The moon landings were an elaborate hoax perpetrated by the USA in order to gain prestige.
FIFTY years after Neil Armstrong became the first man to set foot on the moon the debate rages on over whether it actually happened - or if it was the world's biggest cover up.
I agree - they were a hoax.
Side Score: 199
|
 |
I disagree - they happened.
Side Score: 199
|
|
|
|
|
8
points
8
points
1)The flag they put on the moon has a metal rod running along the top, and when Neil Armstrong pushed it into the ground, he twisted it a little, which set the fabric into motion. The fabric hanging down from the rod acts like a pendulum, moving back and forth under its own momentum, restrained by the elasticity of the fabric attaching it to the rod above. The result is that the fabric undulates or ripples rhythmically, while the stiffness of the fabric resisting deformation gradually slows it. 2)The astronauts were taking pictures of brightly lit, shiny white objects. Under those conditions photographers shoot with a fast exposure time and small aperture. That makes it impossible to capture faint objects in a dark background, such as stars Karan:how would you feel if you were on of the first people to go to the moon but people were not convinced it happened? exactly-why would nasa spend a huge amount of time for research into technology to make the moon landings possible and why were the astronauts needed to be trained before going to the journey to the moon Side: I disagree - they happened.
If the moon landing were fake then why haven't other countries disproved it. It would have been massive propaganda for Russia. I don't even see why people think why it would actually be that difficult to go to the moon apart from the expense. So many conspiracy theories that even if there was absolute conclusive proof that men went to the moon then the people would just claim the proof is fake as well. Side: I disagree - they happened.
There was no exhaust flame spurting from beneath the lunar module when it blasted off from the moon. It's clearly a model being pulled up on a wire Believer: The Saturn V rocket that carried Apollo into space burnt liquid oxygen and kerosene, creating a dramatically fiery plume. The lunar lander, on the other hand, was propelled by a mixture of nitrogen tetroxide and Aerozine 50, which doesn't. Its exhaust gases were transparent. Side: I disagree - they happened.
Side: I agree - they were a hoax.
7
points
You can tell Apollo 11 was faked because: Aldrin is seen in the shadow of the lander, yet he is clearly visible. Hoax subscribers say that many shadows look strange in Apollo 11 pictures. Some shadows don't appear to be parallel with each other, and some objects in shadow appear well lit, hinting that light was coming from multiple sources—suspiciously like studio cameras. Side: I agree - they were a hoax.
I think the landing in moon was fake because the American flag was flapping and there is no atmosphere in moon and when the astronaut was getting of the spaceship he was not covered in the shadow of the space shuttle. In one of the picture it shows there are no stars in it. There is no blast crater under the Lunar Module. The Lunar Module should have created a blast crater as it landed. Side: I agree - they were a hoax.
Another ‘giveaway’ that the landing was faked comes from the footage of the American flag that Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin placed on the Moon. From photos and video, it appears to be flapping in the wind. But hold on a minute! There’s no air on the Moon so how can it flutter?! The truth is that the flag isn’t flapping. If you look closely at the gif to the left, the flag is in the same position between two frames as the astronaut moves. There is a horizontal rod projecting from the post at the top of the pole to hold the flag unfurled. The flag was disturbed as it was planted into the ground and kept this bent shape because of the lack of strong gravity on the Moon. In video footage of the flag being planted into the Moon’s surface, it also appears to wave back and forth. This is because when the astronauts were planting it, they rotated it back and forth to better dig into the lunar soil, which of course made the flag ripple as it swung like a pendulum- without a breeze. There’s a huge amount of footage of the flags stood on the Moon in exactly the same position. :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) Side: I agree - they were a hoax.
You can tell Apollo 11 was faked because: the American flag appears to be flapping as if "in a breeze" in videos and photographs supposedly taken from the airless lunar surface. The astronauts also accidentally bent the horizontal rods holding the flag in place several times, creating the appearance of a rippling flag in photographs Side: I agree - they were a hoax.
