Moon landing photographs are the main argument for the Apollo conspiracy believers, as there are thousands of moon photographs that have anomalies on them. (i.e.: different directions on shadows, things ‘highlighted’.) Because of these anomalies, the photos are believed fake by the conspiracy followers. These people reason “why create fake photos of something that really happened?”
Either.
l. The moon landing was faked.
OR
2. Aliens are on the moon, and are seen on many of the photos and have been replaced with fake ones 
The most constant argument that the moon landing photos (and the videos) are faked is simply that there are no stars in the sky. (See all Apollo images).
But there is a very reasonable explanation, the cameras that the Apollo mission used, had manual light filters, (a bit like the pupil of your eye). The Sun reflects off of the moons surface and the white suits of the astronauts. Making both exceptionally bright, while the stars (because they are so far away) are quite dim.
The cameras on the Apollo mission would be set at a bright setting, so the moon and the astronauts are visible, but the stars are missed because of the flood of light, from the moon and astronauts.
But even if there’s is an explanation for no stars, many photos seem to have multiple light sources shining on the surroundings, casting shadows in different directions, even though there is only one (bright enough) light source visible on the moon (the Sun). The conspiracy believers argue, that the only way multiple light sources could be shining on the ’set’, is if the LM landed in Hollywood.
For example, in the two images to the right, the shadows of objects are in different directions. (In fig one the Landers shadow is pointing east, while the rock shadows are pointing south-east). The conspiracists explanation for this is that more than one light source is shining on the moon, a trick used by movie producers, to highlight certain areas. But common sense then tells us, that there then should be more then one shadow. For example, football players have multiple shadows while playing on the pitch, because of the multiple lights cast upon them.
Instead these bent shadows are caused by the uneven ground of the moon surface, if an object is on a hill or a slope then the shadow will ‘bend’ into the incline. Brilliant pictures demonstrating this can be seen at GODDARD’S JOURNAL under Are Apollo Moon Photos Fake?. You can try this yourself, with a bucket of sand, two poles and a light source.
There’s also a different conspiracy theory about the bent shadows. It is said that the different angled shadows, come from one long artificial light. This could possibly work, as movie lights do cause that effect. Though it is more likely to do with perspective. If you viewed the landscape from a bird’s eye the shadows would be parallel. Though, the conspiracy theorists explanation could work.
Thanks to Aulis, for bringing this to my attention
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?
53 responses to Apollo Moon Landing Hoax – Photographic Evidence
just like to say to Terry:
“On the other hand, go outside on a sunny day and stand in the shadow of your house. Hold your hand out in front of you. Surprise! You can still see your hand.”
you can still see your hand because light is scattered by the atmosphere on earth, however there is no atmosphere on the moon so light travels in straight lines and your hand shouldn’t be seen in a shadow
Like or Dislike this Conspiracy Comment:
1 
3 (-2)
Apollo Moon Landing Hoax – Photographic Evidence
conspiracy-theories-hoax said
“This wasn’t an ordinary camera we are talking about. The entire camera was protected in one way of another. The films were protected with a lead casing while inside and outside of the camera, the only chance of contamination being while the picture was being taken, and most of this was effectively stopped and the outside of the cameras. Which was covered in heat /radiation protection. ”
thats awesome.. because you said so that makes it true. NOT. the entire camera was protected in one way of another? No it wasn’t. The thing wasn’t bomb proof, it was a point and shoot camera and it wasn’t thermally protected or lead lined to protect it from radiation. I don’t know if the film storage canisters were or not, but its possible. The extreme temperatures on the moon on the NON INSULATED film would have destroyed the celulose as was pointed out. There are reflections in the visor of an astronaut as he takes a photo of another astronaut. The reflection of the astronaut taking the picture doesn’t have a camera fixed to his suit!
The russians don’t believe we went to the moon. What planet are you guys from? They were ahead of us in space technology at the time. They had a remote rover on the moon when we didn’t even have an unmanned lunar orbiter. With the technology of the time, they couldn’t find a way to overcome the payload issues of puting a 1 man lander on the moon even using a seperate space launch to supply the mission with extra fuel for the trip. They cancelled the program in 1973 when they realized it was not possible and that they were wasting an enourmous amount of money trying to accomplish a manned lunar landing. Why do you think we can’t go there now. We project a working lunar mission in another 15 years. How did we do it in 6 years 50 years ago? The rest of the world understands we faked it… why is the american population so frigging dense.
