Fact-checking the 'theory that America faked the Apollo moon landing and released footage and photos taken in studios to the public' [Fact Check]

In 1969, the moment humanity first set foot on the moon filled people around the world with wonder and emotion. Some watched it live on television, while others were moved by seeing the footage and photos later. It was truly a 'giant leap for mankind'.

However, more than half a century after that great achievement, voices of doubt such as 'Did they really go to the moon?' and 'Was that footage filmed on Earth?' are still being repeated. On the internet and social media, plausible interpretations of photos and analyses of videos are presented, and it is not uncommon for people to feel as if the 'moon landing was a fabrication'.

But in reality, many of these questions can be explained scientifically. If you understand how light hits objects, the lunar environment, and the tools and technology used at the time, you can understand why 'no stars are visible' or 'why the flag appears to be waving'. Furthermore, space probes and observatories from countries other than NASA have independently confirmed evidence of the Apollo program.

In this article, we will take up the 'conspiracy theory claims' about the Apollo program that are often heard and explain them one by one in an easy-to-understand manner. Once you read it, you should be able to feel clear and think, 'I see, that's what it was'.

1) Claim:

Verdict: False

Brief reason for verdict:
All Apollo lunar surface photos were taken during the 'lunar daytime' (under sunlight), and the exposure was set to a short duration to match the bright surface and astronauts, so it is natural that the faint starlight would not be captured[1][2]. The fact that no stars are visible is as expected and is not evidence of a fabrication[3].

2) Claim:

Verdict: False

Brief reason for verdict:
The flag on the lunar surface is not fluttering. A horizontal telescopic bar was inserted into the top edge to prevent the flag from drooping, and it only appears to be waving in the wind because of the wrinkles left from when it was spread out[4]. The swaying when setting up the flagpole lasts a long time because there is no air resistance, but the flag is stationary after that[5][6].

3) Claim:

Verdict: False

Brief reason for verdict:
The shadows do not appear parallel due to the perspective effect of linear perspective, and the lengths and directions of shadows appear varied on uneven terrain or slopes[7][8]. If there were multiple light sources, multiple shadows would be produced for a single object, but there is only one shadow for each object in the photos, which can be explained by a single light source, the sun[9]. Also, the reason astronauts are visible even in shadows is that the lunar regolith (soil) strongly reflects sunlight and illuminates the shadows like a reflector board[10].

4) Claim:

Verdict: False

Brief reason for verdict:
The lunar surface has a solid bedrock just below the surface, with only a few centimeters of powdery soil [11]. During landing, the engine thrust was throttled down, and the craft touched down gently at a speed of a few kilometers per hour, so no large crater was formed [12]. In fact, the astronauts reported that dust kicked up during the final moments of the landing, but because there is no atmosphere on the moon, it fell immediately and only settled in a thin layer on the surface, failing to form a spreading cloud [13].

5) Claim:

Verdict: False

Brief reason for verdict:
Lunar soil (regolith) has different properties from Earth's sand. Because the fine, angular particles interlock with each other, footprints are retained even if the soil is dry [14]. Earth's sand is rounded by weathering, making it easy for marks to collapse [15]. Also, because there is no wind or water on the moon, once a footprint is made, it remains unchanged for a long time [16].

6) Claim:

Verdict: False

Brief reason for verdict:
Apollo's Hasselblad cameras had black crosshairs for surveying engraved on a glass plate. In areas with bright white objects, the black crosshairs can become faint due to overexposure and may disappear due to copy degradation [17][18]. This has been reproduced in experiments on Earth and is a phenomenon where thin lines are lost during the reproduction or scanning process of a photograph [18]. The disappearance of the crosshairs is due to the characteristics of the photograph and is not evidence of compositing [17].

7) Claim:

Verdict: False

Brief reason for verdict:
The photo in question is a public print from the Johnson Space Center, and that 'C' does not exist on the original negative stored by NASA [19]. It is considered highly likely that what looks like a letter is actually a fiber or hair that got caught during the reproduction process [20][19]. Therefore, this 'letter' is due to foreign matter on the film and is not evidence of a hoax.

8) Claim:

Verdict: False

Brief reason for verdict:
The Apollo 11 lunar module was equipped with an external television camera to film the commander's descent [21]. When the commander opened the MESA (Modular Equipment Stowage Assembly) panel next to the hatch and turned on the power from inside, the camera was positioned to film the ladder [22]. Thanks to this remote camera, the moment of humanity's first steps on the moon was broadcast live to 600 million people on Earth [21].

