The Moon Landing Conspiracy Theory
Disclaimer: This essay has been submitted by a student. This is not an example of the work written by our professional essay writers. You can view samples of our professional work here.
Any opinions, findings, conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of UK Essays.
Bill Kaysing predicted in 1959 the chances of getting a man to the moon and back was very low due to the radiation and micro meters that may harm any human being. Were two years later president J. F. Kennedy made his renowned speech saying that he will assign the USA with lots of recourses of landing a man on the moon before the decade was over .which was never done before and although impossible at the time the project was so fascinating that everyone was talking about it out and everyone was waiting for the moment that rocket will take off from earth to the unknown planet, the moon. Eight years later Apollo 11 took off to the moon carrying three people and came back safely .so.neil Armstrong and his crew won the race against Russia .a lot of very persuasive evidence has been discovered and the people have doubted that America did send a man to the moon, and that was when the Apollo hoax was born. There are three sources of evidence for this hoax: Photographic, video, and scientific.
Wide Spread Conspiracy
In this hoax picture that contractors, NASA tells everyone about the moon landing conspiracy and pays them for their services that their not giving. Nasa makes an announcement to the public telling them that their making rocket parts. Then at the primary day of work they tell everybody in the factory that they are not really making rocket parts and that if they cooperate they will be set for life. Employees that do not comply are threatened from NASA officials. The advantage to this is type of conspiracy that no real equipment has to be made, except for a rocket to go up and a Lander to come down.
If we sent six spacecrafts to the moon in ten years, then why in thirty years with so many technological advances why didn't they go back to the moon not even once? NASA argues that there was a funds cut .for the first ten years this can be explained after the Apollo missions, because of the buildup of nuclear weapons would have cost money that could have been taken away from NASA. But what happened during the other twenty years? Some groups say that the risks were too high to validate another moon landing, but the risk was there the first time and it will always be there. A chance is that the technology available is still not enough for mankind to go to the moon, because we didn't go to the moon in the first place.
Moon landing photographs are the main argument for the Apollo conspiracy believers, as there are hundreds of moon photographs that have mistakes on them, for example different shadow directions. Because of these mistakes the photos are believed fake by the conspiracy followers. Those people explain why create fake photos of something that really happened? One of the most constant arguments is that the moon landing photos and videos are faked is simply that there are no stars in the sky which is impossible.
Although scientists explain this phenomenon, arguing that the cameras used by the Apollo mission had manual light filters, which is similar to a person's eye pupil, The Sun reflects off of the moon's surface and the white suits of the astronauts. Making both remarkably bright, unlike the stars which are very far and so very dim .The cameras on the Apollo mission are put on a bright setting, so the moon and the astronauts are visible but the stars are not visible because of the flood of light from both the moon and astronauts even though there is an explanation for no stars, there are many other photos that look like they have multiple light sources shining on the surroundings, casting shadows in different directions even though the sun is the only light source available on the moon , which the same scientists failed to explain .The conspiracy believers quarrel that the only possible way several light sources could be shining on the ‘set', is if these photos and videos were taken in a movie studio in Hollywood.
One of the biggest anomalies that appear on the Moon shots are the way in which shadows seem to be cast in totally different directions, even though the objects making the shadows are a mere few feet apart. An exampleof this is in one of the pictures where the shadow of the Lander is pointing east while the rocks which are a few meters away are pointing south-east. The conspirasitsts say that in order for this to happen they had to use more then one light source a trick producers use tohighlight certain areas while shooting a movie .
Another picture shows two astronauts with one of the astronauts' shadows bent .scientists say that angled shadows come from one long artificial light work this explanation could work, as movie lights do cause this effect. Although this has to do with ones own opinion but the conspiracy theorists explanation could work.
Another example is the picture of Earth taken from the Apollo 11 when it was 130,000 miles away. This was the very first view ever taken of Earth on the mission and in the picture the window frame appears on the left of the shot which seems very strange as one would want to come as close as he can so one can get the best shot and also to eliminate any light reflections .but Buzz Aldrin, one of the astronauts on the mission and the one who took the shot , took it when he was standing far away from the window also the camera is not put to infinity to get the closest shot possible.
Furthermore According to nasa ,crosshairs were built inside the cameras that would help the astronauts calculate distances on the moon .having said that those crosshairs should be present on all the footage Furthermore on all Apollo footage there should be cross hairs present on the film Incidentally, Jan Lundberg, executive vice president and head of discovery research at Astra Zeneca has stated that the only way that one could calculate the distance in the shot using the crosshairs would be if one had two cameras set up to take a stereo picture. Moreover all of the crosshairs have disappeared from the film. This is impossible unless the film has been tampered with. Other than that all the crosshairs should be not hidden behind any item and should be completely observable in all shots. The only explanation is that NASA has either erased out certain objects in the film or added the objects over the crosshairs.
As a matter of fact the great variation in temperature that the films would have had to go through during the Apollo mission ranges between-180F degrees in the shade to an incredible -200F degree. As seen in some shots the astronauts move between the shadows of the rocks then into full sunlight definitely the film would have corroded under such circumstances. If the films used on that mission had such characteristics why isn't Kodak selling them today in the markets?
Some of the lighting on the footage is very doubtful. One of the pictures shows the astronaut in complete shadow because the sun is behind him, although the whole astronaut is caught in vivid light
The video cameras used on the mission were specially fitted with night lenses to enhance the lack of light because the reflectivity of light is very low on the moon that light does not reflect onto the rocks on the ground. Having said that how can still camera take photos so bright and clear that one can see all the details on aldrins suit and on the lunar
Lander. This is only possible if the artificial lighting is used or it has been added to the photos, although NASA confirmed that absolutely no artificial light was used .how is it possible to have no artificial light and yet the pictures are so bright that even aldrins boot protector is lit up.
Dr. David groves that works for quantech image processing has studied these shots and using the focal length of the camera and he was able to get hold of the boot aldrin was wearing and using these tools he was able to find the exact point at which the artificial light was used.
Next comes the picture that shows neil Armstrong at landing site in the reflector of his visor. The stange thing about this photo is that the crosshair that is supposed to be in the middle appears at the bottom near aldrins right leg. How is that possible if the cameras where attached to the chest of the cameraman? A fact that is provable due to the reflection of the camera man in the visor.
All this evidence suggests that man did not go to the moon and that all the films and pictures are fake because man would have to stay near the earth's magnetic field for safety. But why would NASA fake and the US fake the moon landing?
There are many theories concerning the motives of the USA government to the stage the moon landing .some of these are war prestige, monetary gain and they also used it as a distraction.
It was a very important for the us government to win the race against the soviet union and they also used this incident to distract the world from the Vietnam war ,so missions were cancelled and so the united states took the chance and ceased its partaking in the Vietnam war. According to Bill Kaysing successful landings on the moon was calculated to be 0.017% which ensures that the chance of getting a man to the moon is almost impossible .30 billion was collected and paid off to people as a motivation for their silence .
at that time moon landing was impossible and still is impossible, but o fulfill president kennedy's promise the only solution was to make the world believe they landed on the moon when they actually did not .another reason NASA was forced to fake the moon landing to protect its image in front of the world and save itself from the embarrassment and their fear of national cautious.
Did Man go to the Moon? It is a controversial issue, considering how absurd the question might first seem. Despite the loads of evidence available that prove that the moon landing was faked ,there is still a doubt about the whole issue
Cite This Essay
To export a reference to this article please select a referencing stye below: