The document discusses several Moon landing conspiracy theories, including that the Apollo astronauts did not actually land on the Moon. It summarizes the key evidence and explanations provided by NASA to counter these theories. This includes analyses of moon rocks brought back, photos showing flag waving and shadows, and explanations for the lack of stars and crater formation. The document aims to analyze these theories and photos in detail to convince readers that the Moon landings were in fact real achievements by NASA, not staged events.

1. The conspiracy of the Moon
landing.
Sciences of the contemporary world
26/11/2010
1º Bach
Iago Montero Vizoso

2. The moon landing. Was it real or a joke?
Different Moon landing conspiracy theories claim that some or all elements of
the Apollo Project and the associated Moon landings were falsifications staged by
NASA. Some people say that the Apollo astronauts did not set foot on the Moon.
The cold war and the special race against Russia, the Vietnam fail, the death of JFK
and Martin Luther King… The United States was in a time of defects. If the USA becomes
the first country in the Moon, it will be an important victory in the cold war, like victories
of URSS: They were the first nation to put a satellite into orbit and they put the first
living creature (Everybody knows the history of Laika), first man in the space (Yuri
Gagarin). So this victory would be key in the space race.
What’s the public opinion?
About the 6% of the people in the USA thinks that the doubted that the Moon
landings had occurred. The 5% had no opinion about this.
Let’s go to Britain, in 2009, a poll conducted by the British Engineering &
Technology magazine found that 25% of British people do not believe that humans
have walked on the Moon.
The conspiracy.
The Moonstones.
The astronauts of all the Apollo’s mission collected about 382kg of moonstones
that have been used by geologists of tens of scientific institutions to advance
knowledge of the geology of the Moon. Some of the features of this stones can’t be
reproduced from terrestrial stones. Moonstones haven’t got water; the terrestrial stones
are composed of water and minerals. So this test is 100% accurate.
Well, we land in the Moon, but... We put a feet in his ground?
The moonstones that Neil Armstrong and his crew collected, were exactly that
samples collected by the automatic lunar probes of the URSS. Here we have another
problem with the theory.
Manipulated photographs?
We have hundreds of photos to be discussed. Then I will show the most popular
and famous “hoaxes assumptions” of the NASA.
That’s the “fake” (or not) photographs. Judge by yourself...
2

3. 1. The most popular photo and the most commented. The flag waving without
atmosphere.
The question is why the flag was waving? And the answer was simpler: it has a
horizontal post in the corner of the flag. The flag was folded inside the ship. At the
crease, was in the photo that false sense of movement.
2. The absence of stars in the pictures.
Hasselblad cameras that took these
images were prepared to reduce the
intense glare of the lunar day. The
surface of the Moon is very
illuminated by sunlight. To take a
picture in a landscape quite bright,
you need to set the camera a short
exposure time.
Failure to do so, you run the risk of blur the image, due to the passage of
excessive light from the lunar surface (which reflects the 7% of the light it
receives).
For example:
For the same reason explained above, the photographs
taken from the shuttle, Mir, the ISS or other spacecraft
3

4. (manned or not) does not show stars on the
black background of space.
(The ISS in
orbit
without
stars).
3. The shadows.
In some pictures you can see two shadows are not
parallel, when the only source of light is the sun. This
effect would be created with 2 lights on Earth. In this
picture you can see this effect.
Given the different slope of the land, the shadows from the stones (which simulate the lunar
surface) point to different directions; it does not entail the falsity of the image.
Here's the explanation with a simple drawing:
4

5. * Aldrin and Armstrong shadows placing the American flag.
In this picture, if the Sun was the only source of light in the Moon, the shadows should be
identical. Aldrin shadow (A) shouldn’t be longer than Armstrong’s shadow.
That’s a big lie, the surface of the moon is not flat in any way, judging by the brightness of the
top left of the photograph, the upper end of the shadow of the astronaut on the left is located
on a small slope and therefore, the shadow appears shortened.
Here is an experiment to test it.
So in the Moon has one DIRECT point of light, (The Sun) they weren’t in a studio.
4. The crater.
Where is the crater in the photographs? The immense power of the engine (providing 1,360 kg
of thrust) should have created a huge hole under the ship, however, the images (zone E), the
site remains intact. They also say it is impossible for a machine as heavy as the lunar module
does not sink further into the surface, as it weighs over 15 tons.
The answer is very simple... In part...
5

