Was the moon landing faked - Mythbusters

More than 40 years on conspiracy theories still abound that the moon landing was a hoax. Mythbusters take a look at some of these claims and try to recreate the notorious 'faked' photos.
Subscribe to Discovery TV for more great clips:
www.youtube.com...
Follow Discovery on Twitter:
/ discoveryuk

[@ayyohkayy9527]

That proves it, the moon is flat

[@sansirow4595]

Ayy Oh Kayy THE SUN IS A FIDGET SPINNER RUNNING AT LIGHT SPEED CREATING HEAT FOR US!!!

[@vanquishelite9256]

Sansirow Jesus christ are you actually stupid? The sun is just a huge piece of paper that is attached to the underside of a plane and it flies through the sky I mean are there people who believe in the sun???? Dont be sheep

[@sansirow4595]

VanquishElite IMMA CALL MAH MOTHER N SHE LL DESTROY DAT ABERRATION THAT YOU CALL FACE!!!

[@finesto3404]

lol xD

[@ohtych1004]

Ayy Oh Kayy LOL

[@betotrono]

oh god watch out for the comments section on this one

[@mikalievenstroo8684]

betotrono i was thinking the exact same

[@grillitocantor336]

betotrono I

[@awesomeninja1202]

betotrono right 😂😂😂😂

[@wadel.2465]

betotrono Thanks for the warning

[@dadarkboss3144]

betotrono i

[@chestermartin9991]

The moon was a paid actor

[@saidali2800]

emmm!! Actually I thought it was a star!

[@AdamSelvig]

teter wells16 the moon isn’t paid squat and this is real

[@nicolasb7795]

teter wells16 the moon will win the oscars next year

[@toppybossradio4518]

Lol

[@20k_karat17]

Lol

[@elitecereal]

they wanted to make the moon landing so realistic that they actually filmed it on location

[@bdleo300]

We must totally trust Nixon and that Werner von Braun dude: he looks like a decent, honest fella....

[@bradleyrex2968]

@@bdleo300 Good point. Only Nixon said they went. And German Scientists are known for being incompetent. With solid proof like this everyone will be thinking moon hoax any day now.

[@leelunk8235]

😂BS​@@bdleo300

[@houdinibade9992]

Cannon Air force base in Mexico, thats hte exactly location when they film, the moon landing is fake..

[@FIERCE_BEAR]

I bet you still believe in Santa too😂

[@avivmetz7544]

I kinda expected a 5 sec video of Jamie and Adam saying "No" together and video ending.

[@Blurro]

Aviv Metz why though? That would be ignorant of them

[@spacemans4060]

The Blue Blur no it wouldn’t. It’s ignorant to think something which makes no sense

[@Blurro]

Spaceman yes it would, the conspiracy exists and it makes people believe things that may or may not be true. And like the flat earth theory (which is stupid) there are some "proofs" so if they just said "no" that isn't going to persuade shit, people want facts and proof

[@Arena1999]

+The Blue Blur There is no proof for the Flat Earth theory, nor is there any justification for it existing in the 21st century. At least the Moon Landings conspiracy theory actually has legitimate questions to ask about the official narrative.

[@realitycognizant7142]

The Blue Blur you live in a level realm. Its science fact. No space at all.

[@gdjones6325]

I hate it when people say the cow jumping over the moon was a hoax

[@1dgoose]

Oh dear the cow did jump over the moon....

[@bdavis4075]

I like you Jones. Good one...😂😂😂😂😂🐮🐮🐮🐮🌔🌓🌒🌘🌖🌙🌛🌜

[@bdavis4075]

@@1dgoose ...I know that's rught!!!!

[@gdjones6325]

@@bdavis4075 🐱🎻🐄🌝🐕⚪🥄

[@skycloud4802]

The cow didn't jump over the moon. The flying pig told me.

[@stalkerdelight3048]

Mythbusters faked the moon landing

[@dennyrulos4847]

Stalker Delight yes

[@azthetical2980]

I expected to see someone who got jebaited into saying no lol

[@IzzyRamos]

Yasss

[@inhumanwayz]

Hahahahahahahajahaaaaaa!

[@FrostyBud777]

WOW MYTHBUSTER PROVE IT WAS FAKED AS THEY RECREATE PERFECTLY THE FAKED LANDING AND FOOTAGE!!! WOW!!!

[@ChrisCooper312]

Actually they do get one thing wrong here. That model isn't Neil Armstrong as it has the red commanders stripe on the helmet. That wasn't added until Apollo 14, since in the first two landings it was hard to tell the two astronauts apart on video footage (Apollo 11 only had black and white video anyway so a red stripe wouldn't have been seen easily).

[@Shinramen47]

Hah I’m also a nerd but for planets

[@jokiklos7009]

If you were to watch the Earthrise movies that were shot from the moon, notice anything wierd? The moon is tital lock to the Earth so that one side can only face the Earth. So from the surface of the moon the Earth CANNOT rise.Apollo debunked in one paragraph.

[@rosesmith3971]

Maybe he knows that. But it looks like he already had that astronaut way before this video and just decided to use it and explain the stripes but new he don't have it before.

[@Bsuaiageukcns]

🤓🤓🤓

[@Marco-xz7rf]

but the pictures have color and there was a second camera inside the lem "filming" in color with like 1 fps or something. The coolest thing about that is it was on the same side where the black n white camera was, so they both had overlapping FOV so sometimes you could see the astronauts in both videos at the same time AND some pictures where taking, so you can see one position from 3 different cameras. That is so cool. Also one really funny thing is, you can see how Neil made the photo of his footprint in the lunar dust. Some conspiracy theorists claimed, that it would have been impossible, as the camera was on his chest, but you can clearly see how took the camera off and held it in his hand. How stupid can you be ... also alle the people who wonder who took the photo of neil exiting the lem. no you idiots, thats neil taking a photo of aldrin ... THAT is also visable in the camera!! AND also you can see how bright neil is. His white suite is perfekt for the sunlight to get reflected, additionally lighting the scene of buzz exiting AND explain the small reflections in his boots and some other places. No stupid "there had to be studio light" bs... :D PS: i am a conspiracy theorist myself, i just love to goo deep into things and ask questions, but i do that because i want to know the truth, not to fall for another lie. So far, most of the apollo fake claims were easily debunked by watching the videos and photos of the moonwalks :D

[@1966425]

I'm more impressed with that cardboard model of the lunar module he made!

[@borizovskimilan]

imagine what Stanley Kubrick could make with budgets of millions?

[@robertmiller7721]

There was nothing that Savage couldn’t make. The man is a genius natural builder.

[@Zero11s]

the lunar model is out of cardboard and aluminium foil

[@oliverxvi4373]

Okay. Let's start. Adam says that the astronaut figure is scale 1:6. Then I assume that the lunar lander is also 1:6. The only problem is that their sun is not in scale 1:6 or the distance between their model landscape and their fake sun is not 1:6 in relation to the parameters of reality. This is false propaganda and nothing else. Thanks so much. Im not a flat earther either.

[@daemoniumvenator7099]

@@oliverxvi4373 you're not a flat eather and you're also not smart

[@Max-nt5zs]

UP NEXT ON MYTHBUSTERS! DID BUSH DO 911?

[@joshuanorman2]

WE'LL BE TESTING WITH THIS REAL SKYSCRAPER

[@hoodrichyounging]

This is science you dumb ass

[@jaredchaparro6493]

Rolando Delarosa no shit dumbass

[@99ironic73]

+Rolando Delarosa EXACTLY! 9/11 requires science obviously!

