the real evidence for the apollo missions - wallingup · the real evidence for the apollo missions...

1 of 5 (C) 2009 John S. Jacob Most images: NASA

The Real Evidence for the Apollo Missions

It’s Not About the Photographs

Moon Landing Hoax Theories tend to attach a lot of importance to the photos. The photos are all 100%

consistent with an actual moon landing and support the veracity of the Apollo missions completely.

However, finding fault with photos is an easy game to play. The less you know about photography, lenses,

lighting, film, cameras, and well, everything, the easier it is to see “evidence” for a conspiracy in these

photos. As we will see, this “evidence” does not actually exist. Before sharing with you the real evidence

that the moon landings actually occurred, let me briefly debunk some of the common misunderstandings

about the photos.

Take this photo for example. Who is taking the picture? The

astronaut seen in the reflection in the helmet? But he doesn’t

appear to be holding a camera. Weren’t there only two

astronauts on the moon?

Here is a prime example of how too little knowledge can lead to

conspiracy theories. They must think that Neil Armstrong just

brought along his Dad’s Kodak Instamatic for the trip. In

actuality a special hands-free camera was strapped to the front

of the EVA suits. This allowed the astronauts to take thousands

of frames, but it meant they had no viewfinder with which to

compose the pictures properly. Of the thousands of photos,

only a few actually looked good enough, thought NASA, to

publish. And this original picture had to be re-centred by

adding a black band to the top of it to make it presentable.

Here’s another famous picture. Where are all the stars? Why

are the shadows seemingly going every which way? Again, too

little knowledge results in these questions being raised.

You never, ever see stars in real photographs with a normal

foreground. It is impossible. Try it. To actually photograph stars,

you have to set the camera on a tripod and use an especially

wide aperture and a very long exposure time. If you ever see

stars in the background of a photo or movie, you can rest assured

that they are either fake or added afterwards.

Shadows on the moon’s surface are completely black and show

crisp outlines. No hazy edges. This indicates that there was one

and only one light source in these frames, and not stage lighting as conspiracy theorists wish to believe. Try

it. Multiple lights = multiple faded shadows.

Some also say that the flag is waving, which it couldn’t be doing if it were really on the moon. The truth is,

the flag is never waving. Check the videos for yourself: the flag never waves. It rumples a little, but only


when it is being handled and the astronaut’s motions are transferred to the flag. Otherwise, every wrinkle

and every crease of the flag stay absolutely stock still the entire time.

The directions of the shadows seem to be going every which way, a “fact” that conspiracy theorists say

“proves” it was stage lighting. We know it cannot be stage lighting because the shadows are single, dark and

crisp. The meandering directions of the shadows seen from a horizontal perspective are due entirely to the

unevenness of the lunar surface. Try drawing some straight lines on a piece of paper, then crumpling up the

paper. Flatten the paper somewhat, and view the lines you drew from the edge on. Do the lines now

appear straight? Are all of them plainly visible? No. And it’s no real mystery why, either.

But, just WHAT is all this stuff in the next photo? Stage

lighting? Surely, evidence of a fake?

Anyone with even a passing interest in photography

recognises this immediately. Reflections and glare on the

internal surfaces of the camera’s compound lenses, due to

facing partly into the lighting (in this example, the sun), are an

ordinary, everyday part of photography. This happens both

with stage lighting and natural lighting, so the presence of

glare and reflections is really no evidence at all.

Why can we see the BACKS of the astronaut and the Lander?

Mustn’t that be due to artificial stagewash lighting? No. If

that were the case, the ground shadows would likewise be

faded with multiple shadows visible. The backs of the

astronauts and the Lander are illuminated by sunlight reflecting off the shiny surface of the Moon, or in

other words, Moonlight.

What Is the Real Evidence?

The real evidence for the Apollo program comes in three parts: Physical evidence, Eyewitnesses, and

Scientific evidence.

Physical evidence is the equipment used to get there and back, and the

things they brought back with them. These items support the conclusion

that they actually went, but are dismissed by those who say these items

could have been manufactured. How feasible is this?

