No, LRO won't convince the Apollo deniers

By Phil Plait | July 8, 2009 7:30 am

I’ve been reading a lot about Apollo lately — the 40th anniversary of Apollo 11 is almost upon us — and of course the Moon is in my thoughts anyway with the advent of NASA’s Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter now snapping away as it circles our cosmic neighbor.

I’ve done some interviews about this, and been asked about it endlessly: will the LRO’s incredibly high-resolution images of the lunar surface, including, eventually, the Apollo landing sites, finally quell the lunacy of the Moon Hoax believers?

That would be nice, but obviously it won’t. If they don’t believe the thousands of pictures and video taken from the lunar surface by the Apollo astronauts themselves, why would they believe further NASA evidence? And besides, these true believers don’t live in an evidence-based world. They live in fantasy; it’s the only way they can be shown solid proof their claims are wrong and yet still cleave to them.

I could go into details, but happily the Cumbrian Sky blog already makes these points pretty well.

As for me, I will be happy to sit back and reminisce about Apollo, look over the new LRO imagery, and think about the future of space exploration with some optimism (and fight for the progress to be done rationally!), all the while ignoring the ignorant bleatings of the Apollo deniers. Sixty years from now, when people are celebrating the centenary of the first human to set foot on another world, I think the Hoax will be so long dead and gone that they won’t even know enough to ask, "Sibrel who?"

That’s a future I can look forward to.

CATEGORIZED UNDER: Debunking, NASA, Piece of mind, Skepticism

Comments (230)

  1. Sixty years from now when the deniers are still on Earth they still won’t believe that other Earthlings are on the moon.

    Their excuses will be more convoluted than ever.

  2. Guysmiley

    Ignorant bleating, that sums it up nicely!

  3. Stu

    Thanks for the namecheck Phil, really appreciate that. Can’t wait for an Apollo landing site to be imaged by LRO. Even if it’s fuzzy it’ll be a historic pic :-)

  4. I can’t say it any better.

    Have you already seen the stunning HD video that the folks at GSC have put together (here)?


    What annoys me most is the fact that the instigator of the Moon hoax nonsense, Bill Kaysing, who finally kicked the bucket in April 2005, was only a former furniture maker and just a bloody librarian with no formal background in engineering when he wrote his damn book alleging a Moon landing hoax. The lousy JAMF!

  6. Jeff

    The LROs will convince me, a fence sitting HBer. Just give me LRO images of Apollo and I’ll come over to believing Apollo landed on moon.

    If LRO won’t convince an HBer, then he/she is being irrational. How in the world could the people involved in LRO still be involved in the moon hoax 40 years later. That makes no sense.

  7. Whether or not it convinces anyone, it’ll still be really awesome! I know there’s been no announcement of when that site will be photographed, but wouldn’t it be cool if they release them on the anniversary?

  8. Mike

    Kind of off topic: This year on the 4th of July, I managed to get a great look at the moon while I was waiting for the fireworks display to start. It was really quite beautiful. Then I realized that the LRO was up there at that very moment, cruising around and snapping pictures. It was an awesome realization.

  9. Peter B

    Well, on the 40th anniversary of the Apollo 11 astronauts touching down on the Moon, I’ll be attending a lunch with staff of the former Honeysuckle Creek Tracking Station; you know, the people who were either in on the hoax, or who were fooled by the NASA hoaxers, depending on which Hoax Believer you talk to.

    The ironic thing is that one of the Honeysuckle Creek staff, Mike Dinn, has actually tried to work out how NASA might have fooled them. He’s probably put more work into it than most Hoax Believers put into their own theories.

  10. David D.

    @Jeff #5

    A Poe, right?

    You are a fence-sitter, and someone else is irrational?

  11. Question….

    Am I wrong or do I remember something about mirrors being placed on the moon for distance measurements. Is there a lab somewhere that makes these measurements?

    Shouldn’t that be enough evidence for a real fence sitter?

  12. David #9

    Hoax believer

  13. dhtroy

    Our government can’t keep the world from finding out that Bill Clinton was experimenting with cigars and an intern in the oval office, yet somehow, they have managed, for decades, to keep a fake moon landing quiet???? I’m just say’in …

    Anyway, for those of us that live in the real world, I do look forward to those pictures from the LRO.

  14. @TechSkeptic

    Yup, a laser at the Apache Point Observatory in Arizona.

  15. I can’t wait to see those pics that LRO snaps of the landing sites! Although I doubt it will silence the hoaxers, unfortunately… :(

  16. Jeff

    To David: “A Poe, right?
    You are a fence-sitter, and someone else is irrational?”

    Since I was born 2 minutes after the Big Bang, you’ll have to define “Poe” for me.

    Remember Jimmy Buffett’s line “if we weren’t all crazy, we’d all go insane”. There’s a lot of truth to that, and I’m more crazy than insane; so my degree of irrationality is always based on some cause in the physical universe that makes me question things. For example, the “Cold War” was at its apex during Apollo and I can conceive of intelligence people forcing NASA to fake the moon missions . But really, there are a lot of things that give credence to the moon landings: moon rocks, word of astronauts and mission controllers, etc. I just want the final coup and see the LRO images.

    But if someone doesn’t believe the LRO images, then they really are being irrational for no good reason, and they are probably that way in all subjects.

  17. Nothing will ever satisfy the hard core hoax believers. A hundred years from now one of them will be standing on the moom at the Apollo 11 landing site museum telling people how the Apollo program was a hoax and that NASA built the Eagle lander on site for the museum to maintain the hoax.

  18. Wayne

    In all seriousness, I hope that you (and other fence-sitters) will return after the images are released and let us know how convincing you found them. Although it is not the primary purpose of the images to convince people of the landings, I for one would be interested to know how effective they are for that purpose.

    Oh, and “Poe’s Law” is an Internet thing that says basically that if satire is done really well you can’t tell it from the real thing. David was suggesting you were pretending to be a fence-sitter.

  19. eddie

    It’s been said before and bears repeating: You can’t reason someone out of a position they didn’t reason themselves into.
    I suspect that even taking these nuts to the moon and showing them the footprints will only strengthen their delusion.

    Slightly OT but I’ve just read the chapters in the bad astronomy book and think someone’s messed up. The part about the moon appearing bigger near the horizon has a diagram showing the hemispheric sky and how it seems bowl-like. This perspective assumes the observer at centre of the earth.
    We are you’ll notice, at the surface with the centre 4,000km beneath our feet, and the centre of the moon’s orbit 1,000km beneath us. From here, the sky _is_ bowl shaped; the top of the atmosphere being only 100km away overhead and some thousands at the horizon.

  20. IVAN3MAN


    Am I wrong or do I remember something about mirrors being placed on the moon for distance measurements. Is there a lab somewhere that makes these measurements?

    You’re right, and the mirrors you refer to are called retroreflectors:

    The Lunar Laser Ranging Experiment from the Apollo 11 mission
    The Lunar Laser Ranging Experiment from the Apollo 11 mission.
    (Click on the image to “embiggen”.)

    The first lunar laser ranging station was operated from McDonald Observatory, which works closely with the astronomy department of the University of Texas at Austin — so you see, they are not all nutters in that state!


  21. Daffy

    Nothing will convince these people. If they don’t have the Great Apollo Hoax to help them feel special (they alone are tapped into this huge secret) what do they have left?

    It’s pathetic.

  22. Ivan3Man:

    Fake! How can a black surface reflect any light?

    Just foolin… but seriously, what is the response from hoaxers when presented with the fact that we have been making distance measurements to the moon for 40 years based on the fact that these reflectors are there?

  23. Jeff

    to Wayne: “In all seriousness, I hope that you (and other fence-sitters) will return after the images are released and let us know how convincing you found them. Although it is not the primary purpose of the images to convince people of the landings, I for one would be interested to know how effective they are for that purpose”

    I can’t speak for the other HBers, but if Phil posts here at this blog LRO Apollo images, I’ll post right here that I now believe 100% that they landed. I don’t really need to go to the moon, LRO will be enough to put me over the top.

  24. Hopefully in 60 years the deniers can hop a lunar ferry to the moon and deny it right at the Apollo landing site.
    Because even seeing it with their own eyes won’t make them stop denying it.

  25. IVAN3MAN


    [W]hat is the response from hoaxers when presented with the fact that we have been making distance measurements to the moon for 40 years based on the fact that these reflectors are there?


  26. Jeff

    I listened to Richard Hoagland last nite on George Noory’s show.

    “I have mixed feelings about Apollo 40th anniversary, we covered a lie”

    Then he stated his opinion that a shell game has been going on. He claims that the common moon hoax we know of, was a ruse, for the “real” hoax, which was that Apollo did land, but they found something up there that hasn’t been revealed to public.

    He claims that new videos of Apollo 11 have recently surfaced, and they’ll be rolled out on the 40th anniversary; high quality video; but he implies that the interesting “background anomalies” have been expunged

    He also claims that LRO Apollo artifact images will confirm that we landed on moon.

    He claims that NASA was the original source behind the standard HB myths, because remember he thinks they have a covert operation going. In his view, by getting people turned on to false HB stories, they could totally divert people’s attention away from the “real hoax” that was going on.

    His ideas seem sillier than any standard HB ideas I’ve seen, so I don’t take him seriously. He is fun to listen to.

  27. Mchl

    Oh boy… Hoagland adapts fast! Microevlution of conspiracy at its finest!

  28. zaardvark

    I came across someone on an astronomy forum, who “wasn’t convinced either way” about the moon landing(s). That’s a bad sign right there, but it quickly became clear that he wanted absolute proof that it happened — something like an orbiting satellite to take pictures of the sites. Well, he’ll soon get his wish, I said, but further pointed out that the only absolute proof would be for him to go there himself.

    After all, it’s just going to be more photographs of the moon, which could be doctored! In fact, even if he went there, and saw the evidence, it’s possible he was still being fooled. NASA could have dumped a bunch of spacejunk up there, had a rover make a bunch of artificial footprints and plop a flag or three into the surface. There is no such thing as absolute certainty in science, let alone history!

    I don’t know if I helped him, or sent him even further into woospace :(.

  29. egads, I get chills thinking of standing on the moon. It’s too cool.

