• Blog Stats

    • 1,339,866 hits

LRO and the Apollo Hoax Believers…

Sooner than many people expected, the first images taken by NASA’s Lunar Reconaissance Orbiter have been released – and they’re pretty stunning… click on these pics to bring up full size versions, as usual…



The images are of an area of the Moon close to Mare Nubium, and amazingly, they have a resolution 0f 3m. Three metres!! Ok, so that’s not as good as MRO’s HiRISE camera is capable of but it’s still pretty stunning, and the thing is, these are nowhere near the highest resolution images we’re going to get from LRO. The real goodies and treats will come when everything’s checked out and working properly, then we can expect to see, and drool over, images with a resolution of just half a  metre…

Half a metre. Oh, wow…

Why is that such a big deal? After all, it’s The Moon, so even at that resolution all you’re going to see are smaller and smaller craters, and big boulders, in grainy close-up, right?

Wrong. If LRO can see things half a metre across on the surface of the Moon, then it will almost certainly be able to see “things” left behind by the Apollo astronauts. By “things” I don’t mean flags and footprints, but definitely the lunar rovers, the tracks made in the lunar dust by the rovers – and, most importantly perhaps, the boxy, 4-legged descent stages of the lunar modules that landed those astronauts on the Moon all those years ago.

Is there really anyone out there who would bet against July 20th – the 40th anniversary of the Apollo 11 Moon landing – being a massive day for NASA, which will see them releasing, with great fanfare, an LRO image showing Tranquility Base, with the Eagle’s descent stage clearly visible? Not me! Not when the picture might show something like this…


That fascinating picture is the work of one of my image mage friends on unmannedspaceflight.com, AndyG. Andy (who gave me permission to use the image here, thanks Andy! ) very cleverly simulated LRO’s view of the Apollo 15 landing site by taking a frame from the 16mm camera’s footage of the Apollo 15 ascent module and giving it the same resolution as LRO’s camera, approx 15cm per pixel. Even at that resolution you can clearly see the boxy descent stage, its four legs, and dark trails on the surface where the light lunar dust was disturbed by the astronauts. How stunning is that?!? If LRO returns an image like that of Tranquility Base I might actually shed a tear… 🙂

Inevitably, LRO’s capabilities mean many people are excited about this mission because they believe it will be a knockout blow to the “Apollo Hoax Believer” brigade, you know, the people who insist that NASA faked the Moon landings. Forums and bulletin and message boards are full of posts from Apollo supporters telling Hoax Believers (or “HB”s for short) that their time has come to an end, that NASA is about to prove, once and for all, that they did in fact send people to the Moon, and didn’t just mock the whole thing up on a sound stage deep in the American desert, like the one shown in the classic conspiracy movie CAPRICORN ONE, where NASA faked a post-Apollo manned Mars landing…


Dream on.

The HBs are never, repeat, NEVER going to be convinced that NASA went to the Moon. It doesn’t matter how many times they read, or you explain, that there were no stars in the Moon’s sky because the photos were exposed for the bright surface and foreground, so obviously teeny tiny faint starse wouldn’t be picked up by the camera. You can tell them a million times that the flags left by the astronauts aren’t “blowing in the breeze”, they’re actually flapping about because they’ve got supporting wire frames to stop them hanging there all limp and embarrassing for the photographs. They slap their hands over their ears and sing out “lalalalalala!” when you try to explain that the shadows cast by objects on the Moon look different to shadows cast by objects here on Earth because LIGHTING CONDITIONS ON THE MOON ARE NOTHING LIKE THEY ARE HERE ON EARTH!!


No. Sitting there, in their bedroom or basement, surrounded by old pizza boxes, posters of Gillian Anderson and Xena and piles of musty smelling X-Files t-shirts, HBs’ minds are totally and completely closed, so closed, in fact, that if you picked them up, flew them to the Moon and actually dropped them onto Eagle’s dusty descent stage they’d STILL insist it was just a prop, left there by an unmanned probe, and wasn’t proof that Armstrong and the others walked on the Moon..!

So trust me, when – not if, but when – NASA releases its first image of an Apollo landing site, the HBs aren’t going to be swayed an inch. They’ll dismiss them as Photoshop jobs, or insist that they aren’t detailed enough to show anything, that the feature labelled “LEM descent stage” is actually some rocks in a vaguly LM-like pattern. They’ll ask “Why, if we can see a small rover on Mars, can’t we see a huge lunar module on the Moon?” and when you patiently explain to them that MRO’s HiRISE camera is simply better than LRO’s camera, and that comparing the two probes is grossly unfair, they’ll just smile their knowing Muldur smiles and say, in that smug, self-satisfied tone they have, “Ah ha…”, leaving you wanting to follow Buzz Aldrin’s example and sock them one.

But I’ve always though that’s the one fundamental flaw in their argument. If NASA faked it, they didn’t just fake “it”, thay had to fake it SIX TIMES! There were six succesful Moon landings, so that means they had to fake six landings, six sets of EVAs, six of everything.

Think about that.

How expensive would that have been? How complicated would that have been? How difficult would that have been?

We’ll come back to that later. In the meantime, let’s go back to basics for a moment and, taking a bright blue Stoopid pill, imagine NASA actually did fake the first Moon landing. What would that have required?

Well, it would have required that hundreds if not thousands – if not TENS of thousands – of people would have had to have been in on the secret, and have kept that secret, faithfully, to this very day. For even a single faked landing to have worked, everyone in the Astronaut Office, everyone at NASA HQ, everyone in Mission Control, every one of the astronauts themselves, would have had to be in on it and kept silence ever since.

( But they didn’t do it just the once, remember, they did it six times! More on that later… 🙂 )

Come on.

Still not convinced? Sigh. Ok, then think of this. If the landings were faked, then they would have had to have been faked somewhere – our mysterious “sound stage” inside a mysterious “hangar” – so, everyone working there had to have been in on the secret. That’s every technician and engineer, every computer operator, camera man and cleaner too. Every pilot who flew people there was In On It, every driver who drove people there, too.

Look at this picture…


Now, if something like that happened, if somewhere like that was built, then how many people would have been involved? Well, that’s not a one man operation. At least a few different people would have had to build the set – the spacecraft, the landscape, etc – and build it convincingly. Someone else would have had to light it to make it look realistic for the cameras. Someone else again would have had to use those cameras to film the “Moonwalk”, and still other people would have had to broadcast those pictures to Mission Control, taking great care to adjust for the time difference, of course. And while all this was going on, other people would have had to provide security, inside the hangar and outside, to ensure no-one got in who wasn’t meant to be there. How many people are we talking to operate a joint like that, bare minimum? A dozen? Two dozen?

… and you’re telling me that not a single one of those people, 40 years on, now doesn’t desperately need money for something? Not one of them needs expensive medical treatment for one of their family? Not one of them is facing having their home reposessed or having their business taken over by the bank? If they were involved in an Apollo conspiracy, all their problems and worries could be ended in a moment, just by coming clean about what happened. It would just take one of them, just one of them, to walk into a newspaper, magazine or TV station office and hand over a grainy, creased old photo they sneakily took way back in 1969, and that would be it: cat, bag, whoosh!

To be honest, I can almost imagine such a big secret being kept for a few months back in the late 60s, maybe even for a year. The world was, after all, a hugely different, increasingly paranoid place then. People might have been convinced to play their part in such a huge conspiracy by appealing to their patriotism, by telling them that even if it meant cheating, and lying, the US had to be seen to have beaten the evil Russians to the Moon for the sake of freedom, etc…

But the world has moved on. It’s now four decades since the Apollo landings, and in that time the US and USSR have gone from being enemies to being partners. They no longer compete in space, but work together in it. That means that there’s been ample opportunity for someone to have opened the Apollo can of worms and spilled its wriggling contents all over the floor.

And then there’s basic human nature to consider, and by human nature I mean, of course, greed and stupidity

Let’s look at greed first. Today, money really does – as Liza Minelli said – make the world go round. Newspapers and magazines are happy to pay out absolute fortunes for photographs and stories that would cause shock, scandal and rewrite historty, so can you imagine how much one of them would be willing to pay for proof that the Apollo landings were faked?

The other day I saw, on the front page of a magazine, a picture of Michael Jackson, oxygen mask over his mouth, being carried into the ambulance that took him from his home after his heart attack. It was grainy, blurry, clearly taken on the sly by someone, but that didn’t matter, the magazine bought it and used it, probably paying an absolute fortune for the “privilege”. And you’re telling me that in this climate, when there’s so much money on offer for sensational pics, that not one of the people who worked on Apollo fakery is going to keep hidden away in a drawer somewhere a picture they took that would blow the whole thing wide open? Get real. They could name their price. Proof that the Apollo landings were faked would be the Biggest Story EVER, making Michael Jackson’s death look like a p26 sidebar by comparison.

And if that’s hard for you to imagine, well, consider this: even if everyone involved in the fakery is still happy to keep silent and hold on to their secrets, forty years after Apollo, NOTHING CAN BE KEPT SECRET ANY MORE. No computer records are safe from hackers, viruses and troublemakers. NASA’s own files were famously hacked into not so long ago by a British hacker looking for evidence of UFOs and captured extraterrestrials. And even leaving Neo-wannabe hackers out of it, today’s journalists have an arsenal of modern technology at their disposal, too. Modern computers and the internet mean 21st century hacks can access computer files, scan databases and search records with ease. They have “sources” and “insiders” everywhere, in every agency, company and organisation. If there are secrets to be found, they will be found. So I cannot believe for a moment that if any aspect of Apollo had been faked, a journalist somewhere wouldn’t have uncovered it by now.

I mean, come on, in the US journalists have uncovered countless political scandals, financial and extramarital, which have led to the resignations of high profile politicians. Over here in the UK a daily newspaper recently shookthe political establishment to its very foundations by revealing details of the extravagant and some would say downright criminal expenses claims made by members of the British Parliament. Is it really possible that a faked Moon landing could have stayed secret for so long? Get real!

Then there’s just the sheer klutzy nature of human beings in positions of power to be considered.

People are, generally speaking, idiots. I don’t mean that nastily, I just mean that if they can mess something up, people usually will. That’s why in the past few years there have been countless scandals here in the UK involving lost Government and military laptops, data sticks and files. People have left them on buses, on trains, even in the street. Details – names, addresses, bank records – of tens of thousands of people have gone astray. It’s a long shot, I know, but I can’t help thinking that just because of the cruel, impishly mischevious nature of the universe, if the secrets of a staged Apollo program are hidden somewhere they would have been lost by some poor sap, and found again by – or passed on to – some gleeful journalist, by now.