Like or Dislike this Conspiracy Comment:
1 
0 (+1)
Apollo Moon Landing Hoax – Photographic Evidence
to go back to the flag waving subject, this is easily explained. if you look at any pictures of the american falg on the moon, its not static from the suits, strings, exhaust, (which wouldnt even exist because of the lack of oxygen) or aliens. The flag has a vertical bar running up for the flag to connect to yes? yes. but if you take a close look, not even that close, you can see a horizontal bar running atop the flag. all the wrinkles were formed because the flag was stored folded. and what happens when you store your clothes folded in a dresser? thats right! they get wrinkled! I know every hoax theory there is, and i know how to disprove all of them hands-down.
Like or Dislike this Conspiracy Comment:
1 
1 (0)
Apollo Moon Landing Hoax – Photographic Evidence
Why are there no photos of Armstrong on the moon? You would think there would be hundreds for that historicl feat!?
Like or Dislike this Conspiracy Comment:
1 
0 (+1)
I’ve just read a book that suggests that the moon is artificial, and was somehow created by “an unidentified agency”. (Who built the moon?; Christopher Knight and Alan Butler) It goes on to suggest that an eclipse situation is so coincidental the odds are incalculable. The moon being 400 times smaller than the sun, and 400 times nearer to the earth allowing for the two heavenly bodies to appear the same size from a human perspective. Add to that the moons effect on the earth (tides and so on), and you could easily be persuaded that something very strange is going on.
Like or Dislike this Conspiracy Comment:
1 
1 (0)
Apollo Moon Landing Hoax – Photographic Evidence
I wonder how the astronauts feel about this?
Like or Dislike this Conspiracy Comment:
0 
0 (0)
Where are the stars? without atmosphere… shouldn’t they be extremely bright? why the earth looks so small in the pictures (so few pictures)?.
Also, many ligths should produce many shadows…
Russians also have fakes, and NASA may know them.
Like or Dislike this Conspiracy Comment:
0 
0 (0)
were the Moon landing real? were they faked? who knows? one day the truth will come out and when it does, one group of people will be vindicated in their theories, and the other will make excuses as to why the truth isn’t the truth. in my opinion, the landing were faked. you can try to debunk all the theories you want, there are some things such as how the Astronauts righted themselves after falling down that is just impossible to explain without there being a cable or some other means to right them. if i’m wrong, i’m wrong, but i have the right to believe what i want to. and that’s the point.
Like or Dislike this Conspiracy Comment:
1 
1 (0)
Apollo Moon Landing Hoax – Photographic Evidence
The most compelling evidence I saw that convinced me that trickery was being used to say the least or out and out fraud on the part of Nasa was this. The sun’s reflection onto the helmets of the space suits changes drastically. The legitimate photos reflect the sun as a spiked image having lines that seem to spike up and down from the center of the sun. Some of the reflections looked like the reflection of florescent lighting or some other man made light. You can not fake the reflection of the sun.
Regards, Ted
Like or Dislike this Conspiracy Comment:
0 
0 (0)
Apollo Moon Landing Hoax – Photographic Evidence
My thoughts are simple…if they went to the moon why in this day and age has no one gone again? For sure we have a way better understanding on how to get there now. 40 years is a long time not to go back. If they turn the Hubble towards the moon they should be able to take images of the earth items left behind.
Prove all things
Cheers,
Bob
Like or Dislike this Conspiracy Comment:
1 
0 (+1)
Apollo Moon Landing Hoax – Photographic Evidence
Hey bob. Yes a spy satellite can see objects such as an airplane or car or even a person from orbit, but it’s only about 200 miles above the surface of the earth, whereas Hubble is 250,000 miles from the moon, so it is impossible for Hubble or any ground based telescope to see any of the objects that man left on the moon including the descent stage of the LM which was left there and was about 5m across. If the spy satellites were that far away, they woldn’t be able to see a football field.
First it’s actually only about 37 years since the last landing (the first was 40 years ago). Second, since the only rocket which could lift a large enough payload into orbit to go to the moon, was discontinued in favor of the reusable space shuttle it was impossible for the U.S. to go back. If they had continued flights after going 9 times and landing 6 times, wouldn’t that have been considered by most people to be a waste of money.
Things are proven if you look at the real evidence.
Jim: about the size of the sun and moon appearing the same. Yes this is true now, but far enough in the past the moon was closer and would have appeared larger in the sky than the sun. Conversely, for off in the future it will be noticebly smaller because it will be farther away (maybe in a million years or so). So the coincindence is not that they appear to be the same size, but rather that we are living in a time when this is the case.