9) Claim:

Verdict: False

Brief reason for verdict:
The fact that lunar walking footage resembles movements on Earth when played at double speed is consistent with the laws of physics, as the time of free fall is approximately 2.44 times (√6 times) that on Earth[23]. However, in the actual footage, the astronauts' arm swings and other movements differ from Earth-based slow-motion filming, and no unnatural deceleration is observed[24]. Furthermore, the weight of the spacesuit and life support system was nearly 13 kg even on the moon, and the joints were difficult to move, so it is scientifically natural that they could not jump very high[25]. Therefore, the movements in the footage are consistent with the lunar environment and are not a fabrication.

10) Claim:

Verdict: False

Brief reason for verdict:
The Van Allen belts are zones of high-energy particles, but the Apollo spacecraft spent only about a few hours passing through them[26] and used the aluminum alloy hull as shielding to limit radiation exposure[27]. In fact, the radiation dose received by astronauts during the Apollo program was approximately 0.46 rad on average, which is less than that of some nuclear power plant workers[28], and data confirms that this is far from a lethal dose for the human body[29].

11) Claim:

Verdict: False

Brief reason for verdict:
The lunar surface is a vacuum where heat transfer is slow, providing an insulating effect similar to a thermos[30]. Furthermore, Apollo crew members only operated during the relatively mild time period just after sunrise on the moon[30][31]. The Hasselblad camera film was also kept in protective cassettes away from direct sunlight and was not affected by extreme temperature changes[31]. The spacesuits also incorporated multi-layer insulation, and temperature control measures were applied to the equipment, including the astronauts themselves[30].

12) Claim:

Verdict: False

Brief reason for verdict:
The reason humanity has not revisited the moon since Apollo is due to political and budgetary circumstances, not technical difficulties. In the 1970s, after achieving the goal of a moon landing during the Cold War, the priority was lowered, and it became impossible to justify the enormous budget[32]. In fact, subsequent planned Apollo missions were canceled due to budget cuts, and later human lunar programs (such as the Constellation program) were also canceled due to changes in administration[33]. In other words, it is not that we 'could not go,' but that we 'did not go,' and this is not evidence that the moon landing was a falsehood.

13) Claim:

Verdict: False

Brief reason for judgment:
Reflectors were placed on the lunar surface during each mission, and observatories around the world have confirmed that they can measure the distance to the moon by reflecting lasers from Earth[34][35]. Furthermore, NASA's Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter (LRO) (launched in 2009) and probes from Japan, India, and China have taken high-resolution photographs of the Apollo landing sites, clearly showing the remaining descent stages and footprints[36][35]. Additionally, amateur radio operators and the former Soviet Union's tracking stations intercepted radio signals and communications from the Apollo spacecraft at the time, and independent verification has been conducted, including by other nations[37].

For each claim, there is counter-evidence based on scientific facts, recorded footage, and documentation. All of these conspiracy theory claims have been thoroughly examined, and numerous independent pieces of evidence have been confirmed that show the Apollo moon landings are historical fact[36][38]. Doubts based on misunderstandings can be resolved with correct scientific knowledge.

[1] [4] [7] [32] Moon landing conspiracy theories, debunked | Royal Museums Greenwich

https://www.rmg.co.uk/stories/space-astronomy/moon-landing-conspiracy-theories-debunked

[2] [6] [17] [20] [28] [29] [36] How do we know that we went to the Moon? | Institute of Physics

https://www.iop.org/explore-physics/moon/how-do-we-know-we-went-to-the-moon

[3] [8] [11] [14] [26] [27] [31] Apollo Moon Landing Hoax Theories That Won't Die | Space

https://www.space.com/12814-top-10-apollo-moon-landing-hoax-theories.html

[5] [10] [13] [15] [16] [21] [24] [34] [37] [38] How to argue with a Moon landing denier - BBC Science Focus Magazine

https://www.sciencefocus.com/space/how-to-argue-with-a-moon-landing-denier

[9] [12] [19] [22] [23] [25] [30] [33] [35] Apollo moon landing conspiracy theories - Wikipedia

https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E3%82%A2%E3%83%9D%E3%83%AD%E8%A8%88%E7%94%BB%E9%99%B0%E8%AC%80%E8%AB%96

[18] Clavius: Photography - crosshairs

https://note.com/ai_medical/n/n4faba7a2975c

http://www.clavius.org/photoret.html