Another problem with the moon landing photos can be seen in the next two Apollo images below.
Several astronauts seem to be lit up, as if they were standing in a spot light, even though they are in a large shadow on the moon!
Many moon landing hoax debunking theories have been made to explain this. The most popular explanation is the Earth gives off its own light that highlights the astronauts. But if the Earth gave off that much light, then a shadow would appear behind each person, and there would be multiple shadows in every moon photo. The Earth does give off some light but not enough to hi-light.
Instead, this anomaly is due to the reflectiveness of the moon. The sun light hits the moons surface, and reflects onto the astronaut ‘hi-lighting’ him.
This also happens on Earth. When you wear a white top in the sunlight, – even if you have a cap that forms a shadow – your face will still be lit up by the reflective sun light, when it hits the reflective surface of your white t-shirt.
Conspiracy believers also think that many of the moon landing photos have been doctored. This is because the quality of the photos are constant with every picture. All of the photos are focused and every thing is in view.
This at the time was a remarkable feat, as the cameras were attached to the astronauts chests (see next image) so the astronauts couldn’t see where they were shooting on the moon or whether the picture was focused properly.
If this was true then it would be suspicious. But simple sifting through files shows the real story. NASA wouldn’t print a moon photo took by Buzz if he chopped off the top of Neil’s head. And it definitely wouldn’t appear on the cover of The New Scientist magazine.
At the time it was costly to develop photos, so NASA wouldn’t waste money on faulty photos. The same as you and I wouldn’t show all of the faulty photos, to our friends. But now vast libraries can be put online for free, so all of the faulty photos can be seen in all there glory.
See our Apollo Moon Landing Forum.
Apollo Moon Landing Hoax
Apollo Moon Landing Hoax – Photographic Evidence
Apollo Moon Landing Hoax – More Photographic Evidence
Apollo Moon Landing Hoax – Camera Problems
Apollo Moon Landing Hoax – Video Evidence
Apollo Moon Landing Hoax – Scientific Evidence
Apollo Moon Landing Hoax – Why Fake a Moon Landing?
54 responses to Apollo Moon Landing Hoax – More Photographic Evidence
I offer this to conclude the debate:
http://img25.imageshack.us/img25/8586/as1611318340hrproof.jpg
I whipped this up to settle the question.
Like or Dislike this Conspiracy Comment:
0 
0 (0)
Where are the tire tracks?
Like or Dislike this Conspiracy Comment:
0 
0 (0)
I think of heard almost every argument against the landings, and they are easily answerable. The picture of Aldrin shown above for example, is over exposed to make the astronauts suit brighter. Proof: Look at the surface that he is standing on, does it look like aspalt, which is what is said to be the reflectivity of the surface. If you put it in photoshop and lower the brightness so that the surface is not overexposed the suit is not that bright, and therefore we can conclude that it is due to reflection from the surface and not spot lights.
What about the flag waving in a vacuum. Answer: it’s not. It is supported by a horizontal rod at the top of the flag pole to make it fully visible. If you watch the video you can see that it only moves when the astronaut are in contact with the flag or the pole.
The reason for no stars in the black sky is another point. Anyone who goes out at night with their 35mm camera on a tripod,100 speed film, will realize that doing a 1/100 sec exposure at f16 or f11 will result in a black sky with no stars. This is what is needed in bright sunlight to get the surface, the equipment and the astronauts to be exposed properly. If you were on the moon and wanted to get a picture of the stars, you would need to do a 15 to 30 sec exposute at a low f number, which would cause everthing else to be hugely overexposed. It was necessary for the astronauts to use a high f number to avoid overexposure. This has the added benefit of giving a lot of depth of field. Meaning more is in focus, and therefore not requiring accurate focusing. By the way, this is why most cheap point and shoot cameras can get away with a fixed focus lens (no focusing).
One thing that I have done is to watch the video of apollo 11 while looking at the high res photos. I have all of them on my computer. You can tell when almost all of them are shot by mostly Armstrong during the 2.5 hour moon walk. Meaning that there was no need to fake the photos since we can see the photographer (Armstrong) as he takes them.
As for the dust. If you watch the videos you can tell that it is done in a vacuum, because all of the dust which is kicked up by the astronauts or the luner rover, just falls back the the surface. On earth when you do the same thing you get a dust cloud of fine particles that stay suspended in the air for some time. Because of the vacuum even though there is only 1/6th gravity, this does not happen.
