Top Ten Moon Landing Conspiracies

4

 

The moon landing hoax controversy is probably one of the most well-known of our time. According to polls from 2012, approximately 20% of Americans believe the Apollo landings never happened. The general theory behind this is that the U.S. government wanted to claim victory over Russia in the race to space, and so with the help of film director, Stanley Kubrick, the Apollo landings were filmed in a studio. Many have found what they believe to be flaws in the film and photographs that have been provided to the public, proving this theory, however others claim there are logical explanations for these flaws. Here’s our top ten list of moon landing conspiracies.

 

 

#10: The Wavy U.S. Flag

 

amos_moonlanding
Source: Public Domain

 

As Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin planted the U.S. flag on the moon, ripples could clearly be seen moving through it, as though blowing in a gentle breeze. The problem with this is, the moon has no atmosphere, and therefore no air to create a breeze. Many moon landing skeptics believe this is direct proof the moon landing was false, however NASA claims there are different reasons for this effect. First, the top of the flag was rigged to a horizontal crossbar which enabled it to remain open, and the waving effects were apparently caused from the vibration of pushing the stake into the ground.

 

#9: No Stars

 

a16_11446551
Source: Public Domain

 

There are many photos of the moon landing in which no stars can be seen in the sky. Without an atmosphere, the common belief is that the sky would be filled with them, however NASA claims there is an easy explanation for this as well, and they say it is a phenomena which also happens here on Earth. According to officials, the light from the sun that hits the pale surface of the moon is bright, and it drowns out the light emitted from the stars. Not only are cameras unable to pick up the light from the stars, but neither can the naked eye. Apparently, were you actually on the moon, you would have to block the landscape from your vision to see them. This does happen in cities here on Earth where the numerous bright city lights reflect off the streets, drowning out the stars above.

 

#8: Multiple Light Sources

 

Light Reflections
Source: Public Domain

 

The moon has only one major light source, and that’s the sun, yet some photos of the Apollo landings show light reflections where it seems they should not be, leading many to believe it was studio lights, and therefore additional proof of a hoax. A perfect example would be the famous photograph taken of Buzz Aldrin by Neil Armstrong in which Aldrin is in a shadow, yet clearly illuminated.

In an effort to test a new feature of its GeForce GTX 970 and 980 cards, those at Nvidia, a technology company that designs graphics processing units, decided to put the photos to the test. Utilizing a technique called “voxel global illumination,” developers can use dynamic lighting that bounces, diffuses, and reflects in real-time when new objects are added to a scene. It was discovered by developers that the white material of Neil Armstrong’s space suit reflected a tremendous amount of light from the sun, and after incorporating this factor into their virtual rendering, the final product was nearly identical to the original photo.

 

#7: No Blast Crater

 

8779329_f520
Source: Public Domain

 

The lack of a crater beneath the lunar landing module has raised suspicion among skeptics as well, the theory being that had NASA truly landed on the moon, a blast crater from the exhaust would be visible. None of the video footage shows this. One of the original explanations for the lack of a crater was that the module had landed on solid rock that was covered with fine lunar dust, so there would be no reason for a crater, however the fact that the dust itself did not appear disturbed, for many, makes this argument irrelevant.

NASA counters that the lunar module’s exhaust was not powerful enough to create a crater, even here on Earth. Prototypes of the landing module never produced craters, nor do routine landings by military Vertical Takeoff and Landing aircraft. As for the dust, to say it was completely undisturbed is inaccurate, there are in fact slight discolorations and outward sweeping effects visible when looking at close ups. The explanation is that the dispersal of dust from the rocket’s exhaust would specifically be caused by the displacement of air, and since there is no air on the moon, there is no significant dust movement.

 

#6: The Van Allen Radiation Belt

 

South_Atlantic_Anomaly_svg
Source: Public Domain

 

Between the Earth and moon is a radiation belt held in place by the Earth’s magnetic field known as the “Van Allen Belt.” The Apollo missions were the first attempts to transport living humans through it, and skeptics contend that the high levels of radiation would have cooked them while NASA asserts that the short amount of time it takes to traverse the belt means the astronauts received only small doses. Some skeptics claim that it would have been impossible for astronauts to land on the moon “without any danger” from radiation, but unfortunately this argument isn’t accurate. According to the astronauts, they had experienced blinding flashes during their trip, and as a result, many developed cataracts. At the same time though, it has been acknowledged that long-term space travel for any cosmonaut may elevate the risk of cancer as space is full of radiation.

 

Loading...

#5: The Moon Landings Only Happened During the Nixon Administration

 

collins-getty
Source: Getty Images

 

While there is no proof, many skeptics find it suspicious that the moon landings occurred only during President Nixon’s administration, despite over 40 years of technological advancements. The explanation for this is simply that NASA’s funding slowly dried up after the race to the moon had been won, and the USSR had no interest in coming in second. According to reports, politicians on both sides acknowledged that lower-orbit missions had greater commercial and military potential.

