When Buzz Aldrin first stepped foot on the moon on July 20th, 1969 at 10:56 p.m. EDT, the world was forever changed. After losing many space battles to the Russians, finally America had taken its rightful place as number 1 yet again. But maybe not. Maybe the government set it up. Maybe Armstrong actually set foot on a set in Hollywood. Or Area 51. Maybe the United States, so desperate to finally get the upper hand had set the whole thing up. Since all of the footage and photos came from NASA, how can you prove it was real? After all, didn’t we learn in this that if it can’t be proved wrong it must be true? Maybe not, but the evidence, or lack thereof is convincing to some. A 1999 poll said that 6 percent of Americans thought the landing was fake while another 5 percent were not sure. This number is even far higher with young people. The Smithsonian reported that 27% of Americans 18-24 “expressed doubts that NASA went to the Moon” in a 2004 poll. In the end, critics of the landing say there are too many inconstancies in the footage like the lack of stars in the sky or the waving of the American flag in an environment that should not have wind. NASA responds with evidence of the rocks that were recovered in the missions. So, which is it? History? Or horseshit?
“We choose to go to the moon in this decade and do the other things, not because they are easy, but because they are hard…”
NASA says that these famous words from JFK are what gave life to the Apollo program. The 1962 speech made a promise to make it to the moon in the decade and NASA got right to work. Set in the backdrop of the cold war, the “Great Space Race” between Russia and the United States was intense, and Russia was winning. Sputnik 1 was the first man-made satellite to orbit the Earth. And, it was Russian. Four years later, Yuri Gagarin was the first person to ever be in space- Another Russian. Desperate to get on top again, the United States began the Gemini missions, which were set to practice important tasks for moon landing like space walks and orbital docking. All had been going fairly well until a simulation on the Apollo-Saturn (AS) 204 resulted in a flash fire that killed three astronauts, Gus Grissom, Ed White, and Roger Chaffee. The accident also killed the Apollo program for 21 months.
In October of 1968, the program resumed, and more tests were run to practice things like being able to actually reach the moon, to test the equipment for the landing, and even to orbit the moon without landing. In July of 1969, astronauts Neil A. Armstrong and Edwin E. Aldrin were the first humans to ever set foot on the moon. The landing was broadcast live on television due to a 7-pound camera that had been stowed away in a part of the Eagle. The camera was released to be able to capture the event by Armstrong himself who pulled a lanyard on the ladder on his way to the moon’s surface. His partner, Aldrin, then pushed a TV circuit breaker and the world was able to watch man’s first steps on the moon live. The broadcast was watched by 600 million people, which by today’s standards is 3 times higher than the Super Bowl. An impressive number even today, but in 1969 the 600 million viewers accounted for one fifth of the world: a far more impressive number that held the record for viewers for years to come.
In total, 12 astronauts, all Americans, have set foot on the moon through the Apollo program. These astronauts retuned over 840 pounds of rock/dirt from the moon which have led to a deeper understanding of the moon and how it was formed. They left behind an American flag and a plaque that read “Here men from the planet Earth first set foot upon the moon. July 1969 A.D. We came in peace for all mankind.” The entire Apollo program cost the government 20.4 billion dollars. This is the same as 120 billion dollars today. The program was cancelled in 1972 for “mundane reasons such budget decisions and NASA’s research goals.”
It’s a beautiful story. The United States beats Russia once and for all, accomplished our goals, and made “one giant leap for mankind.” But, is it a true story? Americans seem to be unsure. A 2001 special on Fox called Conspiracy Theory: Did We Land on the Moon? Summarized and presented the evidence that the landing was all a hoax. The following information is all from that film. Top proponents of the conspiracy say that the astronauts did go to space, they just didn’t land on the moon. Instead, Armstrong and Aldrin spent 8 days just orbiting the Earth, waiting to reenter. Conspiracy theorists believe it is technically impossible to land on the moon, and they say this is why no other country has tried it. Most conspiracy theorists believe that the moon landing was actually produced and filmed in the infamous US Air Force facility, Area 51. They say that the set of the lunar landing is still standing in the facility, which is why Area 51 is so heavily guarded. The evidence of this? Conspiracy theorists point to Russian satellite images that show craters that look like those on the moon, and an airplane hangar that could be used as a sound stage.
