Anonymous asked in Science & MathematicsAstronomy & Space · 1 decade ago

1969 Moon landing a hoax?!?

Ok. I was browsing the internet searching for some ufo articles when I came upon this article claiming that the 1969 moon landing was a hoax.

I do believe that NASA landed on the moon in 1969, but after I read this article, it made me wonder...

Here's a link.

After reading the article, is your opinion on the 1969 moon landing changed? Do you think it was a hoax or did we land on the moon?


Huey from ohio- you got an interesting claim, but there is one thing I don't understand here, In one of the photograpgh, it showed the US flag blowing, but there is no atmosphere on the moon, how could it be blowing?

15 Answers

  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago
    Favourite answer

    There's a reflector in the Sea of Tranquility left by Apollo 11 that independent scientists all over the world have bounced lasers off of to measure the exact distance between the Earth and the Moon.

    This hoax thing is amateurish and tiresome. By 2020, we'll be back there and can prove it did happen.

    In the meantime, you might be amused by magician duo Penn & Teller's opinion:

    • Commenter avatarLog in to reply to the answers
  • Otis F
    Lv 7
    1 decade ago

    1) Twelve 12 American astronauts have walked on the moon.

    Apollo 11: Neil Armstrong & Buzz Aldrin

    Apollo 12: Pete Conrad & Alan Bean

    Apollo 13: << failed to land on the moon >>

    Apollo 14: Alan Shepard & Edgar (Ed) Mitchell

    Apollo 15: David Scott & James Irwin

    Apollo 16: John Young & Charles Duke

    Apollo 17: Eugene (Gene) Cernan & Harrison Schmidt

    2) Why haven't we been back?

    a) American astronauts visited the moon on six occasions.

    b) The "moon race" was an extension of the cold war. It was mostly about national prestige. We got there first and achieved our primary objective. There was some good science: surveys, measurements, sample collection. But it was mostly about being there first. Once we achieved our primary objective, there was no political will to go back. There still isn't. Perhaps, if we discover He3 or something else valuable, there will be.

    c) I used to travel to Crested Butte, Colorado every year to ski. Because I don't go anymore, does it mean that I never went?

    3) What about the Van Allen radiation belts? Wouldn't it have killed the astronauts?

    The existence of the Van Allen radiation belts postulated in the 1940s by Nicholas Christofilos. Their existence was confirmed in *1958* by the Explorer I satellite launched by the USA.

    The radiation in the Van Allen radiation belts is not particularly strong. You would have to hang out there for a week or so in order to get radiation sickness. And, because the radiation is not particularly strong, a few millimeters of metal is all that is required for protection. "An object satellite shielded by 3 mm of aluminum will receive about 2500 rem (25 Sv) per *year*."

    "In practice, Apollo astronauts who travelled to the moon spent very little time in the belts and received a harmless dose. [6]. Nevertheless NASA deliberately timed Apollo launches, and used lunar transfer orbits that only skirted the edge of the belt over the equator to minimise the radiation." When the astronauts returned to Earth, their dosimeters showed that they had received about as much radiation as a couple of medical X-rays.

    4) The U.S. government scammed everyone?

    In 1972, there was a politically motivated burglary of a hotel room in the Watergate Hotel in Washington, D.C. There were only about six or eight people who knew about it. However, those people, including Richard M. Nixon, the President of the United States, failed to keep that burglary a secret. It exploded into a scandal that drove the President and a number of others from office.

    If six or eight people couldn't keep a hotel room burglary a secret, then how could literally thousands of people could have kept their mouths shut about six faked moon landings? Not just one moon landing, but six of them!

    5) What about the USSR?

    Even if NASA and other government agencies could have faked the six moon landings well enough to fool the general public, they could NOT have fooled the space agency or military intelligence types in the USSR. The Soviets were just dying to beat us. If the landings were faked, the Soviets would have re-engineered their N-1 booster and landed on the moon just to prove what liars Americans are. Why didn't they? Because the landings were real and the Soviets knew it.

    6) Why does the flag shake? Where are the stars? Who took the video of Neil Armstrong?

    Take a look at the first two websites listed below. They deal well with all of the technical questions.

    7) Finally, please tell us what you would accept as definitive evidence that the six moon landings were real. Is there anything?

    • Commenter avatarLog in to reply to the answers
  • Adonai
    Lv 5
    1 decade ago

    Usually I'd stay away from Hoax theorist stuff but I need to answer this one.

    In 1969 the United States did land on the moon and completed thier mission as stated in the press; we did it many times after that.

    I have heard all the strange tales of "missing stars" in photo's, rocks with numbers on them in photo's and of course there is the "flag waiving" when there was no wind on the moon.

    I can argue ALL DAY and theorist , having that special need for attention, will come up with "what about this or what about that ", Crikey Mate...

    FACTS: The flag "waived" on the moon as it was placed down and the pole "wiggled"; try it in your room where there is No Wind, simply wiggle the pole and watch the flag ripple, a ripple is the same as a waive and you can't tell the difference; while at a basketball game the cheerleaders shake pom poms all friggin day and they wiggle like they are blowing in the wind...yet, your in a gym...

