See other Science/Tech Articles
Title: Could moon landings have been faked? Some still think so
Source:
[None]
URL Source: http://www.cnn.com/2009/TECH/space/07/17/moon.landing.hoax/
Published: Jul 18, 2009
Author: Brandon Griggs
Post Date: 2009-07-18 11:23:26 by christine
Keywords: None
Views: 473
Comments: 49
CNN) -- It captivated millions of people around the world for eight days in the summer of 1969. It brought glory to the embattled U.S. space program and inspired beliefs that anything was possible. It's arguably the greatest technological feat of the 20th century. And to some, it was all a lie. Forty years after Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin set foot on the moon, a small cult of conspiracy theorists maintains the historic event -- and the five subsequent Apollo moon landings -- were staged. These people believe NASA fabricated the landings to trump their Soviet rivals and fulfill President Kennedy's goal of ferrying humans safely to and from the moon by the end of the 1960s. "I do know the moon landings were faked," said crusading filmmaker Bart Sibrel, whose aggressive interview tactics once provoked Aldrin to punch him in the face. "I'd bet my life on it." Sibrel may seem crazy, but he has company. A 1999 Gallup poll found that a scant 6 percent of Americans doubted the Apollo 11 moon landing happened, and there is anecdotal evidence that the ranks of such conspiracy theorists, fueled by innuendo-filled documentaries and the Internet, are growing. And a Google search this week for "Apollo moon landing hoax" yielded more than 1.5 billion results. "We love conspiracies," said Roger Launius, a senior curator at the National Air and Space Museum in Washington. "Going to the moon is hard to understand. And it's easier for some people to accept the answer that, 'Well, maybe we didn't go to the moon.' A lot of it is naivete." Conspiracy theories about the Apollo missions began not long after the last astronaut returned from the moon in 1972. Bill Kaysing, a technical writer for Rocketdyne, which built rocket engines for NASA's Apollo program, published a 1974 book, "We Never Went to the Moon: America's Thirty Billion Dollar Swindle." In the book and elsewhere, Kaysing argued that NASA lacked the technology in 1969 to land humans safely on the moon, that the Apollo astronauts would have been poisoned by passing through the Van Allen radiation belts that ring the Earth and that NASA's photos from the moon contained suspicious anomalies. See improved NASA footage of the 1969 moonwalk » Kaysing theorized NASA sent the Apollo 11 astronauts up in a rocket until it was out of sight, then transferred the lunar capsule and its three passengers to a military cargo plane that dropped the capsule eight days later in the Pacific, where it was recovered. In the meantime, he believed, NASA officials filmed the "moon landing" at Area 51, the high-security military base in the Nevada desert, and brainwashed the astronauts to ensure their cooperation. Some believe Kaysing's theories inspired the 1978 movie "Capricorn One," in which NASA fakes a Mars landing on a remote military base, then goes to desperate lengths to cover it up. Others insist NASA recruited director Stanley Kubrick, hot off "2001: A Space Odyssey," to film the "faked" moon landings. Oh, and those moon rocks? Lunar meteorites from Antarctica. Decades later, Kaysing's beliefs formed the foundation for "Conspiracy Theory: Did We Land on the Moon?" a sensational 2001 Fox TV documentary that spotted eerie "inconsistencies" in NASA's Apollo images and TV footage. Among them: no blast craters are visible under the landing modules; shadows intersect instead of running parallel, suggesting the presence of an unnatural light source; and a planted American flag appears to ripple in a breeze although there's no wind on the moon. The hour-long special sparked such interest in the topic that NASA took the unusual step of issuing a news release and posting a point-by-point rebuttal on its Web site. The press release began: "Yes. Astronauts did land on the moon." In various documents, NASA has countered that the Apollo astronauts passed through the Van Allen belts too quickly to be exposed to dangerous levels of radiation; that the module's descent engines weren't powerful enough to leave a blast crater; that the shadows in photos were distorted by wide-angle lenses and sloping lunar terrain; and that the Apollo flags had horizontal support bars that made the flags swing. Kaysing died in 2005, but not before grabbing the attention of Sibrel, a Nashville, Tennessee, filmmaker who has since become the most visible proponent of the Apollo hoax theories. With funding from an anonymous donor, Sibrel wrote and directed a 47-minute documentary in 2001 that reiterated many of the now-familiar hoax arguments. Critics of moon-landing hoax theorists, and there are many, say it would be impossible for tens of thousands of NASA employees and Apollo contractors to keep such a whopping secret for almost four decades. But Sibrel believes the Apollo program was so compartmentalized that only its astronauts and a handful