    @Jeff: aliens on the moon, maybe? Heck yes! I’d totally go for that 😛

  30. Rick

    Even when those picture from LRO about apollo landing sites, HB will tell us now that NASA fake that pictures too… Wait and see for yourself!. I was a HB when a was a kid.

  31. Debs

    Embiggen. Hee.

    Saw the ISS scoot by the other night and then turned around and pointed my binoculars at the moon, hoping against hope to see anything … Hey- it’s a perfectly cromulent hope!

  32. Mchl

    Wow… Just been to Hoagland’s site. It seems that LCROSS has already managed to confirm that there are some ‘domes’ on the far side that emit IR radiation. All this based on one picture from IR camera (without any scale as to what temperature range was measured). A picture that shows without doubt, that sunlit part of the Moon is warmer than the part in the shadow.


  33. Terry

    Well, the newer pictures of the “face on mars” a few years back seemed to quiet that little story down, so there is hope here, I think…

  34. As others have indicated, if you’ll believe LRO images of the landing site but won’t believe the mountain range (ie bigger than a mountain) of evidence from the 60s and 70s then you really need to examine your internal criteria for accepting evidence.


    btw the existance of reflectors on the moon doesn’t prove anything, they could have been placed there by an un-manned probe. And to be honest the same goes for the landing sites as well.

  35. Greg in Austin


    Based on your calculations, what height from the surface of the moon would a satellite in orbit have to be in able to see the Apollo landers & rovers? What size lens would that camera need? What type of imaging device and what resolution would it require?

    You state your incredulity at the fact it hasn’t been done, but you don’t state what the requirements are to perform such a task.


  36. Jeff

    To astronomer: “As others have indicated, if you’ll believe LRO images of the landing site but won’t believe the mountain range (ie bigger than a mountain) of evidence from the 60s and 70s then you really need to examine your internal criteria for accepting evidence.”

    Not exactly, I’d say I believe they landed 90%, but I need that last 10% from LRO. I see it as final confirmation, and for people like me with suspicions about the cold war, this is even more important; because the people involved with LRO have nothing to do with the cold war.

    I still have my local Milwaukee newspaper color insert dated July 23, 1969 ; it shows all the CM and LM images from orbit, including one showing earth; from the surface. How many people out there still have their original newspaper clippings from July 20, 1969?

  37. MPG

    Neil says:

    You’re all living in a fantasy.



    By the way, where are the photos from LRO?

    Here. I’m no mathematician, but I do believe there are more than two images there.

  38. dhtroy

    #32 – Neil

    So wait, let me get this straight … Japan is in on this now as well?
    How about Russia?

    What do any of them gain by concealing this supposed hoax of yours? Seriously?

    Don’t you honestly believe if any of those countries thought the U.S. faked the moon landings, that they’d be rushing to put a camera up there to prove our government lied!!! That would be HUGE; but yet, they aren’t. None of them.

    Doesn’t THAT sound the alarm bell of truth in your head, that it’s because we DID actually land there, they know it, and there’s nothing to “prove”; or are you just so diluted into actually believing that these countries, that loath us, are also, somehow, in on this “cover up”?!?!?

    So you believe all of the world’s governments are in on this “hoax”???

  39. chaboyax

    neils here everyone, please listen.

  40. ethanol

    We’ve heard a lot of “evidence” from NEIL over these last couple of weeks but NOBODY has proved to me yet that NEIL ACTUALLY EXISTS. He could have sent a picture of himself, and that would have clearly solved this dispute but HE DIDN’T. This would have been so easy for him to do that the only possible explanation is that NEIL IS A COMPUTER PROGRAM operated by the NSA in conjunction with VARIOUS ZIONIST ORGANIZATIONS to discredit the real, hard working, rational moon hoax investigators. NICE TRY “NEIL”

  41. @dhtroy

    Neil is a troll who has popped up in past threads claiming stuff about vast Zionist conspiracies, or some such. Best to just ignore it.

    Oh, and ethanol…brilliant.

  42. @Neil,

    “If you can fake Apollo images that have fooled the majority for 40 years, LRO images are a breeze.”

    For once you and I agree about something, though in different ways. If the HB-ers think that NASA faked the moon landing footage, then it should be a simple task for them to fake some LRO imagry as well. (Easier, in fact, since there won’t be people in the shots & photo editing has advanced considerably since the moon landing.)

    Of course, where we differ is that I don’t think that NASA has folks running Photoshop on some photos of the moon to put in hoax-supporting evidence. I think they actually have a LRO above the earth.

    Oh, and to answer the “where are all the photos/they’ve just released two”, look here: They’ve actually released 15. (I found this link by following LRO_NASA on Twitter.)

  43. DrFlimmer


    If anyone already said it, I’m sorry. At least one had to make this point.
    So anyone who really believes in the hoax will still believe in the hoax. No way to get them out of their distorted reality, unless they are already “on the fence” and thus no real believers….

    Neil is a hoax. I believe that, too, ethanol! Well done! 😀

  44. Ken

    #32 Neil,

    High-res cameras and the radios needed to send the images back to Earth are *expensive*. Tens of millions of dollars just for the hardware to add onto an existing satellite, never mind increases in launch costs and telemetry bandwidth. Remember we’re talking a hostile (temperature, radiation, vibration, etc) environment; that $100 camcorder at Best Buy and a WiFi stick isn’t going to cut it.

    Why on earth would an organization like JAXA spend the money, mass, and radio bandwidth to prove something they never doubted in the first place? Do you think they care about the opinions of a handful of nutters?

    The only reason such cameras are showing up now is because there is now a REASON – the “R” in LRO…

  45. Lemme get this straight. The only way we could have reflectors on the moon is if unmanned landers were sent to multiple sites (no remote rover technology at the time). Each on had to land and present a mirror in the correct direction.

    On which launch did those landers get a ride on? Some secret ones that no one but you know about?

    And despite the huge numbers of photos of launches, armies of people who worked to build suits and vehicles, monitor flights and progress, go get the return capsules and so forth. Those hoards of people are in on an plot that they managed to keep secret except from hoaxers.

    Is there anyone who actually worked on these projects who has admited to the hoax? I mean really, there are thousands of people involved in one of the most important events in history, and robotic landers launched from secret rockets is the more obvious answer to you guys.

    looney tunes.

    Neil, you are simply a denialist with no hope.

    Jeff, why aren’t these mirrors that we have been using for decades enough evidence for you?

  46. John Powell

    I’m willing to bet that there are Europeans that still don’t believe that there were ever any American colonies. North and South America are hoaxes meant to keep European taxes high…

  47. Mchl

    @John Powell: Why else would I need to get a visa to visit this alleged ‘New World’?

  48. Keith

    I can’t wait to see the LRO images, though not for any reasons regarding Apollo. You’re right that even if it does show some Apollo site images, it won’t sway the HBs. After all, they don’t believe the tons of independent evidence that currently exists.

    @ethanol. You must be wrong. The zionist organisations would have shut him down after your post but he’s there again. So Neil is either the aliens who built the domes on the moon (as Hoagland says) or a computer program that has formed itself from the leftover code from various poorly-coded conspiracy theory websites.

  49. “I think the criminals that truly control us and most, and maybe all, governments are mostly unseen”

    that always cracks me up.. unseen, yeah but somehow only you and a small band of other nutz know about them.

  50. Anne V


    Just because you’re paranoid, doesn’t mean no one is following you. Turn around. See those men in the white jackets?

  51. @Keith

    I have an additional hypothesis: Neil is actually a part of the vast Zioinist conspiracy, raving on here merely to cast into doubt the veracity of the conspiracy itself! 1984 is his playbook.

  52. D’oh, original comment, still waiting moderation, so I’ll leave you to put the url together…

    Tech_Skeptic, although IVAN3MAN already posted those very cool images, you can also read about the laser experiment running out of Apache Point Observatory in Arizona, called APOLLO…

    www [dot] physics [dot] ucsd [dot] edu/~tmurphy/apollo/apollo [dot] html

  53. ethanol

    @ethanol. You must be wrong. The zionist organisations would have shut him down after your post but he’s there again. So Neil is either the aliens who built the domes on the moon (as Hoagland says) or a computer program that has formed itself from the leftover code from various poorly-coded conspiracy theory websites.

    I have trouble believing a program could be that insiped except be design, so a I guess moon domes is the only viable explanation. And the moon alien’s (“moonanite’s” perhaps?) control of NASA would explain why the LRO DOESN’T see domes on the moon, even though when i look at the moon through my binoculars I see all sorts of circles.

  54. Matt

    Hello, walls.

    Don’t feed the trolls, even computer generated ones…

  55. khms


    For the honor and prestige of sending back the first photos verifying the nonexistence of Apollo landing site remnants, Japanese camera companies like Nikon, Canon, Minolta, etc. would have bid against one another for the bragging and advertising rights.

    And yet they didn’t. Why wouldn’t they, if they believed you? No reason. So they must not believe you.

    Something is very strange about all of this

    Not really. We’ve known what closed world views do to people like you for a long time now.

  56. Keith

    Todd W. you might be right. We’d never suspect a thing.

  57. Yeah, I don’t really remember voting for Mt. St. Helens to erupt.
    I dont remember voting for Michael Jackson to die.
    I don’t remember voting for this damn blister on my foot to crop up.

    Its weird, you claim that there is some huge conspiracy with unseen powers controlling everything, but what you seem to want is for you to be in control yourself of everything that happens in the world. And if you are not personally in control of those things, then someone else must be.

    OK, I’m done feeding the lunatic troll.

  58. Mchl

    @TechSkeptic: Hey…wasn’t democracy supposed to make the world the way _I_ want it to be? XD

  59. Jeff

    to Neil:

    “1. 9/11 was the work of 19 Arabs with boxcutters.
    2. Twelve American astronauts walked on the moon.
    3. The Holocause happened where six-million Jews were methodically exterminated and incinerated on an industrial scale.
    4. The International Space Station is in operation with people living aboard.”

    take each pillar one by one:

    1. no , it wasn’t their work
    2. I think 90% that they did
    3. It did happen
    4. ISS really is there

    we could debate each of these point by point, but #1 and #3 really shouldn’t be debated on Phil’s blog, give him a break.

    #2 and #4 I’m sure have been debated thoroughly here.

    “I don’t remember voting to have optical internet suppressed to keep preexisting thought controllers in power.”