And if none of those arguments have convinced you, then what about the role of the Russians in all this? Does anyone really think that with their enormous network of spies and surveilance equipment back in the 1960s and 70s, having been beaten in the Space Race, the Russians wouldn’t have uncovered The Truth and told EVERYONE? They’d have been desperate beyond words to embarrass and humiliate the US! Make no mistake, if Apollo had been faked, the Russians WOULD have found out and they would definitely, I’m 10000000% sure, have shouted out “Liars! Liars! Pants on fire!” from the top of the Kremlin’s highest, pointiest tower, as soon as possible.

None of those things has happened, of course, which means one of two things is possible: either a) the Moon landings happened, and the HBs are mistaken/deluded/idiots, or b) the Moon landings were faked, and the HBs have been right all along, and we’re the ones who are mistaken and/or deluded.

What have they got to say about it? Here are a couple of HB classics for you, mined from various websites…

Why does this rock have a letter ‘C’ on it? There is also a ‘C’ on the ground in front of the rock. The use of the letter C on film props is well known by the people in Hollywood and is used to show where the centre of the scene should be.

Neil Armstrong never talks about the Apollo landings. That’s because he’s stricken with conscience. Proof positive that we didn’t go to the moon. 

Aaaggghhh!!!! SLAP!

But back to what I think is the real deal-clincher for people who insist the Apollo landings actually happened – that NASA did the whole thing more than once. Actually, not “just” six times, as I said before, but SEVEN TIMES, because there were seven Saturn V launches, in full view of the world. Think about that. Even if everything after them was a fake, they still launched seven bloody great rockets, each costing a frakking fortune. Why? Why bother? With Russia’s rocket already blown to bits, if I was Head of NASA at the time, and I was determined to fake it, for whatever reason, I’d have launched Apollo 11 and had them “abort” at the last minute because of some “technical problem” and then pause the whole program while that “fault” was fixed, deadline be damned. Or I’d have shut down the Apollo program AFTER Apollo 11 because with the successful landing of Eagle in the Sea of Tranquility that was it, NASA’s job was done, they’d beaten Kennedy’s deadline. Why go another six times? Why spend all that money? Why risk those astronauts? Why not just land one crew then say “Ok, we did it. Our work here is done.”?

It doesn’t make sense.

That’s all in the past though. Today, as the 40th anniversary of Apollo 11’s triumphant landing on the Moon approaches,  NASA is preparing to go Back To The Moon, and LRO is the first stage of that return. And, depressingly and inevitably, already the HBs and conspiracy fans are denouncing the mission, saying that its pictures won’t prove the Apollo missions took place because they will either be doctored or faked altogether to show things that aren’t there. A quick Google search will bring up outrageous claims that would be comic if they weren’t so pathetic. One posted comment – referring to the lack of cameras onboard recent unmanned Moon orbiters powerful enough to resolve Apollo hardware – on Phil Plait’s popular (but, unfortunately, frequently troll-infested) BAD ASTRONOMY blog for Discover magazine is typical of the **** out there. Referring to the lack of cameras onboard recent unmanned lunar probes with sufficient resolution to resolve Apollo hardware, he says:

Nevertheless, they did suspiciously fail to send cameras of sufficient power to resolve and independently verify Apollo landing site remnants. It’s absurd that none sent such a camera when any and all should have.Very strange until you recognize it all as a hoax.

Funnily enough, that was written by the very same Hoaxer who made this confident prediction as the day of LRO’s launch approached…

I predict a major malfunction of LRO. Silence is an easy cover for lies.

Oops. Didn’t quite turn out that way, eh?! 🙂

So no, in a couple of weeks, when NASA releases to the world an LRO portrait of the Apollo 11 landing site it won’t bury the Apollo Hoax conspiracy theories, as much as we’d all like it to. Despite the heart-stoppingly huge expense, the possibility of being exposed to the world as liars and cheats, and the condemnation of future generations if discovered, NASA faked the whole Apollo adventure, the Hoaxers just won’t be told otherwise. And nothing, absolutely nothing, is going to convince them that six pairs of great clod-hopping astronaut boots really did crump down into the lunar dust for all Mankind between 1969 and 1972.

That used to frustrate and bug the hell out of me. For a long, long time if an HB spouted off to me – or even if someone innocently brought up the subject at a party or something – I would do a very convincing impression of Bilbo Baggins turning into Evil Bilbo in LORD OF THE RINGS – gritted teeth, clenched fists, the works. And believe me, if I had been granted a superpower it would have been to have the ability to round up each and every HB, transport them to Tranquility Base, slam them bodily against the Eagle’s descent stage and scream into their pasty, computer-monitor bleached faces “SEE??? SEE THALL THIS STUFF?!?!? WHO DO YOU THINK PUT IT HERE?!?!? LOOK! WE WENT TO THE MOON, OK!?!?!? STOP IT!!!!”

Now I can’t be bothered.

After all, they’re a minority, and what they think really doesn’t matter. Truth, and common bloody sense, is on our side, not theirs, and I’ve come to realise that absofrakkinglutely nothing will ever change their minds. So I just let them get on with it, and if someone brings up the subject during one of my Outreach talks I make a quick slap-down defence and leave it at that. I really can’t be bothered. In my mind we’ve already won the argument.

Which is why I’m not sitting here getting excited about the (surely) imminent LRO images if Tranquility Base thinking “They’ll prove the HBs wrong once and for all!” because, simply, they won’t. No. I’m excited about seeing them because they will be postcards of a familiar place. A place we should never have left in the first place.

A place we will go back to.


Note: if you’re a hoax believer who, after reading this, feels moved to leave a comment defending your woo-woo, tin foil hat-wearing beliefs, then of course you’re free to do so; freedom of speech and all that. But please be aware that the vast majority of people reading your comment, including myself, will laugh themselves silly reading it, and might actually wet themselves, because, come on, you know it really, everyone thinks you’re really, really silly. With that in mind, maybe you should just not bother leaving a comment and spend the time on one of the sites written by someone who actually shares your views, which you’re entitled to, but are absolutely cuckoo. 🙂 🙂

163 Responses

  1. Yeah, Stu. But how do you feel about HBs, *really*? 😉

    Seriously. though. Excellent takedown. I can’t wait to see the photos that come back of Tranquillity Base either, as I’m confident they will, right on the predicted date. It may not shut the deniers up permanently, but it’s likely to strike them dumb for a few moments before they can think up a new reason it was “faked”. You can only cry wolf about Photoshopped pics so many times and people will yawn and stop listening. As I hope they do!

  2. Stu, thanks for using the picture. I’m curious to see how well my recreation reflects the resolution of The Real Thing.

    I’m looking forward to the other sites, too: Apollo 12 with Surveyor nearby, Apollo 14 with (potentially visible) the foottracks for over a kilometre to Cone Crater, and the lunar rovers and their paths from Apollo’s 15, 16 and 17

    Meanwhile, I’ve always wanted to get the HBs into the same room with the WWTTMASSOAABs (“We went to the Moon and saw signs of alien artifacts” – believers).

    …And just lock the door. 😉

    • Andy, after reading your July 7 post, I got to thinking about rounding up this group (HBs & WWTTMASSOAABs) and putting them in the LCROSS booster stage/impactor and getting some fine images of their lunar experience. Oh, and bury them in regolith!

  3. […] could go into details, but happily the Cumbrian Sky blog already makes these points pretty […]

  4. I love the fact that LRO is up there, right now, snapping away! It is something to ponder when we can look up, at night, see the Moon, and realize, that right now, this fantastic probe is scouting out new landing spots, preparing for our return!

    If you look at that second LRO image, bottom center, it looks like there is a row of impact craters in almost a straight line! Very cool!

    • Michael L , that row of impact craters you (and I) saw was probably caused by the breakup and impact of a comet or asteroid (ala Comet Shoemaker-Levy 9). Crater chains have now been identified on many of the larger bodies in the solar system.

  5. One of my favorite comments on the Apollo hoax came from a good friend at NASA Ames, he said:

    “The problem is that in 1969 we didn’t have the technology to fake the moon landings.”

    • “The problem is that in 1969 we didn’t have the technology to fake the moon landings.”

      EXcellent point! Never thought of it that way! Thanks for your comment 🙂

      • I am not convinced either way, but, I think the ‘real story’ behind Apollo is the Nazis at NASA. Moon landing faked or not, that’s not the issue.

        On the ability to fake moon landing, the did have the ability so your point is actually an incorrect statement, as someone who has studied film, media, and screen. Techniques used in the earliest films, exploiting your perception, are still used today.

        Issues I have with your article:

        Whether light acts differently on earth compared to moon is irrelevant, you would expect it to act the same in one picture, and not have shadows in different directions.

        You also wouldn’t have the same squared metre of surface copied and multiplied like they have shown.

        The LRO pics all have photoshops signature in their code!!!

        If the went to the moon or not isn’t the issue, these photos and videos of the 1st moon landing are heavily manipulated or completely false.

        Look at the Chinese moon landing and compare it to the US.

        The decent is clean in China’s footage. The first Apollo mission descends with a jolt at a specific timed interval, that is because it is a camera on a rail and the wheel was oblong or had something pretending to make it jump in timed intervals.

        Also, Apollo makes the moon look silver, as we perceive it from earth, however, the Chinese pictures of moon show brown and green colours???

        You can also find footage of them manipulating the vision of earth in their window by placing a silhouette over the outside of earths circumference to make it appear further away then it actually is.

        They didn’t have to fake all six landings, they could have just faked the first.

        Also the suits that don’t protect from radiation and crossing the Van Allen belt was never satisfyingly answered.

        The real question isn’t if they faked it but why!

        And that question will lead you down a rabbit hole with more questions than answers leading to secret societies and their ‘long promise’ and age old agenda the NWO.

    • How come flags waved in moon without air?

    • Enlighten the rest of us with your stellar understanding of technological history…

    • You did have man, you did. “Capricorn-1” is 1977 movie. “Space Odissey 2001” even earlier, its 1968.

  6. Why do you think we stopped “going” to the moon after 6 successful trips?

    “…they had to fake it SIX TIMES! There were six successful Moon landings, so that means they had to fake six landings, six sets of EVAs, six of everything….How expensive would that have been? How complicated would that have been? How difficult would that have been?”

    Budgets were tight. Sci-fi movies were becoming popular, taking some of the best and brightest effects specialists away from NASA, and making it that much more expensive to keep the rest.

    Now, if you will excuse me, I need to put my tinfoil hat back on (I get shocks when trying to type while wearing it), then I have to clean this basement. Mom says that if I’m going to live down here, I have to keep it clean, and she means NOW. Sheesh – I’m 37 years old… I know when to clean and when not to clean.

  7. “Nevertheless, they did suspiciously fail to send cameras of sufficient power to resolve and independently verify Apollo landing site remnants. It’s absurd that none sent such a camera when any and all should have.Very strange until you recognize it all as a hoax.”

    You know why they didn’t send cameras to verify the Apollo landing site? Because they have better things to do with their time and money than worry about what a bunch of morons think.

    Nice article.