It's now been nearly four decades since Neil Armstrong took his "giant leap for mankind" — if, that is, he ever set foot off this planet. Doubters say the U.S. government, desperate to beat the Russians in the space race, faked the lunar landings, with Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin acting out their mission on a secret film set, located (depending on the theory) either high in the Hollywood Hills or deep within Area 51. With the photos and videos of the Apollo missions only available through NASA, there's no independent verification that the lunar landings were anything but a hoax. The smoking gun? Film of Aldrin planting a waving American flag on the moon, which critics say proves that he was not in space. The flag's movement, they say, clearly shows the presence of wind, which is impossible in a vacuum. NASA says Aldrin was twisting the flagpole to get the moon soil, which caused the flag to move. (And never mind that astronauts have brought back hundreds of independently verified moon rocks.) Theorists have even suggested that filmmaker Stanley Kubrick may have helped NASA fake the first lunar landing, given that his 1968 film 2001: A Space Odessey proves that the technology existed back then to artificially create a spacelike set. And as for Virgil I. Grissom, Edward H. White and Roger B. Chaffee — three astronauts who died in a fire while testing equipment for the first moon mission? They were executed by the U.S. government, which feared they were about to disclose the truth. :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) Side: I agree - they were a hoax.
3
points
i believe that it was a hoax because first of all,Film of Aldrin planting a waving American flag on the moon, which critics say proves that he was not in space. The flag's movement, they say, clearly shows the presence of wind, which is impossible in a vacuum. heading to torrino Side: I agree - they were a hoax.
no :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) Side: I agree - they were a hoax.
Side: I agree - they were a hoax.
Side: I agree - they were a hoax.
no :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) Side: I agree - they were a hoax.
no :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) Side: I agree - they were a hoax.
|
It would've been harder to fake the landing on Earth than it would have been to actually go to the moon. In fact, in 1969 it would have been impossible. There are a few key reasons for this. One reason is the shadows, which are the result of parallel sun rays with no diffusion. The only way to recreate this on Earth would be to light the scene with millions of super-bright lasers. Lasers were incredibly expensive in 1969, and the only color they came in was red. In modern times, we could just change the color with CG, but back then, altering images with computers wasn't possible. Even if NASA had secretly invented computer graphics and kept it from the public, the organization would have had to keep 400,000 employees from spilling the beans, and it would have needed to coordinate the story with dozens of world leaders, including their enemy at the time, Russia. Side: I disagree - they happened.
1
point
7
points
A common argument for the statement is that the Van Allen belts would have completely fried the astronauts. The Van Allen belts are huge belts of radiation that surround the Earth, caused by the Earth's magnetic field and high-energy particles from the Sun's wind. This Side: I disagree - they happened.
7
points
Moon rocks from Antarctica that fell as meteorites were tested against the samples from the Moon (from the Apollo mission), and the tests proved they are from the Moon. As for the claim that all of the Moon rocks came from Antarctica, that’s also incorrect. As any meteorite falls through the atmosphere, it gets scorched and oxidized. The Apollo samples do not possess those same qualities. Side: I disagree - they happened.
Another common argument for this statement is that in the photographs of the space landing there were no stars in the background yet they were in space. The explanation for this is quite simple, the strong sunlight is reflected from the surface of the moon, this brightness contrasts the light of the dim stars in space which is why it isn't visible. for more detail visit https://spacecentre.co.uk/blog-post/ Side: I disagree - they happened.
I disagree with the hoax and so I agree with event as there is no atmosphere the sunlight rays would be extremely bright therefore the camera wouldn't have captured the stars. Also, why haven't other countries disproved it. Building onto that the plan to go to mars in a few years would only be discussed if us humans could even go to the moon, therefore I believe that the moon landing wasn’t a hoax. Side: I disagree - they happened.
5
points
This is stupid. There is absolutely no evidence for a hoax. You guys simply try to pick holes in the massive quantity of evidence that they happened, as if this somehow proves they did not happen. There have been SIX manned missions to the Moon, moron. SIX. So yeah, tell us more about this conspiracy which spanned SIX manned missions. Side: I disagree - they happened.
9
points
This is a debate set up for a year 9 history lesson. We will study numerous sources and articles before casting a vote about the topic. That's kind of how debates work. Thanks for showing my students how NOT to do it though! You have not provided any evidence, aside from the fact that there were (reportedly) six manned missions, and you have resorted to name calling. The fact that this debate still rages on and over 20% of Americans believe that it was a hoax means that it is a topic worth discussing - in a mature and level-headed way. Thanks for your input though. Side: I agree - they were a hoax.
5
points
I believe that the moon landing wasn’t a hoax because why would NASA want to put a fake moon landing which could possibly question their credentials and eventually all their findings and achievements will be put under questions so it wouldn’t be smart idea to put a fake moon landing. Side: I disagree - they happened.
