A History Of: August 2012

Here are the main points of conspiracy corresponding to the NASA moon landing and the facts against it:

Cross hairs on photos

For Conspiracy

In some photos, crosshairs seem to be behind objects. The cameras were fitted with a reseau plate (a clear glass plate with crosshairs etched on), making it impossible for any photographed object to appear "in front" of the grid. This suggests that objects have been "pasted" over them.

Against Conspiracy

This only appears in copied and scanned photos, not the originals. It is caused by overexposure: the bright white areas of the emulsion "bleed" over the thin black crosshairs. The crosshairs are only about 0.004 inch thick (0.1 mm) and emulsion would only have to bleed about half that much to fully obscure it. Furthermore, there are many photos where the middle of the crosshair is "washed-out" but the rest is intact. In some photos of the American flag, parts of one crosshair appear on the red stripes, but parts of the same crosshair are faded or invisible on the white stripes. There would have been no reason to "paste" white stripes onto the flag.

Images from left to right: Enlargement of a poor-quality 1998 scan – both the crosshair and part of the red stripe have "bleeded out", Enlargement of a higher quality 2004 scan – crosshair and red stripe visible, Close-up of the flag, showing washed-out crosshairs.

No stars in photos

For Conspiracy

There are no stars in any of the photos; the Apollo 11 astronauts also claimed in a post-mission press conference to not remember seeing any stars.

Against Conspiracy

The astronauts were talking about naked-eye sightings of stars during the lunar daytime. They regularly sighted stars through the spacecraft navigation optics while aligning their inertial reference platforms.
All manned landings happened during the lunar daytime. Thus, the stars were outshone by the sun and by sunlight reflected off the Moon's surface. The astronauts' eyes were adapted to the sunlit landscape around them so that they could not see the relatively faint stars. Likewise, cameras were set for daylight exposure and could not detect the stars. The effect is similar to not being able to see stars from a brightly lit car park at night—the stars only become visible when the lights are turned off. The astronauts could see stars with the naked eye only when they were in the shadow of the Moon.

Images from left to right: Earth and Mir in June 1995 an example of how sunlight can outshine the stars, making them invisible, Long-exposure photo taken from the Moon's surface by Apollo 16astronauts using a special ultraviolet camera. It shows the Earth with the correct background of stars.

Identical backgrounds

For Conspiracy

There are identical backgrounds in photos which, according to their captions, were taken miles apart. This suggests that a painted background was used.

Against Conspiracy

Backgrounds were not identical, just similar. What appear as nearby hills in some photos are actually mountains many miles away. On Earth, objects that are further away will appear fainter and less detailed. On the Moon, there is no atmosphere or haze to obscure faraway objects, thus they appear clearer and nearer. Furthermore, there are very few objects (such as trees) to help judge farness.

Studio props

For Conspiracy

The photos contain artifacts like the two seemingly matching 'C's on a rock and on the ground. These may be labeled studio props.

Against Conspiracy

The "C"-shaped objects are most likely printing imperfections and do not appear in the original film from the camera. It has been suggested that the "C" is a coiled hair.

Images from left to right: Original AS16-107-17446 photograph, Close-up of later generation prints of 17446.

Fluttering Flag

For Conspiracy

The flag placed on the surface by the astronauts fluttered despite there being no wind on the Moon. This suggests that it was filmed on Earth and a breeze caused the flag to flutter. Sibrel said that it may have been caused by indoor fans used to cool the astronauts, since their spacesuit cooling systems would have been too heavy on Earth.

Against Conspiracy

The flag was fastened to a Г-shaped rod so that it did not hang down. The flag only seemed to flutter when the astronauts were moving it into position. Without air drag, these movements caused the free corner of the flag to swing like a pendulum for some time. The flag was rippled because it had been folded during storage—the ripples could be mistaken for movement in a still photo. Videos show that when the astronauts let go of the flagpole it vibrates briefly but then remains still.

Animation of two photos, showing that though Armstrong's camera moved between exposures, the flag is not waving.

Moon dust footprints

For Conspiracy

Footprints in the Moon dust are unexpectedly well preserved, despite the lack of moisture.

Against Conspiracy

The Moon dust has not been weathered like Earth sand and has sharp edges. This allows the Moon dust particles to stick together and hold their shape in the vacuum. The astronauts likened it to "talcum powder or wet sand".

Danielle Duran
'Took three different books all relating to the financial crisis in the United States, and the conspiracy theories behind how and why the government got into this situation. The idea, what you see isn't necessary what you see.'

http://www.behance.net/

Vidar Olufsen

'The book contains graphic explanation and information about three conspiracy theories, linked to three familiar American objects recognized all over the world; The Marlboro Cigarette package, The Coca Cola bottle and the one dollar bill.'

http://www.behance.net/

Matthew Skelton

'I chose 3 conspiracy theories to look at. The first one was about why the flag appears to be waving on the Moon?, the second one was about why do photos taken on 'The Moon' do not show the stars that should obviously be shown in the background? and last but not least, the third one is about why, when the module landed it did not leave an impression yet in the iconic photo taken on the moon of a foot print clearly shows that there should be an imprint? This piece of work shows you the myth about the moon landing then busts the myths explaining the reasons why the moon landing was not faked.'