  8. Actually I can “prove” we went to the moon with greater ease than anything I’ve seen you or the amazing Bad Astronomer put forth so far. You guys are scientist, so I won’t hold it against you. Y’all think funny. Smart, but funny.

    You started down the right path of correct thinking with your “how many people has NASA managed to keep quiet” idea. It’s a good point, that such an undertaking to hoax such an event would have required massive amounts of manpower, and human greed and human nature would have made it unlikely that NASA could have kept it quiet one, much less SEVEN TIMES.

    But lets assume they did. I don’t know, maybe they shot all the people who knew, after all the HB’s claim NASA blew up Apollo 1 to shut them up. (If NASA was gonna kill Gus Grissom, they’d have done it long before Apollo 1)

    You want to know why I know, beyond a doubt, that the Apollo program took men to the moon? Cause the USSR says so. That’s why!

    Look, the USSR had kicked our butts in the space race and made us look like scientific hacks. Then their own politics and assumptions got in the way, and they couldn’t keep the lead, and we blew by them and landed on the moon (with people) first. An entire battalion of Russian scientist would have done ANYTHING to provide proof that the USA did NOT manage to land a manned craft on the moon.

    So they monitored, they watched, they scribbled parallax equations on napkins over vodka hoping to prove that Neil Armstrong’s transmissions were not coming from the moon. That Mike Collins was NOT orbiting the moon waiting. Anything at all, however slight, would have been shouted from the roof tops, given to the press, and yelled to anyone who would listen:

    “USA hoaxed the moon shot! We’re still in the race!”

    They couldn’t do it. Because everything they gathered told them the same thing we all know is true. We went to the moon. We came back. We did it.

    The real conspiracy is, can we do it again?

    • “They couldn’t do it. Because everything they gathered told them the same thing we all know is true. We went to the moon. We came back. We did it. ”

      Another good point, thanks! 🙂

    • Whether we went or not your reasoning is weak.
      Nixon alone had many secret operations as does any leader. The only reason we know is because he taped them.
      You are essentially saying crime does not exist because criminals cant keep from confessing – great logic there.
      You assume The Soviet Union and America where enemies not only in front of the camera but behind…..If you knew the real story of WW2, Nazism and Prescott Bush then you realize this may not be the case.
      “People especially Russians would have spilled the beans” – they did and they do on all sorts of Black Ops and False Flag operations but the media WILL NOT give them a voice.

  9. Visiting from BA….What you do not realize is that your good buddy, Andy, has just provided the proof that the LRO images are faked. If it can be done with 166mm, then a better fake can be done with photoshop and the hi-res ones from LRO.

    The only way these nuts will accept the truth is if we take them to the moon, and let the get a breath of nice, fresh, vacuum.

  10. Great post. I can’t wait for photos of the Apollo landing sites from the LRO for the same reasons you spoke about.

    Nothing is going to change a hoaxer, you could even strap them to a Saturn V and take them to the moon and they would still think they were in a studio the whole time.

    The LRO pics are for us, not them.

  11. My dad was one of the thousands of engineers who worked on the Apollo project. He still has the original proposal that RCA and Grunman put together for the LEM. Whenever I meet a HB, I say I have proof because my dad worked on it. They then said “Well, your dad is in on the secret”. I reply, “Do you really think that the secret could be kept by thousands for so long?”

    I can’t wait for the pics.

    • You actually don’t need thousands to keep the mission a secret. You propagandists are just retarded. 12 astronauts walked on the studio, sorry I mean “moon”. You need a maximum of like 20 people probably less at NASA to even know that it’s a hoax. Mission Control had no clue. You would probably need no more than 30 people under threat of their own death and family to to fake a moon landing. It’s that easy.

      • I think we can all see who the “retards” are here 😉 But thanks for stopping by, now go back to your bedroom and enjoy your X-Files dvds.

      • Stupid queer

      • It requieres a certain level of intelligence to understand that you need far more people than 20 to be in on a conspiracy on a scale like this…
        MG, us it! Then type!

    • My Dad did too and I helped make the drawings. The companies involved all made a fortune!…….but beyond meeting the government specs of the required piece of equipment NONE of us were involved in the final use of that equipment any more than a car designer or factory assembler or showroom salesmen know of how you are going to use your car after you pay for it and receive it.

  12. Lets see…

    8, 11-17 – I got 8 Saturn V launches. Where did I go wrong?

    Only 6 actually landed. But in each, both astronauts walked, making 12 pairs of boots. And 3 Moon Buggies.

    And at least one laser corner reflector array, easily detectable from earth with a decent laser.

    Not to mention several hundred kilos of strange rocks like nothing ever found on earth.

    And a jumping astronaut saluting in mid-jump, and one falling down and doing a pushup back to his feet in a 100 kilo pressure suit (try THAT on a movie set!), and a demo of a feather falling as fast as a stone.

    The only thing the HBs have convinced me of is their idiocy.

    Thanks for the blog!

    • You’re forgetting Apollo 10, I think.

    • Wikipedia is great. Not always completely accurate, not always unbiased, but a quick and easy source for usually accurate information. In total, there were 13 Saturn V launches, not all were manned. Apollo numbered missions using the Saturn V were 4-6 and 8-17. Apollo 2, 3 and 7 used the Saturn IB. Apollo 8, which went to the moon (oops sorry it was faked), was the first manned Saturn V launch. It was a big risk attempting the moon mission right off with the first manned launch of the Saturn V, but that was the nature of the big game, the space race. “Why does Rice play Texas?”

  13. Great article!! You’re spot on about the HBs and their imperviousness to evidence and reason.

    Hey, I’ve got another one for you.

    Ok, the landings were fake, right? They were filmed in a darkened studio somewhere. So explain to me how the flag could have been waving in the breeze, inside a darkened studio! Or did someone intentionally blow a big fan at the flag–and if so, do you still think NASA was smart enough to pull off a coverup of this size and complexity?

    • I refer the hoaxers to myth busters.
      They shredded the main points the hoax believers quote regularly.
      To some people, science class was a learning experience, to others, it was nap time. Don’t be a napper.

  14. You’re right about the problem of large groups of people keeping secrets.

    Didn’t Twain say something like, “Three can keep a secret if two are dead”?

  15. OK. Let’s clear this up once and for all, shall we?


    While we were never there we filmed ancient palaces, military installations, alien gambling casinos and alien jacuzzis. We then nuked them all so the Russians would never find them on their faked missions. We also nuked them so nobody on Earth would find out that alien civilizations ever existed and start a worldwide revolution.

    Don’t believe me? Check out the Masonic flag we planted when we were never there.


  16. Unfortunately, there are two classes of HBs. The professional, like the idiot so righteously punched by Buzz, who make their living from promoting it as a hoax and the true believers to whom it has now become almost a religion.

    Like you, I used to get extremely annoyed when dealing with HBs, especially as all their points were so easily shown to be purely down to their ignorance on so many subjects from photography to physics. Now however I just laugh at them which has the added bonus that it annoys and irritates the hell out of them instead of me.

    But your right, the professional HB or the true believer won’t allow anything to get in the way of their ‘truth’, not even HD film would do it. And if you actually took them to the moon they would probably claim that we needed the time between then and their visit to actually get the items there clandestinely to make it look as if we had been in the past. A bit like the creationists who claim that the Earth is really 6000 years old but their dog made it look as if it was 4.5 billion years old.

    • Yeah, I guess you could group these misguided souls with the flat earthers, plasma ‘cosmologists’, hollow earthers, the 2012 doomsday lot, electric universe proponents, ancient alien believers, crop circle adherents, etc. Luckily, these people are by far in the minority.

  17. I do hope that LRO will show something.

  18. You’d think that with all that time and effort they’d have done a second take after Neil Armstrong muffed his big line.

    • THANK YOU.

      I especially love the idea that all the people who would have been involved in the “hoax” have kept quiet, and the Soviets knew NOTHING.

      The fricking MANHATTAN PROJECT had Soviet spies. The biggest, most secretive government project in history had THREE DIFFERENT SCIENTISTS giving information to the USSR.

      So the idea that the Soviets wouldn’t have any clue that the whole project was a sham is laughable. If you can’t keep a secret that could result in the destruction of the world, you can’t keep a secret that’s just a big PR stunt.

  19. Millions of people in this country apparently believe that the earth is 6000 years old. I can take you to a web site right now that says that Michael Jackson was an Illuminati slave, or another website that claims that Hitler actually saved the Jews, not killed them- that he took them all out of Germany to protect them from allied bombing. No one out there seems to blink an eye when some Republican congressman or other goes around claiming that Obama is a communist bent on destroying our country.

    Compared to a lot of things out there, the moon hoax people seem almost quaint.

  20. The HBs were gutted a couple years ago by a Mythbusters episode and a Discovery Channel documentary.

    Oh, and the HBs would have posters of Mulder on their walls, not Scully. Scully was the science nerd girl skeptic, Mulder was the conspiracy nut.

    All praise the laser reflector!

    • “Scully was the science nerd girl skeptic, Mulder was the conspiracy nut.”

      True… but most HBs are male, so I reckon they’d be more likely to have posters of Scully on their bedroom walls to swoon over than of Muldur 😉

    • Conspiracy believers are a very inbred, stunned to the bone marrow, thick bunch of dumb asses. Do not underestimate their thudfuck resolve.

  21. Okay, now, yes, “we” (a group of people not including me) went to the moon, but that’s no excuse for shoddy arguments.

    Even if the the first landing had been faked, it does not necessarily follow that they all were. A la Capricorn One, the first mission might have unexpectedly gone awry, and NASA officials could have feared that all subsequent missions would have been scrubbed if the hypothetical truth had come out (and I bet they would have been right).

    Even if footage was shot of a faked landing, it does not follow that everyone involved were informed of the intent of the production. They could have been told it was for a Frito’s commercial ( see http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XPVHOzeGXuA )

    That said, the pretty elliptic arcs of kicked up moon dust pretty much settle the issue, IMO.

  22. […] for debunking NASA’s moon walks? By way of Bad Astronomy, I read Cumbrian Sky’s great debunking on moon hoax believers. The HBs are never, repeat, NEVER going to be convinced that NASA went to the Moon. It doesn’t […]

  23. […] Atkinson of Cumbrian Sky wonders if NASA’s LRO probe will finally kill off the ridiculous “Apollo Hoax” conspiracy… . Stuart looks at why NASA couldn’t possibly have kept such a huge secret – especially for so […]

  24. […] ad analizzare queste “prove” (grazie al solito Bad Astronomer, ma stavolta anche a Cumbrian Sky, per le informazioni e […]

  25. Many of these same points can be made about the “9/11 Truth” crowd.

    • You’re falling into their trap. It, however, is not my concern if you enjoy being part of the flock

      • If you’re not concerned then why did you bother to post a comment? There is no room for hoax believers here. Go and bang your conspiracy-filled head against someone else’s brick wall. 🙂

  26. Ha! Now tell us how you really feel! :-))

    The only thing that ticks me off is that we were on the moon 40 years ago!! How come I can’t schedule a nice week-long vacation there, huh!!!! Or a swing around Mars for a retirement cruise. This really ticks me off; that we spend 10X more figuring out more efficient ways to kill each other than getting “out there”!! Sheesh.

