The Space Page
1.2m readers

Yes, We Really Landed On The Moon And Simple Science Debunks All The "Evidence" Of A Conspiracy

Updated September 26, 2019 1.2m views15 items

NASA is not lying to you about the Moon landings; the Apollo missions really did land on the lunar surface, and there is an abundance of proof out there for anyone interested in facts instead of fiction. While debunking Moon landing conspiracies could be a full-time job for those who know the facts, one can only marvel at the tenacity of conspiracy theorists in their endless quest to perpetuate the lie that NASA never landed on the Moon. Interestingly enough, the most significant piece of evidence to support NASA's claim isn't really evidence, per se; at least not in the physical sense so much as in good ol' everyday common sense. 

The single greatest proof that NASA's Apollo Mission landed on the Moon just as they claimed lies in the simple, undeniable fact that if it had been a hoax, there is no shortage of people out there who are qualified to expose the lie. Not only qualified, but extremely motivated to do so if doing so were possible in the first place. Do not forget, NASA accomplished this feat during the height of the Space Race with the former Soviet Union, and nothing would have pleased the Communist State more than exposing President Nixon and the United States of America as frauds. They did not, simply because they could not. That in itself is pretty substantial evidence the Moon landing wasn't fake. But if you still need a little more convincing in the form of fact-based science, there's a wealth of that to go around as well.

Photo:
  • The "C" On This Moon Rock Is Just A Fiber That Got Caught In The Photo Copier

    The "C" On This Moon Rock Is Just A Fiber That Got Caught In The Photo Copier
    Photo: NASA / Wikimedia Commons / Public Domain

    When people started taking a closer look at the photographs from the Apollo 16 mission, a discovery was made of the letter "C" printed on a particular rock. Conspiracy theorists believe that the "C" was the way of cataloguing a prop; stage crew members would know where to put props based on their letters.

    Some are convinced that the "C rock" is all the proof they need to know the Moon landing was a hoax. However, upon further investigation, the "C" does not appear in the original NASA photographs or even on the negatives. The "C" is believed to be a hair or fiber that somehow got caught in the machine while copies of the photograph were being made.

  • Short Exposure Time Did Not Allow Cameras To Capture A Starry Backdrop

    Some theorists have stated that the missing stars in the backdrop of space prove that photographs were not taken on the Moon. Because of the lack of stars, the photos must have been taken on Earth and/or faked in a studio.

    If the photos were faked, one would think Stanley Kubrick and all of the genius minds behind NASA would have scattered a few fake stars in the backdrop. The simple truth is the cameras were not able to capture the celestial backdrop because the subjects being photographed - the astronauts - were much brighter than the background, and the short exposure time of the camera did not allow the light from the stars to be captured. The light reflected from the moon's surface also played a part in drowning out the light from distant stars. NASA gave the following explanation about the stars being absent in photos:

    "Astronauts striding across the bright lunar soil in their sunlit spacesuits were literally dazzling. Setting a camera with the proper exposure for a glaring spacesuit would naturally render background stars too faint to see."

  • The Moon's Topography And Alrdrin's Suit Caused Multiple Shadows

    Many skeptics of the Moon landing are quick to point out the multiple shadows cast on the Moon's surface; the Sun would be the only source of light if Apollo 11 landed on the Moon, so studio lights had to be involved to create the shadows seen on the lunar terrain.

    This theory is based primarily on a poor understanding of light, reflected light, and how shadows follow topography. In multiple photos presented as evidence of shadows being cast in different directions, it is visually apparent that the terrain obscured one or more of the shadows in question. In addition to the terrain interference, the wide angle lenses used to capture these photos caused distortions. The wide lenses were used so that large field views could be captured on film, and these particular lenses distort images and make them appear flatter than they actually are. 

    But the conspiracy theorists were correct in thinking that an artificial light source was included in the famous photograph of Buzz Aldrin. In 2014, Nvidia, a computer graphics chipmaker company, used their cutting edge technology to create a 3D  model of the Apollo 11 landing site. Mark Daly, a senior director at Nvidia, explained their findings: 

    “We found a clip of videotape that was shot from the other side of the ladder. There is a huge glowing bright white light. And as we analyzed that video a little more we realized it’s Neil Armstrong himself. The bright white spacesuit that he was wearing reflected all that sunlight off of him, and back onto Buzz Aldrin, so essentially Neil Armstrong himself was a light source in that scene.”

  • Hundreds Of Moon Rocks Have Been Verified By Geologists

    During their world tour following the Apollo 11 mission, astronauts Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin handed out moon rocks as goodwill gestures to various science communities in 135 countries. One such specimen was given to the prime minister of Holland. It remained in his care until his death in 1988, at which point it was believed to be donated to Rijksmuseum. Curators of the museum discovered that the moon rock in their possession was, in fact, a piece of petrified wood.

    Conspiracy theorists jumped all over this, claiming NASA was busted. The jig was up.

    The only thing the petrified wood really proves, however, is that the moon rock was not given to the museum. By the time the specimen was donated to the museum, it had been two decades since its initial gifting to the prime minister. There's absolutely no way of substantiating whether the two rocks were, in fact, the same one. 

    But one possible fake moon rock does not a conspiracy make. There have been hundreds and hundreds of samples of moon rocks which have been independently verified by geologists around the world. Where did NASA acquire these if not from the Moon? Conspiracy Theorists made the accusation that all of NASA’s moon rocks came from excavation sites in Antarctica, which were promptly proven categorically false