[@ehwa6780]

sirbutteralotIII yes

[@FlyntofRWBY]

To all the people who believe in these super intricate conspiracy theories, remember that the government can't even unlock a fucking iPhone.

[@VinchVolt]

+FlyntofRWBYNation And when they do, they find out that there was nothing incriminating on it.

[@wroughtiron6031]

+game4brains ' Actually, some guy dropped water on it when celebrating.

[@thepowerofzero4534]

+FlyntofRWBYNation UGH!!!! Maybe you should rethink that statement. They didn't go through all that to unlock a freakin IPhone. They were using this simple ploy and looking at the big picture to enact laws to take away all encryption rights. They were in actuallity, incredibly clever

[@FlyntofRWBY]

Open Your Eyes Your evidence for that statement iiiiiiissss, where?

[@FlyntofRWBY]

Open Your Eyes I know they were trying to pass the encryption law so that they could have a back door to every iPhone possible. That still doesn't prove that they were purposely "having trouble" unlocking the phone so that they could pass that law.

[@blackandblue9272]

this video is basically a demonstration about how easy it would be to fake photos of the moon landing

[@lucyravenclaw1790]

That's how an idiot's brain works. Pathetic.

[@gavinharpur5385]

Ya it's easy to fake a lot of stuff, no surprise. Moon landing happened tho don't get that wrong

[@snellavision]

Hence why they only focused on this single photo and didn't touch the waving flag, etc, etc

[@BGCflyer]

@@snellavision…they did a waving flag mythbuster as well.

[@Dr.Kraig_Ren]

​​​​@@snellavisionthere are countless hours of footage. That follows your "common sense". Stop insulting Engineers who worked hard on this and astronauts who risked their life (and those who died too) I'm sure you don't have a PhD in astrophysics and a respectable job. Go back to ur janitor job

[@180_S]

I call bs... we all know the moon is made of cheese.

[@iswiftyfox8997]

I

[@iswiftyfox8997]

Jaden LaFrance swiss

[@Janpeders24]

@@iswiftyfox8997 DISGUSTING

[@sakom0793]

@@Janpeders24 you monster....

[@alanmaclaren4118]

@iSwifty but Swiss cheese has holes in it

[@sogrim4816]

I think they just proved that an organization can create a moon landing.

[@ManticorePinion]

But they're showing why it's not a secondary light source from stage lights. The moon reflects light, a lot of it. If it didn't, moonlight wouldn't be a thing, since moonlight is only reflected sunlight.

[@sogrim4816]

I understand the reflectivity of the moon, how else would there moonlight? Either way debunking the hoax based on the photo by recreating the landing in a garage is almost in itself recreating a studio landing...that's the point.

[@Tennoinu]

@Cheryl Jolly what about the fact that lights that advanced didn't exist until 20 years after 1969?

[@kanyumski]

@@Tennoinu Yeah i don't understand people, like "ha got you!, it got recreated in 40 years time!" it's fake! solid evidence!"

[@elizabethholis237]

@@sogrim4816 They discussed this in the aired episode.

[@halberthawkins]

You could put a conspiracy theorist on the moon and he would still think it was fake. Let them think what they want: They want to feel special by supporting an unpopular position.

[@jtj1128]

halberthawkins Give then their tin foil hats

[@NessieAndrew]

halberthawkins Exactly

[@trevormiller4181]

halberthawkins so true lol

[@fitnessfanatic6868]

halberthawkins it was staged my dude the landing did really happen no denying that but the photograph and the videos where staged or at least the first one maybe it became like live action towards the 2nd or 3rd landing

[@tony_5156]

drumline guy this is why abortion is legal

[@ninjay700]

Didn't realize a 60s technology cameras film could resist 250+ degree heat .I couldn't get mine to survive being in the glove box of my car...impressive

[@Tim22222]

It's not really 250° in the sense that it's a warm day on earth. The _surface_ is 250° (and only after the sun has been up for a week!!) Did you know there is no atmosphere on the moon?

[@fluffycorgi3695]

Your camera didn't cost billions of dollars though. Obviously your camera won't have the same quality as billions of dollars of technology, scientists extensively testing and planning the entire thing and the best engineers to build the rocket.

[@SophisticatedDogCat]

@@fluffycorgi3695The camera they used on the moon didn’t cost billions of dollars, though. You can see in the alleged footage that the camera is the same commercial one you can buy at the store, but what makes it even more suspicious is the fact that there isn’t any insulation or anything to handle the massive differentiating of temperatures that would otherwise destroy a camera here on Earth with less extreme conditions.

[@JACK-wh6jl]

EXCLNT CRITICAL THOUGHT: I NEVER THOUGHT OF THAT🤜🏻🤛🏻

[@LauraReed-wu2ww]

​@@fluffycorgi3695highly doubt the camera alone costs billions of dollars 😂

[@wesbarnes1682]

To get consistent results, they used the same set as they first did back in 1969.

[@wisegeeks]

hahahahaha

[@00tonytone]

Probably not the same pool and water . Buzz and Armstrong would look like the Grey's if they would have survived getting passed the radiation belt, twice. 🤔🤔🤔. In the 60s we still had black and white Bulb TVs. But we had wireless video transmission to and from the moon and then it was accidentally deleted to record The Benny Hill show or a Barney Miller episode. Who the hell was in charge of the betamax or VCRs in NASA in those days. The greatest achievement of man kind and oops main footage was deleted. IDK but if I was in charge heads are gonna rolll, before the Eagle has landed.

[@TonyEnglandUK]

@@wisegeeks Isn't he so right though? This doesn't bust any myth at all, all it proves is that 1969 used the same construct as Mythbusters did here!!

[@garrettpeterson9816]

Wes Barnes lol that's funny.

[@jeepwk6.5L]

Flat earther but yet, he doesn’t know his facts. Even as simple as the earth... ya... u do research haha. Gosh, this is what you expect from a flatbrain.

[@istoleyourjams270]

The comments are making my brain cells die, especially the newer ones.

[@carsonmorris127]

You got that right

[@Janpeders24]

My brain is like a plutonium rod that overheated and melted. A warm pile useless shit on the floor

[@victoriannecastle]

Yap. It gets more absurd. Just read the moon is a hologram now

[@istoleyourjams270]

@P. Spit lmfao you sure about that?

[@istoleyourjams270]

@@victoriannecastle LmFAO that's the most ridiculous thing I've heard

[@1213Steven]

Why didn't they just go to the moon?...

[@jtj1128]

Steven English Ez myth solver

[@haminatorainz7227]

Steven English because NASA doesn't want people to go to Moon because if Allen life on moon

[@LuisEnriquecrack]

Hamish Mahoney Or because the aliens don't want humans near of them, the humanity have a lot of stupid people, cof you cof

[@lorekeeper685]

Luis Enrique *cough* people who are blinded by their brain *cough*

[@justinc2633]

@Hamish Mahooney Who's Allen and who cares if he lives on the moon?

[@JSSTyger]

Imagine standing on a surface that is 250°F in the direct Sunlight.

[@yazzamx6380]

Same as being out on a spacewalk in low Earth orbit in the sunlight, where the temperature range in low Earth orbit is -250 F in the shade up to 250 F in the sun.

[@Ruda-n4h]

Although huge temperature variations occur on the Moon, the astronauts were never actually exposed to them. The maximum temperature on the Moon is +260F at lunar noon but with no atmosphere this refers to surface temperature not atmospheric temperature. Every Apollo landing was made shortly after lunar sunrise. One lunar day (dawn to dusk) lasts nearly 15 Earth days, and the astronauts were only on the Moon for a maximum of 3 Earth days, so they weren’t there long enough for the Sun to be at its highest and hottest.