One comment about the Clementine probe above, says that the resolution is 7 – 20 metres, ignores the fact that the lunar module (the largest man made object on the moon) is only about 5m, and would therefore be smaller than one pixel in size, so it would not be visible on any photos.
As for the retroreflectors that were left on the moon. When a extremely bright laser is aimed at the sites of the apollo landings that left them, the reflection can be detected with the telescopes at certain observatories. The reflection will only be detected when aimed at these sites.
It’s actually quite funny reading all of the conspiracy sites. I came across one yesterday, which said that Armstrong was contacted by aliens, who told them not to come back. Also that there is an alien base on the other side of the moon/ Hmm, so which is it, did they not really go to the moon, or did they, but aliens told them not to come back. I’ve come across a lot of conpiracy theories over the years, you know: The Kennedy Assassination ones, 9/11 conspiracies, and of course the moon hoax ones, and the all have similar things in common. There’s usually someone who was about to spill the beans (often to the one who is writting the book) but passed away just before they could tell all. (possibly the goverment had them killed, OOOOOh). This idea probably started because of the Oswald killing, which led to that conspiracy theory. Usually the conspiracy theorists claim that the reason the ones in the know (such as the astronauts) can’t say anything, because their lives are in danger. Oh please. Do you really thing that the lives of these astronauts in their 70’s or 80’s are being fallowed by govermnent agents (who by now would also be that old, unless they keep passing it down to younger agents who would now be part of an even bigger conspiracy). Also no evidence of the moon hoax is ever given. Where are all of the people who built the sets. You would have to have alot of truck drivers bringing in loads of gray dirt, and back hoe operators, digging all of those craters. Did you ever see an interview from some 80 year old guy, saying, yup, back in the 60’s I spent years working on the moon sets. Oh ya I forgot, his life would also be in danger if he gave an interview. Think about it people the hoax theories are all rediculous internet nonsense. The idea that all of this was done in a studio doesn’t add up. There is 16mm film of the rover driving long distances with the LM off in the distance. What kind of spot light could light this, without there being multiple shadows from singe objects. Answer: Here’s how they did it. Get ready – Brace yourself. They got in a Saturn V rocket, flew to the moon, landed, and returned, with all of the evidence: rocks dust, photos, film and video, that any person who actually looks at them, will know (not think, but know), that they actually did this. Nine times they went to the moon. that’s right NINE TIMES. Six of which they actually landed (Three they only orbited the moon), and returned, and most amazingly, they did it in the late 1960’s and early 1970’s.
So why can’t they do it now you might ask. Answer: Because they stopped building the Saturn V rocket, which was the only rocked ever built which can lift a large enough payload into orbit, and instead opted for the reusable space shuttle. So it has nothing to do with technology being better now, and they can’t go so therefore people conclude that they never went. Just try getting on a supersonic passanger jet tomorrow. Oh ya, there isn’t one flying now, because the concorde has been put out of service. Does that mean that there never was supersonic passanger flights. Gee, there was in the 60’s and 70’s when the moon flights were taking place. Perhaps technology has taken a step backwards, or costs for both were just too high so they were cancelled.
I know someone is going to read this and still believe the conspiracy stuff, because I didn’t answer ever question. I can see it now. “There’s too much radiation, so they couldnt have gone” Doh. (as Homer would say).
Like or Dislike this Conspiracy Comment:
3 
2 (+1)
Apollo Moon Landing Hoax – More Photographic Evidence
wow. you are wrong. apollo was fake. bye.
Like or Dislike this Conspiracy Comment:
2 
1 (+1)
u are wrong, the onlu conspiracy was the conspiracy, the landing was real, all the evidence proves u wrong…… bye…..p
Like or Dislike this Conspiracy Comment:
0 
0 (0)
so nasa was fake? wheres your proof? u dont have any. you arent a nasa expert. i saw neil armstrong hit a man in the hall on a video, cause he told him the moon landing was fake. good! maybe knock some sense into those fools…
Like or Dislike this Conspiracy Comment:
0 
0 (0)
thanks u for saying all that! i get so many emails from nutcases telling me i am wrong.they just dont listen. we landed and thats that, so much evidence proves the hoaxers wrong, they all need to sign organ donor cards, because they are all braindead…..