Beside the above claims, the main evidence conspiracy theorists mainly rely on inconsistencies for their evidence. They begin with the lack of engine noise in the landing videos. Prevalent in the take-off videos, the sound of the engine and rockets cannot be clearly heard during the landing and conspiracy theorists say you would not actually be able to hear the astronauts over the engine roar. They also say that the landing vehicle, the “Eagle” landed far too easily on the moon. They point to Armstrong’s test in the desert that was attempted a few months before the landing. The test was a complete disaster and resulted in Armstrong having to eject as the vehicle crashed and exploded. The next time a landing vehicle was seen was the flawless landing on the moon’s surface. As the vehicle landed on the surface that Armstrong describes “almost like a powder,” conspiracy theorists say there should have been a blast crater created by the blasters in the landing vehicle. Yet, not only is there no blast crater seen in any photos or videos from Armstrong’s landing, there are no photos or videos of a blast crater in any of the six Apollo missions. Conspiracy theorists also say that as the vehicle creates this crater, (which it didn’t but it should have) moon dust should have been lifted by the vehicle which should then fall onto the feet of the vehicle. Yet, there is no dust on the feet in the photos from the landing. Conspiracy theorist and self-claimed moon landing investigator Bill Kaysing, who previously served as an engineer for the company that designed the Apollo rockets says that lack of dust is “conclusive evidence of the hoax.”
The next inconstancy that conspiracy theorists point to is video of the American flag that Armstrong puts in the moon. It appears to be waving, which is problematic since there should be no wind on the moon. Conspiracy theorists say this is clear evidence that there was a breeze on set in area 51 and the videos could not have been taken in space. They also look at the still photography taken on the moon. The photos were taken by the astronauts, who had cameras strapped to their suits. The issue is that the man who designed the cameras says that there was no way for Armstrong or Aldrin to see what they were actually capturing. With the way the cameras were attached, the astronauts could not adjust the camera for good angles or framing with their hands and they had to use their body and make their best guess. Yet, many of the photos have objects and people perfectly framed. Conspiracy theorists say the photos are framed too well and too high quality to have been taken “blindly.”
They also inspect the photos themselves and point out inconstancies in lighting angles and backlighting, and they look at the shadows and believe they have multiple light sources, even though they should only be lit by the sun. Conspiracy theorists look at and compare the background of the photos and say that some photos have identical backgrounds when looking at the mountains and craters even when they are supposed to have been taken miles away from each other. Conspiracy theorists say that this a sign of bad photoshopping, or the 1969 equivalent of photoshop. The final inconstancy pointed out is that in all of the photos and videos, the sky is only pure blackness. No stars are visible in the sky, which conspiracy theorists say is because the landing was in a set. Paul Lazarus, producer of Capricorn One which is a movie about faking a landing to Mars, says that he believes the technology was and is available for NASA to fake the landing, as he did in his movie with Mars. Even former NASA Astronaut Brian O’Leary who also served as a scientific advisor to the Apollo program said in the special that it was certainly plausible NASA could have pulled off the hoax.
If this is all a hoax though, what happened to astronauts Gus Grissom, Ed White, and Roger Chaffee that burnt to death in the simulation? Conspiracy theorists have an answer for that too. They were executed. Not formally, but rather that the “accidental” fire ignited in the simulation was set on purpose. One of the biggest advocates for this theory is the family of one of the victims: Gus Grissom. Grissom was an open critic of the space program, and both his wife and son believe that at the very least, NASA has and is holding from them information about what really happened. Conspiracy theorists take this idea much further and say that government officials purposely set the fire to silence critical Grissom before he learned, or before he could have told too much to the public. For their evidence, conspiracy theorists cite the mysterious circumstances around the fire, the lack of investigation details released, and the fact that the pod that they died in is now forever locked away in a military facility and cannot be investigated.
Those beliefs, or at least some aspects of those beliefs are held by somewhere near 10% of the nation. But why? Conspiracy theories are always fun to think about, but why do Americans actually believe their government would or could pull this off? An article from the Smithsonian tries to offer some answers. They suggest that it is mainly young people who believe the conspiracy theory because they were not around during the time of Apollo. Another factor that make young people the most skeptical are the plethora of websites sites throwing out the conspiracies, that young people can access easier than ever before.
