Welcome to my challenge of the conspiracy theory that states men never landed on the moon. In this article i will deal with several aspects of the Apollo programme, and investigate claims made by conspiracy theorists that the Apollo One astronauts were murdered by NASA.
There have also been accusations that the Apollo 13 emergency was fake and was manafactured by NASA to re-ignite public interest. This was after interest waned following the initial hysteria of the Apollo 11 landings. I will also be taking a look at some more ‘inconsistencies’ from NASA video and photographs that are touted as proof that the Apollo landings never took place.
Apollo One Murders?
Let’s start by dealing with the accusation by conspiracy theorists that the Apollo One astronauts were murdered by NASA. The three Apollo One astronauts were, Command Pilot Virgil l. “Gus” Grissom, Senior Pilot Ed White and Pilot Roger B. Chaffee. All three men died in a fire that consumed the capsule they were enclosed inside whilst it sat on the launch pad.
So what do the conspiracy theorists suggest could have been a motive for NASA killing these astronauts? Virgil l. “Gus” Grissom was an outspoken man and was openly critical of elements of the Apollo programme. This was to be expected from a man that was dedicated to travelling to the moon, as well as ensuring that it would be as safe as possible for him and his fellow astronauts.
The accusation is very strong, and quite frankly insulting to an organisation such as NASA. Had the conspiracy theorists read the reasons for the fire they would appreciate that it occured due to several significant design flaws in the early Apollo capsule. Let’s take a look at these in some detail.
Reasons For The Fire
One of the primary suspects for the fire was the use of high-pressure 100 percent oxygen for the test. There were also flaws detected in the plumbing and wiring, as well as there being inflammable materials used in the capsule. One of the reasons for the astronauts not surviving the fire was also the door of the capsule. This opened inwards and did not open in the emergency rendering them little chance of survival. The material the astronauts had their space suits constructed from was also attributed as a cause of the fatal injuries they sustained.
So what are the conspiracy theorists attempting to suggest was the motive for the proposed ‘murder’ of the astronauts? The general reason for this accusation appears to be due to Command Pilot Virgil l. “Gus” Grissom being openly critical of the Apollo programme and the hoax theorists suggesting that NASA needed to ’silence’ him before he ‘exposed’ the hoax.
This, to be honest, is complete rubbish. Why would NASA choose one of the most complicated ways in which to murder three astronauts that had so many possible ways for it to be exposed? Not only that but the Apollo 1 fire caused major problems for NASA and could have very easily resulted in the cancellation of the Apollo programme.
The argument that NASA is capable of murder, as well as the ridiculous suggestion that they would use a test to do this with thousands of people there to witness and film the event beggars belief. If you wish to kill three people you will not do it in front of thousands of people with still and video cameras. The conspiracy theorists need to think carefully about this before they make this accusation.
The Apollo 13 Emergency
Most of us that have even a vague interest in space travel will be aware of the Apollo 13 emergency. Even those that have not heard of it through an interest in space will have probably seen, or even heard about, the Hollywood film Apollo 13. This film documented the emergency and showed the heroic effort that was made by both the astronauts and NASA to bring the three men safely back to earth.
Apollo 13 was due to be the third manned lunar landing and consisted of three crew members, Commander James A. Lovell, Command Module pilot John L. “Jack” Swigert and the Lunar Module pilot Fred W. Haise. The emergency took place two days into the mission when an electrical fault in an oxygen tank onboard the Apollo spacecraft caused a serious explosion tearing a large portion of the side of the spacecraft off into space.
To get back to safety the crew had to shut down power in the Apollo module which would be required for re-entry and use the lunar lander as a ‘lifeboat’ to survive long enough to make the re-entry to the earths atmosphere. Due to the location of the emergency it was more effective for the spacecraft to continue on its trajectory towards the moon and ’slingshot’ back to the earth. This would be quicker, use less valuable power and be safer than just instantly turning around.
The Explosion
The explosion that resulted in one of the most famous transmissions from the Apollo missions, “Houston, we’ve had a problem” that is often mis-quoted as “Houston we have a problem” occurred aboard Apollo 13 as it was 321,860 kilometres (200,000 miles) from earth. The cause was an explosion in the number two oxygen tank onboard the Service Module (SM).
The explosion had occured after a request from mission control to stir the oxygen and hydrogen tanks which was necessary to prevent stratifying causing mis-readings on the instruments. The action of stirring the tanks by the crew aboard Apollo 13 caused a fire due to damaged wires that led to the motor that was used for stirring the second oxygen tank. The fire was caused by the poor wiring igniting the Teflon insulation in the local vicinity.
