Figure 1. The Lunar Module in the background appears to cast a shadow directly to the right; however, the rocks in the foreground appear to cast a shadow to the lower right. Could this be evidence of multiple lighting sources? Moon-hoax proponents think so. Source: NASA.

Four hundred kilograms of Moon rocks can’t be wrong — unless you ask Bill Kaysing, one of at least a dozen investigators who believe that men never walked on the Moon. Kaysing, author of We Never Went To The Moon, believes that NASA faked the Apollo missions to the moon, stealing more than $30 billion of taxpayers’ money in the process. He offers a long list of evidence to support his claim.

In the early 1990s, several people began examining Apollo photographs and data more thoroughly using new image processing software, coming up with some questions. For example:

Why were objects’ shadows cast in different directions? How could an 11-by-4 foot rover squeeze into a 5-by-4 foot lunar module? Why weren’t the astronauts killed by radiation from space and the sun?

As their questions piled up, so did their doubts. Many, including Kaysing, became convinced that NASA had faked the entire series of missions. Ralph Rene, author of NASA Mooned America, David Percy, co-author of Dark Moon:Apollo and the Whistle Blowers, Bart Sibrel, producer of A Funny Thing Happened on the Way to the Moon, and James Collier, producer of Was It Only a Paper Moon?, joined Kaysing in declaring the missions a fraud.

Figure 2. Stage set shows how shadows can appear non-parallel when cast on surfaces of different inclinations. Source: Ian Williams Goddard.

As Kaysing and others continued their investigations, the Moon-hoax theory began to make its way into the press. A 1999 Gallup poll showed that 6% of Americans had doubts about whether we actually went to the moon. On February 15, 2001, the Fox network aired “Conspiracy Theory: Did We Land On The Moon?” Hosted by X-Files co-star Mitch Pileggi, the program interviewed several Moon-hoax advocates, and came to the conclusion that NASA likely faked the missions.

Everyone has seen Apollo photographs, video footage of astronauts bounding around the moon, and the famous first steps of Neil Armstrong as he descended from the Lunar Module. Proponents of the Moon-hoax theory, however, have claimed a long list of evidence, and such claims deserve to be addressed. Summarized here are 21 claims the Moon-hoax proponents, the so-called Conspiracy Theorists, have used, and a discussion of their validity.

Shadow Conspiracy

Figure 3. An astronaut descends from the Lunar Module into the vehicle’s shadow, yet he remains brightly illuminated. Could this mean that there was a second light source, aside from the sun? Source: NASA.	Figure 4. Apollo 16 astronaut John Young, jumping up to salute the flag. He is clearly in direct sunlight, yet casts no shadow — does this mean he was digitally added? Source: NASA.

Figure 5. Figure 4 seen from a different angle. This is a still frame from a video camera recording to Young’s right. As you can see, Young is clearly jumping up to salute the flag, he clearly casts a shadow, and that shadow is behind the mound. Source: NASA.

Response: A video camera was set up to Young’s right at the time and was recording the same scene we see in the photograph. In the video footage, Young is behind a small mound and jumps up to salute the flag for the photograph (Figure 5). He does cast a shadow, but it is impossible to see from where the camera is because of the mound. This is one of the more famous

Apollo stories and is well documented by video footage.

Crossed Crosshairs

Possible evidence: The manufacturers who made the Apollo mission cameras etched small black crosshairs onto the camera lenses so NASA would have reference points. These crosshairs appear on all Apollo photographs; however, on a few, the crosshairs appear to extend behind objects in the photographs (figures 6, 7). Some have proposed that this is evidence of later tampering and image doctoring.

Figure 6. A bright white antenna appears to be in front of the black crosshairs etched onto the camera surface. Source: NASA.	Figure 7. A bright white canister appears to be in front of the black crosshairs etched onto the camera surface. Source: NASA.

Response: The crosshairs in question are cut out by extraordinarily bright objects. Since the crosshairs are small, thin, black lines, they are easily washed out by the glare from the large, brilliantly white objects that they cover. This happens everyday on Earth — extremely bright objects can easily wipe out faint lines in photography.

Stage Props

Some Apollo images show anomalous features such as strange rocks or mountains. Moon-hoax proponents have used several of these features as evidence of fraud.

Possible evidence: An Apollo 16 photograph shows a rock with the letter “C” on it (Figure 8). Some think that a stagehand carelessly forgot to remove the label from this “stage prop” on the scene of the lunar-photo-faking.

