 at 3:13 pm -

    Of course they went there. Fuck’s sake. What a shite thing to post.

    Reply
    • Silvia Kutle October 2, 2013 at 8:32 pm -

      You didn’t read the article either did you?

      Reply
    • Bob Osborne October 3, 2013 at 11:57 am -

      Paul Green is spot on and yes I read the stupid article. What’s next, an artilce on why the earth isn’t flat?

      Reply
  16. Nathaniel Jones October 2, 2013 at 3:13 pm -

    People, we placed mirrors on it. If you have a powerful enough laser you can check

    Reply
  17. Nathaniel Jones October 2, 2013 at 3:13 pm -

    People, we placed mirrors on it. If you have a powerful enough laser you can check

    Reply
    • AJ Pthree October 2, 2013 at 4:43 pm -

      <3 <3 <3

      Reply
    • AJ Pthree October 2, 2013 at 4:43 pm -

      needs to happen to everyone like that guy – BUZZ ALDRIN, motherfucker.

      Reply
    • Bryant Baker October 2, 2013 at 6:02 pm -

      That a boy Mr. Aldrin don’t take that shit from nobody

      Reply
    • Gary J Parker October 2, 2013 at 6:17 pm -

      kudos Mr Aldrin, he payed his dues not to have to deal with such fuckwits.

      Reply
    • Mark Nezic October 3, 2013 at 1:11 am -

      Not a bad punch for an old guy, you can really see that knob’s head snap back.

      Reply
    • Mark Nezic October 3, 2013 at 1:11 am -

      Not a bad punch for an old guy, you can really see that knob’s head snap back.

      Reply
    • Mauricio Brenes October 3, 2013 at 11:47 am -

      Good boxing stance…!

      Reply
    • Brian Peterson October 3, 2013 at 10:05 pm -

      Awe. Some. :D

      Reply
    • Adam Apollo October 4, 2013 at 12:51 am -

      Proves he’s tired of making up lies.

      Reply
  18. Jimmy Hutton October 2, 2013 at 3:19 pm -

    Mirrors! Nuff said

    Reply
  19. Jimmy Hutton October 2, 2013 at 3:19 pm -

    Mirrors! Nuff said

    Reply
  20. Peter Mandzuk October 2, 2013 at 3:19 pm -

    This is absolutely ridiculous. It would cost more to stage it, than do it. Give this up already.

    Reply
  21. Peter Mandzuk October 2, 2013 at 3:19 pm -

    This is absolutely ridiculous. It would cost more to stage it, than do it. Give this up already.

    Reply
  22. John Ali Gator-Rodgers October 2, 2013 at 3:21 pm -

    The greatest hoax of all time is sitting in the White House.

    Reply
  23. John Ali Gator-Rodgers October 2, 2013 at 3:21 pm -

    The greatest hoax of all time is sitting in the White House.

    Reply
    • Leonard Daly October 2, 2013 at 4:07 pm -

      No, it was the one who left in 2009.

      Reply
    • John Ali Gator-Rodgers October 2, 2013 at 4:08 pm -

      Hahaha your right its Bush’s fault and I’m racist. Get a life DA.

      Reply
    • Leonard Daly October 2, 2013 at 5:37 pm -

      Do you want an enumeration of things that are Bush’s fault?

      Reply
  24. Peter Sharpe October 2, 2013 at 3:21 pm -

    It’s forgivable to doubt it ever happened when we haven’t returned in 40 years, due to lack of vision Obama saw fit to cancel constellation/orion/ares.

    Nobody has walked on the moon during my lifetime, and I doubt anyone ever will unless there is a drastic change of attitude toward science and exploration. In the current age of austerity, there is apparently no percieved value in progress.

    Reply
  25. Peter Sharpe October 2, 2013 at 3:21 pm -

    It’s forgivable to doubt it ever happened when we haven’t returned in 40 years, due to lack of vision Obama saw fit to cancel constellation/orion/ares.

    Nobody has walked on the moon during my lifetime, and I doubt anyone ever will unless there is a drastic change of attitude toward science and exploration. In the current age of austerity, there is apparently no percieved value in progress.

    Reply
  26. Gerard Von Arkham October 2, 2013 at 3:25 pm -

    Science deniers, science deniers everywhere.

    Reply
  27. Gerard Von Arkham October 2, 2013 at 3:25 pm -

    Science deniers, science deniers everywhere.

    Reply
  28. David Allbritton October 2, 2013 at 3:25 pm -

    If Walter Cronkite, the most trusted newsman in the world, says it happened, it happened!

