Did Apollo 11 land on the moon?

[Joshcitylife]

After doing 3 years of professional photography and also avid research into astronomy I am convinced with the technology that we have that we can finally debunk the conspiracy of whether or not we actually landed on the moon. This means no offense to the families of astronauts that have claimed to make the trip, however this monolithic task of being on the moon within the decade (according to JFK) was literally unbelievable. 
 

We have access to photos and videos of this event. We can then process those images to see if it was fallacy or reality.

Note: I was born in the 90’s therefore I was unable to witness this event in person. However I have accumulated as many videos and pictures as possible as well as the position of the stars for lighting at the time. I am also very curious as to how the flag could wave back and forth in the vacuum atmosphere of space. This oddly enough resembles wind on the surface of the moon. Or perhaps the more insidious reasoning for this exploration to the moon was because of the tension between two powerhouse nations during the Cold War. 
 

I have friends who give valid points on both sides to this argument. We are nerds however our group does enjoy conspiracy theories from time to time and we attempt to debunk them. 
 

P.S. Was alien tech involved?

Edited July 27, 2022 by Joshcitylife

[Markus Hanke]

!

Moderator Note

Moved to Speculations for now - conspiracy theories don’t belong into the main forum sections.

 

[exchemist]

2 hours ago, Joshcitylife said:

After doing 3 years of professional photography and also avid research into astronomy I am convinced with the technology that we have that we can finally debunk the conspiracy of whether or not we actually landed on the moon. This means no offense to the families of astronauts that have claimed to make the trip, however this monolithic task of being on the moon within the decade (according to JFK) was literally unbelievable. 
 

We have access to photos and videos of this event. We can then process those images to see if it was fallacy or reality.

Note: I was born in the 90’s therefore I was unable to witness this event in person. However I have accumulated as many videos and pictures as possible as well as the position of the stars for lighting at the time. I am also very curious as to how the flag could wave back and forth in the vacuum atmosphere of space. This oddly enough resembles wind on the surface of the moon. Or perhaps the more insidious reasoning for this exploration to the moon was because of the tension between two powerhouse nations during the Cold War. 
 

I have friends who give valid points on both sides to this argument. We are nerds however our group does enjoy conspiracy theories from time to time and we attempt to debunk them. 
 

P.S. Was alien tech involved?

That's nothing. What about this? Why are they hiding the truth from us? :-

[dimreepr]

2 hours ago, exchemist said:

That's nothing. What about this? Why are they hiding the truth from us? :-

LOL, funny how it work's, isn't it; Bill Clinton couldn't keep a secret (that mattered) that only one other person "knew", what chance a secret known by many 10's/100's/1000's etc.?

 

[swansont]

5 hours ago, Joshcitylife said:

I have friends who give valid points on both sides to this argument.

Both sides? No, I don’t think so. There aren’t valid points for the conspiracy, only misinformed ones. They have been debunked countless times, including the “flag waving” nonsense

https://www.rmg.co.uk/stories/topics/moon-landing-conspiracy-theories-debunked

Quote

I am also very curious as to how the flag could wave back and forth in the vacuum atmosphere of space

What is your evidence that the flag was waving back and forth, anyway? What reasoning leads you to think things don’t move because you have a vacuum, and also, are you looking at a still image or a video? The only video I’ve seen is while they are setting it up, and shaking the whole apparatus. The special kind of idiocy of thinking only wind would cause the flag to wave when people are shaking it is why moon landing conspiracies aren’t taken seriously. (you can do an experiment in a windless environment to see this, but that’s apparently too high of a hurdle for conspiracy fetishists)

Your post is the worst aspect of this kind of argument - not only are you invoking a conspiracy, you haven’t even presented any evidence, and somehow expect the pro and con points to be treated on equal footing. We discuss science here, and demand some level of rigor in doing so.

[mistermack]

10 minutes ago, dimreepr said:

LOL, funny how it work's, isn't it; Bill Clinton couldn't keep a secret (that mattered) that only one other person "knew", what chance a secret known by many 10's/100's/1000's etc.?

That's a tempting argument, but I'm not convinced. Secrets CAN be kept. Although you would think that they would have to leak out.

Take the allies D day deception. That actually worked perfectly, even though thousands were involved. Obviously, it became common knowledge after D day, but there was no ban on disclosing it after the war.

The biggest USA secret that has been sucessfully maintained in my opinion, was the Kennedy assassination. While I don't believe that there was more than one assassin involved, I totally believe that the fatal shot was an accidental discharge of an assault rifle by one of the guards, George Hickey, as he stood up in the following car and lookeded around for the shooter. The evidence is very very strong for that to have happened, but if it did, it means that that sequence has been covered up by the Secret Service and successive governments for nearly sixty years. And the Warren commission was a whitewash, a deception performed on the US public "for their own good". 

I don't totally dismiss the story of a fake Moon Landing. They COULD do it. But I would say that the chances of it having happened are about one in a thousand. Or even less. I haven't seen any GOOD evidence for it, most of it obviously belongs in the crazy box. 