Response: The original negatives of the image show no such “C.” It is therefore more likely that a small hair or fiber was on the paper when the original print was made.

Figure 8. A lunar rock appears to have the letter “C” stamped on it. Moon-hoax proponents insist this is a stage prop. Source: NASA.

Possible evidence: In two Apollo photographs, identical mountains appear in the background with different foregrounds (Figure 9). Maybe the same backdrop was mistakenly used twice in the faking of the Moon photographs?

Response: The controversial mountains are the Apennine Front and Mount Hadley Delta. They are both large and photographed from far off, so it is entirely possible /that they would appear the same in photographs taken from different locations. Since the Moon has no atmosphere, objects do not fade with distance, and the mountains would look crystal clear from anywhere. In addition, Apollo 15 astronauts James Irwin and David Scott both climbed to the tops of these mountains, a feat that would be especially difficult if the mountains were made of flat cardboard. Both of these mountains have been photographed from every angle, which again is difficult to do with cardboard.

Figure 9. The Apennine Front and Mount Hadley Delta mountains as photographed from two different angles. In both images, the mountains appear the same. Source: NASA.

Does that Star-Spangled Banner still wave?

Figure 10. Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin attempt to set up the American flag on the lunar surface. As they do, the flag appears to wave. But how can this happen if there is no atmosphere on the moon? Source: NASA.

Moon-hoax proponents most often use photographs of the American flag on the Moon as evidence of fraud.

Possible evidence: There is no atmosphere on the Moon, yet video footage shows the American flag waving as Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin attempt to set it up (Figure 10). Doesn’t this mean that there was a breeze, an atmosphere, and therefore a conspiracy?

Response: It might under other circumstances. Here, however, Armstrong and Aldrin were twisting the flagpole into the ground, trying to make it stay upright. The flag was attached to a horizontal rod that stuck out from the pole, so as the pole went round, so did the flag. There being no atmosphere to contend with, the top of the flag moved first, since it was attached, and the rest of the cloth followed a split second later — making it appear to wave.

Possible evidence: Later images of the flag still show it waving, even when Aldrin and Armstrong have finished setting it up. The most famous images of the American flag on the Moon show it standing alone with very distinct ripples (Figure 11).

Figure 11. The flag still appears to be waving, despite the fact that Armstrong and Aldrin are no longer near it. Source: NASA.

Response: In fact, the flag is not waving — it’s buckled. Aldrin and Armstrong had a difficult time setting up the flag that day, because the horizontal bar that the flag was attached to would not extend completely. Eventually, they gave up and let the flag hang not fully extended. The flag then looked like window curtains that are not drawn out — the cloth had folds and buckles in it that looked like ripples from wind. Ironically, the astronauts liked the way it looked, and it became a tradition for Apollo astronauts to only partially extend the flag, producing the wind-like ripples.

Photographing Astronauts

Figure 12. Neil Armstrong descending from the Lunar Module — but who is filming him? Source: NASA.

Moon-hoax proponents also use photographs of the astronauts themselves as evidence of fraud.

Possible evidence: As Neil Armstrong descended from the Lunar Module to become the first man on the moon, his progress was broadcast back to television audiences on Earth (Figure 12) — but who was capturing the footage if Aldrin was still in the Lunar Module? Some believe it was a cameraman, carefully documenting a fraud.

Response: NASA engineers realized that Man’s first step on the moon would be a momentous event, which needed to be recorded. They therefore built a TV camera into an instrument pallet on the side of the Lunar Module. As he stepped out, Armstrong pulled a rope that swung open the pallet, giving the camera a clear view of him and the lunar surface. Buzz Aldrin, inside the LM, then switched on the camera, which relayed to the world the first steps on the moon.

Possible evidence: Neil Armstrong took one photograph of Buzz Aldrin with the horizon at Aldrin’s eye-level (Figure 13). The camera he used, though, was mounted on his chest, so conspiracy theorists insist that the horizon should have been at Aldrin’s chest.

Response: Conspiracy theorists are right about one thing here: If the camera was at Aldrin’s chest-level, the horizon should have been at his chest level as well. At the time of the photograph, however, Armstrong was standing on a hill above Aldrin, looking down on him. The camera was mounted on Armstrong’s chest, but was at Aldrin’s eye-level. Armstrong is plainly visible on this hill from the reflection in Aldrin’s faceplate, and has the camera securely strapped to his chest (Figure 14).