[@LJ...69.]

Haha at least people are now waking up. We can’t even go 1% of the distance right now in 2022. Here is first hand proof it was faked. kzbin.info/www/bejne/Z6aud52hfb6ofq8

[@albertroundtree8546]

@@Ruda-n4h The moon has an atmosphere?

[@Ruda-n4h]

@@albertroundtree8546 An extremely thin one that hardly registers and makes it negligible, hence my comment about the Moon has no atmosphere to hold heat as on Earth.

[@The_Azure_]

Anyone who has ever learned of how reflections work, should be able to realize why the astronaut is lighter than the shadow. How this myth came about in the first place, I really want to know.

[@Yal_Rathol]

mamberu because they have a partial understanding of how shadows work in space. see, in space, shadows are utter black with no gradient. it's why you can't see the dark side of the earth in space pictures. the reason is because there's nothing to scatter the light and break up the shadow, so light travels in straight lines, drawing perfectly straight edges to shadows. problem is, that picture wasn't taken in space. it was taken on the moon, which has a way to scatter light and cut shadows, the regolith dust that coats it, plus it's own pathetic atmosphere of dust. what that means is that shadows on the moon are more similar to shadows on earth than in space, and if i stand in a shadow on earth, i don't melt into the dark and vanish from sight, you can still see me because of scattered light. it's the same here. but conspiracy theorists only listen to the first half, completely disregard the second half and make up an explanation to suit their feelings ("there's only one light source". yeah, there's only one light source when i stand in an open field at noon too, that doesn't mean i could step in a shadow and be gone).

[@corporalc487]

Because they can't accept that they are wrong.

[@SavageGreywolf]

people who believe it are dumb, that's why their 'explanations' are dumb

[@600_20]

Moon Landin aint real 😭😭😂 why would we not go back? Cuz we fkn cant😭😂

[@woodlandbiker]

People who lived in the 60s/70s know how crude technology was then. When I say crude I mean really crude in comparison to today. Its hard to believe they went to the moon when you take a good look at 60s tech. Especially when they say they don't have that tech anymore and are unable to reproduce it. You would have thought that with something so important and groundbreaking that every little piece would have been kept and the whole thing massively documented right down to the smallest nut, bolt and rivet as this is meant to be man's greatest achievement. Why didn't they do this.

[@avap0n459]

BRUH. Reading these comments made me lose hope in humanity, we are fucking doomed if we continue like this, the education system is failing, fast.

[@xavierlopes9204]

Education is indoctrination! All you need is common sense. Trust your senses. Unlearn everything you were taught in schools. It's all lies, but the math works! everything else is pseudoscience, bullshit and unproven theories. Whatever you learn in schools is Masonic bullshit, indoctrination and lies.

[@yakovendelman7659]

Just ask yourself some questions like; When has a nation ever made an innovation, (planted a flag on a new continent, made a scientific advancement) without any other nation following? How was all the data and scientific research to accomplish the moon landing lost? Why has the US not gone back to make a base? Wouldn't it have been beneficial to fake the whole thing to be able to spend more money on the military budget, while the Soviets were actually wasting trillions on trying to get there?

[@xavierlopes9204]

@@yakovendelman7659 because the moon is a luminary that generates it's own magnetic energy and light, it's not terra firma like earth. An astrophysicist from Australia tried to warn NASA in 1965 not to go to the moon, because nobody is ever going to be able to land on it. He said the moon is made of magnetic plasma. The sun is electrical in nature and the moon is magnetic and they are luminaries. If you can't land on the sun, you can't land on the moon. Nobody ever landed on the moon and nobody ever will, if NASA or the president tell you otherwise, you know they are lying to us.

[@edsalt5281]

@@xavierlopes9204 ahahahahahahahahaha please provide a link to those documents.... or did u just hear them in a bar one night. If the moon was made from plasma we would all be dead

[@edsalt5281]

@@yakovendelman7659 what's the point in going back to the moon exactly, anyway india or China are going there soon so hold tight

[@musicpromo9729]

Lmao y’all believe in the moon?

[@musicpromo9729]

Hybrid_ Cuber can’t tell if your trolling or are for real

[@musicpromo9729]

Hybrid_ Cuber well let me explain why we only see one side of the moon. Simply because the earths gravity is so strong that the moon don’t spin like other birds planets. Saturnus moon doesn’t spin either nor Neptune’s. And yes you do see the same stars it’s just that you can’t tell the difference

[@musicpromo9729]

Hybrid_ Cuber and secondly the moon rotates the same speed as it revolves so that’s why

[@musicpromo9729]

Hybrid_ Cuber I would recommend watching some videos about gravitation and how it all works. Everything in our solar system orbits the sun except the moons who orbits their planets wich in its turn obits the sun. The higher mass a planet have the bigger gravitational force it have wich is why the moons orbits the planets closest to them

[@jackd9928]

@@ggurded2262 You're confused because you don't understand, not because you have any point whatsoever. You just don't understand. Study harder.

[@billaltier4735]

When I saw the "moon landing," I thought the 1st person on the moon must have been the photographer.

[@Tim22222]

And what photographer would that be? Dumb comment.

[@Zack_Euler]

There were cameras on the module that captured it??

[@simplydifferent7712]

@@Zack_Euler The cameras were out of reach of the module.

[@WBookout10]

Your assumption is actually correct. Neil Armstrong was the photographer who took this photo of Buzz Aldrin climbing out of the LEM.

[@WBookout10]

@@simplydifferent7712This photo they recreated was taken with a camera Neil Armstrong was holding while Buzz Aldrin climbed out of the LEM. The TV footage that was broadcast of Neil Armstrong climbing down came from a camera on the side of the LEM that was pointed at the ladder. It un-stowed and began recording when Armstrong pulled a handle on the “porch” of the LEM before climbing down the ladder.

[@berhetta552]

Ironically enough, this goes to show how east it was to re create the “‘moon landing”, even though it was 1/6 scale it still goes to show how easy it was to take an almost identical photo as NASA’s

[@kneesurgeryenthusiast6915]

of course it would be easier to re create it 41 years later

[@sandermez3856]

@@kneesurgeryenthusiast6915 its not like they usding cutting edge tech not available 40 yrs ago.... especially nasa big budget

[@mocapcow2933]

@@sandermez3856 not really

[@sandermez3856]

@@mocapcow2933 really? This video of mythbusters laying down sand, making a mock up model and coverng a building to make it as dark as possible is cutting edge and could not be done 40 years ago?

[@mocapcow2933]

@@sandermez3856 they took pictures, you know how much hard it would be to create this, to real life scale, and record it all? No, cause people who are skeptics usually don’t have an understanding of cgi, or even regular science. They are people who come up with conclusions then try to get evidence, instead of using evidence to come up with conclusions.

[@EGAOFFICIAL]

Lmao what if the camera just used flash

[@kallewirsch2263]

Why should they? They didn't need a flash at all. They were there in bright sunlight (at the moon morning) just as you would be when you walk out on a sunny morning on some sand beach and take photos. No flash needed. A flash would have added additional weight to the misson and you would have needed additional batteries to operate it. Besides: it would have been some additional source of failure. Pretty simple: you don't carry anything to the moon that is not absolutely needed - every pound counts. And there is one additional principle involved: KISS - "Keep it simple, stupid!" Besides: As long as there is at least some light on something, you can brighten this area of the image up later in the dark chamber, as will everybody tell you who has ever actually worked in a dark chamber.