The Apollo program retrieved some 380 kg of various

rock and soil types from the Moon. Moon rocks are

unlike anything on Earth due to Earth’s ever-evolving geology and the Moon’s relatively

unchanging state. Moon rocks, unlike lunar meteorites sometimes found in small

quantities on the Earth, have non-scorched surfaces that exhibit micrometeorite impacts,

like pinholes all over the exposed surface. Nothing on Earth has this feature because

micrometeorites do not penetrate our atmosphere. We see them as “shooting stars” on

dark nights.

Moon rocks are unlikely to have been manufactured, because nobody in 1969 knew quite

3 of 5

what a moon rock should look like, or

The materials attributable to the 1969 Apollo project have been studied thoroughly by independent

specialists all over the world and found to be genuine. How do we know what genuine moon rocks are

supposed to be like? In the early ‘70’

out successful robotic sample return missions to the moon.

Their samples match NASA’s samples perfectly, while yet

adding to our growing knowledge of Moon geology and

mineralogy. This is independent verification that the Apollo

missions were real.

Further evidence, if it were needed, comes from

which landed some 100m from a previous unmanned mission,

Surveyor 3. Surveyor 3’s job was to test the soil mechanical

properties to determine if a man could walk on the surface, or

if he would sink straight into the dust and never be seen

again. Using a scoop on an extendable arm i

telling us what we needed to know.

Surveyor 3 had been resting silently on the lunar surface for two and a half

years when pieces of it were retrieved and brought back to Earth. From these

thoroughly

age and survive in the harsh environments of space. This knowledge helped

make future missions even more successful and was gained only as a result of

real moon visits, not

In 1969 no one

in space, and so it is unlikely that someone could have by chance manufactured

or prepared these artefacts in just the right way to completely fool highly

intelligent and independent specialists

fool them for 40 years.

Observational evidence and Eyewitnesses

Did anybody actually SEE the astronauts

walking on the moon? Yes, as a matter of fact.

Radio Astronomers saw the whole thing

through their radio telescopes. Optical

telescopes could not have done it, because

visible the light reflecting off the space

was insufficient (in other words the spacecraft

was too small and dark to see). However, the

spacecraft with Astronauts on board was

emitting plenty of light in a different part of the spectrum: radio. Radio telescopes detected these light

waves coming from the craft as it moved to the moon, passed behind the moon, and as the lander

descended to the lunar surface and stopped at a specific place. Radio telescopes can be quite accurate in

(C) 2009 John S. Jacob Most images: NASA

like, or even be made of.



n the early ‘70’s the Russians carried

out successful robotic sample return missions to the moon.

Their samples match NASA’s samples perfectly, while yet

adding to our growing knowledge of Moon geology and

This is independent verification that the Apollo

Further evidence, if it were needed, comes from Apollo 12

landed some 100m from a previous unmanned mission,

job was to test the soil mechanical

properties to determine if a man could walk on the surface, or

if he would sink straight into the dust and never be seen

Using a scoop on an extendable arm it succeeded during its short operational



thoroughly-studied artefacts we learned things about how m



real moon visits, not through mere simulations or manufactured fakes.

In 1969 no one knew exactly how our man-made materials would

space, and so it is unlikely that someone could have by chance manufactured


intelligent and independent specialists from all over the globe and continue to

fool them for 40 years.

Observational evidence and Eyewitnesses.

Did anybody actually SEE the astronauts

walking on the moon? Yes, as a matter of fact.

Radio Astronomers saw the whole thing

through their radio telescopes. Optical

telescopes could not have done it, because

visible the light reflecting off the spacecraft

was insufficient (in other words the spacecraft

was too small and dark to see). However, the

spacecraft with Astronauts on board was


oming from the craft as it moved to the moon, passed behind the moon, and as the lander


Visible light is only a tiny slice of the complete spectr

also includes Radio waves.