    Reply
  29. David Allbritton October 2, 2013 at 3:25 pm -

    If Walter Cronkite, the most trusted newsman in the world, says it happened, it happened!

    Reply
  30. Eric Hanaway October 2, 2013 at 3:26 pm -

    Not sure why a supposed, scientific website, that I thought I respected, would post such an unscientific thing….

    Reply
    • Silvia Kutle October 2, 2013 at 8:32 pm -

      Did you read the article?

      Reply
    • Mark Nezic October 2, 2013 at 8:58 pm -

      How embarrassing Eric, you didn’t read the article.

      Reply
    • Eric Hanaway October 2, 2013 at 9:18 pm -

      The title is a cheap, shameful way to get the weak to read the article. Thats what titles are for. No need to read the article.

      Reply
    • Nathan A Brooks October 3, 2013 at 12:57 am -

      wow! good one!

      Reply
    • Jake Linton October 3, 2013 at 2:52 am -

      Don’t get your patriotic knickers in a twist there, bud…

      Reply
  31. Eric Hanaway October 2, 2013 at 3:26 pm -

    Not sure why a supposed, scientific website, that I thought I respected, would post such an unscientific thing….

    Reply
  32. Matthew Stone October 2, 2013 at 3:28 pm -

    ive noticed that people who run their mouths about conspiracies usally arent educated or stand to make a profit from the conspiracies, plus as you dive into the way they say it happened, you find all sorts of holes and “information” that isnt really there, personaly, i think consperacies and the people who come up with them are the real threat to america, because it seperates us and makes distrust each other, which is one way to destroy a country

    Reply
    • Pasquale Minichillo October 2, 2013 at 3:53 pm -

      And on the other side you have those who believe whatever the government tells you without question. Yet every other country is not to be trusted? Look at everyone that profited from 9 11. The country being distrusting is what is destroying itself. Not the people smart enough to see its lies.

      Reply
  33. Matthew Stone October 2, 2013 at 3:28 pm -

    ive noticed that people who run their mouths about conspiracies usally arent educated or stand to make a profit from the conspiracies, plus as you dive into the way they say it happened, you find all sorts of holes and “information” that isnt really there, personaly, i think consperacies and the people who come up with them are the real threat to america, because it seperates us and makes distrust each other, which is one way to destroy a country

    Reply
    • Pasquale Minichillo October 2, 2013 at 3:53 pm -

      And on the other side you have those who believe whatever the government tells you without question. Yet every other country is not to be trusted? Look at everyone that profited from 9 11. The country being distrusting is what is destroying itself. Not the people smart enough to see its lies.

      Reply
    • Matthew Stone October 2, 2013 at 4:04 pm -

      i agree but there are things that are what they are and not any diffrent, yes, there where and are people and companies that profit from 9/11, just as there are people and companies that profit from cancer reasurch, i just mean that we should question everything and use our own heads, but be critical in your thinking, i dont belive everything everyone tells me, i take what they say, i do my own reasurch and make my own conclusion, that being said, everyones entitled to their opinion, just be a critical thinker is my point

      Reply
    • Pasquale Minichillo October 2, 2013 at 4:13 pm -

      I feel the same way. There is just a lot that we are told and supposed to accept. I just wish the country was honest with us about more stuff.

      Reply
    • Gary J Parker October 2, 2013 at 6:18 pm -

      occams razor

      Reply
  34. Eric Hanaway October 2, 2013 at 3:29 pm -

    So we faked it, but our mortal enemies at the time, who were humiliated that we made it first, didn’t call us out and say we didn’t go? The Soviets, guys

    Reply
  35. Eric Hanaway October 2, 2013 at 3:29 pm -

    So we faked it, but our mortal enemies at the time, who were humiliated that we made it first, didn’t call us out and say we didn’t go? The Soviets, guys

    Reply
    • Danny Gonzo Adams October 2, 2013 at 5:10 pm -

      Cuz they actually didn’t really give a rats ass

      Reply
    • David Callaway October 2, 2013 at 5:40 pm -

      Because in their “world” the Soviets were in on it, logic is not allowed in their “world”.

      Reply
  36. Raymond Burford October 2, 2013 at 3:32 pm -

    Fuck! How many dumb fuck Americans still believe its a hoax? Crap, no wonder the US is full of Religitards and is going to shit! If this was a fake race instead of a space race it would have been a Russian flag!

    Reply
  37. Raymond Burford October 2, 2013 at 3:32 pm -

    Fuck! How many dumb fuck Americans still believe its a hoax? Crap, no wonder the US is full of Religitards and is going to shit! If this was a fake race instead of a space race it would have been a Russian flag!