    • The main reason is that Apollo as a program was unbelievably dangerous. To get three men, just three men, onto the moon for less than a week with absolute minimum equipment, it took the Saturn V rocket, the command, service, and lunar excursion modules, and a carefully-choreographed dance with Mission Control all working without a hitch. The one time that a relatively minor system went wrong, Apollo 13 almost didn’t come back. Safety for civilians in space has to be a much higher priority, and people like Burt Rutan are only just beginning to work that out.

  27. The internet is a hoax too.

  28. Google ‘Bogosity’ and watch episodes 3 and 9. They’re wonderful videos that every worthless hoaxer should watch.

    I’ve come to the conclusion that if someone believes in a certain conspiracy theory, chances are they believe in all conspiracy theories. The world’s not that complex, folks. There’s not some big secret invisible controlling police force governing the governments of Earth. Vomit.

    NASA – The pride of America’s accomplishments.
    Long live Apollo!

  29. I’m glad you keep hammering away at the HBers. I think it is a mistake to leave the field to those sad, weak minded folk.

    When I was asked to be on the Fox show nearly ten years ago, I told them that you didn’t need more proof than the 16mm film (not video or pixels) of John Young driving the rover, going far away, coming near – nothing in slow motion; the wheels kicking up rooster tails against a black sky, the chevron like pattern of them undisturbed by air as they sailed in their ballistic arc in the light gravity to drop back to the ground. And leave no clouds of dust.

    If NASA claimed NEVER to have landed, that film would have made them liars and we could all be HBers with dignity.

    • You know that’s one thing I hadn’t thought about. If they had been in a studio on earth, with earth atmosphere, it wouldn’t take long before they’d be awash in a cloud of dust from the simulated moon sand. Especially if the ‘wind’ was blowing so steadily like they claim.

  30. Don’t give those hb’s the honor of a reply. You know, there are so may people out there who also believe that Roosevelt set up Pearl Harbor and baited the Japanese to attack. If you look at the major proponents of that story, you see that they are all classic Libertarians and their decendents who are still angry with FDR because he created Social Security!
    What are these hb’s real agenda?

  31. I’m sort of new to all this hoax nonsense so perhaps somebody has thought of this before:
    Consider the political climate at the time. The Soviets were more than capable of tracking the spacecraft and most certainly did. Do the hoax people think for one second the Soviets wouldn’t have been calling ‘bullshit’ from the highest rooftops, if the US was in fact faking it?

  32. […] Moon Landing Denialist claims) “Fox TV and the Apollo Moon Hoax” by Phil Plait “LRO and the Apollo Hoax Believers…” “Bart Sibrel gets Buzzed” by Phil Plait Michael Shermer debunks moon landing denier […]

  33. Y’all don’t get it. NASA’s secret studio wasn’t at Area 51. It was on the moon.

  34. Thanks for the post, enjoyed the read.

  35. Hey have you ever made a pixel analysis of the pictures??? I invite you to do it so you can explain me why in the photographs were moon hills are shown the pixel rate is quite different from the astronaut and the sand he is on…. What kind of protection for the magnetic tape of the cameras was provided, were there any kind of shields to avoid damaging tapes from solar radiation?? There are also some incongruences on the reflections of the helmet sun shields.Why the reflection of the sun on those same shields is different from those pictures taken on the space walks when they repair satellites compare with those taken on first moon landin, were the reflection is squared…..isn’t that weird

  36. I’ve just finished analyzing more than 500 NASA Apollo images by Adobe Photoshop CS4.
    I enhanced the sky portion of the images.
    See for detail: http://members.shaw.ca/alex11/moonhoax/
    To my surprise I found the Moon in the sky of several images, I found shooting stars, two landing modules (in the same image) and the stars in position as seen from the Earth. And not a shred of evidence that any Man has ever been on the Moon.
    So I conclude that the images were faked by NASA. Then come the Europeans and the Japanese, and they can not see landing sites. Then comes NASA and they produce a black square and say this is the lunar rover. Would u believe yourself that to be true? I doubt it.
    Just the simple fact that 40 years ago, with very basic electronic end instrumentation technology they could land on the Moon, but it takes 40 years with very sophisticated technology and we still do not have clear images of the landing sites, proves to me that such landings never took place.

    With Respect

  37. Alex, you’re an idiot.

    With no respect.

  38. Brilliant dissection of the H/B psyche! What never fails to astonish me about their arguments is that they never pick ‘holes’ in the really hard bit. Lets think about it. Once you’re in orbit, if you point the vehicle in the right direction you WILL get to the moon. Landing is a relatively easy task of slowing down the vehicle in an environment with 1/6th the gravity of earth. Walking about is… well walking. Take-Off is a doddle. Not belittling the acheivement, once you’re in orbit the rest is a question of doing things at the right time in the right order and as long as the hardware worked, success was almost certain. Why do they never pick on the really hard bit – Getting into orbit. That is by far and away the single most difficult enterprise undertaken – ever. Still is.
    Why? They can’t.
    Anyway, great article. I personally can’t wait for the close up passes of the landing sites and maybe even the impact araes of the spent Apollo stages.

  39. We never went to the moon. Get used to it.

  40. Thanks for the great bit of work. I have met these unbelivers from time to time and they can drive a person mad. Any person who can think for one seconed that the American Govenment lied to the world about going to the moon or Destroyed there own trade centre in new york killing thousands of people have got to be off thier rocker.These people are all over the internet and for that reason i dont belive the internet will survive in its present form but then thats another story….good luck RJC England.

  41. Those in power wish to remain in power, and will do anything to keep it that way. Why wouldn’t they lie?

    As soon as you resort to swearing and bashing, this demonstrates your non ability to have an open mind. ANYTHING is possible!

    “All I know is that I know nothing”
    quoted from Socrates

    • You mean my inability to have an open mind? LOL

      I have an open mind re Bigfoot, the Loch Ness Monster, the possibility of Jim Carey to get through a movie without gurning dementedly. I don’t NEED to have an open mind on this subject, because we went to the Moon, fact. Absolute undeniable proved-god-knows-how-many-times FACT. And anyone who persists in believing otherwise, in peddling pathetic conspiracy theories and in preaching their utter garbage to others deserves to be treated with nothing but contempt in my mind. And if you don’t like that position, then don’t come here.

  42. I have decided that it is impossible to reason with hoaxers! Even the LRO images mean nothing to these people!

    • You can’t fix stupid. Don’t waste your time trying.
      A hoax believer is programmed to understand one thing.
      “My mind is made up, don’t try to confuse me with facts and reality.”
      They are also always bed wetters, well into their teens.

  43. Alex. I have read your website. Re The Crescent earth Photo on the opening page. I Quote: “That the pictures is fake is obvious, but the quality is so perfect that I’m unable to find evidence of tempering. What I can tell is that the quality of inserting the crescent Earth suggests digital tampering. Also the type of mistake suggests digital manipulation where they selected the Earth from another picture and during insertion they forget to turn off the black background transparency. This is a good job for a specialist.”
    #1 Apart from the completely mindblowing logic..with what sort of digital manipulation technique were these photos ‘tweaked’ back in 1969?
    #2 I know its a far fetched thought but could it just possibly be that the images are so good …. because they’re real?!

    The rest of the site is the usual mumbo jumbo that has been disproved a myriad of times before… then we reach your ‘Conclusion’ page. For a hoaxer you seem fairly clued up on recent missions etc so I am intrigued as to how you resolve some of the Japenese Kaguya Selene mission results that you mention. In particular; as you are aware, this mission did not land but mapped the moons terrain digitally in fairly high detail. This enabled the Japanese to feed this digital stream into modern 3D rendering graphics packages. As you will be well aware as a web designer, the ability to then ‘jump in’ as it were, to any point of that digital landscape and chose ones point of view is also quite possible now. The Japanese did this with an area corresponding to part of the Apollo 15 mission. The results are here:

    To the left we see the Kaguya 3D rendering from the modern day data stream. To the right, an image taken at roughly the same spot in July ’71.I am intrigued as to how the NASA faked this photo with such foresight way back then?

    Your second summary point is, and again I quote:
    “NASA LRO and LCROSS (Lunar Crater Observation and Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter Sensing Satellite) were launched on June 18, 2009. The official NASA site did not list the resolution of the visible cameras, but according to Wikipedia (July-15-09) one picture it took of the Moon’s surface has a resolution of 56 cm/pixel (22 inch/pixel). That is enough to see the landing sites, so the next few weeks will be very exciting to see if NASA will or will not release photos of the landing sites.”

    Well. How excited did you get?

    I personally thought they were a terriffic final proof of Human-Kinds ingenuity, bravery and striving for discovery.
    However, I suppose you’re still struggling to push them through Photoshop!

    Ps. I echo James’ footer. Couldn’t have put it better!

  44. I had the wonderful opportunity many years ago to talk with Richard Feynman, the great physicist and Nobel prize laureate on a few occasions. Feynman, you’ll recall, was on the committee to investigate the Challenger disaster. In addition to being iconoclastic, he was the most brilliant and apolitical person I’ve ever met. It was impossible to intimidate or fluster him.

    If memory serves, one conversation touched on the Challenger and his role in the discovery process and then we talked about NASA in general. He didn’t have a very high opinion of NASA management, but he was very complimentary of the scientists and engineers “who put us on the moon” (paraphrasing). I then jokingly asked “then you believe we actually went to the moon?” and he looked at me like I was a complete fool and said (and I wish I could remember exactly how he said it… it was great!) “anyone who thinks we haven’t gone to the moon is a complete and utter moron!”

    I suppose the point I would make here is that Feynman was brilliant… the most intelligent, sharp-witted person I’ve ever been around and I’ve met some VERY intelligent people. He blasted NASA management for mishandling the Challenger launch, yet he had no doubt at all that we landed on the moon. If there were a speck of doubt… ANY evidence of a hoax, Feynman would have “smelled it” and he would NOT have been shy about reporting the fraud. I think I’ll lean toward Feynman in the argument with hoaxers.

    Also, consider what uncovering such a hoax would mean to a journalist? Can you say “instant pulitzer?” Heck, a simple hotel break-in during the Nixon years couldn’t even be kept out of the mainstream press!

    So, I’ll paraphrase Feynman and say that the hoax crowd… the serious ones… are complete attention-seeking morons.

    By the way, the LRO is controlled by academics and most academics don’t give a s**t what anyone thinks.


