The Apollo 11 Moon Landing – One Of The Biggest Accomplishments In Human History
The Apollo 11 moon landing on July 20, 1969, was one of the most astonishing achievements in human history. That day, an estimated 530 million TV viewers watched U.S. astronauts Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin take their first steps on the moon. Afterward, the two men and third crew member Michael Collins flew safely back to Earth and landed in the Pacific Ocean. This mission was first launched at a time of high tension between the United States and the Soviet Union during the Cold War of the 1950s. Charged by the growing fear of nuclear weapons, threats to national security made in the media, rampant espionage, and war in Korea, space exploration became the new arena for the two superpowers to prove the superiority of their technologies and ways of life. On Oct. 4, 1957, Russia launched Sputnik, the world’s first artificial satellite, into low Earth orbit. The “Sputnik crisis” prompted President Eisenhower to sign the National Aeronautics and Space Act on July 29, 1958, establishing NASA as the federal agency that would oversee the nation’s exploration of space. The “space race” had begun. Now to the public, a manned lunar landing was conceived as the ultimate demonstration of technical superiority. Thus, the Apollo 11 mission began on May 25, 1961, when President Kennedy, speaking before a special joint session of Congress, committed the United States “to achieving the goal, before this decade is out, of landing a man on the Moon and returning him safely to the Earth.” Yet just a few years later, some people claimed the “giant leap for mankind” had been faked. The moon-hoax theories suggesting the Apollo moon landings in 1969-72 had been shot on an earthbound studio set had become widely known in the wake of Bill Kaysings' bestselling book “We Never Went to the Moon” in 1974. Some opinion polls suggest that as many as 10-25% of the United States population also agree that there is the possibility that this could have happened (Bowdley 406). Presented here are reasons for how the arguments for this conspiracy theory are unreliable and why.
First is the conspiracy theories of did we actually land on the moon? Many people were not aware of the Moon hoax conspiracy theory until Fox TV produced a one- hour ‘docudrama’ in the United States (later shown all around the world) called ‘Conspiracy Theory: Did We Land on the Moon?’. The way this program is portrayed, one might be forgiven for thinking that this was breaking news and that in fact, researchers had just come across new evidence to prove that the lunar landings were faked. The show was hosted by Mitch Pileggi (X-Files actor) he introduced a series of interviews with experts in their field who could not explain how NASA had gotten not one, but three men to the Moon and returned them safely to the Earth. “The program makes compelling viewing but unfortunately includes little in the way of in-depth scientific evidence for any of its claims. This is a shame as it would have been of far greater interest to the scientific community if it had.” (Bowdley 407).
The first photo hoax believers think is staged is the most well-known photograph of Buzz Aldrin in his spacesuit on the surface of the moon. Neil Armstrong took this photograph of Aldrin with a camera that was mounted on Armstrong’s chest pack. Hoax believers point out that the photo must have been taken from a higher camera angle. The photo looks as if the photographer is looking down on Aldrin and can see the top of his helmet and backpack. Along with this reason, based on the reflection of Armstrong in Aldrin’s visor, hoax believers claim that Armstrong is not standing on a rock to give him extra height, he also is not holding the camera at eye level. Hoax believers, therefore, claim that the reflection in the visor is not Neil Armstrong. Since Aldrin and Armstrong were the only two people on the surface of the moon, hoax believers ask, Who then took the photograph? The answer to this question is simple. The ground that the two astronauts are standing on is not flat. Armstrong was a higher up on a slope than Aldrin. The visual evidence for this can be seen in the horizon behind each man. The horizon behind Aldrin is at his eye level but, by honing in on the visor reflection, one can see that the horizon behind Armstrong, the photographer, is at his chest level, therefore indicating that Armstrong is on higher ground. Additionally, the weight of the packs caused the astronauts to be more top-heavy. This causes them to be forced to lean forward slightly, thus allowing the viewer to see the top of Aldrin’s helmet and backpack.
The next photo that is criticized is one of Astronaut Neil Armstrong taking a picture of his shadow near the landing site of the lunar module during the Apollo 11 mission. In the picture, it is a large shadow of Armstrong. In the background is a lunar module. It looks as if it's about a yard away from the astronaut. This photo is condemned for unrealistic shadows. Hoax believers claim that many shadows seen in the Apollo photographs are caused by a second light source. This then would prove that the photos could not have been taken on the surface of the moon since the only light source on the moon is the sun. Hoax believers defend that when objects are lit solely by the sun, all the shadows will be parallel with each other and never intersect, regardless of the landscape (Perlmutter, Dahmen 239). In this photo, they claim, an artificial light source was used since the shadows are cast at different angles. Hoax believers are implying this photo along with the rest that will be discussed were made on a movie set. The counterclaim to the shadow argument is scientific. It centers on the idea that photographs are only two-dimensional representations of a three-dimensional surface and, therefore, cannot fully represent three- dimensional features. Meaning that parallel lines may not appear that way on film. For example, consider how parallel lines on a highway appear to intersect in the distance. Additionally, it is important to recognize that the landscape is a factor. Although the angle of the sun on two objects may be the same, the angle of the ground changes, thereby causing differences in shadow length and direction.