[dimreepr]

1 minute ago, mistermack said:

That's a tempting argument, but I'm not convinced. Secrets CAN be kept. Although you would think that they would have to leak out.

Of course secrects can be kept, I'm keeping my identity secret from you... 😉

If you read again you'll note the brackets (that matter) which is meant both sarcastically and factually...

7 minutes ago, mistermack said:

Take the allies D day deception. That actually worked perfectly, even though thousands were involved. Obviously, it became common knowledge after D day, but there was no ban on disclosing it after the war.

How do you know that?

Most secrets were still guarded, long after the war, unless it was good propaganda to leak... 

[mistermack]

My own strongest reason for believing the Moon Landing happened are the fact that the Chinese, Russians, Iranians and North Koreans have never made any effort to disprove it, which you would think would be pretty easy to do. I'm sure that they would love to embarrass the US, and I can't think of any bigger embarrassment than being shown to have faked the Moon Landings. 

[dimreepr]

4 minutes ago, mistermack said:

My own strongest reason for believing the Moon Landing happened are the fact that the Chinese, Russians, Iranians and North Koreans have never made any effort to disprove it, which you would think would be pretty easy to do. I'm sure that they would love to embarrass the US, and I can't think of any bigger embarrassment than being shown to have faked the Moon Landings. 

Then why the argument?

[Bufofrog]

6 hours ago, Joshcitylife said:

P.S. Was alien tech involved?

So the moon landing was a hoax, but you think there might be ET's buzzing around in their saucers?  Marvelous...

 

[mistermack]

1 hour ago, dimreepr said:

Then why the argument?

What argument?

[Phi for All]

7 hours ago, Joshcitylife said:

I have friends who give valid points on both sides to this argument.

!

Moderator Note

If you wish to discuss this scientifically, you need to present these arguments along with any evidence that supports them. Please, no more unsupported conspiracy references (avoid the Joe Rogan intelligence-free, vividly misleading extremism). You need to start presenting support that obviously hasn't been seen, since all the arguments to date have been debunked. Considering all the evidence NASA has presented and testimony from the astronauts involved, it would be highly disrespectful and intellectually dishonest not to hold detractors to the same standards. 

 

7 hours ago, Joshcitylife said:

P.S. Was alien tech involved?

!

Moderator Note

To ask a question like this here, you first have to establish alien existence. No Begging the Question, please.

 

 

[Peterkin]

8 hours ago, Joshcitylife said:

I am also very curious as to how the flag could wave back and forth in the vacuum atmosphere of space.

I can help with this one. It doesn't wave back or forth; it has a ripple.

 

Quote

"It took both of us to set it up and it was nearly a public relations disaster," he [Aldrin] wrote, "a small telescoping arm was attached to the flagpole to keep the flag extended and perpendicular. As hard as we tried, the telescope wouldn't fully extend. Thus the flag which should have been flat had its own permanent wave."https://abcnews.go.com/Technology/story?id=97589&page=1

When you fake something, you can correct mistakes; a flaw is one good indication of authenticity. 

Quote

The wrong coating had been applied to the telescoping rod, so it wouldn't fully extend, which is why the flag looks like it is waving in the wind. Ironically, that famous picture of Buzz Aldrin posing next to the flag is often cited as evidence by conspiracy theorists as proof the mission to the moon was a hoax.

 

Edited July 27, 2022 by Peterkin

[TheVat]

Would be hard to explain how those five retroreflectors got on the moon, for starters.

Also, there are quite a few lunar rocks which have distinctively different mineralogical signatures from terrestrial rocks.  (and they are also different from lunar origin meteorites)

 

[Ken Fabian]

All the documentation and eyewitness "testimony", from watching the launch to the many amateur radio enthusiasts who - by aiming their receivers at the moon - listened in isn't enough?

It didn't make it to the moon but I recall a demo from before the mission of a flag "waver" that was developed to give the flag movement; a bent wire in a sleeve within the top of the flag that turned by a small motor. But I think the actual movement of the actual flag was attributed to static electricity.

[Peterkin]

21 hours ago, Joshcitylife said:

This means no offense to the families of astronauts that have claimed to make the trip, however this monolithic task of being on the moon within the decade (according to JFK) was literally unbelievable. 

Yes, it does, explicitly in the word 'claimed'! What I wonder is: Why? What purpose does it serve to indulge in vague and mostly ridiculous speculation as to the veracity of an event so long ago and so irrelevant to any major issue of today? And why that particular mission, rather than the other 5? Do you have a point to make? 

Edited July 28, 2022 by Peterkin

[Janus]

On 7/26/2022 at 11:22 PM, Joshcitylife said:

r perhaps the more insidious reasoning for this exploration to the moon was because of the tension between two powerhouse nations during the Cold War. 
 

This tension is likely the strongest evidence against the Moon landings being faked.   The Cold War was, for the most part, fought in the court of world opinion; each side trying to convince other nations that their system was the better of the two.    And yes, getting to the Moon first would have been a huge feather in the cap of the country that did it, and was the major motivation behind the program.