    • Oops… forgot to say that my conversations took place about a year before Feynman passed away… somewhere around the latter part of 1986 or early 1987. This was before the moon landing hoax movement was as prevalent as it is now. I believe this was after Feynman’s 3rd surgery for the cancer that ultimately claimed his life (although I could be a bit off on the time frame there). He had nothing to gain by being anything but completely honest.

      It is interesting that as we recede in time from an event, people tend to forget and doubt historical truths. Nobody questioned the holocaust when I was a wee lad. Now, 64 years later….


  45. u did not go to the moon the rocket goes up blows up then comes down while u edit it on u re computer

    Prat. Get off my blog. And learn to write properly.

  46. Brilliant dissertation. A few items: The one guy states NASA did not send powerful cameras to resolve the sites will NO DOUBT, after seeing the amazing pics that have come back of the hardware on the surface will state the pics are doctored. You cannot win with these morons. I’ve given up.
    And finally, you say there were seven Saturn V launches, there were actually ten. Apollo 8 went to the moon in 1968 and orbited, Apollo 10 was a dress rehearsal for 11 with no landing and got within 69 miles of the surface. Apollo 7 was the first manned launch of moon hardware into orbit, it used a Saturn 1B, as did Apollo 9 which flight tested the LM and the moon suit. The tenth full-stack Saturn V launched the 100 ton Skylab in 1973. Saturn 1B’s ferried the three crews to the space station, then closed out in 1975 with the Apollo-Soyuz Test Project.

  47. As a service for folks happening upon this item/blog in early 2010, the LRO pictures HAVE been released…and here’s a link to a great item on the pictures, including comparison of site shots an latter day pictures.

    Fascinating…beautiful…and CASE CLOSED.

  48. Hoax believers are a lot like theists. Facts and logic have no place in their delusional world. If you could transport one to the moon and let them touch a descent module, they would still not believe it. To accept facts would mean they have to give up their illusions. Illusions are a person’s most precious possessions. They will give up their homes, jobs, and families before their illusions.

  49. Delightful, I passed this on to a workmate of mine, and he actually bought me lunch because I found this for him, so let me rephrase: Thanks for lunch.

  50. Pity the link from you Jan 12 entry is not now I’d have liked 2 c it 😦

  51. Amazing! A Hoax believer has taken this blog and used it as evidence in SUPPORT of a Moon Hoax:


    Go to post #53.

    What a maroon.

    • That is… truly unbelievable! :-)) I used to debate with these people, but don’t any longer. They’re attention-seeking cretins, desperate for attention, desperate to feel like they’re “in the know” and smarter and clevere than everyone else. They’re not; they’re sad, deluded little people who really need to get a grip on reality and come out of their suspicious-smelling bedrooms, put away their X-Files dvd box sets, get themselves a girlfriend and join the rest of us in the real world.

      Thanks for showing me the link tho, a very funny start to my day! 🙂

  52. Haha, great link Stan.

    I too would like to thank you for that amusing start to my Sunday. It would be funnier still if it wasn’t so desperately sad what those folks were saying, and believed.

  53. “That fascinating picture is the work of one of my image mage friends on unmannedspaceflight.com, AndyG. Andy (who gave me permission to use the image here, thanks Andy! ) very cleverly simulated LRO’s view of the Apollo 15 landing site”

    Simulated… LOL That about sums up your work nicely 😀

    • Ah, another side-splittingly witty “comment” from another hoax believer who is so sure of their case they won’t even use their own name. Thanks for calling. Shut the door on your way out. 🙂

  54. Confusius he say :-
    You can lead a horse to water.
    But you can’t make it drink.

    So let them alone – they are happy in their own small neat closed world where thought is not required.


  55. With all the talk it was faked the first thing came to mind Russia and other countries would not have let us get away with a lie. I wanted to be 100% sure and remembered a radio ham that had a dish and tracked them to the moon. I found him and he told me it was not fake because he had to track them to the moon with his dish and has recordings of them on the Moon.

  56. This is quite old but pretty much sums up the Hoax Believers mentality. I laughed for hours at this…….

  57. Those of you who think they went to the moon, have very little proof of that fact, whereas those who believe they didn’t have mountains of evidence to show they didn’t and couldn’t have!.

    The problem is, there is very little proof of them landing on the moon, but one hell of a lot of information that shows they didn’t.

    Bit like 9/11 – A few well chosen images and words to say it was terrorists, and stacks and stacks of information showing it was an inside job.

    If these events really happened as reported, wouldn’t the disbelievers have trouble finding evidence to prove their doubt. Where in truth, that evidence is available in many images and from much well researched technical and scientific sources.

    • Oh man, you’re going to LOVE my next post… 🙂


    • Shit for brains.

    • There is lots of proof that we went to the moon. You are just too inbred and stupid to see it. Educated people knew science class as a learning experience. You knew it as nap time. Your motto is this. Don’t confuse me with the facts or reality, I am too inbred and stupid to understand anyway. Your brain can handle pumping gas and flipping burgers. Thinking is not your strong point. Avoid it.

  58. New LRO pictures of the Apollo landing sites:


    Past pictures of the Apollo landing sites

    First series (around 1m/pixel):
    Apollo 11, 14, 15, 16, 17:
    Apollo 12:

    Second series (around 50cm/pixel):
    Apollo 14:
    Apollo 11:
    Apollo 17:
    Apollo 12:
    Apollo 15:
    http://lroc.sese.asu.edu/news/index.php?/archives/180-The-Apollo-15-Lunar-Laser-Ranging-Retroreflector-A-Fundamental-Point-on-the-Moon!.html http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/LRO/multimedia/lroimages/lroc-20100413-apollo15-LRRR.html
    Apollo 16:

    Apollo 11:
    Apollo 14:

    Many other pictures, from 2009 to 2011:
    Enhanced versions:

    • Thank you thank you thank you Thank You THANK YOU!!!

      “No evidence”, Apollo Hoax Believers, eh?

      Seriously, give it a rest, you’re just embarrassing yourselves now.

  59. guys, maybe someone wanna ans my questions here (http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2009/07/17/apollo-landing-sites-imaged-by-lro/comment-page-19/#comment-411496 ) to try to prove mission wasn’t a fake? 😉

  60. Hi,

    I was a graduate student in Geosciences studying mineralogy and also did TA for introductory classes few years back. When available, I showed the moon rock samples under microscope displayed on TV in one of the classes. To those who haven’t had experience to see the actual moon rock samples (more or less in powdered form), they are relatively spherical like tear shape and exhibit colors of dark yellow, dark green, black, etc. Why spherical? because the gravity is so low that when the molten rocks blasted by impacts after impacts cooled in the initial moon formation stage, the dots of molten rocks spent quite a time before it eventually landed on the surface. Remember, moon is geologically dead and has no surface gas now but in the initial stage, things were different because of higher probability of being hit by large asteroids. Internal heat was also higher due to initial impacts. Lunar mare is basaltic because lava flowed to the surface after huge impact.

    Anyways, we have moon rock samples (we know it’s moon rock samples because of radiometric isotope dating indicating much older age than the oldest rock we measured on earth) because we collected them by either Apollo missions or some unmanned missions I am not aware of. Considering the amount of lunar rocks we have or had -a lot of them have gone missing due to poor management- it is most likely to be Apollo missions.

    Actually, I was amazed by such a rather heated exchange between Apollo missions deniers and supporters. Looks like quite a few people think Apollo missions were hoax. Hopefully, I answered some of your doubts.

    Lastly, if you are pursuing science, you have to keep in mind that ultimately it is what you directly observe that makes final confirmation on the facts. Yes, I am quite sure Apollo missions made first human landing on the moon. However, I would like to go to the moon myself to make direct observations to confirm the fact. Until that confirmation, I am 99.99% sure that we landed on the moon. Besides, if I do get to the moon, I’m not really interested about whether Apollo remains are there or not. I would bring geophones and some vibration source to get seismic data to study the interior of the moon. Also some more rock samples to fill up our inventory. After all, I would rather look at the future than the past…

    Thanks for reading.


  61. I dunno why people still debate the fake moon landings, Everyone knows that NASA conned us into believing they landed a man on the Moon. Nobody believes in the Moon landing any more apart from a few idiots who still support NASA lies. Either they are on NASA’s payroll, or if not, then they are in dire need of medical attention to still believe NASA BS.

  62. […] Proof of moon landing hoax!How do the "moon landing hoax" people explain the retro-reflector arrayWeek 7 Moon Landing HoaxProof of the Moon HoaxLyndon LaRouche ReviewA Funny Thing Hoax Film Fully DebunkedConspiracy Theories Documentaries Moon landing!!!!Conspiracy Theories Documentaries “Apollo 20″ moon mission.alienLRO and the Apollo Hoax Believers… […]

  63. Astronauts landed on the Moon six times in reality, but if the whole thing had been faked, then Apollo 13 would have made it SEVEN times. If the landing sites were faked in a studio, everything would have been set up and ready to film. When the Apollo 13 service module explosion took place it wouldn’t have mattered. If NASA were capable of covering up six faked moon landings, they certainly would have been able to cover up what happened on Apollo 13. They could have proceeded with faking the moon landing with the unmanned “Aquarius” (just like the HB’s insist they did with 11 and 12). We would all have been none the wiser….

  64. All NASA would have to do to clear this up is one undeniable, irrefutable picture from a telescope here on earth that people could look and see the rover or any of the so-called moon items left. Will NASA do this absolutely not. Why? Because they did not go to the moon if they did they would have given irrefutable proof long before now.
    Not only does the moon hoax defy scientific understanding but people make instead of being fair and using common sense, they make fun of and cajole people can you imagine a young person questions something and they go out of their scientific way to make them appear like a moron for asking a question or saying please show me factual proof that cannot be denied. Imagine you ask a question and the teachers says you stupid sob everyone knows that why? Because we say so that’s why don’t ask anymore stupid, retarded or moronic questions. The young person says can’t you show just one undeniable photograph like the ones taken of Jupiter and Mars. No these people are rude, condescending and just plain smart asses.

    • You want to know what’s moronic? Apart from believing in the whole “We never went to the Moon! It’s all a conspiracy! Only a few people like me know the truth!” BS, which you really have to be a dozen different kinds of dumb to believe in this modern age of computer hacking and Govt leaks? Writing garbage like that when, on the very same blog, you will find MANY photos of Apollo hardware, taken by the LRO probe, just as you asked for! And if you could be bothered to do a quick Google image search for “Apollo hardware on Moon” you will find countless images taken by the LRO probe showing Apollo hardware on the surface in great detail. NASA doesn’t have to “clear anything up”, there’s nothing TO clear up. We went to the Moon in the greatest, most daring scientific journey of exploration and discovery ever. If you really, and I mean genuinely believe NASA faked not just one but SIX Moon landings, in the greatest, most expensive cover-up Ever, and that not one of the tens of thousands of people around the world involved in the Apollo mission wouldn’t have blabbed by now, and that the Russians know the truth (and they’d have to, because if people with home PCs can ‘figure it out’ then surely the Russians, with their supercomputers, spy satellites and the like would have found out The Truth by now) but have kept quiet all these years, well, nothing, not even taking you TO the Moon and throwing you down at the foot of the Eagle’s ladder, is going to convince you. And that’s a shame, because instead of spouting rubbish about it, and talking it down, you could, and should, be glorying in the achievement of Apollo and celebrating how it makes us all better.