    I agree with you there. There are too many “gatekeepers” on the internet and I view them as more menancing than the “trolls”

  60. I think the value of any hypothetical LRO photos would lie not in convincing the deniers, but in making them do some hilarious backflips to rationalize it away.

    I’ve seen quite a few people say they’d be convinced the moon landing was real if NASA would just point the Hubble (hurrr) at the Apollo 11 landing site and snap some pictures, so if nothing else it would be entertaining to watch them backpedal madly.

  61. Ken

    #47 Neil,

    Nikon, Canon, Minolta, et. al., don’t make spacecraft-mounted cameras. I’m not sure they make anything radiation-tolerant at all. Spaceworthy imaging sensors are a very different market with very different players.

    Can someone please tell me why I am talking to this guy? 😛

  62. Gadfly

    Neil – you’re a dope. Seriously off topic but to try to indict all the folks you listed for treason is a joke. Every major intelligence agency in the world, including France, Russia, Germany, etc — countries opposed to invading Iraq — all agreed that there were weapons of mass destruction. All were wrong. You can accuse GWB of being wrong, but you’ll need better evidence than your own paranoia to prove treason.
    Also, not sure what that has to do with lunar landing deniers…

  63. Holy Jebus, Neil. If you aren’t a poe, please seek some psychiatric help. Soon…

  64. Keith

    If I wasn’t so bored right now I’d have left this comments section ages ago. It’s funny. It asks for independent verification but claims that everyone is controlled by the Zionist Organisation. Where will independent evidence come from?

    Wait. I’ve figured it out…

    [Zionist] @Neil: Your mind control chip appears to be malfunctioning. Please report to where you were born or the nearest synagogue to have it repaired or replaced. Doing so will return you to happiness and everyone will agree with you. [Zionist]


  65. Gabor

    Maybe someone already mentioned here, but I found an interesting “proof”. It is about the TC 3D image of the Jananese program:

    They show the TC 3D generated landscape (based on altimetry) and the photo made by the Apollo 15 astronauts about the very same area. As they say the obvious similarity is a proof that their TC system is working correctly.

    I say it is a proof that the Apollo photo is genuine. As how otherwise people here in a US desert would have been able to create a fake photo of a defined Lunar area that matches so perfectly to reality. That time noone had such precise remote data about the Moon landscape.


  66. Jeff


    I had to ask about Poe also, I didn’t have a clue what that meant, , someone defined it earlier in this blog:

    “Oh, and “Poe’s Law” is an Internet thing that says basically that if satire is done really well you can’t tell it from the real thing”

    you also say:

    ” The formal beginnings of the scientific method can be traced back only about 1000 years and it’s been a very rough road since then. We as humans descend from ancestors that spent tens of thousands, perhaps hundreds of thousands, of years without such a method. In the same way we mostly descend from slaves and serfs, we descend from ignorant, superstitious, barbaric and probably arrogant ancestors. We’re mostly genetically predisposed to be slaves and we’re also mostly genetically predisposed to renounce the scientific method in favor of clutching coveted delusions. Our masters know this.”

    I agree that many people are abandoning the scientific reasoning skills that were predominant about a few decades ago. Signs of it are everywhere: TV and radio programs spouting nonsense like coast to coast ; people do not understand critical thinking, they groupthink for the most part. And yes, the obvious outcome of this will be that certain people will take advantage of the masses and control them as “slaves” as you say. People live in a technological bubble and have no idea the lifestyle that was prevalent during the neolithic (Fred Flintstone) period of human history. They assume that technology will free them for all time from this primitive culture, but it is only temporary bubble. A sociologist colleague of mine reminds his students that technology means tools , nothing more.

  67. Greg in Austin

    Neil says,

    “4. The International Space Station is in operation with people living aboard.

    4. Again, independent verification would prove it a lie.”

    I am all in favor of being skeptical. Its possible that the ISS does not exist, or that there are no humans on board.

    However, the last time I saw them with my own eyes and binoculars, the ISS and Shuttle looked real to me. The video of the astronauts working on the Hubble looked just as real this year as they did in the 1990’s. The last time I sat in the shuttle simulator at Houston, it seemed real to me. The last time I talked to my good friend who helped design the shuttle’s rocket boosters, he seemed real to me.

    The thing is Neil, there is so much more evidence that supports the idea that we are really in space than the ZERO evidence you have provided that would suggest we didn’t, that it is safe to say, with certainty, humans are in space, right now, as we speak.

    And this is not based on anything anyone else has told me, its based on what I’ve seen with my own eyes, and touched with my own hands. Of course, I don’t expect you to believe me. But I can tell you how you can go see these things for yourself, and make up your own mind, if you were really interested.


  68. dhtroy

    #45 Neil

    I think other people here are correct in that, there are other places besides Phil’s blog to debate your beliefs.

    My question was to better understand where you are coming from, and my point was merely going to be: to believe that all the world’s governments are somehow involved in a massive cover up of the United States Space Program, is even more far fetched than many of the things you claim to be lies.

    Another “point”, for lack of a better word, I’d like to make here: If Japan were in on the cover-up, then why didn’t NASA ask them “Hey, can you spoof some landing shots of the Lunar modules for us? We need somebody to back us up on this whole ‘Moon landing’ thing … Seriously, if they were in on it, that seems like a no brainer to me; same holds true if the Russians were involved, and India, etc… is there an excuse for why that wasn’t done either?

    So I’ll leave it at that and say, I think we’ll just have to agree that we don’t agree on a WHOLE bunch of things.

  69. @Keith,

    You’ve hit the nail on the head. When Neil says “independent verification”, he means “a group of people who examine the evidence and come to the conclusion that I predetermined for them.” After all, if they examine the evidence and come to a different conclusion then they are either in on The Conspiracy or were fooled by The Conspiracy into coming to the wrong conclusion. He (and other conspiracy nuts) aren’t looking for proof as much as they are looking for others to validate their wild claims.

    Then again, I’m Jewish and so possibly a member of the Zionist Conspiracy Organization. Man, you’d think running the world would give you a better salary than the one I get…. oops, did I say that out loud? Time to activate the neuralizer built into everyone’s monitor. *FLASH!*

  70. uknesvuinng

    If the moon landing deniers are so hot for independent confirmation of the landers on the moon, why don’t they put their money where their mouths are and fund it themselves? I’m sure SpaceX or some other private space firm would love the extra infusion of cash, even if it means taking an extra trip that’s mostly pointless.

  71. Eddie Janssen

    How many moon-landing denialists are there in the US and are there any in the rest of the world?

  72. Everyone, Phil had already banned Neil the Nut. he’s obviously logging in from a different server, I think it’s best if everyone just ignores him.

  73. Mchl

    @Eddie Janssen: Yes, moon hoax believers do exist outside of US. And bring up same points.

  74. Mark Hansen

    Eddie Janssen, the answer to both your questions is way too many.

  75. Neil

    @Michael L.
    You call it banned.
    I call it censorship.
    This blog article is about Apollo Denial.
    An actual Apollo Denier appears before you and all you want to do is ignore him, get others to ignore him or flame him.
    You folks are seriously weak.

  76. Neil is just proving the BA’s point.

  77. Nail

    IF WORD = “Banned” THEN CALL PROCEDURE “KneeJerkResponse”
    PRINT VARIABLE “Random Dribble”

    LABEL “KneeJerkResponse”
    PRINT “You call it banned. I call it censorship.”

  78. Scott

    This sort of denial has been going on for centuries. Galileo thought he could convince the pope that there were other worlds out there (he could see phases of Venus) but when the pope or his minions looked through Galileo’s telescope they concluded that what ever they were seeing was ‘in the tube’. And so it goes. . .

    Like my uncle used to say, “Never try to teach a pig to sing. You frustrate yourself and you annoy the pig!

  79. JT

    ‘- – DROP table conspiracies;

    Let’s see if that hoses up our resident conspiracy spouting computer program for a while.

    Anyway, I ran into a moonie just this morning who was repeating the whole Van Allen thing. I’ll give you two guesses as to whether or not he could actually tell me the amount of radiation they would have been exposed to, and the first doesn’t count.

  80. TheBlackCat

    Sorry to feed the troll, but Neil, what about FIOS?

  81. T_U_T

    Neil, what is your position on the reality of space shuttle ? Or unmanned space probes ? Or aircraft ?
    Do you believe in germ theory of disease ?
    What is the age and shape of earh ?

  82. “I’m talking about television becoming instantly obsolete if 1-160 Gb/sec optical internet were installed.”

    right because everyone who watches broadcast TV for free would instantly be able to pay for that.

    why am I not surprised you are a 9/11 conspiracy theorist also.

    Have you lined you hat with tin foil yet?

  83. Keith

    You’re right Michael L. Though right now I’m concerned about how the Jews are controlling me while I watch Friends on E4, and I suspect only Neil knows the answer.

  84. Greg in Austin

    Not only is Neil probably a 30-yr old spoiled, unemployed brat living in his parent’s basement, he also has no evidence to support his claims, and flat out refuses to answer any direct questions. ESPECIALLY any questions that make him think.


  85. Paul

    So, what *is* the resolution of the images the LRO will be sending back?

    Will we be able to recognize….
    LEM landing stages?
    Abandoned rovers?
    Some of the unmanned landers?
    The fallen flag at the Apollo 11 site? (OK, that’s a long shot.)

  86. eddie

    Now even linux is part of the WZC!
    I’m trying to install fedora but it just freezes if I don’t select glibweather.
    As you know, this masquerades as a simple background task that collects weather info for your area. In reality it sends out details about you and your activities to the evil overlords.
    Ironic that even with linux you can’t escape.

  87. becky'sthoughts

    First, let me say I am a firm believer, based on massive evidence, in the Apollo missions, man walking on the moon, etc. I would be thrilled to see pictures of the Apollo equipment on the surface of the moon. Not to prove or disprove anything but to have the same excitement as the picture of the Phoenix lander parachuting toward Mars. Just Freakin’ Cool.

  88. Keith

    Good question Paul! It gets the discussion back on topic. I don’t know but I’m sure someone will post it soon.

  89. TheBlackCat

    @ Paul: According to the article Phil linked to it will be half a meter, or around 1 and a half feet (1.64 ft, more specifically).