Most images: NASA



operational life on the Moon in



studied artefacts we learned things about how man-made materials



simulations or manufactured fakes.

materials would react to being

space, and so it is unlikely that someone could have by chance manufactured


from all over the globe and continue to


oming from the craft as it moved to the moon, passed behind the moon, and as the lander


Visible light is only a tiny slice of the complete spectrum, which


pinpointing the location of the signals’ source. Independent astronomers from all over the globe (including

Australia) “saw” light in the form of radio waves emanating from a specific place on the moon which

contained human communications and other man-made signals. There is little room for an alternative

explanation of what these totally independent observers saw in July 1969 and during subsequent Apollo

missions. I have not heard any hoax theory which can explain how

the astronomers could have detected these signals if the signals

were not actually there. The only way to “fake” it would be to

actually carry out the mission.

Astronomers all over the world were watching the mission as it

occurred. Others were watching, too. One shouldn’t be too

surprised to learn that the USSR had spies inside NASA and were

watching the Apollo project like a cat watches a jiggling string. It

seems unlikely that they would have failed to detect even a whiff of something not quite right if there was

some kind of deception being perpetrated. And if they had, do you think they would have hesitated for even

one minute before telling the whole world about the dirty tricks that these degenerate capitalists were up

to?

Scientific Evidence. The primary purpose of Apollo was scientific fact-finding. Political bragging rights were

a distant second. The first task Apollo 11 performed was to retrieve some moon rocks and soil, and stow it

safely on board the capsule in case a speedy departure were required. Most of the EVA (Extra-Vehicular

Activity) or “moonwalk” time was spent setting up the scientific equipment sent with them. From these

experiments, over 1 megabit of data was downloaded from the moon every day for the next eight years. It

enabled us to learn much about space, the moon, even the sun,

that was not known at the time. These facts have also been

independently verified as time goes on.

We now know for example that the moon has a gooey centre,

and that it rings like a bell every time a meteor hits it. We also

know that there are moonquakes from time to time. We also

now know the size and strength of the earth’s magnetosphere,

and that the moon passes through the tail end of it as it passes

behind the Earth in its orbit. The character and make-up of the

solar wind (radiation and charged particles emanating from the

sun), once a mystery in 1969, is now also known.

How would someone preparing a hoax have been able to so accurately presage

unknown facts about space, the moon, and the sun? The data is clearly not

randomly generated, and it corroborates information that has been obtained by

other, independent sources.

The Laser Ranging Reflectors or “corner reflectors” left on the moon by the Apollo

astronauts are still in use today, reflecting laser light from the earth back to the

observatories that use them. This technique has been used to determine the

precise distance from the earth to the moon, as well as the fact that the moon is

receding from the earth at a rate of about 3.5 cm per year (a fact that was not known or even guessed at in

1969).


The Laser Ranging experiments do not work if the exact location of the reflectors is not known. At least one

Russian reflector has been “lost” because its exact location has been forgotten or incorrectly documented.

How could someone have arranged for certain exact places on the moon

to reflect laser light without actually going through with the missions that

placed this equipment on its surface?

The most compelling evidence comes this year from the Lunar

Reconnaissance Obiter (LRO) seen on the right. Launched in June 2009, it

is now in orbit around the moon making a 3-D map of the lunar surface. It

has also opened up a brand-new science, “Lunar Archaeology.”

The man-made object in the centre of the photo below is casting a

shadow across the moon. Its size can be accurately determined, and it’s

location corresponds precisely with the Apollo 11 mission. This is the

Apollo 11 landing stage, found on the moon just where it was left 40 years

ago.

The Apollo 14 site has also been spotted by the LRO. It is even

more compelling because it shows features found on only one

other body in our Solar System: Footprints.

Individual footprints cannot be resolved by the camera yet, but lots

of them together forming a path can easily be made out. The other

sites (except 12) have been imaged as well. This additional

evidence may be dismissed as additional NASA fabrications, but

this is done without examining all the evidence supporting the

reality of the LRO program, too. Again it is a matter of physical

evidence, eyewitnesses and scientific evidence coming together to

form a consistent picture. The LRO is revealing new information not previously available to anyone,

including to those supposedly fabricating the hoax. Scores of independent witnesses and means of

verification are available to give evidence that the LRO is real, that Apollo was real, and that Man did in fact

take his first step on the moon on 20 July, 1969.

the real evidence for the apollo missions - wallingup · the real evidence for the apollo missions...

Documents