Where the spacecraft landed there was a large amount of dust on the surface of the moon, hoax believers ask why there is no dust on the foot-pad of the lunar module. Hoax believers claim that the lunar module never actually landed. In line with the previous discussion of the touchdown of the lunar module, those who debunk the moon-hoax theory argue that the moon dust was blown away during the lunar landing. It is important to keep in mind there is no atmosphere on the moon, there is no air disturbance to allow for dust to blow around and settle on top of the foot-pads of the lunar lander. Once the dust was blown to the side by the lunar landing, there was no air current to blow it back again; dust on the moon does not behave like dust on the Earth.
Hoax believers continue to question if the dust near the landing site was blown away as the lander came down, how could the astronauts have made footprints in the dust so close to the lunar landing site, referring to the famous photo of the footprint in the dust on the surface of the moon. Again, the counter-argument relates to the notion that as there is no atmosphere on the moon, the only dust particles that would be displaced would be those directly impacted by the exhaust. Formerly mentioned the engine propel was quite low and then turned off as the lander descended. Those who debunk the moon-hoax theory argue that only the area directly under the landing site was messed with; the area next to the lunar module would essentially be untouched. The dust around the landing site was probably a bit thicker than before since the dust blown away from the lander would have gathered, thereby allowing boot prints to be made.
One of the most well-known theories as to why the Moon landings couldn’t have happened has to do with something called the Van Allen belts. These are two huge belts of radiation that surround the Earth, shaped by Earth’s magnetic field and pounded with high-energy particles from the Sun’s wind. It’s been said that humans couldn’t have passed through these belts without being fried with deathly doses of radiation. During the Apollo launches the Van Allen belts happened to luckily be at their lowest intensity, which fluctuates with the Sun's activity. Radiation sickness occurs when you have been exposed to 1000 rads of radiation within a few hours (Davis). During the Apollo 11 mission, the astronauts were only within the belts for less than two hours. Therefore they were only exposed to an estimated 18 rads well within the safe limit. Even though this limit is safe there can still be some poor effects from even this level of radiation. NASA was well aware of this and made sure the spacecraft was well-insulated such that the average dose of radiation over the 12-day mission was just 0.18 rads this dosage is similar to a chest X-ray.
A big argument from hoax believers is that the whole mission was to distract the public from the cold war. This couldn't be more untrue. The Apollo program cost $25 billion — but that was in the 1960s dollars. More recently, the International Space Station has been estimated to have cost about $100 billion. United States expenses for nuclear weapons and weapons-related programs between 1940 and 1996 consumed nearly $5.5 trillion in adjusted 1996 dollars. That is 29 percent of all military spending and 11 percent of all Federal Government spending. Reviewing the cost of the Apollo program and the money spent on the war. The United States was in no position to put billions of dollars towards a program that was fake, a deploy and a hoax.
In fact, NASA in the 1960s created simulations that mimicked aspects of what astronauts could expect to encounter. Armstrong and Aldrin rehearsed collecting samples on fake, indoor moonscapes. Armstrong practiced taking off and landing in the Lunar Landing Training Vehicle in Houston. And, to simulate walking in the moon’s lower-gravity atmosphere, astronauts were suspended sideways by straps and then walked along a tilted wall. NASA and the U.S. Geological Survey even blasted out craters at Cinder Lake, Arizona to create a landscape that matched part of the moon’s surface — because, after all, practice makes perfect.
NASA spent strenuous time and hours to build simulations to prepare the men for the mission. They would not waste money and time on training that was for a fake mission.
One of the biggest accomplishments in human history was NASA's journey to the moon. This mission did happen and the United States did successfully bring two men to the moon and back. Any flaws in the photos taken were due to different elements on the moon that are not the same on earth. The difference in shadows in the pictures was due to the sun hitting the surface of the moon, it caused a change in shadow length and direction. The Van Allen belts radiation did not harm the astronauts due to the short time they had passed through them. The United States would not have spent countless time and money on a mission that never happened. Especially during a time where economically it was impossible to spend money on a publicity stunt. There is no dust on the foot-pad of the lunar module because there is no atmosphere on the moon and this causes there to be no air disturbance. There is talk of returning to the moon as it is a big goal for the future. Astronaut Jim Bristine said, 'if it wasn't for the political risk, we would be on the moon right now, in fact, we would probably be on Mars.' Bristine continues to add 'The program took too long and it costs too much money.' Hopefully, in the future, there will be a program developed with the time and money to progress us on another journey to space.