Like or Dislike this Conspiracy Comment:
0 
0 (0)
Apollo Moon Landing Hoax – More Photographic Evidence
After debating all this; I still dont seem to understand WHY would they do all this …
So that NASA puts itself in an humiliating position when someone later discovers that they werent on the moon ?
STMan has summed it up alright …
Like or Dislike this Conspiracy Comment:
0 
0 (0)
The fake photos were because Nixon was told it might not be possible to get good tv reception from the moon but he wanted to flaunt the landing because of the cold war race we were involved with. Pure political propaganda. The fakes were originally made to be used in the event we could not get the actual transmissions from the moon. This was political hi-jinks and had nothing to do with the question of NASA’s technical capabilities of putting a man on the moon. They could, we did.
As feared the transmissions could not be received (or possibly for security reasons, shown) so we showed the fakes. The still photos were released as the scenery (rocks, background, etc.) had to match the tv transmissions.
Defending the intelligence and/or integrity of the men and women who accomplished this is not even relevant to the question of hoaxed pictures.
One of the major problems here is that people on both sides of the argument fail to realize that faked moon pictures are only evidence of faked moon pictures, not a faked moon landing.
A little logic please. Consider:
1. Faked moon pictures do not mean the landing was faked.
2. That the landing was real does not mean the photos are real.
Stop debating until you at least know what the subject is. I tell you the photos are fake, you try to prove the landing was real. You cannot see the disconnect? Your lack of critical thinking demonstrates you would all make very poor quality researchers, scientific or otherwise.
Like or Dislike this Conspiracy Comment:
0 
0 (0)
Apollo Moon Landing Hoax – More Photographic Evidence
Wow.. with the all of the technology of a digital watch, switches, and a few feet of wire…. “To the Moon.” Just think of what we could have accomplished with a Commodore 64 and some bailing wire… “To Mars, or perhaps.. Pluto…”
Like or Dislike this Conspiracy Comment:
0 
0 (0)
nasa woulds spend millions of dollars on a fake moon landing but they wont spend money on the costly fake photos your a moron. dude get a life and stop this your an insult to the american way how about gets some pride man or go move to russia. You saying this is an insult to the great american men who went to the moon and the men who helped get them home get a life
Like or Dislike this Conspiracy Comment:
0 
0 (0)
Apollo Moon Landing Hoax – More Photographic Evidence
I cant believe that more americans were fooled by this BS landing. The media is controlled by uncle sam so true opinions are covered up. Still, we should have millions of protests of this swindle and demand justice for it. NASA must fess up.
Like or Dislike this Conspiracy Comment:
1 
1 (0)
i cant believe people still think this is fake. learn, and read, u will find eveidence. no doubt wee landed. all the questions hoexers ask are answered. they just refuse to listen, casue they are paranoid nutcases. they believe the govt. kills people, controls everything. yes we know the govt. lies, but the hoexers are just overreacting with their stories, there are two types of hoaxers the normal everyday type, and the paranoid nutcase type that believe the govt. is out to kill u. silly we landed, end of srory…..
Like or Dislike this Conspiracy Comment:
0 
0 (0)
Apollo Moon Landing Hoax – More Photographic Evidence
do you think they are also lit up because the sun is bouncing off the shinny parts of the spaceship onto them? This is definitely possible.
Like or Dislike this Conspiracy Comment:
0 
0 (0)
What happened to being able to spell correctly and use proper grammar? You know, when you type in the box (for comments), a little red line appears under the word to show that you may have misspelled it. Doesn’t anyone care about writing anymore? It only lessens your argument when you can’t spell. It is quite sickening.
Like or Dislike this Conspiracy Comment:
1 
0 (+1)
Apollo Moon Landing Hoax – More Photographic Evidence
So if we faked the entire moon mission, if billions of taxpayer’s dollars were rerouted to points unknown, and if our nation’s leaders have lied to us, these things should not be discussed unless we can do so using proper grammar? Perhaps we should get past our egos (did mom tape your English tests to the refrigerator?) and consider that English may not be the first language of many of the people posting here.
Don’t you think the subject being discussed is important enough that one would really have to be suffering a major case of ‘anal retentiveness’ to even consider proper grammar to be worthy of mention in comparison?
So if it is discovered that the moon landings were hoaxed you would pass by the newspaper that published the specific details if it’s headlines were not grammatically correct? Kid you have a major problem.
