The 1969 Moon landing was a significant moment in history, but some people still believe it was a hoax set up by NASA. These conspiracy theorists claim that the images were faked and that the Apollo 11 mission, which took place on December 11, 1972, was not the last time humans left low Earth orbit. Buzz Aldrin admitted in an interview that the Moon landings were faked, explaining why astronauts haven’t returned to the moon since 1972.
The Apollo conspiracy theories began with Bill Kaysing’s pamphlet about “America’s $30bn swindle”. In July 1969, humans landed on the Moon for the first time as part of the Apollo 11 mission. However, there is no evidence to support these theories, and they all come down to money, politics, and priorities.
The Apollo missions were enormously successful, but conspiracy theories claim that some or all elements of the program and the associated Moon landings were hoaxes staged by NASA. When the Apollo 17 astronauts splashed down in the Pacific Ocean 50 years ago, they were the last humans to visit the Moon.
There are six common Apollo 11 Moonlanding conspiracy theories and how to debunk them. It is essential to face the facts and destroy the myths surrounding the 1969 Moon landing, as the big spending boost NASA received went away not long after Neil Armstrong and other astronauts returned to Earth.
📹 Why haven’t we gone back to the Moon?
The Moon landing was one of the greatest achievements of humanity in history. But if it was so good, why haven’t we gone back?
📹 Debunking moon landing conspiracy theories | QI – BBC
Why do people doubt the moon landings? #QI #iPlayer Stephen Fry asks unanswerable questions about hoaxes, with Sean …
Im gonna link another cool website but first some things I want to clear up I am by no means trying to insult the people who were involved in the Apollo Program with this article. Quite the opposite. There was a lot of luck involved with the crews not dying, but it was also skill. 400,000 people came together to do something never done before, and they inspired millions of people and put humans on the surface of another world. These people were and still are incredible, and I am glad people were put on the Moon. Again, Apollo proved getting to the moon was possible and now we’re trying to make it practical Anyways, usually with my moon articles now i like to shout out other creators, and its usually anthrofuturism (who you should watch) but this time I’d also like to bring attention to Lunarmodule5, who has been compiling pretty much all Apollo footage that exists into articles, and its where I got a lot of the Apollo footage for this article youtube.com/@lunarmodule5/videos
I don’t run into moon landing conspiracy theorists often but this is a truly great article to send to people to debunk this kind of stuff. The simple, common sense facts like Soviet spies in NASA’s ranks sending info home and not detecting any conspiracy like this is perfect to explain how this couldn’t have been faked. I mean, the whistle was blown on Watergate pretty quickly, and relative to faking a moon landing it seems a lot easier to get away with.
Nice, you actually gave me a new perspective of the Apollo program with this article and I agree with many of the points u made. However it is worth saying that the technological advancements we had and have because of the Apollo program are just incredible. They created the concept of the microchip and used it to run as many calculations as possible during the flight. So it is true that it didn’t have sustainable long term goals about the exploration of space. but it did a lot for us on Earth on the long term, just in a way we didn’t expect
You make a good point about people losing interest in the Apollo program after beating the Soviets. Does anyone even remember any of the other Apollo missions after 11? Sure, Apollo 13 is infamous for its near-death disaster, but you never see anybody talk about the success of 12 or 14 or 15 or 16 or 17. Can anyone even describe what those missions achieved? All I know is that Apollo 17 had lunar rovers. That’s it. And yeah, NASA was in such a rush trying to get to the Moon that they took major risks and seemed to act on impulse. If anything, their enormous budget enabled them! Once their budget decreased and they saw the consequences of cutting corners after the Space Shuttle Challenger disaster (one of the most easily avoidable tragedies in HISTORY, by the way), they finally learned from their mistakes and have since taken more precautionary measures. It’s better to delay a manned mission than to put human lives at risk.
How would a moon base already exist if Apollo didn’t happen? I don’t understand the logic behind this statement, do you mean that the money that Apollo wasted could be used to settle an actual sustainable base? But if that is the case, then China or the EU would still have their budgets fine to attempt their own moon bases, and yet we don’t see them do it. I agree with everything else in the article it’s just that this comment seemed rather odd and emotionally driven.
I agree apollo Program was very risky and dangerous, it’s also demonstration of how apollo program was crossing it’s limits. It was also very stupid because landing there with humans makes no sense since it was for a shory period of time, but they did increase the duration of stay it was still pointless but i guess It’s Space Race, Artemis 3 is much more safer option and nasa took atleast precautions and safety rather than rushing
i do not believe it happened due to NASA “losing” the original tapes and a rock neil armstrong bought back being fake, but im open for a new and interesting explanation from someone clearly passionate about all things pertraining space and the universe. edit: this take was an incredibly refreshing, reasonable and respected the opposition. very well done.
We don’t have better things, just differents, our technology is… kinda sh*t, not in the way where we can do less things than before, military propulsion allow faster plane and missile computer allow calculations that would have been sci fi back then but there’s definitely things that are worst on more objectives points, often parts that we don’t see, like energy production, industrial capacities, and logistical capabilities, massive pieces of engineering like the crawler are lost until we decide to relearn how to make them, till then thoses things can only be maintained, the shuttle has been lost along with many tech of the x-projects and even nuclear propulsion that were getting worked on, our tech is weird, we have the necessary mean to navigate anywhere in the system with complex ships and trajectory but we lack the ships themselves because, somehow space as been left on the side for economical reasons as well as political reasons (sometime stupid). China just showed their suit that they told earlier this year were complete along with other flight elements to go there, i don’t know what is going to happen but considering they have both the experience and necessary technologies to make it happen i don’t see why they wouldn’t be able to put something off but technologies sectors, are binded with industries and logistics, and energy production, if you lack in on them you don’t have better things, it’s not subjective, f1 engine is impressive but it doesn’t work with starship simply because it has not been created for this, but raptor wouldn’t work either with saturn v.
Space exploration is very dangerous but you are over exaggerating the dangers Apollo and ignoring basic redundancies it had. Even if the Saturn V had blown up. it was equipped with a les (launch escape system) that could fly the crew capsule to a safe distanse. This system would automatically trigger in a fraction of a second if it detected that 2 out of the 3 signal cables, witch ran the whole legth of the rokcet, had broken. Secondly landing on the moon wasn’t needed to return to its orbit. if the lunar decent module failed to land. The lunar acent module could be started at any time to return the crew safely back to orbit. Apollo 13 was a failure but wasen’t even close to killing anybody. The switch breaking was probably the closest thing to killing someone but that was something unexpected that I could see something like that hapening even today. I agree with you on the other problems with Apollo. The space race was just a part of the cold war and the Saturn V can’t compete with reusatable rokcets in terms of cost.
How can you claim that our technology now is so much better when we can’t replicate Saturn V? We need 2 dozen starship launches – when you count the orbital refueling, something that has never been done before – to replicate one launch from the saturn v. Note that starship is still a futuristic vehicle that doesn’t exist yet. The comparison with TVs and jet fighters is disingenuous, since tvs and modern fighters are actually better than their older iterations.
Colonizing the moon isnt going to be nearly as profitable as you think it will be. Its expensive and what do we get from it? sure we can do tourism but there arnt that many people rich enough to do that. And any resources we can get on the moon we can get on earth for cheaper plus launching from the moon requires fuel which cant be produced insitue.