Moon landing conspiracy theories

src: i.ytimg.com

The lunar conspiracy theories claim that some or all elements of the Apollo program and the associated Moon landing are hoaxes staged by NASA, possibly with the help of other organizations. The most important claim is that six manned landings (1969-72) were forged and that 12 Apollo astronauts did not actually run on the Moon. Groups and individuals have made claims since the mid-1970s that NASA and others deliberately mislead the public to trust the landing that occurred, by making, destroying or destroying evidence including photographs, telemetry tapes, radio and TV transmissions, Moon rock samples, and even killed several key witnesses.

Much third-party evidence for the landings is in place, and detailed complaints against fraudulent claims have been made. Since the late 2000s, high-definition photographs taken by the Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter (LRO) from the Apollo landing site have captured the landing and trail module left by astronauts. In 2012, the pictures released show five of the six Apollo mission flags installed on the Moon still standing; the exception is Apollo 11, which has been lying on the lunar surface due to accidentally blown by the disposal of the skirt taking off.

Conspiracy has successfully defended the public interest in their theory for over 40 years, despite denials and third party evidence. Polls conducted in various locations show that between 6% and 20% of Americans, 25% of Britons, and 28% of Russians surveyed believe that the supervised landing is false. Even until 2001, Fox's television network documentary Conspiracy Theory: Are We Landing on the Moon? claimed NASA faked its first landing in 1969 to win the Space Race.

Video Moon landing conspiracy theories

Origins

A preliminary and influential book on lunar conspiracy subject matter, We Never Go to the Moon: Fraud Thirty Million US Dollars , was published in 1976 by Bill Kaysing. Despite having no knowledge of rocket or technical writing, Kaysing, a former US Navy officer with a Bachelor of Arts degree in English, was hired as senior technical writer in 1956 by Rocketdyne, the company that built the F-1 engine used on Saturn. V rocket. He served as head of the technical publication unit at the Propulsion Field Laboratory of the company until 1963. Kaysing's book made many allegations, and effectively initiated lunar lunar land discussions. The book claims that the likelihood of successful manned landing on the Moon is calculated to be 0.0017%, and that despite strict monitoring by the Soviet Union, it would be easier for NASA to forge a moon landing than to actually go there.

In 1980, the Earth Ground Society accused NASA of faking the landings, arguing that they were staged by Hollywood with Walt Disney sponsorship, based on manuscripts by Arthur C. Clarke and directed by Stanley Kubrick. Folklorist Linda DÃ © Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â gh states that the film director-director Peter Hyams in 1978 Capricorn One , who showed a tricky journey to Mars in a spaceship that looks identical to the Apollo plane, may have given a boost to the popularity of hoax theory in the post-Vietnam War era. He noted that this occurred during the post-Watergate era, when Americans tended not to trust official accounts. DÃÆ'Â Â © gh wrote: "The mass media throws this half-truth into a kind of twilight zone where people can make their guess sound as the truth.The mass media has a bad impact on people who have no guidance." In A Man on the Moon , first published in 1994, Andrew Chaikin mentions that during the Apollo 8 orbit months mission in December 1968, the same conspiracy idea was in circulation.

Maps Moon landing conspiracy theories

Conspiracists and their disagreements

Those who believe the moon landings have been fabricated provide some theory about the motives of NASA and the United States government. Three main theories below.

The Space Race

Motivation for the United States to involve the Soviet Union in an Space Race can be traced to the ongoing Cold War. Landing on the Moon is seen as a national achievement and technology that will result in worldwide recognition. But going to the Moon would be risky and expensive, as exemplified by President John F. Kennedy who famously stated in a 1962 speech that the United States chose to leave because it was difficult.

Hoax theory-debunker Philip Plait says in his book Bad Astronomy , that the Soviets - with their own competing Moon program, extensive intelligence networks and a resilient scientific community capable of analyzing NASA data - would scream if the United States tried to fabricate landing on the Moon, mainly because their own program failed. Prove that trickery would be a great propaganda victory for the Soviets. Conspiracist Bart Sibrel replied, "The Soviets did not have the ability to trace the spacecraft until the end of 1972, soon after, the last three Apollo missions were suddenly canceled."

In fact, the Soviets have sent unmanned spacecraft to the Moon since 1959, and "during 1962, space tracking facilities were introduced at IP-15 in Ussuriisk and IP-16 in Evpatoria (Crimean Peninsula), while Saturn's communications station was added to IP -3, 4 and 14, "the latter has a range of 100 million km. The Soviet Union tracked the Apollo missions in the Space Transmission Corps, which were "equipped with the latest intelligence-gathering and surveillance equipment." Vasily Mishin, in an interview for the article "The Hottest Moon Program," illustrates how the Soviet Moon program shrank after the Apollo landings.

Also, there was nothing "sudden" about the cancellation of Apollo, which was announced in January and September 1970 for cost-cutting reasons. (See Vietnam War below.)

NASA's funding and prestige

It is claimed that NASA falsified landings to avoid humiliation and ensure that it continues to get funding. NASA raised "about US $ 30 billion" to go to the Moon, and Kaysing claimed in his book that this could be used to "pay" many people. Since most conspiracies believe that sending humans to the Moon is not possible at the time, they argue that landings should be falsified to meet Kennedy's 1961 goal, "before this decade ends, to land a man on the Moon and return him safely to Earth." In fact, NASA contributed Apollo's costs to the US Congress in 1973, for a total of US $ 25.4 billion.