[@evanogburn]

Then there wouldn't be that dark of a shadow behind the lander

[@topher7716]

Ethan Archibald Music they did not have that in the 1960 dumb ass

[@collinmackin5911]

Nikerio Hey dumbass, yes they did.

[@nahyanrajee198]

Nikero there were flashes wayyy earlier than 1960

[@Silver_s105]

The comment section is a disaster

[@mahitanmandez1284]

Why

[@legalfictionnaturalfact3969]

Another troll saying nothing. :-)

[@plasma9839]

Why

[@baizuo_6246]

@@legalfictionnaturalfact3969 another troll saying dumbass shit :-)

[@legalfictionnaturalfact3969]

@@baizuo_6246 well, you can always stop! lol

[@profileprofile7028]

This does not prove the landings were real...or fake. Just some camera nerd stuff. The larger story and additional discrepancies are ignored. Exactly what one would expect from mainstream TV.

[@yazzamx6380]

You said "This does not prove the landings were real...or fake. Just some camera nerd stuff" That's not the point. The hx claim says that despite the moon being bright enough to cast shadows here on Earth, an astrnaut standing in the shadow of the LM should be completely BLACK with nothing seen in that shadow. All anyone has to do to debunk that claim is to show that the astrnaut in shadow would be lit by light reflecting off the surrounding ground and surfaces, and that is exactly what they did. So they've proven this ONE particular hx claim is wrong. Nothing more and nothing less.

[@yazzamx6380]

You said "The larger story and additional discrepancies are ignored. Exactly what one would expect from mainstream TV." So how many claims do you think anyone can cover in just 45 minutes? This episode of MB was first broadcast in 2008, 14 YEARS ago, where they carried out experiments that NONE of the conspiracy theorists had done themselves! To this day, no-one has carried out the same experiments as MB in this episode and yet arrived at different results, hence debunking the claims they tested. Also, it doesn't matter which claims they selected because there would ALWAYS be many more which they couldn't test in a 45 minute programme :-|

[@scoobtube5746]

@@yazzamx6380 No evidence for your wacky claims.

[@q_rkmghow7083]

they dont debunk this... think better ... they have that guy with the white reflective tshirt stay right where you would need to put a reflective surface... they think they demonstrated the conspiracy theory false, but they actually proved it true... the white tshirt if put to real life scale wound not only be as big as conspiracists claims, but it would be giant compared to the lander and astronauts... aka more than capable of illuminating the astronaut in the shadow...

[@joshuastevens172]

I think you're right. This whole video was a waste of time. You could put a Moon Landing-Denier in a rocket ship, go to the moon, and touch down on a moon. The Moon Landing-Denier would still say that the whole thing was fake, and probably that their experience was fake too. Or that NASA drugged them to think they went to the moon to concoct a plan to trick them to think that they landed on the moon. For some people, all of the evidence in the world still isn't good enough.

[@dark_unit2409]

if there were multiple light sources(like studio lights), then there should have been multiple shadows per object if there was one light source then your gonna need on dam giant studio light

[@epsilon_el_naught]

Can you shut the fuck up? Please, and thank you!

[@rocker761001]

@@epsilon_el_naught you don't understand his comment. he is agreeing that the landing was real

[@epsilon_el_naught]

@@rocker761001 I didn’t tell him to shut up because of his comment it’s just because i hate people with that pfp

[@charleslittleba]

@@epsilon_el_naught can he shut up more like CAN YOU SHUT UP

[@charleslittleba]

@@epsilon_el_naught I don’t like people with YOUR PFP

[@rollercoaster1480]

The moon is actually a sausage and the earth is a bread. Hence we make a hotdog.

[@sixela2268]

And the sun brings the mustard

[@dollrose3085]

@@sixela2268 😂

[@LetsMars]

I always loved this episode. They proved the moon landing happened by proving it could faked.

[@yazzamx6380]

Nope, they simply debunked a specific hoax claim, hence myth busted :-)

[@LetsMars]

@@yazzamx6380 *thus

[@yazzamx6380]

@@LetsMars - You said "*thus". Oh, so you want to be pedantic :-) Ok, here's the problem with your claim, there's a huge difference between still photos and video/film. There isn't a single photographed event in history (Apollo included) for which we cannot recreate the photos of that event in a studio, but... to this day, no-one has EVER recreated perfect 1/6 gravity in a studio where even the kicked up dust and dropped objects fall at the rate of the moon's gravity. Not even in the moon scenes in the highest budget sci-fi films (no advanced CGI existed back in 1969-1972). Even the most modern high budget movies like "The Martian" with its CGI effects doesn't attempt to recreate the 1/3 gravity of Mars for the surface scenes! That's because it's impossible to recreate such effects perfectly in real time on a studio/set with actors, so they typically don't bother at all for Mars and usually resort to rather poor attempts for moon scenes, where only recently have they improved such visuals thanks to CGI (which wasn't available back in the 60s/70s). Therefore if someone successfully recreates perfect 1/6 gravity in a studio and hence demonstrates uncut fake footage that matches the Apollo footage in every way (in terms of gravity) THEN I would drop that argument straight away, because that would be proof that it's possible to fake the Apollo footage here on Earth. :-)

[@LetsMars]

@@yazzamx6380 lol

[@yazzamx6380]

@@LetsMars - In other words, you have no counter arguments :-)

[@johnguilfoyle3073]

As much research as they tend to do, it was odd that Adam started off with an error. Apollo Mission Commanders had Red stripes on their helmets, sleeves, and legs to differentiate them from the Lunar Module Pilots in photographs and videos from the Lunar Surface. The error is that the stripes were a solution to a problem that was discovered while analyzing the Apollo 11 photographs and trying to figure out which photos were of Neil and Buzz. There were no Command Stripes on Armstrong's Apollo 11 mission suit.

[@cocolasticot9027]

To be fair he doesn't say it's how it looked on that particular mission, just that he can tell it's Armstrong based on the stripes.

[@TheCtx6969]

From Apollo 13 onward, the Commaders had arm, leg, and helmet stripes on their suits so that they could be distinguished from the LMPs in mission photographs.

[@KingOfTheJuice666]

Also odd that they neglected a major light-reflectivity-related component of Luna, which is the lack of atmosphere. They didn’t do this in a vacuum, which would slightly alter the way the light behaves, and didn’t even seem to mention it

[@gillesdeomzygovedique7]

In free documentary 'American Moon' from Massumo, (youtube) they debunk the debunkers. All Lunar pictures and videos Are staged on Earth. Not any single doubt.

[@jokiklos7009]

If you were to watch the Earthrise movies that were shot from the moon, notice anything wierd? The moon is tital lock to the Earth so that one side can only face the Earth. So from the surface of the moon the Earth CANNOT rise.Apollo debunked in one paragraph.

[@nhunhuhhii9611]

Real astronaut washed his space suit with tide just before landing he is shinier than your experimental astronaut.

[@srinitaaigaura]

Not only that, the sun's illumination is over 125,000 lux (and that's unfiltered without an atmosphere), which is much brighter than even the brightest indoor lights. I'd say that light they used for the set up would have hardly given them 500-1000 lux. That astronaut would have been much brighter with the sun shining.

[@solangelalebron1348]

I've always thought about that. How did the sun not burn their eyes.