  90. Greg in Austin

    Neil said,

    “I need to understand why the television and internet need to be bundled separately. That doesn’t seem to make sense.”

    It doesn’t I have AT&T U-Verse at my home right now. TV, Internet, Phone, all over 2 copper lines to my house. Its fiber to my neighborhood, but 25-year old copper the rest of the way. Oh, and before that, I had Time Warner Cable’s all-in-one (phone, TV, internet) all over a single coax cable.

    Really, I don’t know where you come up with your claims. Are you still using dial-up?


  91. TheBlackCat

    @ Greg: Same with comcast service, same with verizon FIOS. Internet, TV, and phone all travel along the same lines. The problem, of course, is that tearing up the street, sidewalk, and yards to install fiber optic lines is expensive. I honestly don’t see how faster downloads would really solve all of our economic woes, anyway.

  92. Paul, I just checked the NASA website, that links to a PDF fact sheet on the LRO, and it looks like it will be able to resolve down to .5 Meters, of just over 1 foot!

  93. DPSisler

    Does anyone else feel “dirty” after reading Niel’s rants? I need to take a shower to feel clean again….Hopefully, the drop table command worked this time.

  94. IVAN3MAN

    Notice how whenever the ginger cat, Phil Plait, is away, the troll mice come out to play!

  95. Davidlpf

    More like the bald cat, the trolls come no matter what.

  96. @Neil,

    I think you’re railing against the wrong “conspiracy” with the whole TV/Internet thing. It’s not some shadowy Zionist conspiracy to use mind control powers through TV sets, but something much more mundane.

    Big Content Providers who have made lots of money through one avenue (TV) see the Internet as a threat. It can allow smaller content providers to break into markets that only Big Content Providers previously had access to. It can more easily allow piracy, perhaps cutting into their profits. (A valid concern, but often overstated to be used as a scare tactic.) In short, it represents a loss of control that they once had. So they fight tooth and nail to preserve their old ways in the face of advancing technology. They won’t be successful in the long run, but they can slow things down.

    This “conspiracy” is out in the open. People like Ed Whitacre trying to claim that Google owes him money for the “privilege” of accessing his users, Mark Cuban calling free video every name under the sun, the RIAA all but claiming that every MP3 file is pirated and illegal. These actors aren’t meeting in one room cackling evilly about a master plan, but they are pushing towards the same goal simply because that’s where their self-interest lies. No “evil Zionists” needed.

  97. Mike Wagner

    Hmm. I said a “bad” word in my last post and now I can’t find it. Do they go to moderation or get eaten?

  98. @Neil,

    I never feel dirty questioning Jesus. Then again, I’m Jewish. Does that mean I’m part of the Evil Zionist Conspiracy to Rule the World?

  99. @Greg in Austin,

    To Neil, the fact that he has to evidence of this massive conspiracy/hoax *is* evidence that this massive conspiracy/hoax is true and has covered it up. If evidence comes out disproving his beliefs, it was manipulated by the Puppet Masters. If evidence somehow came out proving something he believed in, it is The Truth that somehow slipped by the massive conspiracy. This way, he can never be proven wrong.

  100. Davidlpf

    One good thing about trolls they make my give me some entertainment, while I am at work.

  101. Daffy

    TechyDad: “I never feel dirty questioning Jesus. Then again, I’m Jewish. Does that mean I’m part of the Evil Zionist Conspiracy to Rule the World?”

    Yes. Yes it does.

    Facts are irrelevant; logic is irrelevant. The Conspiracy is part of a greater Truth, far above mere reality.

  102. jim mcgann

    why do we care that some people think the moon landing was a hoax ? Let’s move on.

  103. IVAN3MAN

    @ Mike Wagner,

    Comments with ‘bad’ words get pulled into the black hole of Phil’s spam filter, never to be seen again.

  104. IVAN3MAN


    One good thing about trolls they make my give me some entertainment, while I am at work.

    Goofing off at work again, are we? 😉

  105. Mchl

    I, on the other hand feel amused when reading Neil’s comments. He thinks I’m delusional, and I think same of him. Boy, isn’t it funny? Nothing dirty about that 😀

  106. Greg in Austin

    Neil said,

    “I’m not sure if you’ve ever been strong enough to confront or reject the religious brainwashing most of us receive as children, but if you did you would find it a similar experience to confronting the Apollo hoax.”

    I agree 100%. The enthusiasm and zeal you have shown to try to get others to believe your moon hoax conspiracy is the same enthusiasm and zeal shown by Mormons who walk door-to-door, and bible-thumpers yelling in the parking lots of Wal-Mart, trying to get everyone to believe their “truth.”

    Let’s see…
    Religion: No evidence, just faith.
    Moon Landing Was a Hoax: No evidence, just faith.

    Thank you Neil for explaining your behavior for us.


  107. Lawrence

    Neil – he’s like the value-pack of conspiracy nuts. For one low, low price, you get all the world’s greatest conspiracies wrapped in one package.

    Talk about contradictions – believes in the 9/11 conspiracy, but is also a Holocaust Denier. You don’t find too many of those in the same place & throw in Moon Hoax Believer & you’ve scored the TRIFECTA!

    Oh, and he rants about religion here – wow, given the last few topics on YEC, Texas & Arizona. Too funny.

  108. Davidlpf

    100 gb/s of people being hit in the privates by different objects that will solve all the wrold’s problems.

  109. PeteC

    There’s one thing that always makes me smile about conspiracy theorists.

    I suspect that politicians love it too, because it would make them feel so magnificent and powerful.

    Conspiracy theorists assume that there is this deep, dark conspiracy, that includes elements such as the USA and the Soviet Union conspiring to fake moon landings for some deep dark unknown purpose related to ruling the world [not that anyone has ever come up with any reason why it makes the slightest difference or gives them any control whatsoever because nobody I’ve ever known has ever ever said “Oh, they landed on the moon, I must now obey the government’s every whim ].

    This conspiracy is run by steely-eyed, lightning-nerves men of powerful will and driven ambition; men who have phenomenal abilities of persuasion and immense competance, who co-operate to the point of almost never breaking ranks. Who else could run such a brilliant, well organised group? Who else could rig the entire WTO with demolition charges, a process that normally takes weeks, without anyone else noticing, or more impressive still predict at the time they were building the place that the plan would be still functional decades ahead and do it then?

    Except that this isn’t true. Our world leaders? The heads of corporations? The international bankers? The leaders of our religions? They’re people. They’re just like the goobers in your office. Look at that half-wit from IT who asks you to send him an email when you tell him the network’s down – that’s the same kind of guy who runs a major government agency. People are just people. That’s why they couldn’t keep a tiny thing like consensual sexual activity between two willing adults in the most secure room on Earth a secret. The percentage of morons is not lower in politics than in your school, office or local bar, it’s probably higher.

    Hell, if they were all as competant as the conspiracy theorists suggest, able to leverage tiny things like “whoa man, they landed on the moon a few decades back” into “Buwahahahaha! Now I rule the world!” then I say let them. It would be so cool to know that everything really was being run magnificently well, because it sure doesn’t look like it.

  110. @Paul, #101:

    So, what *is* the resolution of the images the LRO will be sending back?

    Will we be able to recognize….
    LEM landing stages?
    Abandoned rovers?
    Some of the unmanned landers?
    The fallen flag at the Apollo 11 site? (OK, that’s a long shot.)

    Someone may have answered already, but I didn’t want to wade through more of Neil’s drivel. I’ve had enough of my brain ooze out today.

    If you go back a couple of pages in Phil’s posts, you will see the original post about the LRO’s first images returned. Somewhere towards the bottom of the post, it’s said that once the LRO is in its final orbit, it will have a resolution of about 0.5 meters, or about 18 inches.

    So, yes, theoretically it would be able to image a flag that had fallen over and was laying flat. I believe there are plans to image all of the Apollo sites, as well as other probes that have landed or bashed into the moon’s surface.

  111. IVAN3MAN


    Everyone with optical internet access and a digital camera potentially has the power to produce high-quality television-style programming.

    You must be joking, man! Have you seen YouTube? Most of the stuff on there is a load of rubbish!

    It appears that the only reason some people have of uploading a video to YouTube is: I have a bloody camera! :roll:

    P.S. Furthermore, I seriously doubt that they even bother to review the bloody video before uploading the damn thing!

  112. Jeff

    @pete: “The percentage of morons is not lower in politics than in your school, office or local bar, it’s probably higher.”

    This is true. But intelligence does not an equality make. Facts are resisted by the very ignorant, and the very powerful; because the powerful needn’t head facts, they just snap their fingers and get their whims. Does a high IQ guarantee a good salary and/or power? Absolutely not, it doesn’t work that way, never did throughout human history. Did Julius Caesar come up with the Julian calendar? no, his court astronomer/astrologer did.

  113. Mike Wagner

    Just curious, but what are your qualifications if you would like to be on the team to verify the pressure suits?

  114. Greg in Austin

    No Neil, there actually is evidence that humans sent probes and people to the moon.

    The Russians did it first, and actually had a moving rover, with video. They also retrieved samples from the moon in 1970. Check this out:
    www . russianspaceweb . com/spacecraft_planetary_lunar.html

    In addition, the technology used in both the US and Russia moon missions paved the way for all of today’s aerospace technology. Your television, your cellphone, GPS and especially the internet would not work without the things we learned in the 60’s and 70’s about orbital communications. You can see pictures and video and people from over 15 different countries that have built parts of, or entire, robotic probes that have gone to the moon, to Mars, Saturn, Jupiter, and on the way to Pluto, all using the same technology. You can talk to scientists and engineers and mechanics and programmers and guys that clean the floors who are all part of the space program. There are hundreds of thousands of people all over the country involved in space flight, and all of them owe some part of their livelihood to the United States’ space program. We have the brave souls who risked their lives to get into space, to get to the moon, and to push the human race to the edge of its knowledge and abilities, who are still alive today. And don’t you ever forget those who sacrificed their lives (on Columbia, Challenger, Apollo 1) for you and your country and the entire world, so that you may live in a place where science and technology are used to make your life better.

    How dare you sit there safely behind your computer screen and claim that none of those things happened. You should be ashamed of yourself.

    Now, what evidence do YOU have?