      • See how condescending you are. What if I was a 17 year old child asking a question? This is what I mean you want to accept some blurred object as proof then you certainly can. As for me this will never be anything but a wish and a hope to perpetuate this lie of a hoax. It just so happen I have the right to ask a question it was my tax-dollars that funded this lie. Yes NASA owes us factual irrefutable, and concrete evidence. All you liars say well radiation is not the same in space as here on earth. That is a lie, radiation is radiation. Why don’t they use the material for x-rays the space plastic suits are made of? Oh that’s different radiation, why don’t they take a piece of the capsule an test it with the space radiation and lets see if aluminum will protect one from radiation. If that was true all the world would be using aluminum. Oh its different. Steel and aluminum freeze at -125 degrees on earth but it is a different cold on the moon. It does not matter what anyone asks you always have some moronic answer that defies known science. Absolute zero was not discovered until 1990 meaning they had no way to even test the suits to see if they would withstand the cold. No item of equipment could be tested in 1969 for temperatures below -200. The coldest recorded temperature on earth was -125 and steel fence posts cracked. These people know the temperature on the moon and how to test for it even though they were never there. Rubber as in tires freezes at -100. the structure of film has never been duplicated by Kodak. Kodak states no other film made would withstand those temperatures. All materials even the sir in the tires would freeze or maybe they found a way to take the water out of the tires air (LOL). These guys make up stuff as they go along every experiment they ever performed can be done on earth wow that is strange. They never released air from their suits while on the moon. It would have taken over 1,000 pounds of oxygen for 3 days. This whole story is phonier than a 3 dollar bill. Why don’t they use the radiation free aluminum to stop the radiation from Fukushima Japan and Chernobyl see how convenient that everything we were taught in school doesn’t matter they make up crap as they go along because we have not been to the moon and neither party can prove or disprove the other. Water from their breath, water in the materials used, would have shattered from the extreme cold temperatures. Everything on earth has a moisture content and this is so easy to prove take anything and subject it to these temperatures and they will burst, but not on the moon because -274 isn’t as cold as -125 on earth. This is such crap. Anything made here in that extreme temperature would self destruct.
        Radiation is not the same on earth as on the moon.
        Water does not freeze on the moon like on earth.
        Plastic suits shield from radiation on the moon but not on earth.
        Heat & radiation on the moon is not the same heat & radiation as on earth.
        Less oxygen is need on the moon than on earth.
        Oxygen does not freeze on the moon like on earth.
        Shadows on the moon fall in different directions unlike earth.
        Glass lenses do not crack on the moon from extreme heat and cold like on earth.
        Film does not burn on the moon when exposed to radiation, cold, and heat like it does on earth.
        Plastic that freezes and cracks on earth temperatures that are 100 degrees below that of the moon does not happen on the moon different kind of heat and cold.
        The LRO base when it separated lift off from moon back to the shuttle panned image clearly shows a flame in no oxygen atmosphere like on earth. We didn’t really see the flame as it defies scientific knowledge. There are literally thousands more of facts that are completely ignored and made to look as normal.
        Moon rocks have same composition as earth rocks from Antarctica.
        We tested equipment 40 years before we had the temperature scale to test said equipment.
        If you really view the video the flag was flipping anf moving when neither of the space cadets were even touching the flag pole.
        People these people could clear this up and the guys going all of us are crazy don’t have a single irrefutable or concrete piece of evidence as a matter of fact until we can view the rover’s tires and seats, close up without the LRO it is a lie.
        America think of this we can see 40 light years away crystal clear to the grains of sand on Mars and Jupiter but we don’t have the technology to view the moon 240,000 miles away. We have the technology to supposedly go to the moon, but not see the artifacts until 50 years later and then the pictures we see are of some blurred image that is completely indiscernible except for ol phoenixpics interpretation. Wow great imagination there phoenixpics. People ask the question if I am crazy why does NASA and them show pictures form light years away but not here at home we can’t see anything that is conclusively the moon artifacts?
        the reason Russia and other world powers don’t tell the truth then it opens a can of worms for all of their citizens asking if you knew then maybe you lied to us. If NASA would show a single view from earth it would immediately stop every doubter in the world. NASA will not because it was and is a hoax that NASA cannot substantiate with any concrete evidence.
        Citizens take the time to Google radiation, moon temperatures, brake down of item’s supposedly used in the hoax moon projects see for yourself that scientifically the truth is the items would fail like they fail on earth.
        Their are people that want to make everyone look ignorant.
        In my questions never do I put them down. Never do I make fun of them or call them names to get my point across.
        The truth does not ever need constant reinforcing like a lie. All the NASA moon people constantly reinforce their positions never actually showing any positive concrete evidence. Like here is a picture from the LRO you cannot make out a single piece of equipment. The photos have imbedded adobe photo shopped trademarks that means it is not actual images but photo shopped images from a computer not the actual images captured by the LRO.
        How many of you taxpayers can look at those images and swear an oath on the bible that you actually see the rover and and the pod with the U.S. Flag in the pictures?
        Truth is the enemy of all lies.

      • Sorry, I didn’t mean to sound condescending. I meant to sound dismissive, because, like many people who believe in the Apollo hoax thing, your posts are full of so many inaccuracies (“we can see 40 light years away crystal clear to the grains of sand on Mars and Jupiter but we don’t have the technology to view the moon 240,000 miles away.” – er, what?!?!?! Light years?!?!?! Epic “basic grasp of science” fail there!!!), myths and shockingly bad grammar that I find it hard to take them seriously. Actually, I talk to kids all the time – I do a lot of “Outreach” in schools, and to be honest yes, I do get asked that question a few times, because they read crap on the internet saying we never went to the Moon, see those ridiculous TV documentaries about it and hear adults talking about it, so naturally they’re curious. Of course I don’t reply to them like I’m replying to you, because they’re just kids, and have yet to be educated about this stuff, so I patiently go through the whole debate with them and usually (not always, but usually) they accept the science behind the debate and are then amazed at the achieveent of Apollo. But adults, grown ups, people like you, should know better, you really should. You live in a world where science keeps us alive, my friend. Science keeps airplanes up in the air; gives us iPads and mobile phones; gives us medicines; allows life-saving operations; allows us to communicate across and between continents; keeps cancer patients alive a little longer to let them spend more precious time with their families. Why the fuck, seriously, would you accept all that and yet question the science behind the Apollo missions, much of which gave us the modern world we live in? I can’t get my head around it, I really can’t. NASA owes you nothing. NOTHING. It’s your choice to not believe the hundreds of pictures, thousands of books and magazines, interviews and testimonals, etc. Your choice. The vast, overwhelming majority of the population believe we went to the Moon because the evidence is overwhelming, and because they know that in this modern world, where no secret can be kept, where hackers rifle through Govt files like kids flipping through CDs in a record store, where WilkkiLeaks has spilled the beans on countless “secrets”, where computer savvy reporters sniff around stories like pigs snuffling for truffles in a forest, and where there is so much money floating around that anyone who “knew the truth” about Apollo could earn themselves millions of dollars with just one phone call, if NASA had faked Apollo the truth would have come out. Do you really, seriously, honestly believe that Russia, locked in a spacerace with the US, at the height of the Cold War, wouldn’t have found out Apollo was a hoax and revealed it to the world? Get real, you’re living in a fantasy land. But the basic scientific truth, which you’vechosen to ignore after it was pointed out by another contributor (thank you, by the way!) is that there aren’t any telescopes on Earth that have the resolving power to SEE something as small as Apollo hardware on the Moon, not even with adaptive optics and interferometry, they just can’t. That’s why we have to send satellites there to see things telescopes can’t! And even when a telescope is built large enough TO do that they’ll never be able to see them in any more detail than LRO can. But, hopefully, your salvation and redemption will soon be at hand. If one of the entries to the Google Lunar X Prize succeeds in setting a rover down close to an Apollo landing site, they’ll send back not overhead, blurry images of Apollo hardware but pictures taken from right next to it. They will drive up to the landing site and send back images of the lunar module standing on the Moon. Will you believe it then? Will you accept the truth then? I suspect not. I think that you’ll insist the pictures were interferred with, or just plain Photoshopped, or the team was bought off by NASA. I hope not, I hope you’d see the images and accept them as genuine, but I think Apollo Hoax Believers have invested too much time and energy in their obsession to give it up. They enjoy being “in the know”, it gives them a bizarre and misplaced feeling of power and privilege. And that’s a shame, because really, you could all be enjoying Apollo, delighting in it, celebrating it as the magnificent achievement it was. I won’t have convinced you, I know I won’t, and I’ve probably made you even more frustrated and annoyed, but that’s not my problem. Because when I look up at the Moon I see a place we’ve been to, briefly, and abandoned far too soon, to our shame. I don’t see a lie. And I’d rather live in my world than yours. You said “Truth is the enemy of all lies”, and yes, that’s the case. But to coin a phrase, you can’t handle the truth, because that would mean you’ve wasted all this time obsessing about something ridiculous for nothing. But thanks for reading and contributing to my blog, I actually appreciate it, and sincerely wish you well.

  65. And I Say “All you have to do is to take one undeniable, refutable picture from a telescope here on earth that people could look and see the place where the rover or any of the so-called moon items left are NOT there on the surface of the moon”.
    The coordinates are well publicised. There are lots of private (non NASA) telescopes available in the USA. which could do the job if you had the money to try.
    Over to you – PYMWYMI.

    • So your asking the taxpayers to believe that space cadets with chest mounted cameras take crystal clear pictures with a $1,000.00 camera. Yet the $50 Million Dollars for an LRO camera picture that is blurred out of focus and that’s you proof. Tax-payers paid. One of the so called moon authorities said something smart mouthed to me about a Koda camera, your so called LRO moon shot looks like it was taken with that same $10 Million Dollar Tax-Payer Camera by Kodak.

      • JFK was a political hack….his brave words…”journey to the moon in this decade..(1960’s)” set in motion a scientific impossibility. Did this clown get one thing right in his 1000 days of ineptitude?…vietnam, bay of pigs, moon landing, cuban missile crisis…a miracle the usa survived this pompous ass. His brother Robert attacked Hoffa…the last person to try to end the suffering of truckers. Who needs the commies when you have Kennedys ruining everyone’s chance for happiness! November 22,1963 should be celebrated as a day of liberation. Supposedly a civil rights activist….lip service and bs like every other aspect of this libertine drug addict President! People voted for Obama…Ted Kennedy said he was like JFK……..How true…more bad decisions by a drug addled fool!

