© HUM Images/Universal Images Group/Getty ImagesAstronaut Neil A. Armstrong, Apollo 11 mission commander, at the modular equipment storage assembly (MESA) of the Lunar Module Eagle on the historic first extravehicular activity (EVA) on the moon, July 20, 1969
The head of Russia's Roscosmos space agency has weighed in on conspiracy theories surrounding the US Moon landings, insisting that there is no doubt that soil samples retrieved by the Americans during their Apollo missions actually came from the lunar surface.
Roscosmos chief Yury Borisov was questioned about whether American astronauts had actually landed on the Moon during a parliamentary session on Wednesday. The key piece of evidence that the Apollo missions were real, according to Borisov, is the fact that NASA shared soil samples from several manned flights with its Soviet colleagues.
"According to the expertise of our Academy of Sciences, the lunar soil turned out to be lunar indeed," Borisov reassured lawmakers, insisting that the samples were analyzed in numerous countries, not just the USSR.
The previous head of the Russian space agency, Dmitry Rogozin, was far more skeptical about the Apollo missions, saying that while many in Roscosmos defended Washington's version of events, no conclusive proof was ever presented to him. According to Rogozin, several unnamed academics even angrily criticized him for complicating international relations and undermining the "sacred cooperation with NASA."
Despite all the US missions being closely monitored by its space rival, the USSR, skeptics have questioned the authenticity of the Apollo program ever since astronaut Neil Armstrong set foot on the Moon on July 21, 1969. Conspiracy theorists claim that the Moon landings were actually staged by NASA, which needed to quickly respond to the Soviets after they sent the first man, Yury Gagarin, into space on April 12, 1961.
Many of the arguments have been debunked over the years, but between 5 and 20% of Americans still believe their country's lunar program to have been nothing but a hoax, according to various polls.
In Russia, a survey by the Public Opinion Research Center (WCIOM) in 2020 found that almost 50% of the population think that the US government "falsified" the Apollo expeditions, with just 31% absolutely certain that American astronauts actually walked on the surface of Earth's satellite.
The US stopped sending landers to the Moon after the Apollo 17 mission concluded in December 1972.
Earlier this year, a US-made spacecraft touched down on the Moon for the first time in more than half a century, marking what NASA Administrator Bill Nelson called "the US return to the Moon." However, NASA's Artemis program has suffered numerous delays over the years, with the return of American astronauts on the Moon now expected no earlier than 2026.
Reader Comments
First, the USA did go to the moon. Second, the film evidence of going to the moon was created by Stanley Kubrik because it could not be done on the moon, and because it was to be a USA better than Russia propaganda tool.
The faked footage was made to cover up the (Im sure the quote is wong, pls someone correct me) "Theological and sociological ramifications" of what they found up there..
NASA had a giant working model of the moon and used small cameras to make it look as though the lander was in orbit. These recordings show 'anomalies' flying underneath the spacecraft which people have speculated are alien spacecraft. However, they could easily be bugs that got into the shot whilst they were filming the sequence.
Take a close look at the lander and tell me that scotch tape was part of the design. Then there are the photo's themselves which have been analysed by experts, not the ccn kind, who say there were numerous light sources illuminating the area. This is clear from shadows pointing in different directions. Then there are the voice recording which should have had a delay between question and answer. Sometimes the astronauts forgot and answered straight away and there was no delay. That could only happen if they were on Earth somewhere or in orbit around the Earth.
The US could well have got these samples from an unmanned spacecraft. The Russian's know this as they sent one years before.
You have doubts: Get a telescope and aim it at Sea of Tranquility on the moon. The Lunar Module is still there.
Nasa want to go back to the moon but their present scientists are saying they cannot because of the Van Allen belts being a real problem. Fancy that. I guess believing in humans landing on the moon is similar to believing in the official narrative of Sept 11th. I'm sad to say that both defy the laws of physics.
The USadmin and nasa had a very trustful world believing this event happened. It would have been difficult if not impossible for the Russian admin to convince people otherwise. Think 'covid' and what happened there. The cold war was ongoing at the time so their protestations would have seemed like the sour grapes of an enemy who was losing it. One day the truth will out, that is if it isn't destroyed like most of the data and equipment.
There are still lots more questions without proper answers. One question which stands out is how a lander held together with scotch tape made it off the pad, out of Earths orbit, through 238,000 miles of space travel, land on the moon, and then take off again, without shaking itself to bits? Maybe the astronauts took some extra rolls just in case?
The JFK explanation of his assassination went against the laws of physics. The Sept 11th demolitions went against the laws of physics. The moon landing go against the laws of physics. There seems to be a pattern.
Gosh darn! Convenient, eh?
Not true. Much lamentation can be heard from NASA that the garbage allegedly left behind is just too small to see, even using the most powerful telescopes on Earth! Gosh darn!
Convenient, eh?
youncsn send empty mechanical things to the moon. And also find moon rocks in the Arctic to give to other countries and say they're from a trip to the moon. We can't go past low earth orbit with a human.
Size Limitations of the LM Apollo Missions: The size limitations of the LM Apollo missions were also an important consideration. The LM was designed to fit inside the Command Module (CM) during launch and re-entry, and to have a specific size and shape. The LM was also designed to have a specific weight distribution to ensure stability and balance during flight and landing. So: THE ALLEGED LRV WOULD HAVE SIGNIFICANTLY CHANGED THE WEIGHT DISTRIBUTION ON THE LM? Interestingly enough, I can find no "official" information that even mentions these issues, let alone tells how the whole plan was taken back to the drawing board to accommodate the LRV. Neither is the added weight (which, one would think, would have required adjustments in fuel requirements and handling) ever mentioned. If there's something I've missed, please let me know. Again, it's always seemed to be an ego-stroking exercise in mass distraction, not a scientific achievement.
Walt Disney and Warner Von Braun are laughing in the stratosphere...
However, some key aspects of the lunar soil composition had already been identified PRIOR to the purported Apollo 11 mission in 1969 through the use of remote analytical techniques such as laser spectroscopy.
Not saying they knocked up a batch of "moon dust" off the spectroscopic analysis - cough - but it's far from impossible and would explain the small quantity given (allows for small sample bias (lack of chemical variation) and lack of analysis of any significant polymorphism that could better identify the material source (outside of a lab)).
Mineral Composition:
Telescopic and orbital spectroscopic observations had suggested the presence of silicate minerals like feldspar, pyroxene, and olivine on the lunar surface. The broad mineral assemblage inferred from these remote sensing data was later confirmed by the analysis of the returned Apollo samples.
Lack of Volatiles:
Spectroscopic studies of the lunar surface had indicated an overall depletion of volatile elements compared to the Earth. This was consistent with the significantly lower abundance of volatile compounds found in the Apollo 11 soil samples.
Surface Maturity:
Laser-induced fluorescence studies had provided insights into the high degree of surface maturity and exposure of the lunar regolith to the space environment. The presence of agglutinated particles and glass-coated grains observed in the samples aligned with these remote sensing findings.
Titanium-Rich Regions:
Spectroscopic mapping of the lunar surface had identified regions with higher titanium concentrations, which was later confirmed by the discovery of ilmenite-bearing soil samples.
So it's entirely possible to not only source these from Earth, but cook up a batch of moon dust to the relevant chemical compositions and pass it off as a fair representation of actual moon dust.
[Link]