Mary Bennett and David Percy have claimed at Dark Moon: Apollo and Whistle-Blowers that, with all known and unknown dangers, NASA will not risk broadcasting a sick or dead astronaut on live television. The generally-supplied arguments are that NASA in fact did commit public humiliation and the potential for political opposition to the program by losing the entire crew at Apollo 1 fire during field trials, leading to the top management team being questioned by the Senate aerospace surveillance committee and the House of Representatives. There is actually no video broadcast during landing or take-off due to technological limitations.

Vietnam War

The American Patriot Friends Network claimed in 2009 that the landing helped the US government divert public attention from the unpopular Vietnam War, and the manned landing suddenly ended around the same time as the United States ended its involvement in the war. In fact, the end of the landing is not "abrupt" (see The Space Race above). War is one of several federal budget items with which NASA has to compete; NASA's budget peaked in 1966, and was down 42.3% in 1972. This is the reason the last flight was cut, along with plans for more ambitious advanced programs such as permanent space stations and manned flights to Mars.

src: i.ytimg.com

Claim and decryption

Much lunar conspiracy theories have been put forward: claiming that the landing did not happen and that NASA employees have lied, or that the landing did happen but not in the way it has been told. Conspirators focus on the perceived gaps or inconsistencies in mission history records. The most important idea is that the entire manned landing program is a hoax from start to finish. Some people claim that technology to send humans to the Moon is lacking or that Van Allen's radiation belts, solar flares, solar wind, coronal mass ejection and cosmic rays make such a journey impossible.

Vince Calder and Andrew Johnson, scientists at Argonne National Laboratory, provided detailed answers to the claims of conspirators on the laboratory website. They show that NASA's depiction of Moon landings is inherently accurate, allowing for common mistakes like false photo labels and imperfect personal memories. By using the scientific process, any hypothesis that goes against the observable facts can be rejected. The 'real landing' hypothesis is a story because it comes from a single source, but there is no unity in the deception hypothesis because deceptive accounts vary between conspiracists.

Number of conspirators involved

According to James Longuski (Professor of Aeronautical and Astronautics Engineering at Purdue University), conspiracy theories are impossible due to their size and complexity. The conspiracy should involve more than 400,000 people working on the Apollo project for nearly ten years, 12 people walking on the Moon, six others flying with them as pilots of the Command Module, and six other astronauts orbiting the Moon. Hundreds of thousands of people - including astronauts, scientists, engineers, technicians, and skilled workers - have to keep their secrets. Longuski argues that it would be much easier to actually land on the Moon than to generate a big conspiracy to fabricate landings. To date, no one from the United States government or NASA that will have a link to the Apollo program says the moon landing is a lie. Penn Jillette made this note in the episode "Conspiracy Theory" of her contrarian television show Penn & amp; Teller: Nonsense! in 2005. With the number of people involved, and noting the Watergate scandal, Jillette notes that someone will override the trick now.

Photos and movie weirdness

The lunar land conspirators are very focused on NASA photos. They show weirdness in photos and movies taken on the Moon. Photography experts (including those unrelated to NASA) replied that the weirdness is what is expected of the actual Moon landing, and not what would happen with the image of a tweak or studio. Some main arguments and counter-arguments are listed below.

1. In some photos, the viewfinder appears behind the object. The cameras are equipped with a RÃÆ'Â © seau plate (clear glass plate with carved crosshairs), making it impossible for the photographed object to appear "in front of" the grid. This indicates that the object has been "pinned" on it.

• This only appears in photos copied and scanned, not the original. This is due to overexposure: a bright white area of ​​"bloody" emulsion above a thin black line of sight. The viewfinder is only about 0.004 inches thick (0.1 mm) and the emulsion will only spend about half to blur it. In addition, there are many photos where the middle of the crosshair is "washed" but the rest is still intact. In some photographs of American flags, parts of one crosshair appear in the red stripes, but parts of the same crosshair fade or are not visible on the white lines. There is no reason to "attach" the white line to the flag.

2. Crosshairs are sometimes played or in the wrong place.

• This is the result of popular photos being cropped and/or rotated for aesthetic effects.

3. The quality of the photos is very high.

• There are many poor quality photos taken by Apollo astronauts. NASA chose to publish only the best examples.
• Apollo's astronauts use a high resolution Hasselblad 500 EL camera with Carl Zeiss optics and a 70 mm medium format film magazine.

4. No stars in any of the photos; Apollo 11 astronauts also claimed in a post-mission press conference not to remember staring.

• The astronauts talk about the star-bare sightings during the moon's daylight. They regularly see stars through optical navigation of the spacecraft while aligning their inertial reference platform, Apollo PGNCS.

• All manned landing takes place during daylight on the moon. Thus, the stars are passed by the sun and by sunlight reflected off the surface of the Moon. The astronauts' eyes adjusted to the sunlit landscape around them so that they could not see a relatively faint star. Likewise, the camera is set for daytime lighting and can not detect stars. Camera settings can change a bright background to black when the foreground object is brightly lit, forcing the camera to increase the shutter speed so that the foreground light does not issue an image. Demonstrations of this effect are here. The effect is similar to not being able to see stars from a bright car park at night - the star only becomes visible when the lights are turned off. The astronauts can see stars with the naked eye only when they are in the shadow of the Moon.

• Special ultraviolet camera, Ultra Ultraviolet/Spectrograph Camera, brought to the lunar surface on Apollo 16 and operated in the shadow of the Apollo Lunar Module (LM). It takes photos of Earth and many stars, some of them dim in visible light but bright in the ultraviolet. These observations are then matched by observations taken by an orbiting ultraviolet telescope. In addition, the position of these stars in connection with the Earth is true for the time and location of photographs of Apollo 16.

• Photo of the solar corona belonging to the planet Mercury and some background stars are taken from the moon's orbit by Apollo 15 Command Module, Pilot Al Worden .