[@BiggestNoodle]

@@solangelalebron1348 they had visors

[@unimornnbr1]

@@solangelalebron1348 they had tinted visors as the other guy said

[@Godscountry2732]

Had they tried to fake the sun,the single sourced light would have melted everyone on the sound stage.LOL How did they create the darkness of a vacuum/ space.We see no walls,ceiling yet the brightness matches the Moons low gravity, vacuum environment. Lets see Hollywood fake this.kzbin.info/www/bejne/mKCpi2aZdtymaJI

[@finallyfamous9628]

The moon doesn't have much atmosphere supposedly why they couldn't see the stars

[@nickr5118]

They faked the myth busters.

[@zerohelix4125]

Proof! kzbin.info/www/bejne/kICulKCJjpKAkLM

[@livingperson6962]

Next up on mythbusters: did the mythbusters fake the moon man?

[@cashmagesh5135]

Your actually proving the photo was fake...

[@yazzamx6380]

Nope. The hx claim says that despite the moon being bright enough to cast shadows here on Earth, an astrnaut standing in the shadow of the LM should be completely BLACK with nothing seen in that shadow. All anyone has to do to debunk that claim is to show that the astrnaut in shadow would be lit by light reflecting off the surrounding ground and surfaces, and that is exactly what they did. So they've proven this ONE particular hx claim is wrong. Nothing more and nothing less.

[@scoobtube5746]

@@yazzamx6380 Proof?

[@q_rkmghow7083]

they dont debunk this... think better ... they have that guy with the white reflective tshirt stay right where you would need to put a reflective surface... they think they demonstrated the conspiracy theory false, but they actually proved it true... the white tshirt if put to real life scale wound not only be as big as conspiracists claims, but it would be giant compared to the lander and astronauts... aka more than capable of illuminating the astronaut in the shadow...

[@A.hdh.]

Didnt you think about camera having flashlight turned on?? XD

[@halomaster2137]

A. Hdh. Didn’t you think about that a flashlight wouldn’t just light up the astronaut but the shadow too?? XD

[@A.hdh.]

No u

[@madmarty2892]

Lol Lol unless it was concentrated just on the astronaut then not so much

[@halomaster2137]

Madmarty there as no way it could have been just on the astronaut there would still be light surrounding the astronaut

[@madmarty2892]

Lol Lol yea I guess but anyway it's not because of another light we all know that

[@aotsao7110]

Hah! You think the moon is real?

[@ok4982]

Kristen Cantu earth aint real either

[@heypassthecheesecake4413]

Neither are we

[@bleach9859]

Neither our solar system

[@ivangomez9862]

Neither is the universe

[@Pinkbunny-ow2kx]

Kristen Cantu yea. Duh! 🙄

[@tithonusandfriends8519]

The sheer irony in recreating moon landing footage on set to "prove" its wasn't done on set lmao

[@yazzamx6380]

Er, since when is a photograph the same as footage? :-)

[@seigeengine]

I guess all those scientists who do experiments must be taking the wrong strat too, since models or small scale situations are fake and can't tell you about larger scale or external phenomenon.

[@Mayan_88694]

Shows how utterly delusional you flerfs are

[@Mayan_88694]

Cry harder Flerf.

[@LauraReed-wu2ww]

Lol forreal tho 💀

[@Mooseracks]

100% fictionalized Apollo missions

[@leelunk8235]

FACTS

[@michaelportaloo1981]

They could have just said: A secondary light source would have created a further shadow and saved 4.03 minutes of our time

[@enzoh7763]

yes,, they could easily shorten the video,,, too much drama to come to a conclusion . and now comes the next questions, how come only one camera shot /video of Aldrin , on his right back side ? what happen to the camera that videoed Neil armstrong, it was on his left front angle ? the film run out on the hasselblad videocam ?

[@nachowarrior1]

Have you never watched myth busters before?

[@thomaslewis7883]

Bob, They didn't mention Neils suit? It was like a light bulb in the sun of the Moon.. The white spacesuits reflected about 90 percent of the light striking it.

[@russelltucker3041]

But by recreating this picture on earth with stuff we have on earth just adds to the fact that it could’ve been done on earth. Not saying I believe it was fake, just saying.

[@m4nok968]

it's real, I'm the moon

[@jarcophagus]

No I’m the moon, and I’m lactose intolerant

[@statiik_blaze9465]

No im the moon and I'm allergic to ppl

[@rodjames1693]

Somebody please moon me!

[@dr.zamanritu9033]

@Donald Trenton great one

[@thatguywhosayshi7021]

It’s the cameraman

[@Gustntvl]

**Sponsored by NASA**

[@firewizard842]

Lol Sponsored by NASA to expose their fake moon landing

[@Tesseract1887]

Dude with what money

[@thwype9725]

Gu3stn0t3v1l lmao not

[@ghostsofloreofficialbandch3615]

NASA : Never A Straight Answer

[@EmilioMetralleta]

They don't have the money for that.

[@heyneken2156]

"Apollo Program" Producer: Walt Disney deceased at that time. Co-producer: Wernher Von Braun. Director: Stanley Kubrick Art Director: John Hoesli. Writer: Arthur C Clarke. Photographer: Geoffrey Unsworth. Total cost = 169.51 billion current dollars.

[@telam1744]

What was 169.51 billion spent on? Lawn chairs on a go-cart, foil and curtain rods.

[@alphabetaxenonzzzcat]

The director was more likely Kubrick's effects supervisor at the time - Douglas Trumbull - as he had worked in the past for NASA shooting training films.

[@MrKillJoy200]

Adam personifying the Neil Armstrong figure with the little ‘Quindar’ beep is absolutely adorable.

[@pnwdiver1734]

It's technically an Alan Shepherd, Dave Scott, John Young, Eugene Cernan figure, and the reason being is Neil Armstrongs suit did not have the commander stripes.

[@ziji6261]

@@pnwdiver1734 ah i see you are a man of culture as well

[@pnwdiver1734]

@@ziji6261 If we want to get super technical, Apollo 13's Commander Jim Lovell's space suit was the first to have the red stripes, unfortunately he didn't have the opportunity to walk on the moon.

[@ziji6261]

@@pnwdiver1734 yeah

[@jokiklos7009]

If you were to watch the Earthrise movies that were shot from the moon, notice anything wierd? The moon is tital lock to the Earth so that one side can only face the Earth. So from the surface of the moon the Earth CANNOT rise.Apollo debunked in one paragraph.

[@halt1931]

Way easier way to bust this- just point out the reflective panels that they left on the moon that scientists still use today.

[@covercalls88]

The Conspiracy theorist always gloss over that point. One thing the mythbusters forgot was to add the reflective coming off of Neil Armstrong's space suit, if that is added Buzz Aldrin is even brighter.

[@totowolf9716]

Christian Caisley lol there are no panels Lololol...prove it

[@kap3r0n]

Grab a space laser of your own and find out for yourself. They are there, and the stupidity of moon hoaxers continues to astound me. Ps. Lolollolololololllol!!111!! roflcopter

[@covercalls88]

toto wolf Actually, the Russian, Chinese, Indians(India), the European Space Agency, Japan, etc. have already pointed their space lasers there. Scientists from around the globe use it for lunar research. It is the best way to accurately measure the distance between the Earth and Moon. If they did not get a return signal they would have reported it.

[@kap3r0n]

No no no clearly every single scientist from every country in the world, including ones who are enemies against each other, are all in on this massive conspiracy. Wake up sheeple! I'm sorry i could barely contain my laughter.

[@CannedBeanslol]

Is everything a conspiracy theory nowadays?

[@jtj1128]

IWantToDie Yes.

[@saltysnowflake5832]

Herr Doktor the worst one is either the lizard people in the government theory or the “chemtrail” theory.