6. Supporters of the conspiracy at any time consider that the gravity on the lunar surface is
about six times lower than on Earth, and that much of the fuel load that module was used
during the descent to the moon (in particular , about 8 tons).
When the module reaches the surface, its weight on the Moon was about 1,200 kg because of
the lower lunar gravity. This explains why the module, which may at first seem so heavy, only
sinking a few inches into the lunar surface. In addition, each leg is 90 cm in diameter, which
offers a weight capacity of distribution.
Secondly, we must bear in mind that the descent engine of the lunar module had a maximum
thrust of about 4,500 kg. But the module engine was running at less than 25% of its maximum
power as it approached the surface (against the 1,200kg weight). And even completely left off
sometimes before touchdown to prevent gases could damage the module.
Lunar module landed on the Moon not vertically, but was falling sideways until the astronauts
found a flat and relatively free of rocks in the landing on the moon it easier
Neither the gases emitted by the lunar module exercising the necessary pressure, and it
remained a significant amount of time on the surface to produce something like a crater.
Below this layer lies a hard layer of rock that has a depth of between 2 and 8 meters in the
seas, and up to 15 meters in the highlands, thus preventing the formation of a crater as a
result of the lunar landing module mole.
As the jet engine, many pictures show a slight alteration of lunar ground under and near the
lunar module.
6

7. The conspirators of the Anti Moon theory have many more assumptions, but all are based on
answers already given above like shadows. So here we have another question.
5. If there was no one outside the ship or in the moon... Who filmed and photographed
Armstrong descending the ladder?
The camera recorded the black and white
images of Armstrong descending, was
located in the Modular Equipment
Stowage Assembly (MESA), a
compartment located on the side of the
lunar module. Armstrong simply had to
pull a cable located slightly on the steps
to be opened.
(This is the famous photo of the landing)
6. Our last question: The famous letter C.
In the rock marked with an R, will see a letter C
carved in the rock. It is proof that the rock was part
of a scene, in which each element was assigned a
different number or letter.
Explanation: Actually, the "letter C" seems to be on
the stone is a product of the negative scan taken
this picture. As shown in the picture below, with
several increases, the "C" is actually a hair or a
fibre.
A second
trace that can be shaded from the top of it is clearly
visible. The hair (or fibre) was probably introduced by
accident in the scan process.
The hair didn’t appear in the original photograph.
7

8. The images
containing the
"C" probably
belong to the
3rd or 4th
generation
from the
image. (The
original was
carefully
stored)
That’s my own
compilation of
the most
commented
photos of the
moon landing.
So, let's start with other "problems" of the moon landing.
• The lunar module, with is weight, could not escape the gravity of the moon, and
didn’t contains enough fuel to do this.
The lunar module into orbit needed only because the drive to finally escape the lunar gravity
and return to Earth was provided by the command module after reattachment.
It should be noted again that the gravity on the moon is one sixth that of Earth.
• Instead of being able to jump 3 feet in one-sixth gravity of Earth, the highest jump of
the astronauts was 50 cm.
To be a risk of rupture of the suit by a bad fall, astronauts avoided making exaggerated
movements. Isn’t true that the highest jump was 50 cm. Neil Armstrong reported, was a jump
of 1.5 and 1.8 meters respectively, but stopped trying because of the risk of breaking his
spacesuit.
8

9. • The traces are the result of weight displacing air or moisture between the particles
of dust or sand. The astronauts left their mark everywhere.
It is not necessary to trace moisture in a field. Lunar ground has the same composition as the
earth and sand is much easier to make a difference in the void as shown by the TV series
Mythbusters.
• Why most of the pictures of the Apollo have clear lines of definition between the
foreground and background?
There, in the absence of atmosphere, distant objects (mountains, etc...) Aren’t blurry as can be
here on Earth.
• The replacement rolls were not affected by intense cosmic radiation on the Moon.
Many of the photographs have defects, or are unfocused or evenings
The cameras were modified at the request of the manufacturer, Hasselblad, so they could meet
the conditions of vacuum and radiation.
9

10. Finally, my personal opinion is that, at the beginning of this work was not sure if the man
land on the moon, but now I’m sure because of NASA arguments and scientific
documentaries convinced me that the Apollo Project was true.
Links and more information about the moon landing:
TV Serie: Mythbusters. A scientific and funny TV serie. The myth of landing.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z6Mjmw732SQ&feature=related (Part 1) [Spanish]
COULD THE LUNAR MODULE HAVE MADE IT TO ORBIT?
http://www.clavius.org/bibvoron.html [English]
Goodbye conspiration theory.
http://www.rtve.es/noticias/20090903/adios-teoria-conspiracion-hombre-llego-
luna/290987.shtml
[Spanish]
10