Apollo 11 Conspiracy Theories: Did America Actually Land on the Moon?

Apollo 11

This week marks the 45th anniversary for Apollo’s epic first lunar landing, which occurred on July 20, 1969 and included astronauts Neil Armstrong, Buzz Aldrin and Michael Collins. The backup crew consisted of James A. Lovell, William A. Anders and Fred W. Haise. However, there are many people who believe that Apollo 11 was indeed a conspiracy theory, and that the moon landing was faked by the United States government in order to assert victory in space over Russia. So the real question is did America actually land on the moon?

Conspiracy Theory #1 – The Fluttering Flag

Apollo 11Conspiracy theorists declared that when America first landed on the moon and it was debuted on live television, spectators could see the American flag waving as Armstrong and Aldrin positioned it into the ground. This suggested that there was a breeze causing it to do so. Since there is no air on the moon’s atmosphere, no wind could cause the flag to ripple.

NASA claimed that the flag was held up by a thin horizontal bar and that the flag moved because it was unfurled and also when the astronauts fixed it into position on the moon’s surface.

Conspiracy Theory #2 – Several Light Sources

The Sun is the only light source on the moon, suggesting that all shadows are parallel to each other. Ironically, both photographs and videos demonstrate that shadows are falling in different directions. This suggests to conspiracy theorists that multiple light sources were present and that the photos of the moon landing were captured on a movie set. Again, NASA supposedly debunked the rumor, stating that the odd shadows were caused by the uneven landscape from the surface of the moon.

Conspiracy Theory #3 – The Van Allen Radiation Belt

Apollo 11Astronauts had to navigate through the Van Allen radiation belt in order to reach the moon. Earth’s magnetic field holds the belt in place, remaining in the same location over an infinite period of time. The Apollo 11 mission was the first time humans were transported through the belt. Conspiracy theorists attest that the radiation levels would definitely have cooked the astronauts on their route to the moon, despite the large amount of aluminum that coated both the interior and exterior of the ship.

This argument was countered by NASA, emphasizing the short period of time it took the astronauts to pass through the belt and reinforcing that they only received very small doses of radiation.

Although NASA stated that the radiation to the astronauts was minimal, Apollo 11 conspiracy theorists continue to believe that it was physically impossible for human tissue to survive that kind of impact through the Van Allen belt.

Conspiracy Theory #4 – Absence of Stars

Apollo 11A compelling argument from conspiracy theorists saying that the moon landing was a hoax is that there were no stars in any of the photos or videos from the Apollo 11 expedition. Because no clouds exist on the moon, stars are much brighter then what is visible through the Earth’s atmosphere.

According to NASA, the quality of the pictures washed out the stars so they left them out of the photos. In addition, NASA stated that the Apollo 11 landing took place during a lunar morning, with the Sun shining brightly and blocking out any potentially visible stars for the pictures.

Conspiracy Theory #5 – Lack of an Impact Crater

Those who believe the moon landing was a ruse also point out that there should have been an impact crater beneath the lunar module to mark where it landed. When looking at video footage or photographs of the landings, there is no crater visible and no markings in the dust. NASA maintains that the surface of the moon is solid rock, so a crater would not be formed upon the shuttle’s destination on the moon.

Conspiracy Theory #6 – Stanley Kubrick Theory

There are also those who believe that film director Stanley Kubrick was contacted by the United States government to fabricate the first three moon landings. Allegedly, Kubrick was approached after the release of 2001: A Space Odyssey, which was released in 1968, a year before the first moon landing because NASA noticed the amazing realism of the movie’s outer space scenes at that time. Other conspiracy theorists believe that the director was coerced by the feds before the film was released and that 2001: A Space Odyssey was a “staged” practice run.

NASA has documented hundreds of photos from Apollo 11’s mission plus numerous moon rocks that geologists confirm could only have been taken from the moon itself. It seems that the evidence outweighs the so-called holes in the story that changed American history. Apollo 11’s mission has acquired numerous conspiracy theories over the years. So did America actually land on the moon? Only the astronauts know the real answer.