Like or Dislike this Conspiracy Comment:
1 
0 (+1)
Apollo Moon Landing Hoax – More Photographic Evidence
Uncertain spelling might just be indicative of the fact that you are poorly educated. This in turn might be the reason why you are leaping to such infantile flights of fantasy as to assume that the Apollo landings were faked. A giant insult to the 400,000 souls who were jointly involved in sending man to the moon.
Like or Dislike this Conspiracy Comment:
0 
0 (0)
Apollo Moon Landing Hoax – More Photographic Evidence
yawn, there’s no intelligent life on earth………….obviously.
Like or Dislike this Conspiracy Comment:
1 
0 (+1)
When you think about it…i can see how the US was so determined to “win” the space race that they would cheat by makeing a fake video claiming to have been on the moon. The only problem with that is that the russians were watching us like a hawk and had us on radar…unless we sent up a fake hunk of metal up there and then released the vid. (which i doubt) I think it all depends on who you get the facts from because we all know the press and media twist everything. We have been to the moon and i think we were the first there. If someone has some real hard evdence to prove otherwise i would be willing to listen and keep an open mind.
Like or Dislike this Conspiracy Comment:
0 
0 (0)
Apollo Moon Landing Hoax – More Photographic Evidence
When you think about it…i can see how the US was so determined to “win” the space race that they would cheat by makeing a fake video claiming to have been on the moon. The only problem with that is that the Russians were watching us like a hawk and had us on radar…unless of course we sent up a fake hunk of metal up there and then released the vid. (which i doubt) As for the flag waving…i dont know alot about space and how that works but i know it is a vacuum and therefore no wind. Sure there are a lot of unexlained things in the pics I think it all depends on who you get the facts from because we all know the press and media twist everything. We have been to the moon and i think we were the first there. If someone has some real hard evdence to prove otherwise i would be willing to listen and keep an open mind (of course i would want to know where they got thier resources)
Like or Dislike this Conspiracy Comment:
1 
0 (+1)
Apollo Moon Landing Hoax – More Photographic Evidence
Google ‘china space walk’. If you have even a basic grasp of physics as you pretend to then you will realize a gas leak in space will not behave like the bubbles that leak from the astronauts helmet, following the contours of the helmet’s shape and then floating up and off screen. Every sixth grade science geek who has watched has become convinced that this was photographed in a water tank. It follows that if sixth grade science geeks are aware of this then so is our government whose scientist are a wee bit smarter.
Why didn’t the Russian expose our scam?
I don’t know. Why aren’t we exposing the Chinese’s scam?
So we could put a man on the moon. If Nixon was told we could not guarantee television transmissions then the desire for political mileage against the Soviets would be sufficient to explain fake transmissions. Don’t mix science and politics.
Also, don’t confuse the claim that the photos are hoaxed with a claim that the mission was hoaxed. They are two different things. The debunkers here seen to have a problem with simple logical thinking.
Like or Dislike this Conspiracy Comment:
0 
1 (-1)
Apollo Moon Landing Hoax – More Photographic Evidence
All your post shows is that you have developed an opinion on a subject matter that you know absolutely nothing about. You demostrate very clearly that you struggle with the most basic of physical concepts. Man went to the moon. There are literally millions of pieces of irrefuteable proof that you clearly simply do not understand. There is not a single shred of evidence to the contrary. There are even photos of all six landing modules taken from orbit and before long you will be able to see them directly from Earth. Hopefully then morons of your calibre will finally be silenced.
Like or Dislike this Conspiracy Comment:
3 
2 (+1)
Apollo Moon Landing Hoax – More Photographic Evidence
If you insist that man really went to the moon, to settle the question once and for all, why not send another man to the moon, considering how greatly technology has improved. You may want to volunteer…
Like or Dislike this Conspiracy Comment:
7 
1 (+6)
then what? people will always say it was hoaxed. if the moon was put in your backyard u would say it was fake….do more resrearch, we landed just open your eyes/
Like or Dislike this Conspiracy Comment:
0 
0 (0)
The moon landings were fake. I’m too tired to state anything anymore I’ve argued and proved facts. This is on photographic evidence anyways. Well, with the photo you provided look at the reflection in the astronauts helmet the background is brown. Nevada(Area 51). Funny how they didn’t stay that long on the moon or at least setup any camera’s. It’s all fake, at least I might have a chance to be the REAL first man on the moon. Gotta start training now I have 11 years at the minimum.