• Photographs of the planet Venus (which is much brighter than the stars) were taken from the surface of the Moon by astronaut Alan Shepard during the Apollo 14 mission.

5. The shadow angle and color are inconsistent. This indicates that an artificial lamp is used.

• The shadow on the Moon is complicated by reflected light, soil inequality, wide-angle lens distortion, and moon dust. There are several sources of light: the Sun, the reflected sun from Earth, the reflected sunlight from the Moon's surface, and the reflected sunlight of the astronauts and the Lunar Module. The light from these sources is spread by the moon's dust in various directions, including into the shadows. Shadows falling into craters and hills may appear longer, shorter and distorted. Next, the shadows display the nature of the missing point perspectives, leading them to merge to a point on the horizon.
• This theory is denied on the NASA Moon Landing episode of MythBusters .

6. There is an identical background in the photograph which, they say, is taken miles and miles away. This indicates that a painted background is used.

• Background is not identical, just similar. What appears to be the closest hill in some photographs is actually a mountain a few miles away. On Earth, more distant objects will appear dim and less detailed. On the Moon, there is no atmosphere or fog to obscure distant objects, so they appear clearer and closer. In addition, there are very few objects (such as trees) to help assess the distance. One case was denied in "Who Mourns For Apollo?" by Mike Bara.

7. The number of photos taken is very high. Up to one photo per 50 seconds.

• Simplified teeth with fixed settings allow two photos per second. Many are taken immediately after each other as a stereo pair or a panoramic sequence. Calculations (one per 50 seconds) are based on a single astronaut on the surface, and do not take into account that there are two astronauts sharing the workload during Extra-vehicle activity (EVA).

8. The photographs contain artifacts like two that seem to fit 'C in stone and on the ground. This may be labeled studio props.

• The "C" shaped object most likely prints imperfections and does not show up in the original movie from the camera. It has been suggested that "C" is the hair that is rolled up.

9. A resident of Perth, Western Australia, a woman named Una Ronald (a pseudonym made by the source writer), said that for two or three seconds he saw a bottle of Coca-Cola rolling in the lower right-hand quadrant of his television. a screen featuring live broadcasts from Apollo 11 EVA. He also said that several letters appeared in The West Australian discusses the Coca-Cola bottle incident within ten days of the lunar landing.

• No such newspaper or record report has been found. Ronald's claim was only passed on by one source. There are also shortcomings in the story, e.g. the statement that he had to stay up to witness the moon's landing was easily discounted by many witnesses in Australia who watched the landing in the middle of their daylight.

10. The book Moon Shot contains a clear blend of photo from Alan Shepard hitting the golf ball on the Moon with another astronaut.

• It's used instead of the only real image available, from a TV monitor, which the editors seem to have been too harsh for their books. Book publishers are not working for NASA.

11. There seems to be a "hot spot" in some of the photos that look like the big spotlight used.

• The holes on the Moon's surface focus and reflect light like small glass balls used in road signs, or moisture on the wet grass. It creates light around the shadow of the photographer himself when it appears in the photo (see Heiligenschein).
• If an astronaut stands in the sun while shooting into the shade, the light reflected from his white clothing produces the same effect as the spotlight.
• Some widely publicized Apollo photos are high-contrast copies. Original transparency scans are generally much more evenly distributed. The example is shown below:

12. Who filmed Neil Armstrong stepped onto the Moon?

• The Lunar module does it. While still on the ladder, Armstrong deploys the Thermal Equipment Storage Assembly from the Lunar Module side. These are placed, among others, TV cameras. This means that more than 600 million people on Earth can watch live bait.

Environment

1. The astronauts can not survive the trip due to radiation exposure from the Van Allen radiation belt and the galactic ambient radiation (see radiation poisoning and health threats from cosmic rays). Some conspiracyists suggested that Starfish Prime (a nuclear test in 1962) was a failed attempt to disrupt Van Allen's belt.

• There are two main belts of Van Allen - the inner belt and the outer belt - and the third transient belt. The inner belt is the most dangerous, containing energetic protons. The outermost have less harmful low-energy electrons (Beta particles). The Apollo spacecraft passes the belt in a matter of minutes and the outer belt is approximately 1 ¹ / ₂ clock. The astronauts are protected from ionizing radiation by the aluminum hull of the spacecraft. Furthermore, the trajectory of orbital transfer from Earth to the Moon through the belt is chosen to reduce radiation exposure. Even Dr. James Van Allen, inventor of the Van Allen radiation belt, denied claims that radiation levels are too dangerous for Apollo missions. Plait cited an average dose of less than 1 brake (10 mSv), which is equivalent to the ambient radiation received by living at sea level for three years. The total radiation received on the trip is almost the same as that allowed for workers in the field of nuclear energy for a year and no more than what the Space Shuttle astronaut received.

2. The film on the camera will be blocked by this radiation.

• The film is stored in metal containers that stop radiation from fogging film emulsions. Furthermore, films carried by unmanned moon probes such as Lunar Orbiter and Luna 3 (which use the on-board film development process) are not cloudy.

3. The Moon's surface during the day is so hot that the camera film will melt.

• There is no atmosphere to efficiently tie the moon's surface heat to a device (such as a camera) that is not in direct contact with it. In a vacuum, only the remaining radiation as a heat transfer mechanism. Physics radiation heat transfer is fully understood, and the proper use of passive optical layers and paints is sufficient to control the temperature of films in the camera; The Lunar Module temperature is controlled by a similar layer that gives them a golden color. In addition, while the Moon's surface becomes very hot on the lunar month, any Apollo landing takes place shortly after the moon's sunrise at the landing site; The moon is about 29 ½ days on Earth, meaning that one day of the Moon (dawn till late afternoon) lasts nearly fifteen Earth days. During longer stays, astronauts did not pay attention to the increased cooling load on their space clothes because the sun and surface temperatures continued to rise, but the effect was easily resisted by passive and active cooling systems. The movie was not in direct sunlight, so it was not too hot.