  115. Mchl

    Wow… seriously… who’s moderating this comments section? I doubt BA would remove all Neil’s comments, given that basically whole discussion revolves around him.

  116. TS

    128: “Look at that half-wit from IT who asks you to send him an email when you tell him the network’s down”

    Once had an access control system go down at a university, all we could get from a memory dump was the PIN codes. The system administrator then sent an email to all the students with a list of all the PIN codes, asking them to put their name against their PIN.

  117. JB of Brisbane

    I thought Neil got himself banned by way of an exceptionally (for him) illogical and anti-semitic rant in the comments of another blog. Why am I still reading his phlegm?

  118. Davidlpf

    Right now I think the comments are being auto moderated through the software. The BA’s right now in Vegas getting ready for TAM. He probably has laptop with him but probably busy at the moment.

  119. Davidlpf

    119. jb Neil got banned but he found a new location to post from.

  120. Greg in Austin

    Rats. Looks like all of Neil’s posts are gone.

    And I was just starting to have fun!


  121. Davidlpf

    Just kidding about the bald cat remark.

  122. Pat Montana

    @Greg in Austin:

    Yeah…with Neil gone I guess I’ll have to find a new substitute for Monty Python! He may have been crazy as an outhouse rat and a paranoid racist…but it was fun to shoot down his “scientific” arguments!

  123. #117, Mchl
    The BA banned Neil because of anti-Semitic posts on another topic, and, because of what appeared to be threats of violence against former a employer. This really is not the place for that type of crap. When these people pop up it’s best to ignore them.

  124. Neil’s main points for the latecomers:
    Moon landing was a hoax.
    Spacesuit gloves will asplode in a real vacuum.
    The Moon hoax is Zionist plot.
    The holocaust is a Zionist plot.
    The conspiracy is a Zionist/Bolshevik plot.
    Hitler was a patsy.
    Hitler is a Zionist/Bolshevik conspirator.
    The “showers” were faked.
    Zyklon B isn’t a great insecticide let alone a people killer.
    The crematoria were little more than bakers ovens.
    The ISS is a prop.
    9/11 was a part of Zionist/Bolshevik conspiracy.
    World peace is just a broadband connection away.

  125. Madame Rogue

    My father worked at NASA from 1965 to 1971, as a technician working on the Saturn series (Saturn I, Saturn Ib, and Saturn V). If the moon landing were faked, he’d have had to have been one of the people who were in on any hoax. And after almost forty years, the stories he’s told makes me doubt in the extreme that there is anything to these conspiracy theories.

    The only time I’ve ever heard my father utter expletives was the one time he had the misfortune to encounter a conspiracy believer–even when faced with someone who was there firsthand, the conspiracy guy refused to believe anything my dad was saying, telling him to his face that he was either part of the conspiracy or had been duped by his bosses. The nutcase just wouldn’t believe anything my father told him. It was just surreal.

    So no, I don’t think anything you say or any proof you show will satisfy conspiracy true believers. Belief in their conspiracy of choice has become their religion, and god help anyone who disputes any tenants of their belief. I rank these loonies with the flat-earthers: people who are so ignorant that they are unwilling to let mere facts get in the way of their beliefs.

  126. Mark Hansen

    davidlpf (121), perhaps he’s using a trailer in the desert and his real name is Marvin Trill.

  127. 87. Paul Asks: “So, what *is* the resolution of the images the LRO will be sending back?”

    Approximately 0.5 meters/pixel

    >Will we be able to recognize….
    >LEM landing stages?

    Yes. The descent stage is a little over 10 m across the landing pads, but let’s say 10 m across the solid part. That’s an image of 400 pixels (20 x 20), enough to get a reasonable image.

    > Abandoned rovers?

    Yes. They’re about 2 x 4 m so that would be ~50 pixels in the image. Enough to identify if you already know what it is, but probably not enough to stand up in court.

    > Some of the unmanned landers?

    Depends on which ones. The Lunakhods (remote controlled Russian rovers) were roughly the size of the Apollo rovers, so see above. The Surveyors were triangular, maybe 2 meters on a side which would be an image of only about 10 pixels, plus they were pretty spidery without much to differentiate from the surface (seen from above). The things that might show up are the solar panels, if they are still roughly horizontal, or maybe the spherical propellant tanks, but those would only be a few pixels on a side. Some of the other probes, like Ranger that impacted rather than landed, should have made a relatively easy-to-see crater.

    > The fallen flag at the Apollo 11 site? (OK, that’s a long shot.)

    Probably not. Even if it fell with the flag still perfectly stretched out, it was only about 1 x .5 m which is only 2 pixels. Sorry.

    – Jack

  128. Mchl

    @Jack Hagerty: Don’t forget we will probably be able to see some shadows. With sun low over lunar horizon, the shadows will be larger than the objects themselves.

  129. Joe

    I made my arrival into this world on the morning of July 17, 1969 just in time to witness mankind make his first steps on another.

    I’m currently reading Seth Shostak’s Confessions of an Alien Hunter and I hope I live long enough to witness the revelation of an indisputable signal from yet another.

  130. 132. Mchl Says: “@Jack Hagerty: Don’t forget we will probably be able to see some shadows. With sun low over lunar horizon, the shadows will be larger than the objects themselves.”

    But will the shadows be parallel? 😉

  131. 100. TechyDad Says:
    I never feel dirty questioning Jesus. Then again, I’m Jewish. Does that mean I’m part of the Evil Zionist Conspiracy to Rule the World?

    Back in the 70’s, when I was going to the University (or, for the Brits ‘at University’ 😉 ), we had as a speaker in one class Harlan Ellison (yep, that guy). He made a comment along the lines of (hey, it’s 30 years!) that he might ‘malign Jesus’… from the audience came a comment like ‘go for it’, which rather unsettled Harlan… who stated he felt like he ‘fell down the rabbit hole’.

    Another comment I can’t find right now mentioned the poster’s father worked with NASA, and I have to say my father worked with Bendix, who handled the elevators (Brit: lifts) for the VAB and all the launch pads, etc. He sometimes was at the command console that you see in the views of the command center (at KSC, not Houston), where he could see the status of EVERY elevator at KSC.
    How were the Astronauts supposed to get out of the CSM and back to the ground?


  132. Robert E

    I sorta feel sorry for people like Neil. Living in such a paranoid-conspiracy-filled existence must be terribly frightening.

  133. Torbjörn Larsson, OM

    I think the main effect will be that antiscientist denialists/conspiratists will get their recruiting bases cut off and will be laughed out of all sane discussions. They will slowly suffocate in their pooling drool.

    > Abandoned rovers?

    Here is another one. HiRISE, with a claimed 0.3 m resolution, let us see rover tracks and even chute lines. Can LRO let us see rover tracks and even series of foot prints?

    I dunno, but I would bet on the former and hope for the later.

  134. 111. PeteC Says:

    This conspiracy is run by steely-eyed, lightning-nerves men of powerful will and driven ambition; men who have phenomenal abilities of persuasion and immense competance, who co-operate to the point of almost never breaking ranks.

    Ayn Rand readers/heroes?


  135. theMark

    Now with the LRO, we can see the Towers! Of the Aliens!!! OMFG!!!!!

    Sorry, I guess I just got an allergic response to a severe case of teh stoopid when I saw this guy’s video:

    Oh please, let that be satire… do these weirdos have NO clue at all about light, shadows and photography? I mean, everything in that picture casts enormously long shadows because the sun is barely grazing the lunar horizon. They’re looking at a rock and call it a “tower”. Ouch. And of course, factless shoulder patting abounds.

    Sagan was so right. People don’t understand any more the very basics of the technology and science that powers their world. I do hope I’m no longer around when this ignorance bears fruit…

  136. 111. PeteC Says: “This conspiracy is run by steely-eyed, lightning-nerves men of powerful will and driven ambition; men who have phenomenal abilities of persuasion and immense competence, who co-operate to the point of almost never breaking ranks.”

    Sounds like the “cadre of evil white businessmen” who are behind the goings-on of every season of “24”

    – Jack

  137. 137. Torbjörn Larsson, OM Says: “HiRISE, with a claimed 0.3 m resolution, let us see rover tracks and even chute lines. Can LRO let us see rover tracks and even series of foot prints?”

    I’m starting to get out of my area of expertise here, but there’s more to an image than pixel count. Features with good contrast and are quasi-linear (like rover tracks) will show up quite distinctly even though their width is well below the resolution limit of the camera. The reason for this is where my understanding gets fuzzy, but I would hazard a guess to say that the tracks, even though much less than a pixel wide, still contribute to the average value of that pixel. That means that particular pixel will be darker or lighter than its neighbors (depending on whether the tracks are dark or light). The string of such pixels in a row makes up a visible feature, even though we can’t really “see” the tracks. The same goes for the parachute shroud lines. They were only ~1 cm across, but were so bright against the ground that they showed up, even though that’s only 1/300 of the stated resolution.

    – Jack

  138. ethanol

    Jack Hagerty:

    I believe this is correct, and it seems likely that we will be able to see features smaller than the resolution like rover tracks, but you know the conspiracy theorists will just try to use this too as evidence of fabricated images.

  139. I sorta feel sorry for people like Neil. Living in such a paranoid-conspiracy-filled existence must be terribly frightening.

    I used to think that way. Now they just piss me off, which I suppose is also a part of their whole fantasy trip. Utterly powerless in the their own lives, they cling to their “secret knowledge” to fill the huge gaping holes in their identities.

    At least the UFO nutters can be creative. These people are boring, as well as stupid.

    Buzz Aldrin had the right approach. Put ’em all in a room with the Colonel, and let him take care of ’em.

  140. ND

    I’m with kuhnigget. I’ve lost all tolerance and feel like following Buzz’s example and punching people. I’m hoping that as the years go by I’ll have a more Zen and smug attitude towards them. These nutters don’t help with blood pressures.

  141. At least the UFO nutters can be creative. These people are boring, as well as stupid.

    Agreed. At least Hoagland throws in so much crazy all at once (with grafix !!!) that there’s an “Ed Wood” type of entertainment value.

    The Apollo Hoax Theory is so profoundly stupid that its adherents are self-selected as being unable to even come up with Art Bell-worthy material.

  142. One thing I’ve never understood about the moon hoaxers: Do they allege that ONLY the Apollo 11 landing was faked, or were ALL of them a hoax? And what about Apollo 13? Why would NASA have faked that?