Figure 13. Image of Buzz Aldrin taken by Neil Armstrong, who had a camera mounted to his chest. If the camera was on Armstrong’s chest, then the horizon in the image should be at Aldrin’s chest. Instead, it is around eye-level. Source: NASA.

Possible evidence: Many proponents of a cover-up claim that every photograph from the moon is perfect — too perfect — and that alone shows they were faked. After all, in extreme conditions, with bulky suits, the Apollo astronauts could not have taken perfect photos all of the time.

Response: Right again! They didn’t. Although the Apollo astronauts underwent intense photographic training so they would take beautiful Moon shots, thousands of the photographs brought back from the moon were utter garbage. NASA had expected this, since no matter how much training the astronauts went through, they could not take perfect photos all of the time. The poorly taken Moon shots are available in the Apollo archives (Figure 15); however, for obvious reasons, they are not printed in glossy magazines, so the public is largely unaware of them.

Slow-Motion Astronauts

Possible evidence: As anyone can see in video footage, the Apollo astronauts walked slowly and laboriously on the lunar surface due to the low gravity. However, if you play the footage at double speed, the astronauts seem to hop along at a regular Earth-like pace. Some investigators have cited this as evidence that the astronauts were in fact filmed in slow motion on Earth.

Response: Unfortunately for these investigators, “seem to” is mighty subjective. To others (the Apollo astronauts, for example), tapes played in double speed may look like astronauts hopping in double speed around the moon, not evidence of a conspiracy. In addition to this, the same video footage shows a lunar rover driving on the moon, throwing up dust as it goes. The dust flies up, then falls back down in perfect parabolic arcs — the proper motion of dust in a vacuum. On Earth, those particles would have been suspended in the atmosphere, and billowed out behind the rover. To fake this footage, NASA would have had to build a large vacuum set. The kind of technology needed to create the parabolic dust effect on that scale does not exist even today.

Figure 14. Enlargement of Aldrin’s face plate from Figure 13. Armstrong, who is taking the photograph, is clearly reflected in Aldrin’s face plate, and is standing on a hill above Aldrin. Source: NASA.

An Impossible Slice

During the Apollo 14 mission, astronaut Alan Shepard hit his famous golf balls on the moon.

Possible evidence: Ralph Rene, a Moon-hoax advocate, claims that Mission Control teased Shepard about slicing the ball to the right after he hit the ball. This is impossible, since slice is caused by uneven airflow over the golf ball. No air means no slice.

Response: This is simply misinterpretation. Shepard swung at his first ball, but hit only the top, burying it in the dust. He took a second swing, but only managed to push it two or three feet. Watching from back in Houston, CAPCOM and former astronaut Fred Haise joked to Shepard: “That looked like a slice to me, Al.” Shepard finally hit the ball off to the camera’s right, telling Haise, “Miles and miles and miles …” to which Haise replied, “Very good, Al.” There was no slice — only inter-astronaut teasing. (To see video footage of Shepard’s famous golf shot, go to: www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/al4/video14.html)

Faking Stones

Figure 15. Apollo photograph taken by astronauts on the moon. Clearly, it is not a great shot of Man’s first steps into space. Source: NASA.

The Apollo missions brought back more than 880 pounds of Moon rocks, each of which has been exhaustively studied by planetary scientists and geologists on Earth.

Possible evidence: Several conspiracy theorists have claimed these rocks are, in fact, doctored Earth rocks.

Response: This is simply impossible. Twenty-five lunar meteorites have been recovered on Earth, and tests have shown that the Apollo Moon rocks are identical to the meteorites in composition, isotopic ratios, origin, and cosmic ray exposure. The moon rocks have distinct features never found in terrestrial rocks. For example, since the moon has no atmosphere, every rock on its surface is cratered by impacts at all scales. By taking a microscope to the moon rocks, researchers can see microscopic impact craters created by impacting dust particles that would instantly burn up in Earth’s atmosphere (Figure 16). In addition to this, the moon rocks returned to Earth are between 3.1 and 4.4 billion years old. The oldest known rocks on Earth are 3.96 billion years old. There is no way to fake 4.4 billion years into existence.

Depressed Dust

As the Apollo astronauts walked and drove around on the moon, they left deep footprints and tire tracks. The most famous of these markings is the imprint of Armstrong’s first step on the moon (Figure 17).