    Reply
  38. Gabe Sebastian October 2, 2013 at 3:37 pm -

    As stupid as this idea is…we left all kinds of shit there. Reflectors for lasers to the damned rover. You can see it, you dumbasses!

    Reply
  39. Gabe Sebastian October 2, 2013 at 3:37 pm -

    As stupid as this idea is…we left all kinds of shit there. Reflectors for lasers to the damned rover. You can see it, you dumbasses!

    Reply
  40. Angelo Tolfa October 2, 2013 at 3:37 pm -

    My only problem is why havent we been back in 40 years? They either went there, and found something they dont want to say. Or they never went there, or cant

    Reply
  41. Angelo Tolfa October 2, 2013 at 3:37 pm -

    My only problem is why havent we been back in 40 years? They either went there, and found something they dont want to say. Or they never went there, or cant

    Reply
    • Bryant Baker October 2, 2013 at 6:05 pm -

      We haven’t been back because the only reason we went their in the first place was to beat the soviets. After the Soviets stopped focusing on the moon in their space program the American government did as well.

      Reply
    • Bruno Barral October 3, 2013 at 1:08 pm -

      Too expensive.

      Reply
  42. Gerard Von Arkham October 2, 2013 at 3:41 pm -

    You can see the freaking landing site with a telescope! Unless of course all the telescopes in the world have been manipulated to make you see something that isn’t there….(sarcasm)

    Reply
  43. Gerard Von Arkham October 2, 2013 at 3:41 pm -

    You can see the freaking landing site with a telescope! Unless of course all the telescopes in the world have been manipulated to make you see something that isn’t there….(sarcasm)

    Reply
  44. Tavo González October 2, 2013 at 3:45 pm -

    MythBusters

    Reply
  45. Mark Saddington October 2, 2013 at 3:47 pm -

    There’s probably an empty crisp packet and coke can knocking about up there…

    Reply
  46. Steve Curtin October 2, 2013 at 3:48 pm -

    The only moon landing conspiracy theory that makes any sense to me is that they went to the moon and what they found there was so frightening/crazy/whatever (aliens) that they had to show the staged version to the masses. I’m not saying that’s what happened but I’ve never seen any evidence that’s credible, and most of it is so stupid and poorly fabricated and obviously fake, as in a fake of a fake landing. I particularly love the one where Armstrong is stepping off the lander, and the rafter falls from the ceiling. People really thought that was the smoking gun.

    Reply
    • Paul Brogan October 2, 2013 at 5:00 pm -

      And if they did fake it don’t you think they would’ve then ‘gone back’ to get that flag in there for real? Sending robots to Mars yet still never actually been on the moon? Lols…oh wait, the Mars rovers are fake too I suppose.

      Reply
    • Steve Curtin October 2, 2013 at 5:11 pm -

      Reading comprehension. Look it up.

      Reply
  47. Jeff Gustav October 2, 2013 at 3:51 pm -

    “Moon Landing: Facto or Fiction?”
    That hurts to read.

    Reply
  48. Jeff Gustav October 2, 2013 at 3:51 pm -

    “Moon Landing: Facto or Fiction?”
    That hurts to read.

    Reply
  49. Jason Major October 2, 2013 at 3:56 pm -

    Please. Don’t start these crackpots up again.

    Reply
  50. Jason Major October 2, 2013 at 3:56 pm -

    Please. Don’t start these crackpots up again.

    Reply
  51. John Burrey October 2, 2013 at 4:01 pm -

    mythbusters said it was real. that’s good enough for me. and actually, like hillary famously said, at this point – what does it matter!?! hahaha either way, i’m still poor and struggling to make my house payment.

    Reply
  52. Sudesh Shrestha Joshi October 2, 2013 at 4:01 pm -

    time to time why this type of questions arise?? -_- Wht NASA did wasn’t fake, everyone knows that

    Reply
  53. Sudesh Shrestha Joshi October 2, 2013 at 4:01 pm -

    time to time why this type of questions arise?? -_- Wht NASA did wasn’t fake, everyone knows that

    Reply
  54. ישראל קרבן October 2, 2013 at 4:19 pm -

    I looked up NASA satellite photos of the moon landing site. it appears it was true.

    Reply
  55. Stewart Nicholls October 2, 2013 at 4:36 pm -

    The flag moved as there is no atmosphere or friction to slow it down it is in a vacuum. Mythbusters smashed this ‘myth’ and proved beyond doubt independently that they did land on the moon. Look it up.