5
points
Another point that the moon landing must have been real is because the Japanese- not american- lunar orbiter Selene landed on the moon in same spot. The pictures taken by the camera on Selene was in a very similar terrein to that on the apollo 15 . How could there be similar footage on the two space expeditions 37 years apart and were both directed by two different space agencies in two different countries if there was no moon landing. Side: I disagree - they happened.
You can tell Apollo 11 was faked because the module is shown sitting on relatively flat, undisturbed soil. According to sceptics, the lander's descent should have been accompanied by a large dust cloud and would have formed a noticeable crater. The truth is that the Apollo 11 lander's engines were throttled back just before landing, and it did not hover long enough to form a crater or kick up much dust. Side: I disagree - they happened.
4
points
The moon landing was not a hoax, all the different pieces of evidence that has been used to prove it was a hoax has been proven wrong. The flag was moving because the it was planted into the ground and kept this bent shape because of the lack of strong gravity on the Moon. The objects had different angles of shadow because of the uneven surface on the moon and the objects were positioned at different angles. There was not more than one light source because their would've been more than one shadow. There was only one light and it was the sun, not a studio light because in 1969, laser lights were very expensive and they were only in red. There was no way that a computer back than could change this, unless NASA had advanced computer graphics, which 400,000 employees would have to be trusted with. Side: I disagree - they happened.
4
points
Another reason a lot of people believe that the moon landing was a hoax is because of the image of a rock labelled C that was found on the moon. It is fake as in the original photo no such marking was found. This caused people to believe that it was a staged play because props are usually labelled with letters and numbers. Side: I disagree - they happened.
Majority of the pictures, there were no stars shown in the picture. But shouldn't there be stars as there is no atmosphere blocking it? There is a reason behind this. It is Regolith, it is very reflective. That was why Buzz Aldrin was illuminated. https://nerdist.com/ Side: I disagree - they happened.
4
points
although I agree that there is no wind on the moon and that the American flag flapping in space looks completely fake, but there IS momentum and inertia. The fabric of the flag was moved around while being set in position, and naturally waved as it was being set up.It also has a pole along the top to keep it in position, otherwise it would hang straight down. Side: I disagree - they happened.
2
points
Everyone thinks that the fact that the flag was waving the moon landing is a hoax when in reality the reason the flag was waving in the footage is because when the astronauts were putting the flag into the earth, they had to repeatedly rotate the flag into the lunar soil. This caused the flag ripple and swing continuously as there was not enough gravity to immediately stop the flag from waving. Also, there has been other videos of a flag waving back and forth in other expeditions. Side: I disagree - they happened.
2
points
The moonlanding was not a hoax. Good afternoon children of Year 9, my name is Ishaan Singh and I strongly disagree with the proposal that the moonlandings were an elaborate hoax perpetrated by the USA in order to gain prestige. Before I begin my speech I would like to offer rebuttal to the points made by the proposition. The proposition stated about lunar dust. Unlike on Earth, there is no erosion by wind or water on the moon because it has no atmosphere and all the water on the surface is frozen as ice. Also, there is no volcanic activity on the moon to change the lunar surface features. Nothing gets washed away, and nothing gets folded back inside. The lunar dust molds over a footprint which was also proved by the Russian astronauts that have been to the moon and the countless number of rovers that have been on the surface, the tyre tracks are still present. Another point is the movement of the flag, as my team mate Hassan said the motion of the flag is likely to be made because of the turning of the flag pole enough to drill it in the lunar soil. My last point of rebuttal was the apparent faking of the photographs. Some people claim that an external light source was added well this is in part true due to cameras in the Early 70s having an inbuilt flash. As it turns out, the conspiracy theorists were correct that an artificial light source illuminated the famous photograph of Aldrin. Only it wasn’t a studio light, but the man taking that photograph—Armstrong. “We found a clip of videotape that was shot from the other side of the ladder,” Daly said. “There is a huge glowing bright white light. And as we analyzed that video a little more we realized it’s Neil Armstrong himself. The bright white spacesuit that he was wearing reflected all that sunlight off of him and back onto Buzz Aldrin so essentially Neil Armstrong himself was a light source in that scene.” Moreover, the shadow in the images are parallel which represent a diffused source of light such as the sun and if NASA were to recreate this they would have spent far more on laser technologies far ahead of its time to recreate this scene. Such laser technology costs 23 billion dollars now and had it been around would have cost far more possibl more than the whole moon mission. Moving on to the first of my three points. First point was the cameras. If the astronauts had cameras on tripods set to have long exposure times, the stars would become visible. Instead, the cameras were set up to take pictures of the bright astronauts with the bright Sun and the bright lunar surface. This means the shutter time was much faster and the stars didn’t have time to get exposed on the camera.In contrast, a host of astrophotographers take images known as “nightscapes.” These images are able to reveal brilliant color and texture of the sky that you can’t get with the unaided eye (because the long exposure allows the camera to record more than a fraction of a second’s worth of data). Consider someone attempting to take an image of the stars with a disposable camera. Their attempts would be less than successful. If you want stars, you need to have a long exposure time. That’s precisely why Hubble took so long to capture the Ultra Deep Field Image. My second point completely diminishes all of the oppositions claims of a crater being formed. When landing, the Lunar Module only exerted a pressure of about 1.5 pounds per square inch (that isn’t a lot). Side: I disagree - they happened.