of high-level NASA officials knew the entire story. Sibrel spent years ambushing Apollo astronauts and insisting they swear on a Bible before his cameras that they walked on the moon. "When someone has gotten away with a crime, in my opinion, they deserve to be ambushed," Sibrel said. "I'm a journalist trying to get at the truth." In an episode made infamous on YouTube, Sibrel confronted Aldrin in 2002 and called him "a coward, a liar and a thief." Aldrin, then 72, socked the thirtysomething Sibrel in the face, knocking him backwards. "I don't want to call attention to the individuals who are trying to promote and shuffle off this hoax on people," Aldrin told CNN in a recent interview. "I feel sorry for the gullible people who're going to go along with them. I guess it's just natural human reaction to want to be a part of 'knowing something that somebody doesn't know.' But it's misguided. It's just a shame." It's been 37 years since the last Apollo moon mission, and tens of millions of younger Americans have no memories of watching the moon landings live. A 2005-2006 poll by Mary Lynne Dittmar, a space consultant based in Houston, Texas, found that more than a quarter of Americans 18 to 25 expressed some doubt that humans set foot on the moon. "As the number of people who were not yet born at the time of the Apollo program increases, the number of questions [about the moon landings] also may increase," NASA said in a statement. "Conspiracy theories are always difficult to refute because of the impossibility of proving a negative." Launius, the National Air and Space Museum curator, believes Apollo conspiracy theories resonate with people who are disengaged from society and distrustful of government. He also believes their numbers are overblown. "These diehards are really vocal, but they're really tiny," he said. But Stuart Robbins, a Ph.D. candidate in astrophysics at the University of Colorado who gives lectures defending NASA from Apollo hoax theorists, believes their influence can be harmful. "If people don't think we were able to go to the moon, then they don't believe in the ingenuity of human achievement," he said. "Going to the moon and returning astronauts safely back to Earth is arguably one of the most profound achievements in human history, and so when people simply believe it was a hoax, they lose out on that shared experience and doubt what humans can do." In its information campaign against Apollo's "debunkers," NASA may have a potent ace up its sleeve, however. Its Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter is now circling the moon with powerful cameras, snapping crisp pictures that could reveal Apollo 11's Eagle lander squatting on the moon's surface. Then again, conspiracy theorists may just say NASA doctored the photos. "Will the LRO's incredibly high-resolution images of the lunar surface, including, eventually, the Apollo landing sites, finally quell the lunacy of the Moon Hoax believers? Obviously it won't," writes astronomer Phil Plait in his blog on Discover magazine's Web site. "These true believers don't live in an evidence-based world."
Moon landing hoax theorists point to the "rippling" flag as evidence the landings were faked.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 29.
#10. To: christine (#0)
The 911 fantasy proves that the government with the aid of the media can fool the public by lying and withholding evidence. However, the trips to the moon is not one of those cases. Instead of lying and withholding evidence NASA has been very open. 1. We could not have fooled the Russians.
Here is a "What if" for you. What IF we already had a non-rocket propulsion system capable of taking a man, or men, to the moon and possibly further. Given the secretiveness of our government that is not at all beyond the pale, and it is bolstered by a couple of snippets that made it out around the periphery: 1. Werner Von Braun insisted that the space program use rockets. Why would he insist that if there were not other options? 2. At a dinner party the late Mr. Northrop, founder of Northrop Aviation, was quoted as, tearfully, saying to a small group "we have the stars and they won't let us go". I never have found out who "they" is whether earthly or e.t.. 3. Due to slip by a congressman that was picked up in "Aviation Daily" we know that there is a black budget space program, and has been for quite some time. 4. A kid by the name of McKinnon "hacked" the Pentagram computer system and one of the interesting things he came up with was Officer transfers between Navy ships. The problem is that no ships by the listed names exist - at least in the open. The speculation being that they are part of the black budget space program and that our capabilities are well in advance of what the public is allowed to know. The Pentagram has been very insistent on extraditing McKinnon from the U.K. where he resides. So: 1. Who says the Russians were fooled? 2. Given advanced capabilities, beyond what is known in the public domain, the rocks could very easily have been collected and sent back for the charade. 