What is the evidence of the 1969 moon landings being faked?
You can leave an optional "tip" with Mahalo's virtual currency, Mahalo Dollars. If you are asking a difficult question that might require some research, or if you'd like a wide variety of feedback, a higher tip often leads to more answers to your question.
M$2 Answers
The most important movie on this subject is "The Dark Side of the Moon", you can find it on Youtube. Its stance is that Stanley Kurbick filmed the fake moon landing in a studio at president Nixon's request.
Actual arguments are.
-Why did the American flag appear to be moving in the wind when in fact on the Moon there is no air
-The deaths of 10 people involved in the space program is often referred to as cover up and was presented by a famous FOX documentary on the moon hoax
-If we went to the moon 40 years ago, why havent we gone back??
-Who filmed the take off of the Apollo spacecraft from the moon? The camera actually moves to watch the ship fly away so, considering the delay in commands, it would have been difficult to stear manually from Earth
-Pictures from the moon landing have misleading shadows, as if filmed under the light of film studio lights, with shadows going in different directions
-The flag appears perfectly lit even though its "front" should be on the shadow side
-In all the moon landing pictures there are no stars, even though it would appear that on the moon, having almost no atmosphere, the stars would appear brighter
-There is no crater below the Apollo after landing or take off, wouldnt the blast of a jet engine that brought the vehicle from Earth to the Moon leave a mark? Also it weighed 17 tons and left less of a mark than the famous footprint?
-The Van Allen belts, scientists argue that it is unknown what the radiation of the Van Allen belts would do to humans, but most likely they would kill them immeadiately and no suit or protection known to us even today can protect us against them
-Technology, similar to why havent we been back? Actually someone who used to work for NASA once told a relative of mine that with todays technologies and efforts it would be impossible to get to the moon... The man knows more than some of us I guess.
-There was also an issue with the moon photos that some of them had suspicious markings on them
-The moon rover apparently left no tracks and also looks fake in some of the video footage, as if fast forwarded after an Earth video shooting, keep in mind the gravity on the moon is much lower
I dont know wether the landing was fake, but I like to keep an open mind. Some arguments are interesting but most have been proved wrong. However more interesting I find the reactions of some of the space astronauts reactions to interviews with conspiracy theorists, they seem to get really worked up every time and act a tad suspicious. Again who knows, would be the greates bs story of all time. And if anyone could do it, it would be the USA.
AGAIN, I am not saying it was fake, but you asked what the arguments are, so that is a list of the arguments I found.
http://www.apfn.org/apfn/moon.htm
http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2001/ast23Feb_2.htm
Previous research because the topic interested me
You can leave an optional "tip" with Mahalo's virtual currency, Mahalo Dollars. If you are asking a difficult question that might require some research, or if you'd like a wide variety of feedback, a higher tip often leads to more answers to your question.
M$In my opinion, it's evident that humanity took a lot of risks and put ourselves on the moon for the sake of just "reaching" the goal. It's remarkable that we haven't done it since, but it seems appropriate. There just isn't a GOOD reason for humans to go to the moon. It's not exactly rich in resources, and even if it were, there would be no cost effective way of transferring those resources back to the planet below. We did it "because we could", and there has been no real reason to do it since then.
You can leave an optional "tip" with Mahalo's virtual currency, Mahalo Dollars. If you are asking a difficult question that might require some research, or if you'd like a wide variety of feedback, a higher tip often leads to more answers to your question.
M$
The asker's original ambiguity (which it totally okay, by the way! ;) ) points out a chief strength/flaw in the Mahalo system. It is upon the interpretation of the answerer that the question gets answered. Hence we have a small army of answers ranging the spectrum. While it's fine to point out flaws in the other answers (if not entirely polite), there is no reason to assume that our answers have "done nothing at all". After all, many a black-belt posts an otherwise useless answer, but just wants a voice heard. I already admitted to nickunderscore that I did nothing to answer the question, but I'm not sure it totally "invalidates" my input.
Thanks for hearing me out.
There isn't an "other side" to this argument. There is the list of soundly debunked "anomalies" that have no basis in evidence, that has been provided in the previous answer.
I feel this answer "there really isn't much evidence at all" is being generous. There is no evidence that the moon landings were faked. But you have my vote.
I disagree with @cannonade. This is a problem with many debates and arguments in our modern society - just because we disagree with an argument, or completely dispute the veracity of it, doesn't mean that the other argument doesn't exist.
This asker wanted to know what the argument was for the faked moon landing. Debating the existence of "evidence" is semantics - replace the word "evidence" with "arguments" if it makes you feel better. But I think we could all reasonably understand what the Asker was looking for with this question, and sadly this answer did not deliver that at all. I think this probably would've been best as a comment on one of the legitimate answers (or reworded as a brand-new question?).
But the question asks about the arguments of the "other side", you may be right but have done nothing to help answer the question.
Thank you guys for all your input. And just for the record, I was looking for arguments in reality, not evidence. Sorry for all of the confusion. I should have saw this coming when wording the question.
You are in fact quite right, I did nothing to answer the question, but I did fill the goal, I provided my "best answer" though it may not be THE "best answer". Further, the asker asks for EVIDENCE, which has a far different standard that must be met than "arguments" (which you provided in great quantity). A studio filled with moon dirt, hanging wires, light sources and shoddy cameras would be "evidence". There is none.
That is not to say that "evidence" does not exist, simply that it hasn't been found.
Thanks alot for the nomination, it means alot that ones effort is rewarded.
@teflashfire, I found the Mythbusters episodes and found them very helpful. Thanks for your input.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wym04J_3Ls0That is possibly the best, most knowledgeable answer I have ever come accross.
On the next vote for the best answer thing I'll be sure to vote fo you.
Again, I highly recommend viewing the Mythbusters episode on this topic. Much of the concerns you raise are addressed there. I realize that a Discovery channel TV series is hardly a replacement for clean facts, but many conspiracy theorists claims of "evidence" do not stack up to actual "evidence". The burden of proof has not been met. For example, the deaths of 10 people involved with the space program. It is a logical fallacy to say that the deaths are evidence of a cover up, because you must pre-suppose the cover up to have occurred.
The claim that we don't have the technology today is a bit of misnomer... we lack the technology to make a SAFE trip, as safety was not as much a pressing concern in the previous space race. Today, thanks to budget cuts, NASA can't afford to do anything that might result in loss of life or equipment.
Interesting stuff!
I did want to point out that the "Dark Side of the Moon Part 1/3" is listed as a French "Mocumentary". The revelations are quite shocking until you realize that it has much in common with those YouTube videos where people re-edit movie trailers to change the meaning.
Thanks alot, much appreciated!
Superb answer! Really fantastic and helpful!
Hey, I'm nominating your for Sept. 2 ANSWER OF THE DAY! Please stop by vote for your answer!
And if anyone here liked this answer as much as I did, please stop by and give @nickunderscore your vote too! :)
I agree with you, I am not here to dispute the moonlanding, merely to answer the question. If you missed it read it again.