Chris asked why is there no photos of Armstrong on the moon. This refers to still photos, there is however video and 16mm movie film of the moon walk with both Armstrong and Aldrin in them. It was Armstrong who had the still camera (at least most of the time) and so the photos are of Aldrin.
Baratacus Your coments about the film are not true. The film would not over heat anymore than on cameras taken on a space shuttle space walk. The temperature on the moon refers to the surface. Since there is no air to conduct the heat to the film in the camera (it is in a vacuum inside the camera) it remains cool because it is insulated by the vacuum just as if it was in a thermos bottle. The camera was also metallic (silver in color) and therefore reflected the heat of the sun. If the film would over heat, why wouldn’t this happen to any other astronaut’s film that did a spacewalk in low earth orbit, or do you believe those are fake too.
One other thing, the rest of the would does not believe the landings were fake, I am not an American, and know the landings did happen, and so did the Soviets who put it on page one of Pravda (the government controlled newspaper) the day after apollo 11 landed. Once the lost the race to the moon, they quite their moon program, since being second would not have looked any better than not going at all.
Like or Dislike this Conspiracy Comment:
2 
1 (+1)
Apollo Moon Landing Hoax – Photographic Evidence
In 2005, Nasa said it would take them 25 years or so to be able to send a man to the moon in a fully funded project. Strange even though technology has advanced many fold since the first claimed mission. The space shuttles have never traveled more than 400 miles from Earth and have yet claimed more astronaut lives than the original “moon” missions.
Why haven’t the Russians ever gone to the moon? Because they can’t. Just like we can’t. You think for a minute that they would let us lay sole claim to the moon? Riiiight.
Like or Dislike this Conspiracy Comment:
1 
0 (+1)
Apollo Moon Landing Hoax – Photographic Evidence
Better to have said:
“That’s one small step for man in a pressurized space suit; one giant leap for mankind.”
The moon does not support life. Without the suit they would die instantly.
Like or Dislike this Conspiracy Comment:
1 
0 (+1)
Where can I see a photo of the famous’C’ rock? Thanks
Like or Dislike this Conspiracy Comment:
0 
0 (0)
Right here (http://hubpages.com/hub/NASA-Moon-Hoax-Rocks-With-Writing-On-Them). Peace.
Like or Dislike this Conspiracy Comment:
0 
0 (0)
I find it incredibly frustrating that all the comments from “skeptics” indicate a general lack of understanding of simple mechanics and physics. In other words they are generally “uneducated”. Why bother making a comment based on Dumb thinking. This is reinforced by the fact most of them can not even spell correctly.
P.S. They probably dont even believe the tooth fairy exists!!
Like or Dislike this Conspiracy Comment:
1 
2 (-1)
Apollo Moon Landing Hoax – Photographic Evidence
i will admit i am not an educated man but i have a few questions about the supposed moon landing who was filming armstrong as he was taking his first step on the moon tv signals had to be transmitted from tower to tower with many watts of power on earth how did they have enough power to send their signal from the moon, let alone power all of their life support equipment. if the astronauts could not walk on the moon without space suits how were the conditions in the lunar lander any different how did they take off their helments to eat and drink. and the moon buggy was it battery powered it sure ran for a long time without charging. i dont believe an internal combustion engine would work on the moon being there is no oxygen there. if it took a rocket full of fuel to break the earths gravitational pull and reach cruising speed to go to the moon would it not take 10 times as long get back to earth with less fuel and speed 69 years before the moon landing we were horse and buggying it it has been 40 years since the moon landing why have we not gone to mars or the moons of jupiter where we have more to gain scientificaly i thought the moon was going to be a base camp for such missions. the billions of dollars they wasted on faking the moon landing they could have won the vietnam war. how come they did not send a man to mars instead of a rover it would have been cheaper wouldnt they have sent a rover to the moon first instead of risking lives. speaking of lives neil armstrong buzz alderan those sound like hollywood names. they probably tried to go to the moon with another group of astronauts but why would they show them not making it or dieing horribly so they faked the footage we see to day just in case they failed on the real mission, which they did…..
Like or Dislike this Conspiracy Comment:
3 
2 (+1)
Apollo Moon Landing Hoax – Photographic Evidence
Here’s some answers to your questions.
Question: Who filmed Armstrong as he took his first steps: Answer: No one. Armstrong pulled on a D-ring, which deployed a black & white video camera which was stored in the instrument bay.
