Conspiracy theories about going to the Moon: Fact or hoax?

In 1969, the world watched fascinated as Neil Armstrong took his first steps on the Moon. But since then, conspiracy theories questioning the veracity of this historic achievement have emerged.

Months after the event was publicized, the first suspicions pointing to a possible hoax in the story were published, and in 1974, Bill Kaysing published the pamphlet 'We Never Went to the Moon', in which he laid out many of the conspiracy arguments. Astronomer Philip Plait published in his book Bad Astronomy another possible theory: the NASA discovered a fatal flaw in its rocket, launching its rocket unmanned and sending the astronauts to a base in Nevada to simulate the entire space mission and capture the images of the achievement. According to The Washington Post, this is one of the first conspiracy theories that gained appeal among Americans.
Despite the years and repeated rebuttals by NASA, websites, books, and articles dedicated to defending the conspiracy continue to appear.

Main arguments supporting the theory that man did not land on the moon?

• Absence of stars in photos: Due to the short exposure and intense light on the lunar surface, faint stars were not captured in the released photos; it requires some imagination and zoom to visualize what they call stars.
• Mortal radiation: Crossing the Van Allen belts, areas that are 1,000 to 15,000 kilometers from Earth, is done in just one hour; this area is known to have a lot of radiation, preventing the astronauts from crossing it despite the shielding of the spacecraft.
• Absence of lunar dust at landing: The thin layer of lunar dust and the low speed of landing did not generate a large cloud of dust.
• Temperature on the Moon can reach 120 degrees and would have killed the astronauts: The mission was planned to coincide with a period of mild temperatures on the Moon, say those who try to defend the theory that yes, man would have reached the moon.
• Strange shadows: The shadows had a strange shape and color, different from what was initially imagined, but this was justified by NASA saying that the light reflected by the lunar surface and the space suits altered the shadows.

Refutations and Counter-arguments:

• Number of people involved: Silencing over 400,000 people involved in the sending project would be a colossal challenge.
• Lack of evidence: The Soviet Union, the US rival in the Cold War, did not speak out against the hoax.
• Incoherence of theories: The explanations of conspiracy theorists are often inconsistent and contradictory.
• Confirmation bias: Human tendency is to seek information that confirms their pre-existing beliefs.
• Need for belonging: Conspiracy theories provide a sense of community and belonging.

The conspiracy that never dies

Anyway, meticulously refuting these suspicions doesn't have much effect, as new questions always arise in the debate. The conspiratorial logic doesn't build a solid argument: it's enough to look for loopholes in what is called the "official version." They launch a multitude of weak arguments in the hope that one of them sticks.

Eugenio Fernández, physicist and author of "The Lunar Conspiracy, What Fraud!", reminds us that explanations contradicting the suspicions of conspiracy theorists "are more complex and require more time." It is common not to be sure if space radiation is dangerous or not, and what was the speed of the lunar module when landing.

This adds to the tendency of confirmation bias, to which we all succumb sometimes. This tendency makes us pay attention to data that confirm our preconceived ideas (like the idea that we didn't go to the Moon), while ignoring opposing arguments that support other ideas.

Believing in conspiracy theories also gives us a sense of comfort: they are narratives that have an internal logic and help us understand unexpected and frightening things, which is why they also frequently arise in relation to terrorist attacks. Belief in these theories can help overcome feelings of helplessness and lack of control, as psychiatrists Jack and Sara Gorman argue in their book "Denying until the End."

This doesn't negate the fact that the supposed arguments of the deniers are quite superficial. As Plait says in his book, if it were so obvious that everything is nothing but such a crude hoax that even a flag waving in the wind can be seen, why didn't the Soviet Union denounce it 49 years ago during the Cold War? Perhaps because, as Russian cosmonaut Georgy Grechko stated: "When we received signals from the Moon, it was from the Moon that we received them, not from Hollywood."

Share:

Help spread knowledge! Share this article on WhatsApp and Facebook using the buttons below.