And while you might think that this would lead to the temptation to "fake it",  Neither side would have risked trying that.   The blow to international prestige caused by being caught would have been magnitudes worse than the gain from getting away with it.  And both sides knew that the other would have experts pouring over every frame of footage shot, every photo shot, etc. looking for the evidence they needed to expose fakery. 

So, the side that was trying to fake it would have had their own team painstakingly go through everything, looking for anything that would give up the game before any of it was released. So things like flags "waving" when they shouldn't be wouldn't have made the cut unless there was a explanation for it that was consistent with it being on the surface of the Moon in a vacuum*  The idea that they would miss all these things that some people point to as "proof" of the landings being faked borders on the insane.  This is not some Hollywood production where they'll let things slide because they understand that the majority of the audience won't notice or care.

Before the US would have even considered faking it, they would have gathered experts and asked them if it were possible to fake it. And the answer would have been "No. Not the the degree that would fool our counterparts in the USSR."

I'll give you an example of what I mean. Recently, I saw a video of a group of CGI experts reviewing some footage of a robotics demonstration. A fair number of people were out there claiming that this footage had been faked with CGI.  Their conclusion was that it was real footage.  Mainly based on the fact that there were things in the footage that just couldn't have been done CGI without leaving clues that they would have spotted.  They knew what could be done CGI, and what couldn't.

So the idea that the US could have faked it well enough to fool the USSR, or that USSR could have exposed them and didn't, is laughable.

The very fact that USSR never made any attempt to claim the US landings were faked is because it would have made them a laughing stock in the court of world opinion.

* And it wouldn't have been good enough to offer some "hand-wavy" explanation.  As stated above, the USSR's experts would have gone over with that footage frame by frame, comparing the flag's motion against what would be expected for it being in a vacuum on the Moon vs. being disturbed by moving air.

[StringJunky]

Apart from the fact it was 'faked ' 5 more times.

Edited July 28, 2022 by StringJunky

[PeterSeeksKnowledge]

The flag was not really waving. The motion was caused by vibration when the pole and the flag was planted, as putting it in place was achieved by applying a force downwards, which then caused a reaction upwards, manifested by a continuous vibration as there was no air pressure or friction.

[MigL]

On 7/27/2022 at 1:15 PM, TheVat said:

Would be hard to explain how those five retroreflectors got on the moon, for starters.

Probably put there by the same aliens who placed the Tycho Magnetic Anomaly One ( TMA-1 or Tycho Monolith ) on the Moon, that was discovered by the Odissey mission in 2001, led by A C Clarke.

[Joshcitylife]

On 7/27/2022 at 7:52 AM, mistermack said:

That's a tempting argument, but I'm not convinced. Secrets CAN be kept. Although you would think that they would have to leak out.

Take the allies D day deception. That actually worked perfectly, even though thousands were involved. Obviously, it became common knowledge after D day, but there was no ban on disclosing it after the war.

The biggest USA secret that has been sucessfully maintained in my opinion, was the Kennedy assassination. While I don't believe that there was more than one assassin involved, I totally believe that the fatal shot was an accidental discharge of an assault rifle by one of the guards, George Hickey, as he stood up in the following car and lookeded around for the shooter. The evidence is very very strong for that to have happened, but if it did, it means that that sequence has been covered up by the Secret Service and successive governments for nearly sixty years. And the Warren commission was a whitewash, a deception performed on the US public "for their own good". 

I don't totally dismiss the story of a fake Moon Landing. They COULD do it. But I would say that the chances of it having happened are about one in a thousand. Or even less. I haven't seen any GOOD evidence for it, most of it obviously belongs in the crazy box. 

Im pretty sure that Bletchley Park had very much to do with D Day as well

[exchemist]

1 hour ago, Joshcitylife said:

Im pretty sure that Bletchley Park had very much to do with D Day as well

You can read about it here: https://bletchleypark.org.uk/our-story/bletchley-park-and-d-day/

Though what this has to do with moon landings, or secrets kept by the state. I don't know - unless you mean the Enigma-coded  messages sent by the German military.   

 

[Joshcitylife]

9 hours ago, exchemist said:

You can read about it here: https://bletchleypark.org.uk/our-story/bletchley-park-and-d-day/

Though what this has to do with moon landings, or secrets kept by the state. I don't know - unless you mean the Enigma-coded  messages sent by the German military.   

 

Just watched 60 minutes where they talked about “deep fakes” which is quite scary. Perhaps “deep fakes” technology was available decades ago…

[Bufofrog]

1 hour ago, Joshcitylife said:

Perhaps “deep fakes” technology was available decades ago…

No, it obviously was not.

[exchemist]

6 hours ago, Joshcitylife said:

Just watched 60 minutes where they talked about “deep fakes” which is quite scary. Perhaps “deep fakes” technology was available decades ago…

What are you suggesting might have been “deep faked”, then?