  143. @Lugosi
    For the drama maybe. People may have been starting to think the hoax was becoming routine so they needed to make it more interesting. Maybe the real “prop” had issues so they had to fake fixing the problems. Of course if they lost the “prop” they would have had to bury the astronauts out in the desert somewhere. See the documentary “Capricorn One” for more info.

  144. Charles J. Slavis,Jr.

    I was in Vietnam looking up at the moon as we landed. I didn’t have a camera to snap the historical picture. I then ran around my hill top telling POW’s that America was on the moon. How do you explain to somebody that you have been trying to shoot, cut off their ears, throw out of helicopters and beat information out of….That man has progressed enough to land a man on the moon, and safely return him to earth?

  145. Charles J. Slavis,Jr.

    The Apollo 13 hoax was done because they knew it was going to be a great movie.

  146. Charles J. Slavis,Jr.

    If you haven’t noticed, there is a man with a crank standing next to the Earth and the sun and moon pass over in time to his cranking. The paint on the milky way is still wet.

  147. Charles J. Slavis,Jr.

    Actually the sky is only 40 feet above you. They use perspective to make the painted buildings look that tall.

  148. Charles J. Slavis,Jr.

    Doesn’t it bother anybody that they landed on this side of the moon, placed mirrors to laser the distance from the earth to the moon, and found out that it is moving away from the earth. Now we need to land on the other side to push it back.

  149. Charles J. Slavis,Jr.

    As the moon moves away, the tide will be effected. My underwear will turn gray.

  150. Alex

    Unfortunately, NASA’s backwards-looking approach regarding returning to the moon — seemingly starting from scratch, having forgotten how we got there in the first place, it seems — is just giving the deniers more ammo. The fact China will likely get there first won’t change any minds, because if any country has the ability to fake such an event, it’s China! Some of these deniers will only be convinced if they are personally taken to the Moon … no, they’d probably come up with some sort of drug-induced hallucination theory to explain that away, too!

  151. MassachusettsCares

    Where is GOOGLE MOON!!! that will settle all this BullSh*t we can all see the trash we left behind!!!! I dated a Mna who wroked on the first landing it is for real , there is no way all those people could keep a lie like that for this long!!!!

  152. Megan

    If we are truly capable of putting people on the moon, then why haven’t we done it since 74 or whenever the last “moon-landing” was? Our government loves to spend money sending people up in to space, why not spend a few billion more and send someone up there again and prove to us all that we are truly capable of it?

  153. Kevin

    Let’s face it. The only people that really made it to the moon used a space capsule made from a cement mixer truck and monohydrazine for fuel. I think Andy Griffith documented the whole thing and it was on TV so no one can disbelieve it.

  154. REAL6

    I want to know why there has been only one moon landing 40 years ago but has not been back since?

    Sounds like a crock if you ask me. And how come there are never any stars in any of the pictures? It just looks like the Movie ‘Capricorn One’.

    Also, how come there are never pictures of the dark side of the moon? What’s going on back there? Secret alien bases and they told you humans to back off?

    Also what about Aristarchus Crater? We know there is a fusion reactor of some kind in there. A source of light, extra terrestrial? Could be….

  155. Skepticism

    I think that people give the government the benefit of the doubt much too often. For example, the CIA blatantly and utterly lied to the American public on the matter of the explosion of TWA Flight 800 on July 17, 1996. The CIA produced a video which tried to explain away 600+ eyewitness accounts of a missile rising from the ocean to hit the plane. The FBI recorded more than 600 testimonies from people who explicitly saw this missile. Furthermore, 120+ of these people saw the missile begin it’s ascent from the ocean surface (in other words, confirming it was an ascending object). However, the CIA spent hundreds of thousands of dollars to produce an animation to convince everyone that these 600+ people were all mistaken, and they were really looking at burning wreckage FALLING from the plane, not a single point source of light (i.e. missile plume) rising from the ocean. The CIA attempts to explain this by saying the airplane, which had completely lost it’s nose cone by this time, actually flew for 20+ seconds in this non-aerodynamic position! This, of course, cannot happen and the laws of aerodynamics prove this. The CIA participated in a lie that to this stay still stands as the ‘official’ response. Anyone who believes this garbage from the CIA certainly isn’t of sound mind, and very certainly ins’t anyone who understands fluid mechanics.


    In summary, I have no opinion regarding the Apollo 11 event. In all honesty, I don’t care if it were real or faked (either way is fine by me). What I do care about is that the government often (and sometimes always) lies to the public, and we cannot allow that as a society interested in democracy.

  156. Eugene

    PROOF: July 21, 1969, Apollo 11 astronauts Buzz Aldrin and Neil Armstrong put a mirror on the Moon! “Using these mirrors,” explains University of Maryland physics Professor Carroll Alley, the project’s principal investigator during the Apollo years, “we can ‘ping’ the moon with laser pulses and measure the Earth-moon distance very precisely. This is a wonderful way to learn about the moon’s orbit and to test theories of gravity.” How did the mirror get on the lunar surface if astronauts did not put it there? Oh, I know, aliens put it there!

  157. Don Diego

    I suppose that the unfortunate deaths of the Apollo 1 crew; Grissom, White and Chaffee were a hoax too?

  158. Joe Yuna

    From the signals I received as an amateur operator to the early laser measurements from those mirrors on the lunar surface, to the thousands of other radio operators tuned into the direct line-of-sight communications from the Apollo lunar orbiter, I say the naysayers are without substance, without science and without intellect or scientific method of any kind.

    If anyone of these experts want to match pure scientific, direct evidence and not some lame analysis by amateurs, and not by fellow scientists and engineers as myself, I say bring it on.

    It is time to admit the ignorance, and embrace the fact that at least one generation of Americans had the know-how, the will, and the courage that these fools and today’s generations lack in their everyday lifestyle and value systems.

    Quit giving press to these few whose value to history or science is nill – and embrace today’s few who have taken us farther than man has gone before – and soon to Mars or the moons of Jupiter or Saturn where life is possible, and awaits the same challenge and real Americans that braved the journey to the moon years ago.

    Aldrin should have given the idiots a real military man-sized beating, as these little children of science rightly deserve – Aldrin and his comrades faced incredible odds and dangers for the likes of these fair-weather patriots and mental midgets.

  159. Dan Loganbrenner

    So now NASA has inadvertently destroyed the original video footage of the landing so that all we have is enhanced remastered images that are “much better.” Could it possibly be that the original video wouldn’t stand up to the the scrutiny of modern analysis techniques and would be shown as fakes? No, of course not–NASA simply reused the tapes and destroyed the most important video footage in the history of the world. They can put a man on the moon, but they can’t keep track of a role of tape??? Come on.

  160. jim

    These “fake” folks make for some fun reading … but I did learn something new today:

    Thanks for the news, Phil, and have a great day! I’m just enjoying the afternoon listening to the chatter between the ISS / ground … and the ceremonial bell ringing welcoming the shuttle? Another new thing I learned today. Okay. Sign me up for the vacation-on-the-moon contest, eh! I’m psyched! :-))

  161. jim

    @Yuna: nail on the head

    @BO’B: screw the trillion dollar pseudo-penance to some ‘shell’ company for natural gas (ie, CO2), send it to NASA and let’s get out there!

  162. Trevor

    Maybe when we go to the moon this time, we should see if we can have a part of the mission be to set up some sort of a light or something. Something that would be bright enough to be seen from earth with, say, binoculars.

    Something solar powered, someting of a larger scale, made out of LED’s.
    With proper magnification, during a new moon, anyone would be able to look up there and see it for themselves “USA 2020” or something like that.

    Is there ANY way, this time around, to make it unmistakable that we actually were there? You know how some people can be. “I’ll believe it when I see it with my own eyes” . . . . . .

  163. John

    It sure was a fake, we are humans once we lead we follow. We havn’t been there in 40 yrs ?? We havn’t gone back since hmm I guess we were never there. It’s just that simple. I don’t see rides to the moon: if so Michael Jackson would of put neverland on the moon.

  164. Rob K

    Good Article .

    There have been tens of thousands advances in science that the race to the moon has provided to civilization.

    If someone truely does not believe the moon landings happened they should prove their commitment by giveing up their computers, cell phones, baby diapers, GPS systems .. international communications .. internet … and the ability to make an income from companies that use it.

  165. Cousin Vinny

    You true believers, and non-believers, are a hoot…let us know when you find the WMDs, ‘patriots.’

  166. Fox Muldar

    In the 1960’s, I spent a lot of years of working with scientists – first in college as an under grad and then upon graduation, as a lab rat/lab instructor in a small college. I did this for nearly 10 years and during that time, I was fortunate to be able to spent hours working and talking with (and learning from) a lot of very bright Phd’s and engineers. It was, and I realize it may sound corny, quite an inspirational time in my life. I saw men and women wo had dedicated their lives to improving young minds and finding truth through science. Real science; the antithesis of the willful ignorance so common, recently, in holders of high governmant offices. None of these people (and I worked with dozens) would or could be involved in a hoax that made a mockery of real science.

    I honestly pity anyone who has not had the opportunity to be inspired by the excitment and energy of pure and applied science.

    Remember, for years, more years than men and women have been exploring space, people – bright people – believed that the earth was the center of the universe, that the sun revolved around the earth and that the earth was flat. But, over time – centuries, in fact – the un-believers died off or were made believers.

    The take away is that, today we know that these flat-earthers, etc., were ignorant or stupid (maybe both) and so, over time, will the people who self-identify as HB’ers be known.

  167. Snowman

    The problem with conspiracy theorists as a whole is that they have a fundamental misunderstanding of what constitutes evidence. Their understanding of the scientific method is also a cartoonish version of how we should approach analysis of a subject. Instead of collecting evidence, examining it, and then drawing a conclusion, their analysis is completely inverse- they start with a conclusion, and they then go out and try to find “evidence” to support their hair-brained theories. If something contradicts their theory, they dismiss it with a wave of the hand… “NASA faked those photos!” or “Bush could have had the them killed!” Meanwhile, they offer ZERO evidence that their guesses as to what happened may possibly be true.

    For CTers, wild speculation and half-witted theories replace evidence and the scientific method. These people are often not very bright, but not always. Sometimes they can be very bright, but also extremely paranoid.