4. The Apollo 16 crew can not survive the great solar flares while they are on their way to the Moon.

• There were no big sun flares that occurred during Apollo 16 flights. There was a big sun flare in August 1972, after Apollo 16 returned to Earth and before the Apollo 17 flight.

5. Flags are placed on the surface by astronauts fluttering although there is no wind on the Moon. This shows that it was filmed on Earth and a breeze caused the flag to fly. Sibrel says that it may be caused by an indoor fan used to cool the astronauts because their space cooling system will be too heavy on Earth.

• Flag tied to ? - rod-shaped (see Lunar Flag Assembly) so it does not hang. The flag just seemed to be fluttering when the astronauts moved it into position. Without air resistance, these movements cause the free angle of the flag to swing like a pendulum for some time. Flags fly because they have been folded during storage - ripples can be misconstrued as motion in still images. The video shows that when the astronauts unplug the flag it vibrates for a while but then stays quiet.
• This theory is denied on the NASA Moon Landing episode of MythBusters .

6. The footprints in Moondust are unexpectedly well preserved, despite the lack of moisture.

• Moon Dust has not weathered Earth-like sand and has sharp edges. This allows the Moondust particles to stick together and hold their shape in a vacuum. The astronauts likened it to "talcum powder or wet sand".
• This theory is denied on the NASA Moon Landing episode of MythBusters .

7. Landing the Moon suspected of using a sound stage or being filmed outside in a remote desert with astronauts either using armor or slow motion photography to make it look like being on the Moon.

• While the HBO miniseries "From the Earth to the Moon", and a scene from the movie "Apollo 13" using sound-stage and harness settings, it is clear from the films that as the dust rises not quickly settles; some dust forms clouds for a moment. In the film footage of the Apollo mission, dust is kicked by astronaut boots and wheels from Lunar Roving Vehicles rise high enough because of the lower moon's gravity, and settling rapidly to the ground in a parabolic arc is not disturbed because there is no air to suspend dust. Even if there is a sound stage for a lunar Month that has air pumped out, the dust will reach a place near the altitude and trajectory as in the Apollo movie footage because of the greater gravity of the earth.

• During the Apollo 15 mission, David Scott experimented with dropping hammers and eagle feathers at the same time. Both fall at the same level and touch the ground at the same time. This proves that he is in a vacuum.

• This theory is denied on the NASA Moon Landing episode of MythBusters .

Mechanical problems

1. Lunar Modules do not make explosive craters or dust marks scattered.

• There is no crater to be expected. The 10,000-pound Descent Propulsion system was stranded very far during the last landing. The Lunar Module is no longer rapidly slowing down, so the descendant machine should only support the weight of its own owner, which is reduced by the gravity of the Moon and by the close fatigue of the landing propellant. At the time of the landing, the engine drive is divided by a nozzle outlet of only about 10 kilopascals (1.5 PSI). Outside the engine nozzle, the blobs spread, and the pressure drops very quickly. The exhaust gas evolves much faster after leaving the engine nozzle in a vacuum than in the atmosphere. The influence of the atmosphere on rocket blobs can be easily seen in the launch from Earth; when the rocket rises through the thinned atmosphere, the exhaust fumes are widening. To reduce this, rocket engines made for vacuums have longer bells than those made for use on Earth, but they still can not stop this spread. Landing gases, therefore, extend far beyond the landing site. The do machine spreads a lot of very fine surface dust as seen on the 16mm film of every landing, and many mission commanders talk about its effect on visibility. The landers generally move horizontally or vertically, and the photographs indeed show exploring the surface along the last landing lane. Finally, the moon's regolith is very compact beneath the surface of the dust layer, making it impossible for the offspring to blow up the "crater". The explosion crater was measured under the Apollo 11 landings using the length of the landing machine's bell-shadow and the approximate number fitted by the landing gear and how deep the lander's tread had hit the surface of the moon and found that the engine had eroded. between 4 and 6 inches of regolith out from under the engine bell during the last landing and landing.

2. The second stage of rocket launch and/or climbing stage of Lunar Module does not make the flame visible.

• The Lunar module uses Aerozine 50 propellers (fuel) and dinitrogen tetroxide (oxidizers), selected for simplicity and reliability; they light up hypergolis - after contact - without the need for sparks. This propellant produces an almost transparent exhaust. The same fuel is used by the nucleus of the American Titan II rocket. The transparency of their clots is evident in many photo launches. Clumps of rocket engines fired in a vacuum spread rapidly as they leave engine nozzles (see above), further reducing their visibility. Finally, rocket engines often run "rich" to slow internal corrosion. On Earth, excess fuel ignites contact with atmospheric oxygen, increasing visible flame. This can not happen in a vacuum.

3. The Lunar Module weighs 17 tons and there is no sign in Moondust, but footprints can be seen beside them.

• On the surface of the Earth, Apollo Lunar Module, eagle, and a capacity of 11 will weigh about 17 short tons (15,300 kg). On the surface of the Moon, however, after removing the fuel and oxidizing the offspring from the moon's orbit, the lander weighs about 2,698 pounds (1,224 kg). The astronauts are much lighter than the landers, but their shoes are much smaller than the footprints of about 3 feet (91 cm). Pressure (or force per unit area) rather than mass determines the amount of regolith compression. In some photos, footpads do hit regolith, especially when they move sideways on the touchdown. (Pressure bearing beneath the feet of Apollo 11, with landing about 44 times the weight of astronauts configured with EVA, will have the same strength as the bearing pressure provided by astronaut boots.)