 

#4: The “C” Rock

 

With C Darker
Source: Public Domain

 

A popular photo has circulated of a moon rock that appears to have the letter C on it, leading many to believe it was marked for a production set. As many believe it was Hollywood director, Stanley Kubrick, who faked the moon landings for NASA, it should be known that they do not mark props in Hollywood, and there’s no reason to think NASA would either. The explanation for this photo is that it was most likely debris on a photo copier, such as a stray hair. With every copy that is enhanced and defined, this image becomes darker and clearer. The original photo apparently has no “C” shaped anomalies, and neither did any of the images that were taken just before.

 

#3: Missing Photo Cross-Hairs

 

sibrel_crosshair
Source: Public Domain

 

The cameras that were used by the astronauts incorporated thin cross-hairs to aid with scaling and direction, however in many of the photos that were taken, the cross-hairs appear behind some of the objects leading skeptics to believe NASA printed man-made objects over an actual photo of the moon. It has been countered that it would be illogical for NASA to use cross-hairs if their plan was to produce fake photos, and that this phenomena comes down to a simple case of overexposure. In all of the images in which parts of the cross-hairs are missing, it is always in front of a white object.

 

#2: Identical Backgrounds

 

photo14
Source: NASA

 

There are two photos that were taken during the Apollo 15 mission which show identical backgrounds, though the photos were taken at a fair distance from one another, leading many to believe the photo backdrop was duplicated, and therefore fake. Some sources claim the photos were supposed to have been taken miles apart from each other, however NASA states that the first photo was taken at station 8, while the second was taken at station 9. Both stations are 1.4 kilometers apart from each other which is less than one mile, and officials also state that those are not hills in the background, but mountains, meaning even at the distance from the first photo, the second photo is still going to catch the same general background due to the sheer size of the geological formations. One other explanation made is that the moon is much smaller than Earth, making the horizon appear significantly closer to the human eye.

 

#1: Stanley Kubrick

 

iuQZSTVZ83
Source: Films Index

 

Although there are plenty of other moon landing discrepancies that can be listed here, due to the popularity of the theory that the moon landing was a Hollywood production, director Stanley Kubrick is worth mentioning on our list. There are two versions of the conspiracy, the first being that the government groomed Kubrick to film the moon landing and that his film, 2001: A Space Odyssey, was a practice run of sorts. The second theory is that NASA, impressed by Kubrick’s Space Odyssey film, approached him after the movie was made. Internet conspiracy theorist, Jay Weidner, claims further proof can be found in Kubrick’s movie, The Shining, which he believes contains secret imagery Kubrick inserted to reveal his secret. Admittedly, these claims are a rather far stretch, as for example one of them refers to hotel room 237 in The Shining as representing the 238,000 miles it took to travel to the moon.

The most interesting aspect of this conspiracy, however, is an apparent interview with Kubrick in which he actually confesses to helping NASA fake the moon landings. The video was released at the website, YourNewsWire.com, in December of 2015, fifteen years after it was supposedly filmed.

Upon first glance, the interview is compelling, except that isn’t Stanley Kubrick. There are multiple clips of the interview in circulation, all of which originate from a film by T. Patrick Murray titled “Shooting Kubrick”. The film’s official website stated that Murray was granted access to interview the Space Odyssey director in May of 1999, two months after he had already passed away. One could easily call it a typo, if it weren’t for this clip in the interview in which Murray directs the actor playing Kubrick, known only as “Tom”, on what to say.

To add one, final intriguing twist to the Apollo 11 mission, both Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin had reported to Mission Control that they were not alone. Strange objects were observed in space, and according to close friends and family members of both astronauts, the men had observed several large, unknown craft around a crater on the moon near where the Lunar Module landed. Armstrong never went public with his testimony for fear of repercussions, and it took Aldrin years to finally step forward, even at the risk of his reputation and safety, making it unlikely that either of the astronauts were looking for any form of recognition on the matter, or that it was part of a disinformation campaign. One might ask themselves why these men would create such a story had the Apollo missions never taken place.

This concludes this week’s edition of the Anonymous Top Ten Countdown. Join us again next week for another edition. We are Anonymous. We do not forgive. We do not forget. Expect us.

 


This Article (Top Ten Moon Landing Conspiracies) is a free and open source. You have permission to republish this article under a Creative Commons license with attribution to the author and AnonHQ.com.


 

Get Your Anonymous T-Shirt / Sweatshirt / Hoodie / Tanktop, Smartphone or Tablet Cover or Mug In Our Spreadshirt ShopClick Here

Loading...

4 COMMENTS

  1. If Neil Armstrong was the first man to step on the moon, then who put the camera on the moons surface to capture the event?

    • One can understand, why such conspiration theories circulate, when such questions are put.
      These questions show, how extraordinarily underinformed people are.
      It is enonogh to read only a little to learn a lot about how the moon expeditions were equipped, what instruments and photo/video devices were used etc.

      To answer: the B/W video camera was attached on one of the legs of the lander, pointed to the direction of the ladder on which Armstrong climbed down.

      Such simple.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.