Possible evidence: Several conspiracy theorists note that, on Earth, moisture is necessary to form footprints. Since the moon is devoid of water, they argue that the soil must be faked.

Response: Yes, on Earth, most footprints are formed as a result of water. However, most of the lunar soil is composed of silicates, which have a tendency to bond easily with other silicates. Because so many meteorites have struck the moon, the silicate chains in the soil have been blasted apart, and lie exposed. On Earth, they would be swept up by wind, water, or animal life and quickly reform; however, the moon has none of these, so the silicates just lie there until something (like a great big astronaut boot) comes along and pushes many of them together. As they are pressed together, new bonds are able to form, and the newly strengthened silicate chains hold the dust in place — allowing footprints to remain intact.

Possible evidence: The Lunar Module weighed about 17 tons, but appears to have sunk into the lunar dust no more than the astronaut’s feet, suggesting that it was a fiberglass fake.

Response: Seventeen tons (about 34,000 pounds) is the Lunar Module’s weight on Earth, loaded with nine tons of descent stage propellant. On the lunar surface, the Lunar Module weighed 2,700 pounds, which was distributed over four 37-inch diameter footpads. This means that the Lunar Module (LM) exerted about 90 pounds per square foot of pressure on the lunar surface. Armstrong commented to Mission Control, “the LM footpads are only depressed in the surface about 1 or 2 inches.” The astronauts each exerted a pressure of about 58 pounds per square foot, leaving footprints only a fraction of an inch deep.

Figure 16. This tiny piece of dust from the moon is smaller than the human eye can see. Yet, in this scanning electron microscope image, one can clearly make out two large dish-shaped grooves in its surface. These are micro-craters, created when tiny meteorites (smaller than dust) struck this Moon dust speck and dug out tiny craters. This never happens on Earth, because small meteorites burn up immediately in our atmosphere. Source: NASA.

Possible evidence: Investigator James Collier has suggested that the shear amount of dust on the Moon is indicative of a hoax, wondering “how the Moon acquired a 10-foot layer of top soil without wind, rain or water to erode the volcanic-crystalline surface.”

Response: One word: impacts. The Moon has been bombarded with space debris at a level we can only imagine. Every time something struck it, the “volcanic-crystalline surface” was pulverized, leaving only dust, debris, and small shards. On Earth, this dust would be swept up by wind and water and deposited in lakebeds and oceans, where it would turn into sandstone and other sedimentary rocks. On the moon, with no water, wind, or erosion to alter it, the dust lay right where it landed. After 4.5 billion years of impacts, the surface is nothing but pulverized rock.

Blowing Dust

As the Lunar Module descended during Apollo 11, dust was blown away from the surface by the rocket. However, when Armstrong steps out, he makes his famous footprints in the dust.

Possible evidence: Skeptics claim that the exhaust should have blown away all the dust, leaving none near the lander for the first famous footprints.

Response: This would be true — if the astronauts had landed on Earth. On Earth, dust is held aloft by air, and can be transported far from the site of disturbance by air currents and turbulence. Since there is no air on the moon, the only dust that was blown by the landing craft were particles that were physically touched by the exhaust from the engines. Most of the dust at the landing site was left undisturbed.

Figure 17. First footprint on the moon, made by Neil Armstrong. On Earth, footprints form because water holds the dirt together, but there is no water on the moon, so how could this footprint be there? Source: NASA.

One Crater Too Few

Possible evidence: One of the most frequently cited pieces of evidence for a faked Moon landing is the lack of a crater left by the Lunar Module. Conspiracy theorists claim that a rocket with 10,000 pounds of thrust should have blasted a huge crater on the lunar surface.

Response: Both parts of the claim are true — 10,000 pounds of thrust could make a tremendous crater, and there is no crater where the Lunar Module landed. What conspiracy theorists fail to see is that, although the rocket was capable of 10,000 pounds of thrust, astronauts throttled that down to less than 3,000 pounds as they descended to the lunar surface. After all, they just wanted to land on the moon, not total their Lunar Module. The rocket’s nozzle was 54 inches across (2,300 square inches), so the rocket actually produced just over one pound of thrust per square inch on the lunar surface — nowhere near the amount of pressure needed to blast a crater.

There are 10 more lines of evidence commonly cited to support the Moon-hoax theory. They will be presented in Part 2 of this article, to be published in the February 2004 issue of JYI.