4. The air conditioning unit that is part of space astronauts can not work in an environment without atmosphere.

• The cooling unit can only work in a vacuum. Water from the tank in the backpack flows out through the tiny pores on the metal sublimator plate where it rapidly evaporates into space. The loss of evaporating heat freezes the remaining water, forming an ice sheet on the outside of the plate which is also sublimated into space (turned from solid to gas). A separate water circle flows through the LCG (Liquid Cooling Garment) used by astronauts, carrying its waste heat through the sublimator plate where it is cooled and returned to the LCG. Twelve pounds (5.4 kg) of feed water gives about eight hours of cooling; because of their large size, often this is a limited consumption of EVA length.

Transmission

1. There should be more than two seconds delay in communication between Earth and the Moon, at a distance of 400,000 km (250,000 mi).

• The trip time of a two-second lamp is visible in all real-time recording of lunar audio, but this does not always appear as expected. There may also be some documentaries where the delay has been edited. Reasons for editing audio may be a time constraint or for clarity.

2. The delay in communication is usually about 0.5 seconds.

• The claim that the delay is only a half second is incorrect, since the original recording check shows. Also, there should be no consistent time delay between each response, since the conversation is being recorded at one end - Mission Control. Responses from Mission Control can be heard without delay, because recording is being made at the same time when Houston receives the transmission from the Moon.

3. The Parkes Observatory in Australia is billed to the world for weeks as a site that will communicate from the first moonwalk. However, five hours before their transmission was ordered to retreat.

• The moonwalk time was first changed after the landing. In fact, the delay in getting the moonwalk begins means that Parkes covered almost the entire Apollo 11 moonwalk.

4. Parkes is suspected of having the clearest video feed of the Moon, but the Australian media and all other sources known to run live bait from the United States.

• While it was the original plan, and, according to some sources, the official policy, the Australian Broadcasting Commission (ABC) took direct transmissions from the Parkes and Honeysuckle Creek radio telescopes. It was converted to NTSC television at Paddington, in Sydney. This means that Australian viewers see the moonwalk a few seconds before the rest of the world. See also Parkes John Sarkissian Radio Astronomer article, "On Eagle's Wings: Parkes Parkes Support from Apollo 11 Mission" The events surrounding the Parkes Observatory role in broadcasting live television from the moonwalk are depicted in a slightly fictional Australian comedy. Dish "(2000).

5. Better signals should be received at the Parkes Observatory when the Moon is on the opposite side of the planet.

• This is not supported by evidence and detailed records of the mission.

Missing data

The blueprints and drawings of the design and development of the involved machinery are lost. Apollo 11 data tapes containing high quality telemetry and video (before scanning conversion from slow scan TV to standard TV) from the first moonwalk are also missing.

Recordings

Dr. David R. Williams (NASA's Arsipar at Goddard Space Flight Center) and Apollo 11 aviation director Eugene F. Kranz both acknowledged that Apollo 11 telemetry data tapes were missing. The conspirators saw this as evidence that they never existed. Apollo 11 telemetry recordings are different from other Moon landing telemetry records because they contain raw TV broadcasts. For technical reasons, Apollo 11 landers carry a slow-scan television (SSTV) camera (see Apollo TV camera). To broadcast images to a regular television, scan conversion must be done. The radio telescope at Parkes Observatory in Australia is capable of receiving telemetry from the Moon at the Apollo 11 moonwalk. Parkes has a larger antenna than a NASA antenna in Australia at Honeysuckle Creek Tracking Station, so that gets a better picture. It also received better images of the NASA antenna at the Goldstone Deep Space Communications Complex. This live TV signal, together with telemetry data, was recorded onto a fourteen-inch analog band on Parkes. The original SSTV transmission has better detail and contrast than the scanned image, and it's this missing band. The raw and real-time SSTV scan conversion is done in Australia before it is broadcast worldwide. However, there are still photos from the original SSTV image (see photo). About fifteen minutes was filmed by an 8 mm amateur film camera and this is also available. Then the Apollo missions do not use SSTV. At least some telemetry tapes from ALSEP's scientific experiments abandoned on the Moon (which lasted until 1977) still exist, according to Dr. Williams. Copies of the tapes have been found.

Others are looking for lost telemetry cassettes for different reasons. The record contains the original and highest quality video feeds from the Apollo 11 landing. Some former Apollo personnel want to find recordings for posterity while NASA engineers looking for next Month mission believe the tapes might be useful for their design studies. They have found that the Apollo 11 recordings were sent to be stored at the US National Archives in 1970, but in 1984, all Apollo 11 tapes have been returned to the Goddard Space Flight Center at their request. Cassettes are believed to have been stored rather than reused. Goddard saved 35,000 new cassettes per year in 1967, even before landing on the Moon.

In November 2006, COSMOS Online reported that about 100 data tapes recorded in Australia during the Apollo 11 mission were found in a small marine science laboratory at the main physics building at Curtin University of Technology in Perth, Australia. One of the old tapes has been sent to NASA for analysis. The slow-scan television pictures were not on the tape.