    Basically, if you are the type of person who can look at a website and believe that is “evidence”, without any verification, you’ll probably believe just about any conspiracy theory. 9/11Inside job, Moon Landing, JFK, whatever… they will believe it.

    LOL at people who think perusing websites is “research”… sorry, the Internet con-artists who push these theories aren’t exactly credible.

  168. The pictures are here, the pictures are here! Apollo 11, 14, 15, 16, 17 so far. Even the foot path’s for Apollo 14. Its nothing short of stunning. So what headline does CNN choose to run on its web site? “Could moon landings have been faked? Some still think so”.

  169. RedBEERd

    The anti moon landing conspiracy nuts should devote their time and efforts to the real conspiracies such the Bilderberg group and their factual new world order attampt. This is NOT a conspiracy theory anymore, it is a fact that Bush, Cheney, Kissenger, and the other members of the Bilderberg group have made public comments about. Fear them a lot more than the moon landing people.

  170. Scott

    Here’s the “highly” detailed LRO shots…snicker

  171. Mike

    I’d like to hear all the CT retards try to get around the fact that anybody with a HAM radio could easily listen in on the broadcasts sent to and from both the Apollo spacecraft and Earth.

  172. Henrique

    I was born in the 70’s and I too have strong doubts.

    Tech is now tens of times improved but we can hardly manage to put people in space, nevermind the moon.

    Those “thousand” people from NASA or colaborative companies who needed to be “in” on the hoax, well, sorry to disagree, but 1) only a percentage of those needed to be in on the hoax; 2) Groups of individuals coordinated by Cheney, Nixon and other high profile USA politicians were professionals on fabricating fact and covering their tracks while they were doing it, why not this?

    But the question on my generation of post-moon landing remains. If we put 11 men there when techonology was so primitive… why not NOW?

  173. Tom

    All I can say is…

    If you believe the Moon Hoax, please consider getting sterilized. That would be your greatest contribution to mankind.

  174. John G

    “hardly manage”?

    As I type we have 13 people in LEO. It’s still too expensive, but we manage it quite well.

    “why not NOW?”

    It’s just a matter of money and the will to do it. When someone asks “Why don’t they…” the answer is almost always MONEY.

    Right on, though I must point out that this needs to happen before breeding. 😉

  175. Charles J. Slavis, Jr.

    There were several flights to the moon. Enough to almost take them for granted. But I watched every broadcast possible. Yesterday I got so excited about the mirrors that I ran out side with my laser pen and aimed it at the moon. Three airliners almost crashed as my beam hit the mirror and came racing back at me. It reflected directly back into the out house, and blasted it to pieces. Now I need to hide from the FBI and I have literally nowhere to go.

  176. Andy

    There are people who believe we never went to the moon.
    There are people who believe the world is flat.
    There are people who believe they can make angels fly out of their asses.
    Enough said.

  177. Rick Viets

    Americans love to doubt and argue. The LRO wont convince most of the Apollo Deniers. You could hit them all over the head, Tie them up in a space suit and take them to the moon and kick them around the Sea of Tranquility till your blue in the face and bring them back and they will still swear the whole thing was a hoax. Thats just good red blooded hard headed Americans for you! For some reasons Americans just love to whip long dead horses. Alot of Hard Work, Organization and Courage was put into landing those men on The Moon, it is just disgusting and unpatriotic that our own people want to stand here and call it all fake. I could understand it being called fake if NASA were to wake up one morning, unveil the Saturn V Rocket and shoot 3 people all that way. But there was Launch after Launch of testing and perfecting to land them safely on the moon and bring them back safe. 3 Men Lost their lives in the beginning process of that mission. We lost the greatest Gemini/Mercury astronaut in the Apollo 1 accident, Gus Grissom. If you are saying that Apollo 11 landing was a fake, your saying those 3 men died for nothing in that caplsule. I find that unacceptable!

  178. Gods nation

    whether the moon landing was a hoax or not doesn´t really interest me – a strong political motivation to fake it was there at the time, along with the technical capabilities do do so. This should hold true at least.

    When reading some of these above posts, I can basically only see grown-up kids, crying due to fear of having their favourite toy taken away from them. this applies to both sides, fanatics*/patriots and HBs/deniers as well. the intrinsic benefit of heigthening one´s self-esteem through identification with a successful person/country/organisation… plays a major role in these processes. You are all fans. Better become fans of yourselves somehow. Sadly, this is only possibly for those who actually have inner strength, talent and the ability to achieve something meaningful in their lifes. Generally speaking, I have to admit that I tend to respect people who think critically and have the balls to fight against the establishment and “common belief” if so necessary more than those, more often than not, weak individuals who overidentify themselves with more powerful entities to compensate for their own feebleness.
    rant over.

    What I really would like to know though: what about the dark side of the moon? why didn´t we condict any research there yet – we had 40 years to do it? why send rovers up to distant Mars first?

    * patriotism is just another, but not any less dangerous, colour of fanatism – if anyone even cares to think about uncomfortable issues in this forum at all, which I strongly doubt.

  179. Steve

    So the CIA can read read a newspaper from Earth orbit but NASA can’t give us high res moon pics? WTH?

    And those Hasselblad cams the Apollo guys used “on the moon” were not “radiation protected”, neither were the film magazines they managed to change “on the moon’s surface”…..and the film was nothing special…amazing how the radiation and extreme temp swings didn’t affect it…..

    All you sheep who kiss the gubmint’s feet and blindly believe everything they say w/o question really should research BOTH SIDES of the story before you speak.

    The LEM had like what…..32k of memory?? (must’ve been running Linux) 😉

    How did the fibreglass whip antenna on the Gemini 6A capsule survive the tremendous heat of atmospheric re-entry?

    Instead of being able to jump at least ten feet high in “one sixth” gravity, the highest jump was about nineteen inches

    An astrophysicist who has worked for NASA writes that it takes two meters of shielding to protect against medium solar flares and that heavy ones give out tens of thousands of rem in a few hours. Russian scientists calculated in 1959 that astronauts needed a shield of 4 feet of lead to protect them on the Moons surface. Why didn’t the astronauts on Apollo 14 and 16 die after exposure to this immense amount of radiation? And why are NASA only starting a project now to test the lunar radiation levels and what their effects would be on the human body if they have sent 12 men there already?

    The astronauts in these “pressurized” suits were easily able to bend their fingers, wrists, elbows, and knees at 5.2 p.s.i. and yet a boxer’s 4 p.s.i. speed bag is virtually unbendable. The guys would have looked like balloon men if the suits had actually been pressurized.

    The water sourced air conditioner backpacks should have produced frequent explosive vapour discharges. They never did.

    Why did NASA’s administrator resign just days before the first Apollo mission?

    In 1998, the Space Shuttle flew to one of its highest altitudes ever, three hundred and fifty miles, hundreds of miles below merely the beginning of the Van Allen Radiation Belts. Inside of their shielding, superior to that which the Apollo astronauts possessed, the shuttle astronauts reported being able to “see” the radiation with their eyes closed penetrating their shielding as well as the retinas of their closed eyes. For a dental x-ray on Earth which lasts 1/100th of a second we wear a 1/4 inch lead vest. Imagine what it would be like to endure several hours of radiation that you can see with your eyes closed from hundreds of miles away with 1/8 of an inch of aluminium shielding!

    There should have been a substantial crater blasted out under the LM’s 10,000 pound thrust rocket. Sceptics would have you believe that the engines only had the power to blow the dust from underneath the LM as it landed. If this is true, how did Armstrong create that famous boot print if all the dust had been blown away?

    The Apollo 1 fire of January 27, 1967, killed what would have been the first crew to walk on the Moon just days after the commander, Gus Grissom, held an unapproved press conference complaining that they were at least ten years, not two, from reaching the Moon. The dead man’s own son, who is a seasoned pilot himself, has in his possession forensic evidence personally retrieved from the charred spacecraft (that the government has tried to destroy on two or more occasions). Gus Grissom was obviously trying to make a big statement as he placed a lemon in the window of the Apollo I spacecraft as it sat ready for launch!

    Why did the blueprints and plans for the Lunar Module and Moon Buggy get destroyed if this was one of History’s greatest accomplishments?

    Come on guys….think about some of these things!!!


    If you can’t answer these questions then keep your trap shut.

  180. Scott

    Steve – your post doesn’t even really warrant rebutle.
    You represent bad science at its worst.

    Your views demonstrate a fairly limited ability to understand physics and engineering.

  181. Charles J. Slavis, Jr.

    God made it. Apollo did it. I believe it. That’s it.

  182. Charles J. Slavis, Jr.

    Isn’t anybody concerned that sending a lot of stuff from many countries to explore and mine the moon just might mess up a delicate balance up there? The moon is already moving away from the earth. Shouldn’t we try to nudge it back at some point? And can anybody build a laser proof outhouse?

  183. Cyberdude

    I agree with steve, although guys spend time arguing over trivial things like the flags, and photos. some important quesions still lie unanswered. for example, after the wright brothers first flight.. look at where Aeroplanes have advanced. But after apollo..??? no human has left low earth orbit. how did the LEM land with just one main thruster beloe, it that too Buzz aldrin claims he manually took over the controls as the main computer failed.. even today highly specialised computers and sensors are needed to keep a craft stable by controlling the levles of thrust between multiple thrusters to keep the craft level…it would take almost nothign to turn the LEM over, and that would be the end of it.. and they did it succesfully 6 out of 6 times, whom are you kidding.. As far as the LRO images are concerned, theyre a joke a very funny one that too.. if the cameras used for google earth images, which are around 4 times higher in altitude, can easily identify cars and in some cases read your newspaper headlines, the LRO flying few miles over the moon, should be able to show actual footprints, and detailed images. theres no way apollo could have brought back humans alvie form the moon.. that to 6 out of 6 times.. if they could send a guy 40 years back.. Sending another today should have been childs play.. yet they cannot.. despite immense tech advancements.. Some day the truth will come out.. until then, low res images, etc will be easy to produce to try to convince the majority.. good luck

  184. Steve

    If you’re such a genius give a good rebuttal to the questions I brought up…… me I’n not in a trailer park wearing a tin foil hat….
    None of you believers can handle the hard questions? WTH?