3. Ditto the reflectors - they could either have been planted by drones or by others to support the charade. Throw into the mix "The Brookings Report" from 1959, commissioned by the newly formed NASA which counseled against letting the public know about any artifacts found, on the moon or other plantes,which indicated e.t. civilization as it would create a cultural upset and the mix gets more interesting. So, IF the moon missions were faked the question becomes WHY? Since it was not beyond our capabilities to do them there has to be another reason or reasons. The Brookings Report is one. That it would have been epochal to admit to civilization beyond this one little mud ball it would have created a cultural revolution in viewpoint. Something upsetting and destabilizing to a group trying to establish a particular mindset of control in the culture. You just can't have large groups of people thinking and asking questions when you are trying to use Psychiatric methods to limit the scope of their thinking and questioning. As well is "Cold War" mindset of keeping advanced technology secret. Remember that the SR-71 Spy Plane was fully operational in 1959 - 13 years before the government would admit it existed. Another would be to create a cover program to use to siphon off the majority of the 40 BILLION (about 300 Billion plus in todays dollars) "spent" on Project Apollo into the black budget program. Our government is duplicitous enough to do just as outlined and the Straw Man "that they can't keep a secret" is just that A Strawman. As a disturbing foot note. Astronaut Edgar Mitchell could not recall his time on the Moon and went to a world renowned Hypnotherapist to try to recover the memories. None were ever recovered. This raises the possibility that some or all of the Astronauts were mind washed as part of the larger program. At one time I thought that the "silly" theory that Apollo was faked was absolute hogwash. The accumulation of data over time removed the certainty of the opinion. The truth of this matter remains an unknown, but the elements outlined are to the best of my knowledge true (you can download the Brookings Report as someone got hold of a copy and it has long since been scanned to the Web). Edgar Mitchell talked about his visiting a Hypnotherapist in his own book. So, my speculations are not without support. So, WHAT IF the Apollo missions were just a big charade to cover something larger? Why is NASA firing a Kinetic Energy weapon at the Moon? The cover story that they are looking for water vapor is preposterous. There is another reason not being given. Destroying evidence? Of what kind? I am reminded of a quote from Oliver Wendell Holmes:
2. Given advanced capabilities, beyond what is known in the public domain, the rocks could very easily have been collected and sent back for the charade. 3. Ditto the reflectors - they could either have been planted by drones or by others to support the charade. 1. On 12 April 1961, Yuri Alekseyevich Gagarin, Hero of the Soviet Union, was a Soviet cosmonaut and the first human in outer space and the first to orbit the Earth. He received medals from around the world for his pioneering tour in space. That a Russian was first in space and first to orbit the earth was an embarrassment to the USA and the reason for going to the moon. If we had faked going to the moon, the Soviet Union would have embarrassed us even more by exposing the hoax. 2. The Apollo missions returned rock and soil samples totaling 842 pounds, comprising 2,196 individual specimens. Any mission capable of returning over 800 pounds of rock and soil samples would be a massive, complex and difficult undertaking. If NASA could pull this off, then surely they had the technical know-how to land a manned vehicle. In fact, with an astronaut at the controls, a manned mission would likely have greater odds of success than a robotic mission. Perhaps the greatest case for the Apollo landings exists in the variety of rock samples collected. A robotic mission would be limited to a random collection of samples in the lander's immediate vicinity. However, the Apollo astronauts visited vastly different geological sites and were able to roam about the surface looking for particularly interesting and valuable specimens. And, they used tools well beyound the capability of robotics for collecting the rocks. For example, it is very unlikely that a robot would have been lucky enough to scoop up the "genesis rock" found by Apollo 15 astronauts. Only trained human explorers could collect the diversity of samples credited to the Apollo astronauts. 3. Any mission capable of installing laser reflectors would be a massive, complex and difficult undertaking. If robotics was used, the conspiracy would be one of stupendous proportion involving literally thousands of individuals. A program of huge scope would have been necessary. The design, manufacture, testing and launch of these spacecraft would have involved numerous subcontractors and suppliers, as well as thousands of workers. There is no supporting evidence for such a program, or the multitude of people involved in the project willing to be participants in the cover-up.