Question: How did they send their signal from the moon. Answer: The moon is close relative to Mars, Jupiter, Saturn and the other planets that unmanned probes have been to. All of which can send a strong enough signal for the large parabolic antennaes back on Earth to receive. So the signal was easy to pick up from the relatively close distance of the moon.
Question: How did they take of their helmets to eat and drink. Answer: They only could take of their helmets when they were inside the lunar module, which was pressurized with oxygen, so that they could breath without their helmets on.
Question: Didn’t the lunar rover run a long time without charging. Answer: The longest was apollo 17, which logged 4 hours and 26 min. But remember, it did this as a very light vehicle in one sixth gravity.
Question: Would it not take 10 times as long to get back to Earth: Answer: No. When the command module engines were fired to get them out of lunar orbit and send them back to earth, the Earths gravity was used to accelerate the craft as it headed back. It picked up speed just as any object does when it falls to Earth. Also because most of the fuel was used on the way there, there was not as much mass for the engines to accelerate.
Other comments: There was unmanned missions to the moon before the astronauts risked their lives. To say they faked the footage shows that you haven’t looked at all of the evidence. The moon landing were shown live on TV, with the astronauts communicating with ground control in Houston. The transmissions were listened to by several countries around the world, including the Soviet Union, who reported about the 1st moon landing on page one of Pravda, their govermnent controlled news paper. As well, the apollo missions were tracked by Britain and Austrailian astronomers, who used their large parabolic antanneas to listen to the communications. If they had not gone, there would have been no transmissions.
So why don’t they go now? Isn’t technology better now? First the fact that they don’t go now isn’t proof that they never went, but there is plans for a new heavy lifting rocket which can return astronauts to the moon in about 10 or 12 years if the schedule is kept. Currently it isn’t possible to go since the Saturn V rocket was discontinued, and replaced by the reusable space shuttle, which is only for low Earth orbit.
Like or Dislike this Conspiracy Comment:
2 
2 (0)
Apollo Moon Landing Hoax – Photographic Evidence
Gordon Sheppard is right, if thousands of people went and prepared to launch and land a rocket on the moon, and it was a hoax, one of them could make millions of dollars by writing a book! some of them wouldntve given it away but others will be greedy. There is absoloutely no proof of the moon landing being a hoax, and any proof you think you may have is always easily explained. IT IS DIFFERENT ON THE MOON THAN ON THE EARTH! things will be different! and if thats not detailed enough, you should watch a show called mythbusters, where they conducted like, 5 tests to try and prove the moon landing was real, and the results, it was real!
Like or Dislike this Conspiracy Comment:
3 
3 (0)
Apollo Moon Landing Hoax – Photographic Evidence
I like the moon, I think AREA 51 is on the moon
Like or Dislike this Conspiracy Comment:
3 
1 (+2)
I find that the people who do not believe the NASA story are generally better educated, but it is more important that they are INDEPENDENT thinkers.
Many of the Apollo Moon photos have the stars in them if you lighten up the image.
A good example is AS15-85-11425HR.
You can get this image from NASA archive:
http://history.nasa.gov/alsj/a15/AS15-85-11425HR.jpg
You can do it even with Widows Photo Gallery: Click on FIX, Adjust Exposure, then adjust Brightness and Contrast. (You may have to do it twice so as to see the stars.)
Then you can compare it with my version, I did only the right hand side half, sky portion:
http://members.shaw.ca/alex11/moonhoax/img/15-85-11425.jpg
You may also browse My site for more evidence of hoax:
http://members.shaw.ca/alex11/moonhoax/
All the images with the Astronauts and the LM are faked. Some other images appear the be genuine, they were taken probably on the Moon by the Surveyor spacecrafts.
Like or Dislike this Conspiracy Comment:
2 
2 (0)
Apollo Moon Landing Hoax – Photographic Evidence
Sorry but they did not go to the moon. Recent investigations into the film footage and photographic material clearly shows a hoax. The light given of the surface of the moon is only approximately 7% as can been seen when you examine photos and shadows of moon rocks. Yet oddly enough pictures taken in shadow of the crew leaving the landing craft appear to be very well illuminated. As they openly admit, no external extra lighting was taken with them, where did this light souse come from. Hoax debunker’s always appear to select aspects which are reasonably easy to counter. but are careful to avoid aspects which are incontrovertible. Check out the cross hires built into the camera’s and in some shots you notice the cross hair is behind the object being pictured this is an impossibility! Mountains being moved between one set and another, further clear evidence of a hoax.The list goes on and on. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EQj-Mh__fRc&feature=related There is far more to this film which goes on for near 2 hours. Heres where we find the truth
Like or Dislike this Conspiracy Comment:
4 
2 (+2)
Apollo Moon Landing Hoax – Photographic Evidence
I find some comments extremely interesting, others amusing and then there are those that are just plain ludicrous… but all-in-all, entertaining. Anyone care to comment on the Flat Earth Society? If the moon landing was a hoax, then who’s to say that the earth is indeed round?