  185. Mark Hansen

    Steve, if you had done some basic research first, you would realise that the main engine of the descent stage wasn’t operating at full thrust when landing. It’s like parking a car. Do you approach the parking space at maximum speed and then hit the brakes at the last second? No, you reduce your speed so that when you want to stop, you apply a minimum amount of braking effort. Same with the descent engine.
    This simple example is why people like you get very short shrift from people that think. Try thinking. It’s free, doesn’t hurt, and can help you with life’s basic needs.

  186. Mark Hansen

    Cyberdude, if you would like to see man return to the moon, just put a proposal to NASA, detailing how you would like to see it done and wait. Oh, you might like to include a check/cheque for quite a few billion or perhaps trillion dollars. There’s the problem; not technology but money.

  187. sygmal


    “All you sheep who kiss the gubmint’s feet and blindly believe everything they say w/o question really should research BOTH SIDES of the story before you speak.”

    ehem.. speak for yourself.

  188. Charles J. Slavis, Jr.

    When the LEM took off it didn’t set still while the rocket fired. It seemed to spring up off it’s platform. It appeared as if a sling shot launched it. With less gravity, the rockets were able to give an immediate push up up and away. I could barely see the thrust. I would like to see a movie of the astronauts as they took off. BOING!

  189. Ed

    So I go to the LRO site, read the copy and look at the pictures. Then I put NASA and their words to test. I suggest you all do the same. I would like to know what you came up with.

    ” The spacecraft’s current elliptical orbit resulted in image resolutions that were slightly different for each site but were all around four feet per pixel. Because the deck of the descent stage is about 12 feet in diameter, the Apollo relics themselves fill an area of about nine pixels. However, because the sun was low to the horizon when the images were made, even subtle variations in topography create long shadows. Standing slightly more than ten feet above the surface, each Apollo descent stage creates a distinct shadow that fills roughly 20 pixels.”

    I used the Apollo 14 picture with the 100 meter scale, zoomed in, and started counting pixels. If you zoom to 2000 x, every single click to the right or left is two pixels.

    The 100 meter guide turned out to be 232 pixels x 4 ft = 928 ft = 282.8544 meters.

    The Apollo relic is suppose to be 9 pixels. I counted 63, which at 500 x, was a 9×7 rectangle. I didn’t count the random edges just to be fair.

    Now the shadow, I went very conservative again and only counted the main rectangle, 12×25 = 300. NASA only counted 20.

    What were your numbers?

  190. Charles J. Slavis, Jr.

    Aren’t pixels fictitious tiny people with wings?

  191. Charles J. Slavis, Jr.

    NASA uses bucky balls.

  192. Charles J. Slavis, Jr.

    Is there a golf ball in orbit around the moon? Or, did it end up in a crater?

  193. Charles J. Slavis, Jr.

    Is this the same NASA that used feet instead of meters and missed Mars?

  194. Charles J. Slavis, Jr.

    You put your left foot in. You take your left foot out. You take one small step for man. Then you shake it all about.

  195. Charles J. Slavis, Jr.

    I guess that’s why they didn’t let me go. They didn’t want any Hokey Pokey.

  196. Charles J. Slavis, Jr.

    I can hear Walter now. He’s placing his foot in…..No he’s taking it out……Now he’s placing his foot in……and he’s shaking it about.

  197. Marco Hernández

    @ED #202

    It says “image resolutions that were slightly different for each site but were all around four feet per pixel”. The image named “369236main_lroc_apollo14labeled_522x256.jpg” has 522 pixels width and 538 meters witdh (1 pixel = 3,38 ft). The image that you used has been modified and that is the reason for the 100 meters guide. Now do tha math again.

  198. Marco Hernández
  199. Interesting comments.

    I’ve always been intrigued at the idea and the possibility of man being on the moon. I was actually about 1 year old when Apollo 11 epoch landing or its hoax version took place. For me it does not matter. I simply love the idea that we (mankind) could do it. Even if it was not done it matters not, because it has not changed the progress about space exploration or it attending exploitation mankind has recorded in the last 40 years.

    To all HBs, feel free and enjoy being just that! We can not all be the same.

    I remember in a science class in high school, when we were told light has seven different colors, some accepted it but others rejected, claiming light has only 1 colorless hue. Only those who believed it ever made it to the next class, where the practical experiment demonstrated that truth about light.

    A quantum of solace to all HBs, right here in Nigeria West Africa, a friend’s mother upon being told that man has landed on the moon, looked up, pointed at it and said “This moon! This very moon am seeing! No! It’s not possible! No man can set foot on this moon!” She has since died (RIP) believing that. So “You are not alone”

    Life goes on.

  200. Iseenem

    My recommendation to Phil and others is that they not be so arrogant regarding the alien artifact question. There very well may be alien artifacts on the moon.

    Never let your mind diminish your tiny insignificant existence on this spec we call earth. How large the universe is and how old.

    Every day for the past two thousand billion years, this planet has advertised life to the universe with trillions of watts of energy reflected into the universe in all directions.

    So, please keep an open mind.

  201. Charles J. Slavis, Jr.

    The reason that hoax claimers persist after being debunked is that they have no place to put it to rest.

  202. Mike Breach

    Close up of the Tower photograph by LRO and digitally remastered by the scientist Ron Stewart,

    collaborates the structure reported in Hoagland “Dark Mission”, i.e., the Tower.

  203. Charles J. Slavis, Jr.

    And just when we had them convinced. NASA and the Apollo Astronauts give the Dutch a petrified wood moon rock.??????????

  204. Charles J. Slavis, Jr.

    Trees on the moon? I knew that there was life out there!

  205. Gods nation

    So here we have it.
    “US officials said they had no explanation for the Dutch discovery.”

    Now this whole issue looks very much like a fraud indeed! I was wondering why it took so long to come up with that discovery. Didn´t the Dutch have the technology to analyse the “moon rock” in the ´70ies? What about the other rocks given out, those have to be analysed as well.

  206. Charles J. Slavis, Jr.

    Now I wonder if the Rolling Stones were real.

  207. Charles J. Slavis, Jr.

    Mick Jagger may have been petrified at his first performance.

  208. Charles J. Slavis, Jr.

    US Officials were stumped.

  209. Charles J. Slavis, Jr.

    If you want to try for Double Dutch, hide the moon rocks with the original tape.

  210. Charles J. Slavis, Jr.

    The moon rocks may be at an undisclosed location with Dick Chaney. Perhaps they are with the Weapons of Mass Destruction. Could be in area 51.

  211. Charles J. Slavis, Jr.

    They may have been abducted by aliens.

  212. Charles J. Slavis, Jr.

    NASA should be issued jump suits without pockets.

  213. Charles J. Slavis, Jr.

    Could NASA save money by firing the people responsible for incompetence?

  214. Andrew

    202. Ed Says: July 21st, 2009 at 10:10 pm

    So I go to the LRO site, read the copy and look at the pictures. Then I put NASA and their words to test. I suggest you all do the same. I would like to know what you came up with.

    ” The spacecraft’s current elliptical orbit resulted in image resolutions that were slightly different for each site but were all around four feet per pixel. Because the deck of the descent stage is about 12 feet in diameter, the Apollo relics themselves fill an area of about nine pixels. However, because the sun was low to the horizon when the images were made, even subtle variations in topography create long shadows. Standing slightly more than ten feet above the surface, each Apollo descent stage creates a distinct shadow that fills roughly 20 pixels.”

    I used the Apollo 14 picture with the 100 meter scale, zoomed in, and started counting pixels. If you zoom to 2000 x, every single click to the right or left is two pixels.

    The 100 meter guide turned out to be 232 pixels x 4 ft = 928 ft = 282.8544 meters.

    The Apollo relic is suppose to be 9 pixels. I counted 63, which at 500 x, was a 9×7 rectangle. I didn’t count the random edges just to be fair.

    Now the shadow, I went very conservative again and only counted the main rectangle, 12×25 = 300. NASA only counted 20.

    What were your numbers?

    203. Charles J. Slavis, Jr. Says: July 22nd, 2009 at 10:21 am
    204. Charles J. Slavis, Jr. Says: July 22nd, 2009 at 10:23 am
    205. Charles J. Slavis, Jr. Says: July 22nd, 2009 at 10:26 am
    206. Charles J. Slavis, Jr. Says: July 22nd, 2009 at 10:36 am
    207. Charles J. Slavis, Jr. Says: July 22nd, 2009 at 10:38 am
    208. Charles J. Slavis, Jr. Says: July 22nd, 2009 at 10:44 am
    209. Charles J. Slavis, Jr. Says: July 22nd, 2009 at 10:52 am

    What’s Your Problem Charles J. Slavis, Jr.?
    Didn’t want us to see Ed’s post did ya ?

  215. Mark Hansen

    Andrew, no-one knows what the Charles’ problem is. I’d suggest Irritable Vocabulary Syndrome but I’m not a doctor. He also snowed out Marco Hernandez’s post wherein he responded to Ed’s post.

  216. kreg

    The latest LRO images are quite impressive if you know anything about planetary imaging. You can see the rover tracks at the Apollo 17 site and Neil Armstrong’s boot tracks (or the shadows thereof) he left trekking to the little west crater. Take a look at

    Of course, the deniers won’t believe it when we have lunar webcams that can go out and track down the camera timer that Gene Cernan tossed over his shoulder, but nobody should need ANY new evidence to convince them that we went.

    The simple fact is, the folks involved in the effort have left an ocean of sensible, clear, coherent, consistent, scientifically sound information for us, far, far, far, far, far more than anyone in the wildest speculative fantasy land of imagination would ever dream up to support a hoax. And the deniers, on the other hand, have mostly demonstrated that they are lazy, sloppy, disengenuous, and lacking in a basic elementary school education. So like the pinhead fanatics who distort reality to try to brainwash their children into thinking that we are all the product of God’s voodoo instead of the rational consequence of a well designed universe, this nonesense is best treated as a good way to help young people recognize fuzzy headed dumba##edness whereever they see it, and with a little education and reason, they will see it (rather than conspiracy) practically everywhere. Good night America.

  217. Moon Hoax believers are stupid people. Bottom line.


Discover's Newsletter

Sign up to get the latest science news delivered weekly right to your inbox!


See More

Collapse bottom bar