The most convincing point the article makes however, and the one that I relate to the most, is the growing distrust of the government. After government scandals like Watergate and the Lewinsky Scandal, we have become so distrusting of government and politicians that I for one think the government is capable of almost anything. This distrust in my generation has led to theories like the idea that 9/11 was an inside job and maybe has caused a rise in belief in theories like the moon landing hoax.
How do those involved in the landing respond to the claims? Well, Buzz Aldrin punched a conspiracy theorist in the face. NASA published a fact sheet in 1977 listing why the moon landing was not a hoax and said that the discussion and argument is “an insult to the thousands who worked for years to accomplish the most amazing feats of exploration in history. And it certainly is an insult to the memory of those who have given their lives for the exploration of space.”
For rebuttal, NASA and other government officials have attempted to explain some of the inconstancies pointed out by conspiracy theorists, but a NASA spokesmen said that replying to all of the claims would be unnecessary and a waste of time. One of their explanations is that the reason that the flag looked like it was blowing in the wind is because the inertia from placing the flag in the ground kept it moving. As for the lack of stars, officials say that since the moon reflects sunlight, and glare from the sunlight would have made it almost impossible for the astronauts or the cameras to see the stars. They also say the exposure settings on the camera help explain why no stars can be seen. In response to the lack of a crater caused by the blasters, scientists argue that the vehicle’s blasters were running too low and the vehicle was not directly over the moon for enough time to cause a crater. What about the multiple light sources seen in photos? Spaceflight historian Roger Launius, of the Smithsonian’s National Air and Space Museum says that there are in fact multiple light sources present on the moon. “You’ve got the sun, the Earth’s reflected light, light reflecting off the lunar module, the spacesuits, and also the lunar surface.”
NASA’s basic argument is that between bad photography equipment and simple science, all of these inconstancies can be explained. They just aren’t willing to take the time or energy to explain every single claim. Conspiracy theorists say that this is an easy excuse for the things that NASA cannot explain and that they don’t buy the explanations they do give. They base their arguments on circumstantial evidence of discrepancies and a few outlandish claims. The government plays the role of the defense in the argument, trying to combat what theorists say with science and the general premise of a trustworthy government.
So, which is more convincing? If the government was on trial accused of falsifying information and I was a jury member; I certainly couldn’t convict them. As someone who does not trust the government, at all, the conspiracy theorists do make some strong points. There are some real concerning inconstancies that they point out and are not fully addressed by the government. Now with that said, some of their claims are absolutely absurd and are so farfetched that they risk discrediting themselves. On the other hand, the government has some good explanations that make sense. However, just because they can explain one or ten of the inconstancies, doesn’t mean they are being fully truthful. The government simply is not able to completely discredit all of the claims. Conspiracy theorists also can not completely verify the claims either, and the burden of proof lies with those making the claims.
So where do the conspiracy theorists go wrong? For starters, they have the appeal to the person fallacy in their logic. “You can’t trust them government people” yells the man in the tinfoil hat… The entire premise of this theory is that the government does bad things and cannot be trusted. Although it is not one person being attacked, it is still appeal to the person as they are criticizing the morals and intentions of the government. There are also signs of the appeal to authority fallacy in a couple of cases. For example, the man who worked for the company that designed the rockets isn’t an expert on photography exposure by any means, but he is presented as an expert and reliable source based solely on his loose connection to the project. This fallacy is not seen in all of their logic, but in some of the presentation of their ideas, it can be seen. You can also see the fallacy of appeal to ignorance riddle throughout their arguments. Since NASA has all the evidence and NASA can’t be trusted, and since NASA’s evidence might be deceitful, their argument cannot be proven false, therefore their arguments must be true right? Not so much. Conspiracy theorists relay on the fact that they cannot be proven wrong as evidence when it is simply not. Finally, the conspiracy theorists suffer from the false dilemma fallacy. Anything that is not consistent with their understanding of science or anything they believe cannot be fully understood must be a government conspiracy and they do not leave any room for other explanations.
As for human perception pitfalls, assuming the claims are false, the conspiracy theorists suffer most from the pitfall of misinterpretation of random events.