Like or Dislike this Conspiracy Comment:
1 
2 (-1)
Apollo Moon Landing Hoax – Photographic Evidence
RE:FLAT EARTH SOCIETY…That’s an easy one…God said the earth was round thousands of years ago
If our predecessors would have only read Isaiah 40:22 “It is he that sitteth upon the circle of the earth, and the inhabitants thereof are as grasshoppers; that stretcheth out the heavens as a curtain, and spreadeth them out as a tent to dwell in:”
It was there all along.
Like or Dislike this Conspiracy Comment:
4 
3 (+1)
Apollo Moon Landing Hoax – Photographic Evidence
wow……really? did you ever take time to realize that the ground the astronauts are standing on are at different elevations due to the various topography? go watch mythbusters shadows they actually explain it pretty well, i just had to post this cuz i couldnt let you people go on being to ignorant, but please go do research before being another group of idiot CT’s.
Like or Dislike this Conspiracy Comment:
2 
2 (0)
Apollo Moon Landing Hoax – Photographic Evidence
Exceptional site. Sorry I have not noticed it before now. I am a conspiracist. I was an investigative reporter for decades before eyesight failed.
Never thought much about fake moon landing until Edwin Aldrin sucker punched an American citizen in an unprovoked attack then received a pat on the back from corrupt American legal system.
Foolishly accepted NASA claims on faith alone. I was naive teenager in 1969. Actions by this astro-not caused me to examine possibility that the moon landings were just flights of fancy.
My focus went from federal government sponsored domestic assassinations (JFK, RFK, MLK, John Lennon) and 911 official fantasy (federal government sanctioned 911 report pure fiction paid for by wasted tax dollars) to moon. All pseudo scientific balderdash compiled by folks with personal agendas.
No Elizabeth, Americans never landed on the moon. Astro-nots under secrecy oaths. Many citizens/astro-nots who did blow whistle or attempt to do so are in final resting places (http://hubpages.com/hub/NASA-Mirder-On-Pad-34).
Reason for hoax? Suppose president proclaimed that USA WOULD land on moon when though technology was not available at that time (as now) to do so? Delay at first. Then thoughts of unaccounted billions of taxpayer dollars for project magically overcome technology problem. Many hoaxes can be and have been staged for a lot less money!
Know what really bothers me? Rest of world already knows NASA and astro-nots like old sucker punch presented a piece of wood to the Dutch people as a genuine moon rock (http://hubpages.com/hub/NASA-Moon-Hoax-Exposed-With-Commentary).
This is fully verified. Why has NASA never been brought to task for this national disgrace? Where is the accountability? Righteous indignation? Oh well. Thanks again for forum. Peace.
Like or Dislike this Conspiracy Comment:
0 
1 (-1)
Apollo Moon Landing Hoax – Photographic Evidence
All I am asking for proof is for the Americans to show us, close up, crystal clear, non blured, non grainy photos of the foloowing. 1/ the American flag with all its colours.2/ the moon buggy, 3/ The abandoned landing craft, Oh and one thing I only thought of today, If they went to the moon 5 times shouldn’t there be 5 abandoned landing craft up there. Having just done a sweep of the moon, the same as the Japanese Selen they should be able to show us. That is if they are there of course. Despite very clear photo’s from Selen, not one scrap of eveidence.
Like or Dislike this Conspiracy Comment:
0 
1 (-1)
Apollo Moon Landing Hoax – Photographic Evidence
I’m not convinced that the moon landings were fake but I saw a video were you can clearly see what looks like wires connected to the astronauts. Does anyone know of an explanation for this. A lot of other inconsistencies can be explained but I can’t find anything that explains the wires. If anyone has any info on this I would appreciate it.
Like or Dislike this Conspiracy Comment:
0 
0 (0)
Apollo Moon Landing Hoax – Photographic Evidence
Leave a reply to Apollo Moon Landing Hoax – Photographic Evidence