Like or Dislike this Conspiracy Comment:
3 
0 (+3)
Apollo Moon Landing Hoax – More Photographic Evidence
Please answer the question. Why is it that EVERY single photo is questionable, They all have faults.
Like or Dislike this Conspiracy Comment:
0 
0 (0)
I am really surprised at why nobody have ever understood the Russian silence on this subject, it is quite easy to understand when you think of it. Just remember the cold war, OK. each side were trying to beat the other side, OK. Many claims of achievement were made by each side and many times they were just bluff. When claims of achievement were genuine each side were proud to announce them just to convince the other side that they had the edge,OK. Try this experiment, draw a square, now divide it into four squares with a vertical and a horizontal. Mark the top left hand square as 1, the bottom left hand as 2, the top right hand as 3 and the bottom right hand as 4. In square 1, write, The Americans landed on the moon. In the bottom left, 2 The Americans never landed on the moon. In the top right marked 3 write, the Russians Had the ability to track. in the bottom right square marked 4 write, The Russians never had the ability to track. Now, if you link up 1, the Americans went to the moon , with number 3, the Russians had the ability to track. Dont you think that despite loosing the race to the moon the Russians would have been proud to say, yes you went there because we tracked you all the way. This would have been a feather in the Russians cap by proving to the Americans that they had the technology to track. They didnt say anything did they. Now link up no 1 top left left with no 4 bottom right. The Americans landed and the Russians never had the ability to track, What would be going through the Russians mind? Stating that they can not say because they do not have the ability would be giving away secrets, ie letting the Americans know that they are not as advanced as the claim. Their next line of thought would be, what if we congratulated the Americans by stating we tracked them and it turned out they never landed. That would be letting the Americans know their level of tracking. The only thing that makes any sense is the Russians never had the ability to track and their best option was to button their lip and say nothing. Not giving anything away.
Like or Dislike this Conspiracy Comment:
0 
0 (0)
Apollo Moon Landing Hoax – More Photographic Evidence
OKAY, THERE WAS A TIME, NOT SO LONG AGO IN FACT THAT I WOULD’VE ENJOYED THIS KIND OF DEBATE~ BUT THIS BICKERING AND ARGUING BACK AND FORTH AMONGST EACHOTHER SEEMS TO BE QUITE HONEST, A BIT POINTLESS AND IRRELAVENT (IF I SPELLED THAT WRONG MY BAD) FOR THE TIME BEING…I AM SPEAKING OF THE CRISIS IN HAITI, AND ALL OVER THIS WORLD (OUR WORLD ) AS WE SPEAK. NEVER LESS OUR OWN COUNTRY’S CRISIS…THE HUNGRY, HOMELESS, DISSABLED VETS, THE ABUSED…MUST I GO ON? DON’T GET ME WRONG…SPACE EXPLORATION IS AND ALWAYS HAS BEEN A BIG THING IN MY LIFE, AND IN MY HUSBAND’S, AND IN MY FATHER’S LIFE(S) AS WELL~ BUT WHAT I WANT TO KNOW, AND IF U HAVE THE ANSWERS PLEASE DO GIVE THEM TO ME, AND PROVE ME WRONG! WHAT I WANT TO KNOW, IS WHAT IS NASA DOING/ OR THINKING, RATHER BY SPLURGING MILLIONS OF DOLLARS ON TODAY’S SHUTTLE MISSION (AS WE SPEAK) WHILE ON THE OTHER END OF THE GLOBE THERE ARE STILL HELPLESS VICTIMS LAYING IN MAKESHIFT HOSPITAL BEDS AMIST RUBLE AND ENDLESS DEBRIS? COULDN’T THIS MISSION HAVE WAITED A BIT LONGER? HAVE THEY (NASA) EVEN DONATED ANYTHING TO THE CAUSE? TO ANY OF OUR OWN NATIONS CAUSES? AGAIN, IF I AM WRONG…PLEASE LET ME KNOW? BUT IF WHAT I HAVE SAID IN THIS BLOG HAS HIT A CORD W/ ANYONE, AND YOU ‘FEEL’ ME? PLEASE…BE MY GUEST AND SPEAK OUT.
Like or Dislike this Conspiracy Comment:
0 
1 (-1)
Apollo Moon Landing Hoax – More Photographic Evidence
like it or not…the truth hurts huh/
Like or Dislike this Conspiracy Comment:
0 
0 (0)
Leave a reply to Apollo Moon Landing Hoax – More Photographic Evidence