[@BigPlanesCustomLEGOaircraft]

No flat earth has got to be the worst. ;)

[@OrangeBroom]

Imagine bumping into a moon landing, chemtrail, flat earth, anti vax, lizard conspiracy vegan

[@Sednas]

I have a conspiracy theory We will all die

[@Zichfried]

Didn't they just prove it can be easily faked? Lmao. Good video! XD

[@yazzamx6380]

Not at all Zichfried. EVERY scene EVER photographed in history can be replicated in a studio, Apollo is no different, but replicating actual FOOTAGE is another thing altogether, where it is impossible to replicate perfect 1/6 gravity in a studio :-)

[@johnvrabec9747]

If the moon missions were faked the USSR would have been the first ones calling BS. Also, if you don't know how things react in a vacuum or how light scatters and reflects, take some science courses and expand your mind a little bit.

[@idiosyncrasy7703]

No, what they need to do is actually live up to the experience for them to actually believe the science. Why not stick them in a vacuum chamber and see for themselves how their bodies react? That'll be beneficial for both sides.

[@MA-uf8ly]

What if there is complicity. Why rule it out. Why go by tv. Why not use common sense. Think out of that idiot box. Nobodys friend or foe nations. We all are greedy insecure and envious.

[@MA-uf8ly]

Vaccumm is another big BS. What divides the vac from atmo. Who has seen that divide. 11 thousand satellites up there. Get a live vid evidence. Also if vaccumm exists then by definition it must suck up entire mass if any. It cannot be allowing atmo or mass to resist. If it do so its not vaccumm. Its just another extended layer above atmo. # Vaaccumm hoax

[@sohanturtorial3856]

@@MA-uf8ly Actually vacuum and atmosphere aren't separated.The atmosphere just thins up to the point where it seems no atmosphere is present but there is an atmosphere.This is why satellites need to be replaced or boosted back after a few decades or so.Also how does saying that no nations are friend or foe explain why the USSR wouldn't call bullshit if the US faked the moon landing?

[@MA-uf8ly]

@@sohanturtorial3856 theories n theories.... no satellites up there. Disprove me. Show live vid of sats from any other sat. Ok. Show me sats from telescope or any scope one can. If we can snap mars then y not our own sats. To believe is faith. To prove is truth. Complicity :: u scratch mine i scratch yours. Who would not "cooperate" if deception receives funding...

[@mohmmedvaru275]

Make a Feather and Hammer drop at the same time and land at the same time with 1960 Tech, then come back to me and say it was faked

[@justinc2633]

we talked about that in physics class, we also calculated the amount of gravity experienced where the video was taken and we got that it is around 1/6th that of earth which is what the moons gravity is. it could easily be faked tho by using a fake feather that would fall around the same speed as the hammer and a rope to slow the acceleration to 1/6th of gravity on earth, but i highly doubt it.

[@divyesh573]

Moh_mmed What the fuck are you on about?!

[@justinc2633]

Divyesh he was saying they couldnt have faked the moon landing what dont u understand?

[@justinc2633]

Aiden Drake im not sure if they had the technology to make a vaccum chamber that big in the 60s lol

[@MrMarinus18]

Well actually they did that in the episode. But decided to cut it.

[@l3gosnip3r]

The CIA hired Stanley Kubrick to fake the moon landing but he was such a demanding director that he would only fill on location

[@John-Doe-Yo]

Before I finished reading your comment I was shaking my head then by the end I started laughing. Lol good one.

[@oknevals]

Actually, Donald Ramsfeld said that Stanley had his private set to stage the landing in case mission was unsuccessfull but, the they just didn't need it. For whatever reason, Stanley never left his property ever after.

[@ReaghNetwork]

@@John-Doe-Yo if everyone was so sure what they knew was right wisdom would not be a word. instead of shaking your head have the courage to find the truth for yourself. That TV on the wall is no source for truth. it's purpose is profit and programing

[@bdleo300]

10 idiots repeating exactly the same dumb joke

[@spectet787]

"Apollo 11 mission is fake!" another apollo mission:

[@nativeorangiboom6833]

All apollo flights are fake, nasa is fake

[@LiAuditor]

Lol

[@Dahmy12]

Yeah it's

[@houdinibade9992]

Yes its fake, because the location when they film is in cannon Air force base in Mexico,

[@herbalgerbil]

I quit believing in the moon landing when I realized 2001 was just a movie.

[@robertsanchez8132]

herbalgerbil I hope I get woooshed and this isn’t real

[@cvf1660]

It's not a movie it's a episode of F.RI.E.N.D.S

[@hankjustilien1375]

@@cvf1660 no it's not it's a 26 page essay about frogs

[@justinhecimovich3005]

2020 is just a movie

[@Hypnostedon]

Balls so big like planets

[@pacoramirez7363]

7/11 was a part time job

[@gordonschnick12]

@That Guy James I don't see any reference to 9/11 i just see that 7/11 is a part time job, I agree with him.

[@SolveGr]

I work at dunkeroil

[@thehexpro2429]

Gordon Schnick tbh there is a difference between ‘was’ and ‘is’... 7/11 IS still a part time job there is no was cuz it always will be a part time job. It was a joke one the less so who cares

[@blackcard6423]

9/11 = Tisha B’Av

[@Sunny-qt4ji]

What people need to realise is that they made the exact same picture but they weren’t on the moon

[@seigeengine]

Do you... think the Moon landing photos' veracity were predicated on the idea that it's impossible to build a scale model of something?

[@mariecourtney7672]

Absolutely agree ..a replica but not the real thing.. no real proof

[@reptilexcq2]

NASA

[@yazzamx6380]

Says the ignorant :-)

[@Tim22222]

There are no such "acts" and there never were. Get a life.

[@LJ...69.]

Not a bad one. We can’t even go 1% of the distance right now in 2022. Here is first hand proof it was faked. kzbin.info/www/bejne/Z6aud52hfb6ofq8

[@leelunk8235]

FACTS FAKED

[@zarstar1576]

Like your ans..here's one nasa no aliens saw anything

[@TheJollyGreen]

It's quite simple, really. People who can't accomplish anything don't understand how other people can.

[@ajendrafps]

It's science not life or success

[@YdOntYaCryAboutIt69]

Yeah that makes sense with your logical fallacy. More like "I believe we went to the moon over 60 years ago, over half a century and havent returned because NASA tells me that it's too hard and a Painful process to try to rebuild the technology. And it just so happens to be the only technology that has become less efficient over the course of 60 years". But sure, keep on believing a bunch of people, including NASA who use green screens and have more foul-ups than Harlem globetrotters game.

[@TheJollyGreen]

@@YdOntYaCryAboutIt69 Actually one shift of the flag is convincing enough. The astronaut quickly rotates the flag with a sharp movement, and the corner of the flag quickly and gracefully swings above the cross bar. That can't happen in our gravity, and couldn't be emulated or faked. That was a result of .17g, they were on the moon. Done. Your welcome.

[@TheJollyGreen]

@@crispbacon3763 Yeah, I did.