Opinion By Amy Nelson

The Telegraph

11 Responses to "Apollo 11 Conspiracy Theories: Did America Actually Land on the Moon?"

  1. Siegfried Marquardt   March 24, 2017 at 1:43 pm

    On 06.02.2017 the “great success story” of Apollo 11 with the alleged moon landing in summer 1969 was broadcast in N 24 in the evening hours. At the beginning of the documentary it was shown how, under experimental field conditions, a vehicle of the lunar lander on the earth crashed out of relatively low altitude and the pilot could save himself with need and trouble. How could a lunar ocean ferry boat be able to land vertically on the moon in the summer of 1969? This problem was solved technically / technologically only in December 2015. Furthermore the computing power for the control of the Commandmodul and the Moonmodul by the control center in Houston should have been made, since the Computer had a too low performance (like a today’s pocket calculator). How should this have worked? In the case of a necessary control correction for the commandmodul and the moon landing, a time of approximately 2.7 s (t = s: c = 2 * 400,000 km: 300,000 km / s ≈2.7 s) until the corrective signal had arrived at the commandmodul or at the lunar landing stage. During this time, the moonmodul module would have changed its position when landing on the moon at an orbit speed of 1.6 km / s over 4 km and a positional correction would have simply been lost!
    Siegfried Marquardt King Wusterhausen

  2. ap   October 13, 2016 at 8:42 am

    Oh dear Amy! Are you ‘blonde’ as well? So many flaws in that moon ‘expose’! Love the bit about the lack of impact crater. Uhhh, for there to be an impact crater, wouldn’t they have to had crashed onto the moon?
    And, the lack of stars. You are probably right saying that nasa ‘left them out’, because, if they really were on the moon, then stars should be visible, even in daylight. We can’t see stars on earth during the day because – we have a reflective atmosphere. On the moon, Uhhhh, no atmospgere.

  3. James Williams   September 5, 2016 at 8:06 am

    As for different light sources, why does the moon glow so bright at night? Because of the sun. So, the Earth is considerably larger than the moon and with the sun shining on the Earth, reflecting off the oceans, that could create “light”. If the Sun was to their right and the Earth on the left, that could produce shadows from different directions, not to mention landing lights on the lunar module, itself.

  4. jiggley josh   November 4, 2015 at 12:57 pm

    poo in a bucket

  5. Samuel McGrath   July 23, 2015 at 6:20 am

    They had a studio on the moon where they shot the moon landings.

  6. Person   February 13, 2015 at 8:29 am

    There are multiple other theories. There was no crater. The impact wouldve left a big crater.

  7. jamie foy   February 3, 2015 at 6:03 am

    if no stars where able to be captured on film why was It possible to capture such a picture perfect of the earth but no stars ? we need to wake up I think

    • ThatAdelaideBellringer   October 21, 2015 at 5:43 pm

      Seriousy. Just seriously. Do you know how far the stars are away from earth? The closest is four LIGHTYEARS away. Thats 37,840,000,000,000 kilometers. The earth is only 384,400 kilometers away. With the the sun directly behind, which do you think is brighter?

  8. uncleburger   November 18, 2014 at 5:26 pm

    you are wrong, the moon need a sufficient amount of food/water to stay in this universe

  9. DLWELD   August 17, 2014 at 2:05 pm

    Oh man! That “several light sources” thought – take a look outside for God’s sake – note the way the sun’s light gives different shadow angles depending on where you (the observer) are placed. Amazing how the conspiracy folks’ specious thinking and flakey observations can get any traction at all.

  10. DLWELD   August 17, 2014 at 1:58 pm

    Love that supposed “no stars” problem – the film was exposed for the earth or the moon in bright sunlight. An exposure like that (for bright sunlight) is NOT going to show any stars – way too faint.


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.