Were the Moon Landings Faked?
If you've been paying attention to this page, you know that it is not updated very often, but once in a great while something comes along that gets Mr. Hook so riled up that a rant ensues. The thing that set him off this time was the recent airing of a FOX special called A Funny Thing Happened on the Way To the Moon, an investigative report type program that explored the possibility that the 1969 Moon landing by Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin (as well as all the other moon landings) may have been a big fat hoax.
I have seen a lot of stupid things I my life, but this show took the cake and ate it too. If youd like to see a tit for tat list of arguments which refute the evidence that the FOX show offered as proof that the moon landings were faked, I heartily recommend that you go visit: http://www.badastronomy.com/bad/tv/foxapollo.html
Im only going to get into the first piece of evidence the FOX show used to imply that the moon landings were hoaxed because it is the most ridiculous item and it will help make my point, namely that the people who produced this show simply didnt know what the hell they were talking about.
The first and foremost complaint the conspiracy theorists had to offer was that you cant see any stars in the sky in most of the film footage captured on the surface of the moon. If you want to know why the stars dont show up in the lunar film footage and why the sky on the moon appears completely black, I suggest you try this little experiment:
Go to Wal-Mart. Get one of those cheap disposable cameras. Now go to a location well outside city limits (to avoid light pollution) on a starry night and take some snapshots of the sky. Then go back to Wal-Mart and get your film developed (it only takes an hour and it should cost about $7.00). Now count how many stars appear in your photos.
I can tell you how many stars you will find. NONE. Why? Because starlight is so dim and so faint that the film in the camera cannot register the stars as a light source. To take pictures of stars you have to use a camera that can leave the lens aperture open for a prolonged period of time and a film stock that is extremely sensitive to light. Motion-picture cameras take several exposures per second, every film frame is a film exposure unto itself. So of course youre not going to see any stars on film-footage from the moon. It has nothing to do with the moons lack of atmosphere, the stars are simply too far away and dont emit enough light for them to show up on the film stock the astronauts were using at the time.
The people who made the FOX special clearly dont understand any of this. They dont understand how cameras work. They dont understand how film stock works. They dont understand how photo development works. Theyre ignoramuses. They simply dont know what theyre talking about when they make the assertion that the lack of stars in the moon footage is clinching proof that the film footage has been faked.
They continued to demonstrate their ignorance throughout the program. All of their photo analysis which was meant to demonstrate anomalies in various moon photographs came across as ludicrous if you actually know something about how photography works (or more to the point, how photography _doesnt_ work). Their nitpicking on lighting effects and discrepancies in shadow angles only demonstrated that they were completely ignorant of the principles of optical perspective, something they could have picked up at any junior-high drawing class, but obviously never had.
I could go on about how the makers of the program didnt know anything about radiation either (they directly compared the radiation in the Van-Allen belts to the amounts of radiation present in the aftermath of the atomic bombing of Hiroshima - if that doesnt clue you in to the fact that these people are morons, I dont know what else can), but the real issue at hand here is that these experts were proud of their ignorance and tried to persuade the viewing audience that they were really the smart people who knew better (anyone who gives NASA the benefit of the doubt is a hapless dupe as far as the conspiracy theorists are concerned).
And this is the part that really got me riled up. Point #1: Ignorance is NOT strength (militant agnostics take note!). Note that ignorance, in this case particularly, is NOT a sign of objectivity or neutrality. Understand that these conspiracy buffs have a vested interest in NOT KNOWING whether or not man landed on the moon because they think it makes them look smart and open minded. Rather than hail the moon landings as one of the most significant events in human history (despite all the gathered evidence and eye-witness accounts), these yokels would RATHER believe that NASA collaborated with the U.S. Government to perpetrate a massive hoax upon a gullible American public. Which leads me to Point #2: Disbelief is NOT a virtue (militant atheists take note!). Just because these people are willing to believe that the moon landings might have been hoaxed does NOT make them more open minded than the rest of us. In fact their minds have been CLOSED to the possibility that NASA might be telling the truth (if you want further evidence of this, give this conspiracy buffs diatribe a once through: http://www.zyworld.com/nasa/1.htm)
This is a common tactic of self-appointed intellectuals of all stripes. Under the guise of tolerance and open-mindedness they try to disguise the fact that their minds are completely closed to anything that is outside the boundaries of their own world-view. Then they pat themselves on the back for adopting such a narrow-minded philosophy because they KNOW that everyone else is just a dumb hick who doesnt know any better. ENOUGH ALREADY!
The way the FOX program closed was the biggest outrage of all. The authors of the program suggested that if and when the Japanese finally launch some satellites to orbit the moon and we get photo data on the American lunar lander from this neutral (read non-NASA) third party, THEN and only then will we know for sure that man landed on the moon. Balderdash! 20 years from now FOX will no doubt be broadcasting a new special entitled: Were the Japanese Moon Photos Faked? Not because theyll have any evidence to support their claims, but because some people will go to any lengths to deny any truth that is contrary to their world-view. Its sad. Its pathetic. Its what were stuck with. Aint humans fun?
For more infromation regarding stupid NASA conspiracy theories:
Essay: Little Green Men
Is there any intelligent life out there? And even if there is, why should we care?
Rant #0: Letterboxing: What it is and why you should love it
If you don't even know what letterboxing is, it's high time you found out.
Rant #1: ENC Syndrome - What it is and what you can do about it
Mr. Hook examines the fable of the Emperor's New Clothes, and how it relates to modern art.
Rant #2: Mr. Hook hates it when people talk during the movie...
A thoughtless comment during Mr. Hook's first viewing of Saving Private Ryan sparks a diatribe against feminists who think women (historically) have had it tougher than men.
Rant #3: The Phantom Menace - Why I loved it despite its obvious shortcomings
Per email request, Mr. Hook puts in his two cents worth on Star Wars: Episode 1.
Rant #4: Mr. Hook's X-Files Primer
Interested in the X-Files but not sure where to start? Mr. Hook can help you (maybe).
FEEDBACK | WHAT'S NEW | LINKS | BIOGRAPHY
BOOKS | MOVIES | MUSIC | HOME