[@YdOntYaCryAboutIt69]

@@TheJollyGreen Oh ofcourse, I forgot, You've been to space, you've experienced .17g and you are basing ALL of what you're saying and believing on the information given to you by the very people who write the textbooks, want you to believe what they say and you've given up on your own physical senses to justify an invisible force. But sure, I can tell by your retort that you haven't looked into the excessive number of NASA inconsistencies across the last 60 years, Haven't learned your history when it comes to why an agenda such as faking space missions would exist, along with believing that space bubbles exist too. Can you explain how bubbles occur in space?? Please enlighten me, because as it stands NASA spokepeople state it is debris and NOT bubbles, but then they proclaimed astronauts needed snorkels in space. As it stands now, NASA has been losing support steadily due to their MAJOR greenscreen failures, the regular failures and inconsistencies regarding space, a vacuum that never sucks away earths atmosphere and a constant requirement to base everything on Gravity and your main basis for evidence is a flat moving while you're watching a video which was filmed in a slower speed in order to generate an odd look so people such as yourself will defend it as being "the moon bc it looks different and we dont know what the moon would be like". Let's not forget that these "AstroNOTS" cannot utilize the gravity of the moon properly and reach heights of more than 12 inches when jumping, when they should be jumping upwards of 4 to 6 feet with Zero issue physically. But they aren't on the moon, they are utilizing cables, have a pretty good budget and have been deceiving people for nearly 70 years, so theyve become pretty efficient and yet still they are fouling up on an almost daily basis. Just look into The Moon crossing the earth and watch how pathetic the footage is, it is sad, cringy and shows how little they think of us as a civilization. Anyway, I'm happy to believe what I Know, tou keep on believing scientism founded by some Nazi rocket scientists who even proclaimed upon their final death marker( gravestone) Psalms 19:1, just look into it, why would the father of Rocketry do such a thing? hmmmmm.

[@meshachriamei3251]

I know nobody will see my comment but sometimes when I’m bored I go to the garden,cover myself with soil and pretend am a carrot 🤣

[@ΜιχαήλΚοντάκος]

Someone saw your comment🤣

[@shinchanindia6306]

thats some great shit i respect you

[@Casteray]

I sometimes cover myself with sand alone on the beach and pretend to be a shell

[@aosman2484]

26 people saw it

[@SpectreGR396]

@@aosman2484 Now 30

[@user-ru2sb9yk8k]

1:12 pls lets take a moment of silence to appreciate the beauty of this mans mustache.

[@epsilon_el_naught]

Gay

[@OsamaBinLackin_]

@@epsilon_el_naught how

[@epsilon_el_naught]

@@OsamaBinLackin_ satafu ya prick

[@BigPPwhofckedyourmomWoW]

@@epsilon_el_naught n8ggà

[@epsilon_el_naught]

I’m pretty sure you’re like “What The Fuck”

[@Thex-W.I.T.C.H.-xMaster]

The Soviet Union was closely monitoring the United States' Space Mission to the Moon. In the event that the mission was a fabrication, the Soviet Union would have widely publicized this information through various media outlets, including television and radio.

[@EXOTICLEX]

Not if they were blackmailing NASA

[@AndyBrownlie]

soviet union and USA were controlled by the same ppl 🤣 the same ppl that control every country now

[@AndyBrownlie]

so no, they were both in this game and the top ppl know this is all fake but needed for a long term plan

[@Kat-zj5kd]

they aren't advanced enough to know if it is fake. Plus they think they do these kind of things, they assume americans don't..

[@pattonpending7390]

There was a second light source which they did not take into effect. Neil Armstrong took that picture, and a small amount of light was produced from the reflection of the sun off of his white pressure suit and onto Aldrins - enough to brighten Aldrin a bit and make him stand out more from the shadows.

[@jonsmith3945]

Nonsense. Light reflected off his suit wouldn't light up the shadow side like Times Square. Nvida's computer model was designed to achieve the desired outcome - another bogus explanation for the extra illumination.

[@pattonpending7390]

@@jonsmith3945 , And you are basing that statement on what, exactly? What evidence to you have to the contrary, other than "I don't believe that is true?"

[@jonsmith3945]

@@pattonpending7390 It's based on my experience with lighting and photography. And I know that computer models can be tweaked to give any desired result, so I don't trust them. I understand the reason for your question, but it's akin to asking me what evidence I have to debunk your claim of owning a pink unicorn. There's no 'evidence to disprove Nvida. I just don't buy it. And, even if it's legit, it only address one anomaly out of hundreds. It doesn't sway me towards believing the landing were real.

[@jonsmith3945]

@@rtbt12 There's no credible evidence that Kubrick was involved. In today's world, we're told more lies than before, because of all the previous lies they got away with.

[@pattonpending7390]

@@rtbt12 : Do you actually believe that? If so, you may want to seek help. Why would a top secret, "Let's lie to the world" government project hire a civilian to do this? How many people would have to be involved in this, all of whom have NEVER spilled the beans? Why did the Russians not expose this while they were closely monitoring all traffic and tracking the module - wouldn't they have jumped at the chance? How is it that ALL the thousands of people involved in the project keep their mouths shut and not a shred of evidence is available to support this? I truly hope you are joking and just regurgitating the old joke about Kubrick with out adding the "..but he insisted on filming on location" ending. Seriously, aside from a few crackpot you tubers there is absolutely no proof of this! Do you also believe in Flat Earth? SMH

[@testaccount3891]

But doesn't that prove that there is clearly a way to achieve that effect without actually being there?

[@yazzamx6380]

Any event or scene in history can be recreated in a studio with a single photograph, but the perfect 1/6 gravity seen in hour and hour of Apollo footage can't be recreated in a studio.

[@leelunk8235]

1967 MY GUY, WE DIDN'T EVEN HAVE COLOR TV'S, HUMANS CAN'T GO THROUGH THE VAN ALLEN BELTS, IMPOSSIBLE, SPACECRAFTS THROUGH THOSE BELTS WOULD GET DESTROYED FROM HIGH RADIATION

[@fire1446]

​@@leelunk8235ok prove that mathematically

[@lanchanoinguyen2914]

​@@yazzamx6380that is where the devil is,1/6 gravitational force but not zero.There were methods that could levitate objects or even dust.

[@mjtigerfang]

Space debris would tear the craft to pieces. There’s more debris out there than mentioned. Not only that , earth is frequently bombarded by small meteorites that burn up in atmosphere. Yet satellites stay up there for years unscathed? Yeah right, internet can actually work without satellites because it uses waves. I don’t believe we got satellites in space. Genuinely we are being lied to badly

[@ferruccioalderisi3753]

2001: A Space Odyssey budget = 10.5 million USD Apollo 11 budget = 25.4 billion USD NASA overpaid.

[@willoughbykrenzteinburg]

Is your premise here that the movie 2001 looks real?

[@ferruccioalderisi3753]

No, my premise here is that the apollo movies look unreal. kzbin.info/www/bejne/kJTdYZiClMeMqas @@willoughbykrenzteinburg

[@Agarwaen]

@@ferruccioalderisi3753 Because you have no way to know what real looks like.

[@ferruccioalderisi3753]

@@Agarwaen Are you claiming this looks legit? kzbin.info/www/bejne/kJTdYZiClMeMqas

[@gocevoyevoda8847]

Yeah plus 2001 looks much better lol

[@dominichazell7862]

What annoys me about the secondary light source theory that never seems to get mentioned is that there would be shadows from that source but there never is. You only see one shadow per object or person.

[@hoofhearted1102]

There were multiple light sources in the warehouse lighting seeing as they never done it in darkness and taken a shot from a single spot light to see how that camera handles exposure but shows exactly the same as the nasa photo. I’m neither say it was real or fake but this doesn’t debunk any argument.

[@DemonDrummer]

@@hoofhearted1102 Are you suggesting any light spill from outside the test area is significant enough to reflect more light than the control light inside the blacked out area?

[@jokiklos7009]

If you were to watch the Earthrise movies that were shot from the moon, notice anything wierd? The moon is tital lock to the Earth so that one side can only face the Earth. So from the surface of the moon the Earth CANNOT rise.Apollo debunked in one paragraph.