  66. Reply to rdbob’s post on December 16, 2012 at 4:17 am
    Oh Man !
    Which temperature scale are you talking about
    Celsius, Fahrenheit, or Kelvin ?
    ‘Absolute zero was not discovered until 1990’
    Well I must live in a time warp, because before I graduated from school in 1953, we already knew about, and used, the Kelvin scale, which started at Aboslute Zero. so how come they didn’t discover it until 1990 in your TimeLine?
    Steel and Aluminium Freezing at -125 degrees ??
    If you are talking in K temperature scale, Impossible statement.
    If you are talking C or F temperature scale, I have small question for you, What state are the 2 metals in above -125, and below melting point (Al = 460 deg F, Iron = 1534 deg F) as you seem to have redefined Freezing Point. I was under the impression that ‘things’ were liquid ABOVE the freezing point, and solid BELOW freezing point, but you(or you mentors) have Invented a new state, Not Frozen but below the liquidation point, and even more advanced, Steel(iron) and Aluminium have the SAME freezing point, but not the same Liquidation point.
    I would be gratefull for elucidation, as my primative (pre 1990) education seems seriously lackinjg, I’m suprised that my generation ever got anything to work at all, let alone the odd satilite, Television, mobile phone etc.
    Er er – pictures of pebbles on Mars – they come from several (Imaginary) Rovers and landers (sent by nasa), not hand held Kodak Instamatics taken from earth, yet you seem to believe in them – excuse me while I scream..
    Have a nice day in your own private world, and I hope the intra-dimensional leak heals its self so you are no longer bothered by our disturbing (to you) time.. 🙂 🙂

    • Okay again why do we not have a crystal clear photograph from here on earth? What technology are we lacking that will show the letter’s on the rover tires, the stars on the so called waving flag that didn’t furl, and the debris serial numbers or just a close up of the items that are identifiable?
      Please explain in common 1953 English why the LRO is the best we can do? Tell all the world why we can see mars and Jupiter and the Sun but not the moon?
      One (1) irrefutable, concrete, factual image that will stop every inquiry by every living human being on earth. 1 (one) image taken from the planet earth.Please use that PHD and explain why we can’t view the moon debris from earth one more time? You can use scientific terms but please break them down afterwards so my small education can understand why we can’t or it is impossible to show the images from earth?

      • “You can use scientific terms but please break them down afterwards so my small education can understand why we can’t or it is impossible to show the images from earth?”

        Ok, here goes. This has been explained to you already, but you have just ignored it, so, again, in bang-my-head-against-the-wall simple terms:

        Apollo hardware: very small.

        Earth telescopes: very small. Not powerful enough to see things on Moon the size of Apollo objects.

        There. That’s it. But if you want more…

        Not even the Hubble telescope – the best we have in space – could see objects as small as Apollo hardware on the Moon.

        Not even Superman, with his amazing vision, could see numbers on the tyres of LRVs, or stars on the flags planted by the astronauts.

        We can see Mars and Jupiter and the Sun, yes, but we can’t see details on them, from Earth, less than TENS OF KILOMETRES in size.

        NASA has nothing to prove. You’re wasting your time, and your life, on this crusade of quackery. Give it up.
        Seriously, you’re making fools of yourselves, all of you Hoax Believers. Time to move on. Life’s too short to live in an episode of the X-Files. There’s an amazing, beautiful world out there, and an amazing, beautiful Universe beyond. Come and join us in it. 🙂

      • 1; I’m no PHD, I graduated at 16 years, The schooling system is different here in the boondocks of U,K, but that didnot stop me becoming a hardware/software engineer for Industrial lasers.
        2. Looking down from 300 miles is somewhat different to looking UP from 238,900 miles. The turbulence of the atmosphere effectively causes camera shake looking UP which even adaptive optics cannot remove. Just think about the angular size of an automotive numberplate from 300 miles, and a lunar rover from 238,900 miles (simple geometry,which tought to every 12 year old here) nothing fancy.
        Sorry, even if you took one of the (recently) advertised tourist trips to the moon (only $150.000.000 link http://www.space.com/16367-private-moon-missions-excalibur-almaz.html), and knelt down beside the rover, you would not see the makers name on the tyres – because it had no tyres only woven spring steel ( because 1/6th gravity and short distance mission = tyres not required – well documented by Nasa) Look at the (fake) videos you will see that for yourself.
        Sorry can’t vote for you for president, unless you annex the UK.before the polls
        Oh yes, and thank you for your tax dollars that gave us the wonderful space exploration which holds so much promise for human kind. .

      • nothing there to see…the props of this hoax have been destroyed…watch apollo 13…the entire “cleaning up the crime scene” have been written into the script…the only thing more bogus is “flight 93” to explain 9-11-2001…a hilarious movie if u do not drink the 19 arab terrorist koolaid they make everyone drink….the real comedy comes in a special feature, where the actor playing the fictional person meets the family that the fictional person supposedly was a member…The interviews have the same feeling as the nasa news conferences…mike collins…”i didn’t see any stars”…circled the dark side of the moon waiting to pick up the lem astronauts….but saw no stars….saw no black people in harlem,new york either….look phony photographic evidence is all we got for 135 billion dollars of space waste!

    • Phoenixpics thank you for an intelligent response. Why does everyone get upset if I question our government? I have a right to ask as many times, as many question until I am clear on the matter. There is no question that is a stupid question. In life when there is doubt there is only a single reason for doubt. That is a lie. In my world everything must be on a plane that I can understand, I must have logic. Everything that is used to prove the moon was not a hoax can be duplicated here on earth.
      The coke bottle rolling on the moon this is a fact this is not conjecture. I’m sure there is a reason for the coke bottle. It should not have been there this raises doubt. I didn’t raise this doubt NASA raised this doubt. The flag is furling you can say it was the shaking of the flagpole. On the moon it would be impossible. Secondly how did they have prior knowledge the ground @-259 degrees was not solid? Why did they not use a hammer to pound the flagpole into the ground? NASA has an answer but the question should have never been raised. There was absolutely another light source. NASA denies and say the illumination was from the sun and reflection of the moon it is impossible. It is proven that same pictures have identical backgrounds with different mission at different places on the moon. NASA denies this yet the rocks, shadows, horizon are exact duplicates. All you that believe this deny these abnormalities and try to make everyone believe they do not see what they see. This is a fact, angles of photography are impossible to achieve yet NASA denies this and your group sides with them. Let me show how I see things the sun is searing hot. Now anyone in their right mind that denies this would be insane and to this day no human being has made a counter statement to this fact it is universally undeniable. Why? The sun is irrefutably, concrete, proof positive evidence of itself. This is how the so called moon missions should be. If not the people that took tax-payers money owes tax-payers undeniable, irrefutable, proof positive evidence. If NASA had used its own money then we as tax-payers would have no right to question. We would either believe or dis-believe since it was our money NASA owes us undeniable proof. An out of focus, blurry, and indiscernible photograph is not proof but only more confusion and disbelief a hoax was committed. Now we have the temperature theory, look cold is cold -269 degrees in space, on earth, or on the moon is colder than we have experienced on earth. So here is an experiment let’s build an identical replica of the Apollo 1dt. Mission. Now we take this identical replica to the north pole put it in the coldest spot we can find during one of the worst storms put 3 space cadets inside for 3 days with their plastic suits and after 3 days lets go see how they fared. Surely you will agree that the temperature of the North Pole will only reach 1/2 of the temperature on the moon at least 150 degrees less. No now NASA and your group say cold is not cold. Why would their space suits reflect the radiation of space but not here on earth? Okay let’s do this; let’s make 3 identical space suits of 1969 same material make a chamber and for 1 week that’s how long they were in space and bombard the suits and prove what all you that believe this is false. Oh we can’t you say or we won’t. These are very simple and easy things NASA could do to prove this was no hoax if the people survive the radiation we know it is possible. Proof suits do not contain any lead shields to protect the wearers. We could also build a chamber for the craft with them inside. Hey as an after though we could get them myth busters to lie about it they contradict science all the time. Why can’t we show proof of these simple tests? Why has Kodak never made film that will withstand these temperatures? Why is it no film made keeps from freezing when subjected to 150 degrees less than on the moon?
      Look phoenixpics you believe in the moon hoax, I don’t it amazes me that the LRO pictures define nothing, you cannot make out any image of anything, and you as an educated person do not question this? The picture quality for the money tax-payers paid for the on board camera, you cannot be serious. How do you in all fairness say this is the object stated? You or no one else can make out a recognizable image.

      On the Fahrenheit scale of today this temperature is minus 460 degrees. On the Centigrade scale it is minus 273 degrees, Absolute zero on this scale, is 273 degrees below the freezing point of water. Fahrenheit never dreamed such a temperature was possible. Absolute zero is almost impossible to produce even in our modern laboratories. At absolute zero there are no gases and no liquids. Air freezes solid long before this temperature is reached, As far as we know nothing can get any colder than minus 273 degrees Centigrade, for all the heat energy has gone and the busy molecules are perfectly still.
      The average daytime temperature on the Moon is around 107°C (225°F), but can be as high as 123°C (253°F).
      When an area rotates out of the sun, the “nighttime” temperature falls to an average of -153°C (-243°F).
      Temperatures on the moon are hotter and colder than on earth. It makes no difference if one uses Celsius, Fahrenheit, or Kelvin. On the moon temperature would drop 250 degrees in just a matter of moments when entering the shade, in 1969 we did not have the technology in space suits to handle that dramatic change in seconds.

  67. What a beautiful collections of balderdash, it must have taken a lifetime of internet searching to collect.

    Pity you didn’t use your obvious oratory, interpersonal and teaching skills to become President,
    You could have forced the truth (as you see it) to be distributed to the whole world, and anyone who disagreed sent on a long holiday in SE Cuba,

    Maybe there still is time for you to do it.

    I look forward to seeing your name in the Polls.

    Have a Nice Day.