In July 2009, NASA indicated that it must have removed the original Apollo 11 Months recordings years ago so that it could reuse the tape. In December 2009 NASA released a final report on Apollo telemetry 11. Senior engineer Dick Nafzger, who was responsible for live TV recording during the Apollo mission, was assigned to handle the restoration project. After a three-year search, the "inescapable conclusion" was that about 45 tapes (estimated 15 tapes recorded in each of three tracking stations) of Apollo 11 videos were removed and reused, Nafzger said. In time for the 40th anniversary of Apollo 11 landings, Lowry Digital has been tasked with recovering the surviving footage. Lowry Digital President Mike Inchalik said that, "this is far and away the video with the lowest quality" that is handled by the company. Nafzger praised Lowry for recovering "crispness" on the Apollo video, which will remain black and white and contain a conservative digital enhancement. The US $ 230,000 restoration project takes months to complete and excludes voice quality improvements. Some recording options that are recovered in high definition are available on the NASA website.

Blueprints

The Xenophilia.com website documented a hoax claim that the blueprints for the Saturn V rocket, the Apollo Lunar Module (LM), the Lunar Roving Vehicle (LRV), and related equipment were lost. There are several diagrams of Lunar Module and Lunar Roving Vehicle on the NASA website and at Xenophilia.com. Grumman appears to have destroyed most of their LM documentation, but a copy of the blueprint for Saturn V is on the microfilm.

Four decent LRV missions are built by Boeing. Three of them were taken to the Moon on Apollos 15, 16, and 17, and were left there. Once Apollo 18 is canceled, another LRV is used for spare parts for Apolos 15 to 17 missions. The 221-page operation manual for LRV contains some detailed images, though not a blueprint.

Technology

Bart Sibrel cites the relative level of the United States and USSR space technology as evidence that Moon landing is unlikely to occur. For much of the early stages of the Space Race, the Soviet Union was in front of the United States, but in the end, the Soviet Union was never able to fly the plane to the Moon, let alone land one on the surface. It is said that, because the Soviet Union can not do this, the United States should also not be able to develop the technology to do so.

For example, he claimed that, during the Apollo program, the Soviet Union had five times as many hours in space than the United States, and noted that the Soviet Union was the first to reach many of the early milestones in space: the first man-made satellites in orbit ( October 1957, Sputnik 1); the first living creature in orbit (dog named Laika, November 1957, Sputnik 2); first man in space and in orbit (Yuri Gagarin, April 1961, Vostok 1); the first woman in space (Valentina Tereshkova, June 1963, Vostok 6); and the first spacewalk (EVA) (Alexei Leonov in March 1965, Voskhod 2).

However, most of the above Soviet acquisitions are matched by the United States within a year, and sometimes within a few weeks. In 1965, the United States began to achieve many firsts (such as successful first space meeting), which is an important step in the Moon's mission. Furthermore, NASA and others say that this advantage by the Soviets is not as impressive as it seems; that some of these first things are just actions that do not advance technology, or at all, for example. , the first woman in space. In fact, at the time of the Apollo flight launch orbiting the first manned Earth (Apollo 7), the Soviet Union had made only nine spaceflights (seven with one cosmonaut, one with two, one with three) compared to 16 by United States. In terms of space shuttle hours, the Soviet Union has 460 hours of spaceflight; The United States has 1,024 hours. In terms of astronaut/cosmonaut time, the USSR has 534 hours of manned space while the United States has 1,992 hours. In the days of Apollo 11, the United States had a far greater advantage than that. (See List of human spaceflights, 1961-1970, and see individual flights for long periods of time.)

In addition, the Soviet Union did not develop a successful rocket capable of running manned moon missions until the 1980s - their N1 rockets failed on all four launch attempts between 1969 and 1972. Soviet lunar landing landing was tested on a low-orbital flight of three orbital Earths times in 1970 and 1971.

NASA personnel death

In a television program about alleged month-landing hoaxes, Fox Entertainment Group recorded the deaths of ten astronauts and two civilians associated with a manned spacecraft program as may have been killed as part of a cover-up.

• Theodore Freeman (killing out of the T-38 who had suffered a bird attack, October 1964)
• Elliot See and Charlie Bassett (T-38 accident in bad weather, February 1966)
• Virgil "Gus" Grissom, Ed White, and Roger B. Chaffee (Apollo Fire 1, January 1967)
• Edward "Ed" Givens (car accident, June 1967)
• Clifton "C. C." Williams (kills out of T-38, October 1967)
Michael J. "Mike" Adams (X-15 crash, November 1967. The only pilot killed in the X-15 flight test program.) He is a pilot test, not a NASA astronaut, but has flown the X-15 in over 50 miles.)
• Robert Henry Lawrence, Jr. (F-104 crash, December 1967, shortly after being elected as a pilot with the Air Force United States Air Force Manipulation Air Force program (later canceled).
• Thomas Ronald Baron (North American Aviation Employee killed in a railroad car crash on April 27, 1967, six days after testifying before Rep. Subcommittee Olin E. Teague House on a NASA Oversight check held at Cape Kennedy, Florida Fire Apollo 1, after which he was fired). The Baron is a quality control inspector who writes critical reports on the Apollo program and the overt critic after the Apollo fire 1. The Baron and his family were killed when their car was hit by a train at a railroad crossing. The death was an accident.
• Brian D. Welch, a prominent officer at NASA's Public Affairs Office and Media Services Director, died several months after appearing in the media to dispel the prejudice of Fox pro-hoax television broadcasts quoted above. He died of a heart attack at the age of 42 years.

Two of them, X-15 pilot Mike Adams and MOL pilot Robert Lawrence, have no connection to the civilian manned space program which Apollo is part of. All deaths listed next to Welch occurred at least 20 months before Apollo 11 and the next flight.

In February 2016, seven of Apollo's astronauts who landed on the Moon between 1969 and 1972 survived, including Buzz Aldrin. Also, nine out of twelve Apollo astronauts who fly to the Moon without landing between 1968 and 1972 still survive, including Michael Collins.

