The 'Fake' Moon Landings

I'd like to change my answer. I did some research and wow - there is a virtual treasure trove of excellent information out there that completely debunks the whole lunar landing.

I now believe it was faked. Holy crap!

The Facts - Photographic Evidence

m

anyone who thinks that we "america, whatever" didn't goto the moon is just silly.

I now do however start to think that a lot of the moon footage and phots are fake, but not the actually fact they they went.

There aparently is a good french documentary about this, gotta find what it is. But i heard bascially that The US wanted the landings to look good so they hired Stanely Kubrick to film the landings in a studio set. Then it even goes off into more consipiracy that people that knew about this have mysteriosly died. Probably a lot of conspiracy theory there, but i think the general idea of the us wanting to make themselfs look good so they filmed a version of the landings to show the public could be true

Let me start by saying that I think America did land on the moon. But, if it had been faked it would have been the most ingenious political move ever.

Think about it. The U.S and the Soviets are in a dead heat, and no one knows who will get there and back again first. So, the U.S decides to fake it. Photos and film are broadcast all over the world that depicts men landing on the moon. The next thing you know, the US has all the glory, and the soviets have stopped racing because they think they’re beat. Now the US is free to go to the moon at its own pace. Very smooth if you ask me.

I will also add this. Not long ago Japan announced that they will be sending manned flights to the moon in the not-so-distant future. Shortly after, the US announced that it too would like to go back, and would likely go before the Japanese. One might wonder why, after so many years, they’re so anxious to get back.

hehe something to hide up there before anyone else visits.... hehe j/k

As for no stars in the sky. Perhaps (actually truthfully), it was because since all the landing tooks place during the moon's day, there is no sight of stars. Just like taking a picture of the earth sky in the day and asking where are the stars. They are there, just too much other light to see them.
As for tracks in the moon (the site said for tracks like that you need a material/water mixture), I guess these people don't have clay by their homes. With soft powdery clay, it makes perfect imprints of shoes, tires, anything. And this is in the hot 40C summer days at my place. I guarentee no water content in the clay.

Are you people total idiots?

There aren't any stars in photographs taken on the moon due to the moon's lunar surface and the white spacesuits. In order to take a picture of bright white astronauts on a bright shiny surface, the shutter speed on the camera has to be practically lightning quick or the film gets over-exposed. The small aperture and rapid shutter speed preclude distant sources of light from having time to adequately strike the film enough to expose it.

Jesus!

What other tripe are you people passing around on here??

I agree with your analogy. You would need a very slow shutter speed to capture the stars... but the shadows my friend... the shadows. Plus that infamous american flag on the lunar module, that should be half shaded. What about that.

The flag and the stars can be explained the exact same way. it is very bright on the moons surface. just look at it at night, sometimes it appears as if it is nearly daylight out. That is all light being reflected off of the moons surface. Imagine what things would be like on the surface itself? Odds are, any faint light source would get blocked out while anything that is reflective would appear to be very bright. White spacesuits are very rarely seen as being in the shadows, and it would not be unreasonable to assume that the flag that was on the lander would not have been made to be highly reflective so that everyone could see it, NASA likes to think of those types of things.

And as far as Japan going to the moon, why wouldn't America be able to get there before the Japanese? Going to the moon in the first place was because of politics and it will be again. And America has the advantage of having done it before.

If you look at the base of the Lunar module, it is made of a shinny gold highly reflective foil... and in the shade, a less reflective flag... well light.
Most of the other pictures are talking of inconsistant shadows. That is the picture that is not sitting well with me... I might sound biased to a: NO they didn't make to the moon, but I am actually sitting on the fence on that one.

Mario,

I'm going to make a few predictions. 1) You've watched that terrible Fox show about the faked landings, (please, please, PLEASE say you're not getting this from websites...) 2) This is going to be a ping-pong game where you introduce some photograph, state what you believe to be incorrect about it and claim it is evidence of a fakery while I dispute it and 3) You will shy away from answering questions about the theory of faked moon landings as a whole.

1) Don't quote shit from the Fox program. It was shit.

2) I don't mind playing ping-pong if you don't mind admitting you don't understand photography. The flag on the lander is infilled by reflective light from the lunar surface. It's common practice in photography. Hold up a bright white sheet next to what you want to photograph, illuminate the subject and sheet with a bright light and presto-bango, the sheet reflects light and infills what would otherwise be nasty shadows on your subject. A basic understanding of photography would do wonders here.

3) If the lunar landings were faked, as you believe they were (or to whatever other idiot believes they were) then what motive do you ascribe to the Americans for doing so? (Remember, nobody serves up a softy question like that without something big coming up behind it, so take your time answering this question.)

whoa man chill. i(we) never said they were for sre fake, i think its just a possibility. i have seen lots of evidence proving them fake, and lots of evidence proving that evidence wrong. So might be somewhere in the middle. thats why lately im leaning towards the "went to the moon but some of the photos/video were fake to look good" theory

To answer your first question… NO I did not see that show on Fox. Also I wasn’t about to play ping-pong, and introduce a bunch of pictures… one by one. I am not expert at photography… BUT I know enough to know that unless the astronauts tragically places a reflective screen (or light) to put some accent light on the flag (like you so diligently mentioned)… it would not be possible to have that flag illuminated. First you would need a lightmeter to be able have a good balance between the ambient light and the lack of light in that shadow. Plus, how and why should the astronaut know about this tinny detail or a flag in the background, in the shade. WHY is it sooooo important to have that flag in the Picture? Way too many details to analyze for a casual shoot of a mission on the moon. All the other pictures I checked are about shadows. Since the pictures are poor quality, we don’t see all the angles, and hidden moon features due to overexposure. On another picture, they are showing a “C” on one to the rock.. Engineer over analyzing the moon surface could have penciled that one in a later day.
And… I said that I am on the fence about that one. Anything is possible with those Americans. Its not always like it seems with them. For example, back in the sixties, when Cuba removed all nuclear missiles from the Island. Cuba and the USSR did not back down and removed those ICBM without a trade… the USA removed all their land mines and ICBM from Turkey. And the latest one… you hear a lot about 9/11 and all those people that perished in NY. What about the ones at the pentagon… Not a whole lot of media coverage on that one. Not one witness mentioned seeing any planes of a decent size around… People mentioned a hiss, doesn’t sound like jet engines to me. On those pictures, of a good quality, you can clearly see huge wire spools in a very good conditions (except for the burnt aspect).

All that to say that there is evidence that the lunar landing could be a hoax.

Why would the United States fake the Lunar Landings? What is the motivation? I get the “Space Race” component that clearly existed in the early 60s (when the Cold War was extremely hot) but by the late 1960s détente had largely set in, thus largely eliminating the propaganda angle.