    Rocks with numbers on them...theorist claim Nasa used a studio, took photo's and accidently left a number on a rock they used while fake photographing in the studio took place....No, the photo of the real moon surface was indexed and Numbered while at a Nasa lab.....the Number was written on the glossy photo and happened to be on a rock in the photo, it could easiliy have been in the dirt...

    In a photo taken of Armstrong on the Moon a theorist screamed bloody murder when they saw No Stars in the back ground behind Armstrong and saw only a black sky.....the surface of the moon IS VERY BRIGHT, the camera setting on the lens was minimal (fast exposure) enabling the film to Capture Armstrong. Such setting will not have time to allow for dim stars to be captured at that setting. Ask a photo shop owner in your town about that if you won't believe this.

    Theorist can still argue thought, but for those of you whom have common sense coupled with intelligence I'd submit the following to close this for me:

    Nasa would not tell the American people that the Moon had no atmosphere then allow a flag to waive in one of thier "Hoaxes"; remember, Nasa Gave us the moon and all the information that went with it, if they were to stage a dumb trick to hoax the world into thinking we Americans went there and did not, they would set the stage better than Theorist give them credit for, they have 1/2 he Ph'ds in the planet on payroll now...

    Then there is the shuttle programe, a hoax, No, 14 dead astronauts later and I think the reality is that space travel is risky and people die doing it, no hoax, they died in space, and Nasa admitted how it happened, give them the credit they deserve, it's no game they play.

    In the event Nasa, the United States, were to have pulled such a Hoax, it would have been discovered eventually by someone, the Russians and where would U.S. credibility be with the world? Nasa, nor our Goverment then or now is that stupid to risk it.

    • Commenter avatarLog in to reply to the answers
  • 1 decade ago

    The "article" you read is a bunch of pseudo-scientific hoo-hah, with no merit whatsoever.

    For a complete debunking of that crap, go check out:

    The Americans landed on the moon six different times.

    The flag is not "blowing in the breeze" -- it was supported by a metal rod to keep it extended so it could be seen, and was folded up during transport, so it had wrinkles in it. The only time the flag can be see moving is when they were planting the pole in the ground. So try this little experiment -- put a flag on a small pole, and try sticking into your lawn without wiggling the pole back and forth and making the flag move -- go ahead, I'll wait.

    Can't do it, can you? End of discussion.

    • Commenter avatarLog in to reply to the answers
  • What do you think of the answers? You can sign in to give your opinion on the answer.
  • Gene
    Lv 7
    1 decade ago

    I don't think any sane nation would spend 28 billion dollars, spend 14 years and hire 250,000 people to make a fake movie and then have all the people involved stay quite about the hoax. Th flag had a piece of wire in it to make it look like it was in a breeze and if you look at the movie the flag only waves while the astronaut is pushing it into the ground and for a few seconds after that for the oscillations to die out. And as far as documentaries on TV, when I think of credible science I definitely think of the Fox Network as being top of the list.

    • Commenter avatarLog in to reply to the answers
  • Tim C
    Lv 4
    1 decade ago

    About the flag:

    The folks who came up with the idea of taking an American flag to the moon were aware that unless they rigged something up, the flag would just hang there. So they built a special flagpole expressly for the purpose of making the flag appear to fly. they needed a flagpole that was easy to assemble and to plant in the ground. Plus, the pole had to be portable, and not use up a lot of precious cargo space. So scientists rigged a telescoping pole with a telescoping horizontal crossbar that was supposed to make the flag look as if it were blowing in the wind. The flag itself was standard issue, although the top was hemmed so that the astronauts would be able to slide it over the crossbar.

    • Commenter avatarLog in to reply to the answers
  • 1 decade ago

    I have read the article before. Most of the information comes from a group called the flat earth society. They are still in existence and believe the world is flat. the moon landing seriously hurt their credibility and they afterwords published or caused to be published a number of articles either questioning the moon landing or claiming outright that it was a hoax.

    • Commenter avatarLog in to reply to the answers
  • 1 decade ago


    when the astronauts returned and walked down the same hill. they followed there tracks back from the 2.5 mile trek.

    Seeing the front side of the astronaut .You don,t know what was behind the photographer that could reflect light back. Also NASA can clean up a bad picture light dark ect

    the flag could be solar activity disrupting the transmit ion to earth.There is a reason your news broadcaster don't where strips on TV. They just don,t photo well. That would be a good question . Why is that?

    Well I think Americans were there

    Happy caving Carroll

    • Commenter avatarLog in to reply to the answers
  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    Oh, the article convinced me! Now I also believe that we never sent any rovers to Mars; that was filmed in the Arizona desert! And even though all of the 9/11 conspirators were Arabs, they were paid by the Jews to do it! And there's no such thing as global warming! And it was President Roosevelt who allowed the Japanese to bomb Pearl Harbor just to get us into the war! And every single bad thing that has happened in the last six years was Bill Clinton's fault! And President Bush is really an alien agent from the planet Moron!

    • Commenter avatarLog in to reply to the answers
  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    They weren't faked. They happened. Just ask the Russians, they were tick off because they did not get there first!

    Let the feeble minded hoax sayers produce evidence to the contrary!

    • Commenter avatarLog in to reply to the answers
Still have questions? Get answers by asking now.