1
point
HERE I WILL COUNTER SOME FAKE EVIDENCES THAT THE MOON LANDING WAS A HOAX. THERE ARE SEVERAL EVIDENCES TO SUPPORT THE MOON LANDING: 1. THE LIGHTING WAS ALMOST IMPOSSIBLE TO CREATE ARTIFICIALLY IN 1969. THE ONLY LIGHT SOURCE TO CREATE THIS WAS LASERS AT THAT TIME. FIRST THEY WOULD HAVE TO HAVE A HUGE WALL OF LASERS BECAUSE IF THE SHADOWS IN THE PICTURE ARE DIAGONAL, WHICH IS NOT POSSIBLE IF THERE IS A SMALL LIGHTING. THEY WOULD DIVERGE. IN 1969 LASERS WHERE VERY COSTLY, GETTING A WHOLE WALL OF THEM WOULD COST MORE THAN EVEN THE BUDGET OF THE WHOLE COMPANY. ANOTHER REASON WAS DUE TO THE LASERS AT THAT TIME, THE ONLY COLOURED LASERS WHICH WERE AVAILABLE WERE RED. THE COLOURED PHOTOGRAPHS WOULD HAVE BEEN RED IF THEY WERE SHOT IN A STUDIO. https://www.youtube.com/ https://www.history.com/news/ 2. IN THE FAMOUS PHOTO OF BUZZ ALDRIN WHICH WAS TAKEN BY NEIL ARMSTRONG THE SHADOW SHOULD HAVE MADE ALDRIN DARK AND NOT AS VISIBLE AS HE IS. AFTER A LOT OF RESEARCH, WE HAVE FOUND OUT THAT THE LIGHTING WAS FROM ANOTHER LIGHT SOURCE, BUT NOT A LAMP. THE LIGHT FROM THE SUN REFLECTED OFF OF NEIL ARMSTRONG HIMSELF. THE MATERIAL ON THE MOON REFLECTS ONLY 12% BUT THE SUITS OF THE ASTRONAUTS REFLECT 85% OF THE LIGHT. THE LIGHT WHICH REFLECTED OFF OF NEIL ARMSTRONG THEN HIT ALDRIN WHICH MADE HIM CLEARLY VISIBLE. https://www.history.com/news/ 3. THE MOON LANDING CANNOT HAVE BEEN FAKED BECAUSE OVER 4000 PEOPLE WOULD HAVE TO LEAVE THIS A SECRET. EVEN THE RUSSIANS WOULD HAVE TO LIE BECAUSE THEY GOT THE TRANSMISSION FROM THE MOON AS OTHER COUNTRIES DID. WHY WOULD THEY LIE FOR THE AMERICANS????? https://www.history.com/news/ Side: I disagree - they happened.
1
point
If we find the total cost of all the Apollo program($25.4 billion) and divide that between all Appolo missions, Appolo 11 comes at a cost of around 800 million to 1 billion. Seeing this, it would seem that staging the apollo 11 mission could not reach up to the estimated cost of the actual mission. I am 100% aware that the cost of the apollo 11 mission isn't confirmed (as I couldn't find it on google) but in the chance that we do find it, we could prove my initial point. Either way, it is an easier piece of information to find than to piece together all the physics involved with the footage of the moon landings. Side: I disagree - they happened.
1
point
It’s important to remember the politics surrounding the Moon landing. While the Apollo astronauts were talking to NASA, the Russians, radio astronomers, and ham radio operators from around the world were tuning in. Third party observatories, such as the Alfred Lovell, were able to confirm the authenticity of the Moon landing. If the USA had faked the landings, the Russians would have been the first to call them on the bluff. Side: I disagree - they happened.
|