    Reply
  56. Thamir Ghaslan October 2, 2013 at 4:47 pm -

    any decent observertary around the globe can shoot lasers at the mirrors or zoom into the landing site. Plus, 3rd party evidence from Japanese satellites already took photos of the landing site. When will this conspiracy ever die?

    Reply
  57. Heather Holt October 2, 2013 at 5:20 pm -

    Fact…. My goodness, people love a good conspiracy… The government can’t even pass a budget, how could they manage a hoax of that scale.

    Reply
  58. David Callaway October 2, 2013 at 5:33 pm -

    I’m a very tolerant of everything kinda guy, EXCEPT conspiracy theories and their followers. To me Conspricay theorists tend to woven from the same cloth, Holocaust Deniers. Birthers, Truthers, and every other nutty fantasy they dream up. Some, have been watching The Matrix, way too many times. Why do they bother even coming to sites like this, when they know they will get a beatdown everytime.

    Reply
  59. Bunni Baker October 2, 2013 at 6:18 pm -

    its hilarious all the people getting mad at the admin of this page LOL – because if you read his article – HE BELIEVES THAT WE DID GO TO THE MOON. his article was to prove the conspiracy theorists wrong. lol

    Reply
    • Alan Nielsen October 2, 2013 at 7:33 pm -

      True, anger blossoms in the heart of the fool.

      Reply
    • Twoplustwo Equalsfour October 3, 2013 at 1:14 am -

      Having anger does not make one a fool. How one uses or expresses anger makes him or her a fool or not. To not have anger is to be dead inside, just like not having sadness or happiness. How can one not be a fool but lack one of the most basic emotions that drive the human condition, in fact, of all, the one that is most basic to our survival as a species?

      Reply
    • Twoplustwo Equalsfour October 3, 2013 at 1:14 am -

      Having anger does not make one a fool. How one uses or expresses anger makes him or her a fool or not. To not have anger is to be dead inside, just like not having sadness or happiness. How can one not be a fool but lack one of the most basic emotions that drive the human condition, in fact, of all, the one that is most basic to our survival as a species?

      Reply
  60. Clinton Neuhaus October 2, 2013 at 6:41 pm -

    I do believe we landed on the moon, but I just want to point out that it’s wise to distrust mainstream media, and to delve into cryptohistory when trying to find some truth… because every bit of news they feed the public is spun to fit an agenda… and that’s been the case since the dawn of the written word. Blind faith in government is utterly foolish. Those in power depend on such complacency from the general public. You HAVE to read between the lines ALWAYS.

    Reply
  61. Richard Thietje October 2, 2013 at 8:55 pm -

    The Moon does rotate. Do your research before making statements like that.

    Reply
  62. Brad Bargmeyer October 2, 2013 at 9:08 pm -

    You only have to point the laser 238,900 miles to hit the moon. I wonder how many people who don’t believe in the moon landing also have satellite TV.

    Reply
  63. Fenix October 2, 2013 at 11:50 pm -

    I think the biggest reason people make these kinds of claims is the total lack of understanding of Physics. Even a basic understanding of Newton’s laws of motion, or Relativity, make most of these claims sound completely ridiculous. Jussayin!

    Reply
  64. Marius Botha October 3, 2013 at 12:44 am -

    i’m sure most of the moon landings did take place (although much of what was found, has been hidden from us), but most of their PR photo’s were studio takes.
    just one question though – big race to get there and then never go back to the moon…..odd not???

    Reply
  65. Ronald Wade Cooper December 17, 2013 at 3:12 am -

    Good essay. I might point out that the shadows pointing in different directions is a horizon perspective because each shadow points backwards toward the sun, the shadows are fanned out because of the camera’s close proximity to them. From a hundred miles straight up they would appear almost completely parallel. The exhaust would not kick up dirt and dust but shoo it away sideways because there is no atmosphere to mix it into, no turbulence to swirl it up as there is on Earth. Throw a handful of dirt up on the moon and it comes right back down, do the same on earth and some dust will spread and linger as a cloud of dust.

    Reply
  66. Tony NuFc Burn December 17, 2013 at 2:29 pm -

    I wonder what the conspiracy nuts make of the current Chinese photos of the Moon taken by their rover that have no stars in either :-D

    Reply
  67. chris January 29, 2014 at 11:15 am -

    Thank you for the wonderful and elaborate explanation I always knew it however my friend is conspiracy maniac so he always doubted the moon landing ….that; your explanation hopefully will open his eyes and bring his logic conclusion forward. .thx again very good research

    Reply

Write a Reply or Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

(Spamcheck Enabled)

newspaper templates - theme rewards