While the Apollo 11 moon landing has been accepted as a historic event, some people have raised conspiracy theories claiming that it was fabricated. They presented a variety of evidence, but scientific refutations and evidence have gradually dispelled the conspiracy theories.
There are many events and accidents in the world, and there is always a reason behind them. Reasons are the means by which humans understand and make sense of things. For ordinary events, “ordinary” reasons are sufficient to understand and make sense.
However, many events are beyond the scope of human understanding. This could be the death of a loved one, or a mystery, such as the frequent disappearances of airplanes in the Bermuda Triangle. How do people react to events that are outside the scope of human understanding? The short answer is that people create reasons for these events, sometimes illogical and unrealistic ones, to make sense of events they don’t understand.
Consider a classic example of how this happens: when a celebrity commits suicide, there is always a suspicion that someone else did it. People can’t believe that their idol took their own life. But it’s clear that the idol is dead, and that’s a fact that needs to be accepted, so people suspect that the idol was murdered. This is more acceptable to their minds than suicide.
Through this mechanism, conspiracy theories are inevitably raised in response to new and unconvincing events. The conspiracy theories about whether the Apollo 11 mission to the moon actually happened probably started in the same way. At the time, the idea of humans landing in space, or even on the moon, was not just groundbreaking, but a new event in history. But at the same time, it was also a difficult event for many people to understand.
The Apollo 11 conspiracy theory was started by American Bill Kaysing in his book We Never Went to the Moon. In this book, Kaysing raised a number of suspicions. It is true that the Apollo 11 astronauts took off with a Saturn V. But Caseing claimed that they only orbited the Earth for eight days, and that the footage that was broadcast around the world was faked, shot in a secret studio. According to his calculations, the odds of humans going to the moon and returning safely to Earth at that time were only about 0.0017%. The fact that the astronauts were in that 0.0017% didn’t make sense to him, so he came up with the conspiracy theory that the footage of the moon landing was doctored.
This conspiracy theory was not just a claim, but a lot of evidence was presented. As the number of conspiracy theorists grew, their arguments became more and more convincing. Let’s take a look at the five most important pieces of evidence.
The first evidence is that the American flag on the lunar surface was fluttering in the wind. Wind is created by the flow of air, and there is no air on the moon, so in theory, the flag could not have fluttered on the lunar surface.
The second piece of evidence is that the photos taken by the Apollo astronauts show no stars at all. Earth has an atmosphere, which refracts starlight and makes it harder to see stars, but the Moon has no atmosphere, so there’s no refraction, and no weather to block out starlight. Therefore, it’s normal to see stars in photos taken from the Moon, but the Apollo astronauts’ photos show nothing but black space and no stars.
The third piece of evidence is that when you analyze the photos and videos of the Apollo spacecraft landing on the moon, you don’t see any engine injection marks. Spacecraft are very heavy and require a lot of force to move and stop them. Landing on the moon also requires strong engine injection pressure. But there were no engine blast marks or even dust on the lunar surface.
The fourth piece of evidence is the footprints of Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin, which are still on the moon. The moon’s gravity is only one-sixth of Earth’s, so a person weighs only one-sixth as much. So how could human footprints be so deep when even a powerful engine jet couldn’t leave a mark on the moon?
The fifth piece of evidence is the suspicious lights. The most powerful light source on the moon is the sun. Other stars can also be a source of light, but they are very weak compared to the sun’s light on the moon. The moon’s shadows should all be parallel, but in the Apollo photos, the shadows were crossing in multiple directions, not just one.
These five key pieces of evidence were convincing enough to many people, including Bill Casey himself. As a result, the conspiracy theory spread across the United States and eventually around the world.
However, there are two things to note. First, it’s unclear how Bill Casey’s probability of about 0.0017% was calculated and what factors were taken into account. Second, the items presented as evidence for the conspiracy theory are scientifically refutable.
The first piece of evidence, the fluttering flag, is made of nylon, which the developers designed to unfurl on the airless moon. The reason the flag appears to be fluttering is because of the wrinkles, and the astronaut waved the flagpole. In fact, the video shows that the flag only moves when the astronaut grabs the flagpole and shakes it.
The second piece of evidence, the lack of stars, is due to the limitations of photographic technology at the time. The technology of the time made it difficult to capture distant starlight when photographing bright subjects.
The third reason we don’t see engine jets is because there is no air on the moon. Without air, there is no wind, and without wind, there is no dust. The moon’s low gravity also allowed the spacecraft to land with low pressure, leaving no significant marks on the lunar surface.
Fourth, the multi-directional shadows are explained by the moon’s topography. If there were multiple lights, each object should have cast multiple shadows.
Finally, the landing marks on the moon are still evident. Even with today’s technology, we can still observe the traces of astronauts’ landings from Earth. In addition, the approximately 400 kilograms of moon rocks that the astronauts brought back to Earth are solid evidence that the moon landing actually took place. It should be noted that moon rocks have a different composition from Earth’s rocks.
With all these refutations and scientific explanations, the moon landing conspiracy theories have become less and less convincing. Just as conspiracy theories about celebrity suicides have been dispelled by autopsy results, so too have conspiracy theories about the moon landing been dispelled by scientific explanations. Only after a number of questions were clearly answered did people begin to accept the new event of the moon landing.