    Half truths are indistinguishable from lies,

    • Actually it takes no more than maybe 1 hour. Now will you also explain why we can’t have a crystal clear photograph of the rover inside and out read the letters on the tires. In the 70’s on earth we could read the date of a dime on the sidewalk with Satellite but now our technology will not allow such closeups and why is that? For God’s sake Google has better pictures of the earth than NASA”S LRO of the moon. Why can’t we see these items from earth what is the reason? You make fun as usual, that’s what you liars do you can’t prove it we know you can’t so whats the next best thing to proof make anyone that asks a question look simple, stupid and retarded why? You have not a single shred of proof except for a glowing object that is a spot on a gray field and that’s your proof positive? Just one (1) photograph from that that no conspirator theorists can say this is faked. You know why THE HOAX IS A HOAX BY ITS OWN ADMISSION OF NO PROOF WHEN A SINGLE PHOTOGRAPH THAT WILL IDENTIFY CLOSE-UPS OF NUMBERS OR LETTERS. Every one knows by no submission of a truthful, undeniable, irrefutable evidence in the form of a photo the possibility of a lie will continue. Every American knows we have the knowledge and technology so why is it hid?
      We the tax-payers that funded this lie have every right to ask any question we paid NASA, NASA sent us no checks. NASA has not paid the money back to the tax-payers so yes we have every right to ask for proof or NASA defrauded American tax-payers out of their money.
      Please give proof of wht we have nothing but blurred million dollar pictures that show absolutely nothing but lines on a field of gray. Truthfully the tracks of the supposed foot trails are actually larger than the objects going to and from the tracks should not be that pronounced but in faking they wanted to make sure the tracks would be the sealed deal as proof.
      I will believe when 1 (One) picture with clarity and resolution that is not photo-shopped copyright images on the image. And I will publicly apologize to every tax-payer in America for my lack of knowledge and being part of a conspiracy to hurt our country.
      Again one irrefutable piece of evidence not some blurred shiny misleading photo as proof. The only proof is that this object is shiny round with more pronounced paths that are larger than the shiny object in size on a gray background.
      Just one picture where the object is certifiable, distinct, and clear.

      • Hi Anon, I only just now found your reply.
        I have just one small point to make.
        The Rovers did not have tyres (rubber with BFGoodrich moulded on in white) – they were open spring steel mesh, because of the 1/6th G, and total lack of atmosphere on the moon.
        Maybe 1 minute more of Internet searching would have told you that.
        HAND 😉

  68. It is absolutely amazing to watch educated grown men treat people that honestly ask questions. Cambrian Word Press with your great storehouse of knowledge. You talk to us like you are in the 5 th. grade. Is this what an education does for people, they make fun of and put people down call them shit crap and every uncivil vile name you can think of? In all this I have not read one hateful put down by the so called retarded shits that we are according to you people. I will tell you this if I am wrong I’ll have the moxy to admit it to everyone. One thing I want to make clear is I am going to show young children high school age your put downs, your snide hateful remarks and tell them is this how you want to be treated by this group of people that are crass full of hatred just because you have a question that either they cannot answer or puts them in a bad light? Even if it is answered 100 times these are adults that are so impressed with themselves that there is absolutely no possibility they could be wrong. You people are so immature you have no idea. Your smug conceitedness you deserve each other. I will spread your venom to everyone I meet. I want people to see this is how your treated by the Cambrian Word Press Crowd. The only thing educational is the questions asked by outsiders. You act so childish to reasonable honest discussions. Your right there is no need for honest questions to you bunch of rude know it alls.. Some of you say you have knowledge of science yet when presented with said science you make up new science to fit your scenario. TRUTH IS THE MORTAL ENEMY OF LIES.
    A prudent man concealeth knowledge: but the heart of fools proclaimeth foolishness. The way of a fool is right in his own eyes:
    A fool shows his folly and shame by answering a matter even before hearing it fully presented:

    • Hi Anon
      Oh my what a prickly person you are.
      Methinks you doth protest too much.
      I wonder how you would react if I dumped a similar diatribe onto your personal blog ??

      HAND 😉

  69. There were 13 Saturn V launches. Nine of those went to the Moon with a crew of three, and yes ther were six landings.

  70. Telescope explanation: http://curious.astro.cornell.edu/question.php?number=134

  71. Wonkierbeam
    Thanks for that link, A much better description of Why Can’t We See the bits of Apollo from our back yards.

  72. Thank you, I’ve recently been searching for information approximately this subject for a while and yours is the greatest I have found out till now. But, what in regards to the conclusion? Are you positive concerning the supply?

    • Well the provenance is that the information comes from the US Government. That makes the info gold standard, for both the HBs and the ABs. HB know that everything out of US Gov is made up of lies and falshoods, and so adds to their case, and the ABs say there you go, one more proof of Apolo mission success. Pick your choose, both camps will be happy

      • You’re replying to a spam message. That’s a generic message designed for you to click his link.

  73. RdBob….are you seriously trying to draw comparisons between Googles ‘Earth’ software and attempting to view a lunar rover mesh ‘tyre’ from Earth with a telescope? (360-400 thousand km away dependent on time of year). The photograph of your house, was taken from an aeroplane not from a satellite. The sheer genius of Googles software is the almost seamless stitching together of countless images from aerial mapping with that of satellite imagery and very clever algorithms. It’s so good that some people think pictures of their own house have been taken from orbit. (In the words of Homer….’Doh!’)

    In your post you ask for proof. I put it to you that there is nothing anyone can show you that will change your mind. You complain that the LRO displays nothing more than a ‘glowing object that is a spot on a gray field’. What resolution would you be happiest with? You want it to look as sharp as the images that the astronauts took? But then you’d complain about that….. ‘they’re too good’! For some reason you want to believe that the moon landings were faked. There is absolutely no ‘proof’ that you could be shown that would change your mind. Apart from maybe dropping you into Little West Crater; where you could gasp your last incredulous, ‘It’s all a faked….’ at the sight before you. Just before you got the best suntan ever and your blood boiled.

    • Oh **** off, I’m sick of you silly tits. Get a life and stop your conspiracy theory fairy tale crap, it’s pathetic, you’re embarrassing yourselves.

  74. ‘TODD’. The component parts of this name when broke down to their places in the alphabet are 20, 15, 4 & 4.
    If we subtract the designation of the last mission to land, (17) from the first figure of 20, we get 3.
    If we add the number of successful landings (6) to the second figure of 15, we get 21.
    If we take the 3rd figure of 4 and find the 4th mission (to fly), we get Apollo 10. If we add that 10 to the 4 we get 14.
    If we take the final value of 4 and find the mission designation of the 4th landing, we get Apollo 15. If we add that 15 to the only mission to end in tragedy, (Apollo 1), we get 16. If we add that 16 to that final 4, we get 20.
    Astonishingly; this gives us 3, 21, 14 & 20. When we transpose those values back to the alphabet, we get C, U, N, T.
    Not only that but their accumulation of 58 is I believe your IQ.

  75. @WB/MB
    I think you missed the div(0) when calculating the IQ, –
    Everyone Knows that AHB’s have an IQ in excess of infinity,
    Also 3211420’s are quite useful for most outgoing variants of HomSap to have access to…
    That taken, your post I found droll, and apposite..

  76. @GodKilla
    Mike (SOF) 😉

  77. I ‘m one of the believers about Moon landing. There are so many evidences that is a hoax. From this video you can see:

    and for those who don’t believe.

  78. Way cool! Some extremely valid points! I appreciate you writing this article and the rest of the site
    is really good.

  79. Take Home azbestu ekspozycji Tradycyjny obraz
    ofiary opłucnej existing matki małych czereda bądź po prostu mężczyznę wchodzącego sile wieku,
    wszak raczej na emeryturę pracowników samochód względnie woj marynarki wojennej,
    który został eksponowany na impreza wysokich dawek azbestu w całej jego karierze.

    Niestety, coraz to więcej ludzi, którzy nie pasują
    do stereotypu są z rozpoznaniem choroby. Chociaż nie przypuszczalnie egzystować narażone
    na przedsięwzięcie azbestu przy użyciu ich pracy, są synami,
    córkami a małżonkowie, którzy nieświadomie przyniósł do domu azbest spośród nimi
    po pracy. Co owo jest take-home narażenie na działanie
    azbestu? Z drugiej ręki, czy też wykorzystania w domu, wystawa
    na azbest jest jednym spośród głównych przyczyn choroby w tych,
    którzy nie pracują w zawodzie związane azbest.
    To się dzieje, podczas gdy ktoś, kto pracuje w bezpośredniej bliskości azbestu prowadzi
    śmiercionośny domu włókien spośród ​​nich po pracy.
    Azbest przypadkiem stanowić realizowane na wszystko,
    od czasu odzieży a obuwia aż do skóry oraz włosów. Gdy ów azbest jest brane do domu, przypadkiem istnieć wdychany za pomocą członków rodziny, którzy
    Hug przewoźnika ewentualnie wypierze ubranie.
    Włókna rakotwórczych może być nawet wdychane przy użyciu dzieci, które spędzają Chronos zabawy zanieczyszczonej odzieży w pralni.
    Dziś lekarze widząc zaskakującą zmianę w demografii ofiar międzybłoniaka pod dorosłych w średnim wieku i starszych kobiet, które wcześniejszy narażone na impreza azbestu dekad
    wprzódy przy użyciu członka rodziny.

  80. damme na busca!yosh o mosh!

  81. Just saw an original Star Trek, Series 3 episode 12 ‘The Empath’. Scotty radios Kirk & Co. on the planet, warning about a dangerous solar flare approaching. Kirk orders Scotty to move the Enterprise away out of danger, while the landing party remain on the planet, protected by the atmosphere. This show was first broadcast on 6th December 1968 [but mysteriously censored by the BBC until 1994], 7 months before the first Apollo landing, with all Apollo landings happening during a time of dangerous radiation from high solar activity/flares, yet NASA claim they had no idea solar flares were dangerous back then. Seems Star Trek had better scientific knowledge than NASA!! Also, explain why the famous NASA photo, of an astronaut allegedly standing on the Moon, is obviously taken with the aid of a spotlight just out of shot, resulting in the astronaut standing in a ‘hotspot’ of light. No additional lighting was taken to the Moon, so the entire landscape should be evenly illuminated, but the light fades away into the distance. NASA say; ‘The truth is in the photos’, but this photo was not taken on the Moon!! So, what else are NASA lying about?

    • The radiation question is beyond me, however I can easily believe the ‘hot spots’ in certain photos, as they are centered around the shadow of the lunar photographer, i.e, directly opposite apparent position of the light source. The hot spot would require the soil to have an amount of tiny glass bead-like crystalline granules in order to reflect more as the ‘sun’ bounces in a direct line back to camera.

      Bye the way, it would be convenient for critics such as the author if we were all either “HB’s” or NOT, but – sorry – the world isn’t quite that black and white. Some of us are simply curious.

    • It’s much worse than that! Incontravertable photographic proof that the Moon Landings were faked.
      Er the LEM was made of shiny aluminium and shinier gold foil. Has that figured into your uniform lighting conditions. Also the astronauts suits were made to be higly reflective too.
      Also light is not diffused on the Luna as it is on the Earth.
      No atmosphere.

      Mods sorry if the link has been posted before as the comments are tl and I dr but it’s a useful one IMHO.

  82. So why did Buzz Aldrin Tweet that the Moon landing was FAKE???

  83. & not a very good one if they can’t even do a rebuttal first try DUH

  84. How did they manage to leave tracks and footprints on the moon when close-up photos show that the lunar module’s powerful engine didn’t even disturb the dust on the lunar surface?

  85. Someday one nation shall really land there, maybe China, maybe anyone else, but then, and only then, the truth will be known. We will all know what happens when a hoax fall apart, or who will apologize who.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: