THE MOON LANDING ( REAL OR HOAX)

Background Information For a long time the thought that the United States landed on the moon in 1969 was thought to be fact. But for some time now, skeptics have been voicing their opinions on the subject..

The Moon Landing was Faked

Shadows Shadow on suit would be much darker if moon was only light source. Background would not fade out in an atmosphere-less environment. Small white spec is reflection of some larger structure.

Stars and Shadows Picture shows no stars in the sky. Flag on LEM is illuminated.

Directional Shadows Shadows cast by one light source should go in the same direction in parallel lines.

Shadow Illumination If the Sun is only light source than how is the man in the space suit so illuminated?

Scenery Same background looked as though used two separate times One has LEM in it and one doesn’t

Crosshair and Tire-Tracks The crosshairs that are supposedly fixed into the camera lens appear to be behind the object on the Land Rover. The tracks made by the Land Rover are too defined. There is a C carved into the rock.

Crosshair Continued… Closer inspection of the crosshairs…..

Final Arguments The United States faked the moon landing so they could beat the Russians in the space race. NASA collected billions of dollars in cash that wasn’t really used for landing on the moon. To take Americans minds off the Vietnam War.

The Moon Landing Was Real

Overview of Shadow Discrepancy The moon is covered with a very fine layer of dust several inches thick. This dust is very reflective of light, which is why we can see the moon so well as the sun shines on it.

Shadow Refutation The following arguments were tested by scientist Ian Goddard. As you can see in this experiment done with a single light source, the white more reflective paper reflects the light unlike the black paper. You are able to see the detail of the front of the space suit of the figurine.

Illuminated Shadow Refutation In this picture we can see with a similar “reflective surface” we can see the figure illuminated. But when we use a black piece of paper you can not.

On Earth Too If you viewed this scene from above then the shadows would be parallel, however, with a low sun angle and the perspective of the camera, the shadows appear to be divergent.

Slanted Shadows Explanation This picture shows how shadows can also be slanted by the landscape. In the picture the shadows are curving into the cannons due to the slant of the walls.

Apennine Front/Hadley Delta

Scenery Explanation In the argument saying that the same scenery was seen in separate photos with the LEM in it, there is an obvious explanation. Despite the lack of atmosphere it is obvious that the mountains are way off in the distance. By simply moving where your taking the picture from, you can still see the same reference point on the mountain. The first of the two previous pictures was taken on the left is Apennine Front and on the right is Mt Hadley Delta. The astronauts actually walked on Hadley Delta.

Scenery Explanation Continued….

Crosshair Refutation The picture shows and experiment where a hair was placed over the lens of the camera to show how it showed up on a dark and light background. It almost disappears on the light background and sunlight is much brighter in space

Blast Crater Explanation No Crater would be made by the Lunar Module.

The Blast Crater Skeptics also say that there should have been a blast crater where the Lunar Module landed and took off from. This is not so. Skeptics argue that 3,000 pounds of thrust were used to land and take off. But the blast nozzle had a diameter of 54 inches or an area of 2,300 square inches. Now divided out, that only equals about 1.5 pounds per square inch of thrust. This is not nearly enough to make a large impact crater. Also, exhaust in a vacuum spreads out very quickly. On the contrary, Earth’s atmosphere constricts the rockets exhaust into a thin column but this simply isn’t true in a vacuum environment.

Radiation To go to the moon astronauts must go through the van Allen Belts. But according to William Wheton, a scientist, the Astronauts passed through the belt “very quickly and not long enough to get a lethal dose of radiation”. He goes on to say that the metal hull of the Apollo spacecraft would kept out most of the radiation anyway.

Edgar Mitchell This reply was sent to a pro- moon landing web site from the former Lunar Module Pilot of the Apollo 14 Mission.

Actual Astronaut Message The Re: Moon Hoax EDM Discussion Group From: Edgar Mitchell Category: Category Date: 16 Sep 2002 Time: 14:31:29 Comments Thank you. Your web site looks great and presents all the correct points. Sibrel faked his way into my home with false History Channel credentials for an interview. After about 3-4 minutes, he popped the bible question. Realizing who he was, I maintained my cool enough to swear on his bible, then ended the interview and tossed him out of the house, with a boot in his rear. (Did same to Buzz Aldrin)

Buzz vs Sibrel

Buzz Aldrin Lunar Pilot for the Apollo 11 mission Second man to walk on moon Overall cool guy

Bart Winfield Sibrel Conspiracy theorist who has been known to harass former astronauts about their moon trips. Claims to have been a journalist (although he actually was only a part- time editor at a local Nashville NBC affiliate for a couple of months, and "he has no right whatsoever to claim any association with our news organization" according to the news director there

Buzz vs Sibrel On September 9, 2002, Mr. Sibrel jumped out at Mr. Aldrin with the Bible, daring him to swear on it. Buzz told Mr. Sibrel to go away repeatedly, and even asked for the police. When Mr. Sibrel physically blocked his path, Mr. Aldrin (who is 72, 5'10" and 160 pounds) punched Mr. Sibrel (37, 6"2" and 250 pounds) in the face.

You Decide Overall you have to make the final decision of what you believe in. I hope this presentation has at least presented you with the facts.

Bibliography    htm htm  

The End