The number of deaths in the American astronaut corps during the Apollo shooting period and when the moon landing was similar to the number of deaths suffered by Russia. During the period 1961 to 1972, at least eight Russian and former cosmonauts died:

• Valentin Bondarenko (road training accident, March 1961)
• Grigori Nelyubov (suicide, February 1966)
• Vladimir Komarov ( Soyuz 1 accident, April 1967)
• Yuri Gagarin (MiG-15 accident, March 1968)
• Pavel Belyayev (complications after surgery, January 1970)
• Georgi Dobrovolski, Vladislav Volkov, and Viktor Patsayev ( Soyuz 11 accident, June 1971)

In addition, the head of the entire manned space program, Sergei Korolev, died while undergoing surgery in January 1966.

NASA response

In June 1977, NASA released a fact sheet that responded to a recent claim that the landing on Apollo Moon had been betrayed. The fact sheet was very dull and thought the idea of ​​faking a landing on the Moon was unreasonable and strange. NASA refers to the rocks and particles collected from the Moon as evidence of the legitimacy of the program, as they claimed that these rocks could not have formed under the conditions on earth. NASA also noted that all operations and phases of the Apollo program were closely followed and under the supervision of the news media, from launch to traps. NASA responded to Bill Kaysing's book, We Never Goed to the Moon , by identifying one of his fraudulent claims about the lack of a crater left on the surface of the Moon by lunar module landings, and refuted the facts about the soil and cohesive properties of the surface Month.

The fact sheet was reissued on February 14, 2001, the day before Fox's television broadcast of Conspiracy Theory: Are We Landing on the Moon? The documentary revived public interest in conspiracy theorists and the possibility that the Moon was a fake landing, which has provoked NASA to once again defend its name.

Suspected Stanley Kubrick's involvement

Filmmaker Stanley Kubrick is accused of producing recordings for Apollos 11 and 12, probably because he recently directed 2001: A Space Odyssey , which is partly arranged on the Moon and features sophisticated special effects. It has been claimed that when 2001 was in post-production in early 1968, NASA secretly approached Kubrick to direct the first three Moon landing. The launch and fall of the plane will be real but the spacecraft will remain in Earth orbit and the fake tape is broadcast as "live from the Moon." There is no evidence offered for this theory, which ignores many facts. For example, 2001 was released before the first Apollo landing and Kubrick's portrayal of the Moon's surface is very different from his appearance in Apollo's videos, movies, and photography. Kubrick did recruit Frederick Ordway and Harry Lange, both of whom had worked for NASA and a major aerospace contractor, to work with him in 2001. . Kubrick also uses some of the remaining 50 mm/0.7 lenses from batches made by Zeiss for NASA. However, Kubrick only acquired this lens for Barry Lyndon (1975). The lens was originally the photo lens and the necessary changes to be used to record the film.

The mockumentary based on this idea, Dark Side of the Moon , could trigger conspiracy theories. This French mockumentary, directed by William Karel, originally aired on the Arte channel in 2002 under the title of Opà © raation Lune . It parodies conspiracy theories with fake interviews, the assassination of Stanley Kubrick's assistant assistant by the CIA, and a variety of glaring faults, wordplay, and references to old movie characters, inserted through the film as a guide for viewers. However, Opà © raation Lune is still taken at face value by some conspiracy believers.

An article entitled "Stanley Kubrick and Moon Hoax" appeared in Usenet in 1995, in the newsgroup "alt.humor.best-of-usenet". One part - about how Kubrick should be forced into a conspiracy - reads:

NASA further exploited its position by threatening to publicly disclose Mr. Brothers's heavy involvement. Kubrick, Raul, with the American Communist Party. It would be a shame for Mr. Kubrick, especially since his release. Strangelove .

Kubrick does not have such a brother - the passage is a spoof, complete with a free sentence describing Kubrick firing on the moonwalk "on the spot" on the Moon. Nevertheless, the claim was taken earnestly; Clyde Lewis used it almost word for word, while Jay Weidner gave the brother a more senior status in the party:

No one knows how to power-convince Kubrick to direct the Apollo landing. Maybe they have compromised Kubrick in some way. The fact that his brother, Raul Kubrick, was the head of the American Communist Party may be one of the ways the government has taken Stanley to cooperate.

In July 2009, Weidner posted on his web page "Secrets of the Shining", where he stated that Kubrick's The Shining (1980) was a veiled recognition of his role in the scam project. This thesis is the subject of rebuttal in an article published on Seekers almost half a year later.

The 2015 movie Moonwalkers is a fictitious account of CIA agency claims for Kubrick's involvement.

In December 2015, a video appeared that allegedly showed Kubrick being interviewed shortly before his death in 1999; the video shows that the director confessed to T. Patrick Murray that the Apollo Moon landing was faked. Research quickly found, however, that the video was a hoax.

Academic work

In 2002, NASA gave James Oberg $ 15,000 to get a commission to write a point-by-point denial of a hoax claim. However, NASA canceled the commission that year, after complaints that the book would appreciate the allegations. Oberg said he intended to finish the book. In November 2002, Peter Jennings said "NASA will spend several thousand dollars to prove to some people that the United States did land a man on the Moon," and "NASA has been so confused, [they] hired [somebody]] to write a book that refute conspiracy theorists. "Oberg said that belief in the deception theory is not the fault of conspiracists, but rather of teachers and people (including NASA) who must provide information to the public.

In 2004, Martin Hendry and Ken Skeldon of the University of Glasgow were awarded a grant by the UK-based Particle Physics and Astronomy Research Council to investigate the lunar conspiracy theory on the Moon. In November 2004, they gave lectures at the Glasgow Science Center where the top ten claims by individual conspirators were addressed and refuted.