The crew initially feared that they may have been struck by a meteoroid, as this type of problem was not foreseen by the astronauts or the ground crew. The problems did not end there however, as the number one oxygen tank also sustained damage from the fire and explosion and began to leak pure oxygen into space. The leaking eventually meant that the SM was completely drained of oxygen and the crew were forced to move into the lunar lander attached to the SM and use it as a ‘lifeboat’.
There is no doubt that if the designs had not allowed the astronauts to take the lunar lander with them attached to the SM, the incident would have been fatal.
So this is the dramatic situation that developed which resulted eventually in the safe return of the astronauts. The aim of this is not to document a blow-by-blow account of all the events but to tackle those who claim that this never occured and was a deliberate hoax to channel interest back into Apollo again. So what could the reasons have been behind NASA orchestrating such an event. What would they stand to gain by doing this?
There can be no denying that by the time of Apollo 13 public interest in Apollo had waned. Members of the public are reported to have rung up television channels and complained that re-runs of ‘I Love Lucy’ were being dropped in favour of live coverage of moon landings. This reaction clearly demonstrated how fickle the American public was regarding their relationship with the Apollo programme. Landing once on the moon was a major event, but once it had been achieved the American consumer wished to turn their interest to other things in the blink of an eye.
Looking at this situation it is clear to see the argument the hoax theorists make about the reasons for this mission being faked. It is of course fair to say that NASA was struggling to ignite interest in the Apollo programme and surely there were discussions as to how public interest could be re-gained, but to pull off a hoax this elaborate?
It is important to look at other events that were unable to be kept secret and compare these with the Apollo 13 situation. During Apollo 13 Richard Nixon was in the White House serving as president. This was only a few years before the infamous Watergate scandal broke resulting in Nixon resigning as President.
We have to seriously look at this incident and wonder, if a simple case of burglary could not be covered up by Nixon’s government could the faking of a space mission involving thousands of people? Not only that but the telemetary data is available for this flight in its entirety. This data is very hard to fake and must go some way to proving that the Apollo 13 emergency was real and lives really were at stake.
The C Rock
Moon hoaxers have, for a long time, proposed that an image of a rock on the lunar surface was engraved with the letter C with a corresponding C on the lunar surface. They have suggested that this is proof of labelled props being used on a studio set and therefore the moon landings must have been hoaxed.
This has always been a difficult claim to discredit as there was very little to argue as what appears to be the letter C is clearly visible in the image. However as with all debunking the answer will be available if you dig deep enough. Fortunately research on this matter has uncovered just what this strange C mark was, and it turns out to be simply a hair on the image when it was scanned! So much for this great theory!
Extensive research was undertaken on this image and reported on the internet. Examination of the original images of this showed no C mark, indicating that it had been introduced somewhere down the line during reproductions of the image. Not only that but after magnification of the photograph, and examination close up, it can clearly be seen that the top of the C has a small shadow underneath it indicating that the hair or piece of fibre was not lying completely flat on the photograph.
This is a sure sign that this mark was not part of the rock on the moon, or part of the actual original photograph. It is therefore unfortunate that the one image that was chosen for widespread distribution was in fact the one with the piece of fibre visible on it. As a result another piece of ‘evidence’ of a moon hoax bites the dust!
Low Gravity Video
Another area that is popular with the hoax theorists is the accusation that the astronaut footage looks like it is simply earth gravity slowed down to simulate lower gravity. This is very misleading. It is up to an individual to decide if they feel it looks like this, however i personally do not think that it does show this.
Even when sped up the moon footage does not look like earth gravity as the movements of the astronauts still looks wrong. However, this will not be a view shared by the hoax theorists. Fortunately there is something else on the moon that proves that they actually were there!
Take a look at the Lunar Rover wheels and see how the dust moves. If the Lunar Rover were moving around on earth and the footage was simply slowed down then you would expect to see the dust move upwards over the wheels and the float over the surface. This does not happen.
What we see with the Lunar Rover is the dust move straight up and down again demonstrating ballistic flight in a vacuum. The only way to ensure you can achieve a shot such as this is by creating a very large space in which you could house your moon set and then remove all the air from it.
This was not possible in 1969 and cannot even be achieved today. Video footage of the Lunar Rover on the moon is 100% proof that it must have been on the moon - there is no other explanation! Had the hoax theorists investigated this they would have known that this argument is a non-starter. Using it as evidence simply illustrates their complete lack of understanding of space and the way objects move.
More arguments against the moon landing conspiracy theories have now been debunked, and this concludes the second part of my series.
Patrick is an expert Research and Travel consultant. His current interest is in Bristol airport hotels and Manchester airport lounges.