1. That the Russians put the first man in orbit does not prove that the Russians were wholly ignorant of any subsequent deceptions by the U.S.. I am not saying that they were aware, although they had/have a very significant intelligence network, but that it is not proved one way or the other. 2. Again - uproved and unsupported. The problem with that line of reasoning is that it assumes that the rocket technology used by the Apollo Program was the farthest reach of our propulsive technology. We simply do not know the true extent and capabilities of the black budget space technology. Here I am speculating and clearly so labeled, but there have been a lot of hints that there are at least some craft in operation with at least a partial anti-gravity system of some sort. What I suggest, and believe to be the case, is that there is in operation, and likely has been since the 60's, craft with capabilities far far beyond what the public is allowed to know. It is beyond the scope of a short post to go into all the evidence direct and indirect that forms that opinion. However, as you may recall, or may not be aware of, as early as the 1940's the Nazi's were working on exotic propulsion systems and from what has leaked, and been inferred, had met with some success. Those scientists who were working on those systems were captured by the Allies and brought to the U.S. under Operation Paperclip. Nikola Tesla was working on "Zero Point" energy generation systems as early as the 1920's and when Tesla died all of his research papers and apparatus were scooped up and put under many layers of secrecy and have never been allowed into the public domain. In the 1960's there were designs for ionized Plasma drive systems which lacked only a sufficiently powerful compact power system. And I am being conservative in my speculations here. So your use of the word "complex" assumes only rocket technology and not possible (I think virtually certain but that is my own opinion) advanced systems which would have turned that complex and difficult undertaking, with primitive chemical rockets, into simply a logistical problem of no great magnitude - other than the desire to keep it under the highest levels of secrecy. 3. Largely answered in two. It would only be a complex problem unless you "think outside the box" of what is put forth for public consumption. And it may well have been that some of the open lunar activity was legitimate, but with a background of subterfuge at play. Sometime take a look at the film of the Lunar Excursion Module Taking off to return to orbit. There is one very curious anomaly about it - there is no rocket exhaust plume. In fact there is very little disturbance of the lunar dust by what should have been a very powerful exhaust coming from a rocket motor. I see a couple of possible explanations - it was done on a movie set OR the L.E.M. was using one of those alternative propulsion systems and the rocket nozzle was only a stage prop for show. And again like too many people you assume that a well organized compartmentalized program requires "thousands" of individuals "in the know". That is a Strawman as in a tightly compartmentalize high security program the guy setting at the desk in the next cubicle often has not a clue as to what his neighbor does. And there is supporting evidence for the black budget space program thanks to the slip by a Congresscritter and reported in Aviation Week in 2004: Link To Article. There is a lot of other evidence, mostly indirect, that the program exists and has likely existed on a parallel track to the public NASA Dog and Pony Show which exists for the same purpose as a stage magician waving a kerchief - to distract from what the other hand is doing. This also provides explanation as to WHY the public space program has been hobbled, starved for funds, and kept alive only to divert public attention. We could have had an expedition to Mars 20 years ago and a large fully functioning Permanent Space Station in Lagrange 5 by now. (For those not familiar with the Lagrange points - in short they are points in the Earth-Moon system where the gravitational forces cancel out and allow a station to be put in perpetual stable orbit for nearly zero energy cost.) The Above Top Secret Website has a lot of interesting data in their article on the program and speculations as to its extent. Just to throw into the mix is that NASA and Malin Space systems have been caught, on multiple occasions now, retouching and altering photographs of the moon and Mars to obscure interesting anomalies. The world is much stranger than you think - and a hell of a lot more convoluted. Do you think 911 was staged or exactly as represented by the government and major media?
Perhaps of interest ping.
#32. To: Original_Intent (#29)
Before I'd seriously entertain a conspiracy -- any conspiracy -- I want to see a credible motive for it. If there's no credible motive, then there's likely no conspiracy. If reaching the moon was beyond the means of NASA 40 years ago, then the USA certainly had a motive to fake it due to competition with the soviet space program. It's a great way to make Americans feel patriotic in a decade when taxes rose enormously. I don't know if we went landed on the moon. I wasn't there. And regardless of whether we really did or not, the government is *still* not to be trusted with anything. That being the case, it doesn't matter to me if the landings were faked or not. Wouldn't surprise me if it were. But I don't know, and in the big picture, I don't really care. I just want this monstrosity called the US Government to collapse under it's own weight as it so rightly deserves.
Very interesting, thank you.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
2. We brought back over 800 lbs of moon rock over 4 billion years old. Rock that doesn't exist on earth and cannot be duplicated. Also most any recognized scientists world wide can borrow the rocks for examining and non destructive testing and thousands of scientist have done so.
3. Apollos 11, 14 and 15 erected laser reflectors on the lunar surface. Laser beams are routinely fired at these reflectors through telescopes at McDonald Observatory in Texas and near Grasse in southern France. Those are the only places on the moon that lasers are reflected back to earth. Point the lasers anywhere else on the moon and the lasers are scattered and not reflected back. NASA is very open about the laser reflectors and their locations and will demonstrate it to most anyone willing to make the trip. It would be impossible to fake the laser reflectors and fool Russia, China, and the rest of the world's scientists. No doubt scientists in Russia and other countries have fired lasers at the reflectors to measure the distance to the moon.
#11. To: DWornock, christine, TwentyTwelve, Cynicom, Wuddiz, all (#10)
"A man's mind stretched to contain a new idea never returns to its former dimension."
#27. To: Original_Intent (#11)
1. Who says the Russians were fooled?
#28. To: DWornock, christine, TwentyTwelve, FormerLurker, Cynicom, Wuddiz, all (#27)
(Edited)
Any mission capable of returning over 800 pounds of rock and soil samples would be a massive, complex and difficult undertaking.
#29. To: James Deffenbach, Lod, Pinguinite, All (#28)
Replies to Comment # 29.
#33. To: Original_Intent (#29)
Perhaps of interest ping.
End Trace Mode for Comment # 29.