MythBusters special

An episode of MythBusters in August 2008 is dedicated to landing on the Moon. The MythBusters crew tested many conspiracy claims. Several exams were conducted at the NASA training facility. All the conspiracy claims examined on the show are labeled as "Busted", which means that the claims of the conspiracies are incorrect.

src: s.hdnux.com

Third-party evidence of Moon landing

Partners landing sites

The lunar lander conspirators claim that the Hubble Space Observatory and Telescope must be able to photograph the landing site. This implies that the world's major observatories (as well as Hubble Programs) are involved in the hoax by refusing to take photos from the landing sites. Photos of the Moon have been taken by Hubble, including at least two Apollo landing sites, but the Hubble resolution limits the look of the moon object to a size no smaller than 60-75 yards (55-69 meters), which is not enough resolution to see the landing site features.

In April 2001, Leonard David published an article on space.com, which showed photographs taken by Clementine's mission showing dark dots that spread on sites that NASA said were Apollo 15 landers. The evidence was noticed by Misha Kreslavsky, from the Department of Geological Sciences at Brown University, and Yuri Shkuratov from the Kharkiv Astronomical Observatory in Ukraine. The SMART-1 unmanned inquiry from the European Space Agency sent back photographs of landing sites, according to Bernard Foing, Chief Scientist of the ESA Science Program. "Given the high beginning orbits of SMART-1, however, it may prove difficult to see artifacts," Foing said in an interview on space.com.

In 2002, Alex R. Blackwell of the University of Hawaii pointed out that some photographs taken by Apollo astronauts while in orbit around the Moon indicate the landing site.

The Daily Telegraph published a story in 2002 that European astronomers at the Very Large Telescope (VLT) would use it to view landing sites. According to the article, Dr. Richard West said that his team will take "high-resolution images from one of the Apollo landing sites." Marcus Allen, a conspiracist, replied that no photo of the hardware on the Moon would convince him that the manned landing had taken place. Because the VLT is able to complete the equivalent of the distance between the car's headlights as seen from the Moon, the VLT may be able to photograph some features of the landing site. Such photographs, if and when they are available, will be the first NASA-generated photographs from these sites on that definition.

The Japan Space Exploration Agency (JAXA) launched their SELENE Moon orbit on September 14, 2007 (JST), from Tanegashima Space Center. SELENE rounds the Moon at an altitude of about 100 kilometers (62 mi). In May 2008, JAXA reported detecting "halo" generated by Apollo 15 Lunar Module exhaust from Terrain Camera images. Photos of three-dimensional reconstructions also match the field of Apollo 15 photographs taken from the surface.

On July 17, 2009, NASA released low resolution engineering test photos from Apollo 11, Apollo 14, Apollo 15, Apollo 16 and Apollo 17 landing sites that have been photographed by the Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter as part of the mission startup process. The photos show the landing stage of the landing of each mission on the surface of the Moon. Photos of the Apollo 14 landing site also show tracks made by astronauts between science experiments (ALSEP) and landers. Photos of the Apollo 12 landing site released by NASA on September 3, 2009. The landing stage of Intrepid , experimental packages (ALSEP), the Surveyor 3 spacecraft, and the astronaut pathways are all visible. Although the LRO images have been enjoyed by the scientific community as a whole, they have not done anything to convince the conspirators that the landing took place.

On September 1, 2009, India's Chandrayaan-1 moon mission took photographs of the Apollo 15 landing site and the lunar catcher track. The Indian Space Research Organization launched an unmanned moon probe on September 8, 2008 (IST), from Satish Dhawan Space Center. The photographs were taken by a hyperspectral camera mounted as part of the mission image charge.

The second Chinese lunar probe, Chang'e 2, launched in 2010, can capture the surface of the moon with a resolution of up to 1.3 meters (4.3 feet). It saw the trail of Apollo landings.

Moon Rock

The Apollo program collected 380 kilograms (838 lb) of Moon rock for six manned missions. Analysis by scientists around the world all agree that these stones are from the Moon - no reports published in peer-reviewed scientific journals exist that dispute this claim. The Apollo samples are easily distinguished from both meteorites and Earth rocks where they indicate a lack of hydrogen alteration products, they show evidence of having impacted events on sultry bodies, and they have unique geochemical properties. Furthermore, most are more than 200 million years older than the oldest Earth rocks. Moon rocks also have the same properties as Soviet samples.

The conspiracy argues that Marshall Space Flight Center Travel Director Wernher von Braun to Antarctica in 1967 (about two years before the Apollo 11 launch) is collecting the moon meteorite for use as a fake Moon rock. Since von Braun is a former SS officer (though one who has been detained by the Gestapo), the documentary Did We Go? declared that he could be pressured to consent to conspiracy to protect himself from the Gestapo. recriminations over his past. NASA said von Braun's mission is "to look at environmental and logistical factors that may be related to future space mission planning, and hardware." NASA continues to send teams to work in Antarctica to mimic conditions on other planets.

It is now accepted by the scientific community that rocks have been destroyed both from the surface of Mars and the moon during impact events, and that some of these have landed on Earth as meteorites. However, the Arctic first-month meteorites were discovered in 1979, and the origin of the moon was not recognized until 1982. Furthermore, the moon meteorite was so scarce that it was impossible to explain 380 kilograms of Moon stone collected by NASA between 1969 and 1972. Only about 30 kilograms of lunar meteorites have been found on Earth so far, though private collectors and government agencies around the world are looking for over 20 years.

While the Apollo mission collected 380 kilograms of the Moon's rock, the Soviet robot Luna 16, Luna 20 and Luna 24 only collected 326 grams of combined

Source of the article : Wikipedia