[@DemonDrummer]

@@jokiklos7009 Link (google search phrase) to where we can find these “Earthrise movies” you speak of. Go ahead, we’ll wait. You’re an id*ot.

[@deanhall6045]

Here it is. They went to the desert 4 hours from L.A and here's what went down. They said they couldn't use the sun because it was night time so they used a single light to shoot heaps of footage. So, why didn't they wait a few hours for the sun to come out ? They wouldn't address that question. When questions started to arise about the authenticity of the whole thing, they compared the moon tapes to the ones shot in the desert to prove that they are authentic... Get it ? But the ones shot in the desert were done using artificial light. The shadows are all wrong but so were Apollo's so they must be real, right. So they actually proved themselves as liars with their own evidence. All of this is now proven and part of history as is the fact that no human has been through the Van Allen belt...but you probably don't care if you are a believer. Good luck.

[@nathanaelschraeder4641]

the reason why buzz was lit was because the light bounced off the surface and also bounced off niel armstrong because his suit is white

[@pchead]

finally someone who have knowledge moon works like a mirror and it bounces the sun light to other directions.

[@xavierlopes9204]

@@pchead except that Buzz Aldrin admitted to an eight year old girl on camera, that the moon landing never happened, it was faked, and the look on his face when he said that, was priceless, he felt like a lying fraud and was obviously distraught. Your knowledge can't replace the truth!

[@Wankle.]

He was lit because he blazed a huge doobie before he put the suit on

[@AviaForce]

@@xavierlopes9204 You good, mate? You just said "eight year old girl". Of course he would lie, she's just a small child! Buzz either didn't want her to risk her life by becoming an astronaut, or he didn't want that child to be confused. God bless astronauts.

[@guywhoknowsstuff6379]

His suit was bright against the darkness of space

[@juliankandlhofer7553]

Sort these comments by new if you need a laugh.

[@paradisebird7108]

Thanks the best is here, same as the votes, those are rigged too.

[@piromaniac8]

Wait, you can sort comments?! FFS...

[@ChrisKim683]

technically there was a 2nd light source but most people don't know that its actually Neil Armstrong in his spacesuit as the suit he wore reflects about 80% of the sunlight and he's directly in front of buzz aldrin (hence how he took the photo)

[@timberrr1126]

The reflected light is likely around 20% not 80% There are losses….shiney tin foil would be around 90%

[@Anony_mous1993]

he is not a magnifying glass directing the light towards the other astronaut. rather dispersing incoming light in all directions not enough to be noticed by anything rather than just illuminating himself.

[@mostinterestingmaninthehoo4630]

Actually that was 1960's studio lighting.. on a film set. Nice try

[@Erymanthios_Kafros]

There is a reflection on the boot of the descending atronot, which has been used to trace the height and position of the secondary light source. If the light was reflected by the suit of the second astronot, it would light other darker parts of the photo, since it would be reflected all over the place, and not be focused.

[@ReaghNetwork]

noble effort now try to explain why we never went back to the moon. or why no other countries followed NASA.

[@Souu998]

If it was faked give them 100 Oscars, it was 1969, grand salute to the filmmaker’s

[@go.jothekitkat]

it was not

[@mikes8386]

@@go.jothekitkat YES IT WAS MORON...... DO YOUR DAMN RESEARCH... THE FIRMAMENT PREVENTS SPACE TRAVEL AND SO DOES COSMIC RADIATION ... VAN ALLEN RADIATION BELT.. THESE MORONS WOULD NOT HAVE A TV UNLESS THEY WENT ALONG WITH THE FUCKING LIES... DO YOUR DAMN RESEARCH.

[@leelunk8235]

1967 MY GUY, WE DIDN'T EVEN HAVE COLOR TV'S, HUMANS CAN'T GO THROUGH THE VAN ALLEN BELTS, IMPOSSIBLE, SPACECRAFTS THROUGH THOSE BELTS WOULD GET DESTROYED FROM HIGH RADIATION

[@victorhugo-rf7py]

they cant even go know, imagine in 1969

[@Torrriate]

That's how science is done indeed. You try to figure why something occurs. Once your explanation doesn't contradict itself or the rest of what you know of the world you try to setup an experiment that is as accurate as possible and then compare its reproducible results to the phenomenon in question. If it fits you can represent it to the world as THE explanation as long as nobody comes up with an explanation that fits the afore mentioned criteria better. Nobody has, and NONE of other factors and parties that are/were sincerely involved contradict the historic event of the moon landing so that we, social media consumers, exposed to more dis- than real information, especially by exchanging so called information with our semi-informed counterparts on the web, can SAFELY ASSUME, WE FUCKING INDEED MADE IT TO THE MOON. So suck it!

[@JenMarco]

I'm not saying we didn't go to the moon but the camera was positioned in the shade which would block sun glare so this experiment needs to be redone correctly.

[@heyraskolnikov7121]

+jtuno122 the camera wasnt in the shade and it was in a similar place with the original camera (angle) not only that but there was no light glare in the original photo try agaim

[@ploxman]

www.techinsider.io/neil-degrasse-tyson-moon-landing-conspiracy-theories-2016-1

[@nerviswr3k385]

No they didn’t make it to the moon FAKE

[@user-ii6xq4ke7v]

Stop reading it after ur first sentence. Too boring

[@ziongarner4485]

What’s funny is that the arch-nemesis of the USA, the Soviet Union, never claimed once that the landings were faked. You’d think they would be the first in line, but they had equipment to detect that the radio waves from the mission did not come from earth.

[@yazzamx6380]

Come on, you're using facts and common sense, that's cheating ;-)

[@MerrowGula]

because claiming it to be fake would make them soar losers whiteout hard efference. if the the moon landing was real than Armstrong wasn't the first on the moon but the camera man

[@yazzamx6380]

@@MerrowGula - Except the Soviet Union could have *easily* obtained hard evidence of a hoax *any time they wanted* (would you like to know how? :-)) but there was no need because they knew for a fact that the USA had beaten them to the moon. And regarding your camera comment, if your friend showed you a selfie on his phone, would you ask "So who took the photo"? :-)

[@MerrowGula]

@@yazzamx6380 how emotional are you while writing that? man if girl can make millions on twitch by showing her tits. how would a legit company not go to the moon already? no way you cant make a couple bill going to the moon taking some stones back or anything. its been 50 years man. or tech evolved so much yet the space stuff didt. But the main reason why I think we didt go is because the can allen belt but that is my opinion. think about your health before u gonna lose you're calm writing back.

[@yazzamx6380]

@@MerrowGula - Emotional? A classic example of projection on your part :-) The only people who claim the Van Allen belts are a problem to pass through are conspiracy theorists who have never sent anything into space themselves, and of course people like yourself who blindly believe those theorists. I find that amusing because you're happy to trust NASA when they say the *invisible* Van Allen belts exist, BUT you don't trust the *same* NASA when they say those *same* belts are not a problem to pass through in a few hours. Dr Van Allen himself said we would need to stay inside the region of the belts with the highest radiation for *one week* to receive a fatal dose of radiation. The Apollo craft passed through the belts in about 2 hours. Work it out :-)

[@mykealberttayoto7331]

There's no moon. It's just the ball of gray cheese I dropped when I was just visiting Earth.

[@charleslittleba]

Dude the landing isn’t fake there’s literal proof there’s freakin moon dust

[@marbleman2278]

@@charleslittleba r/whoooosh

[@charleslittleba]

@Ella Cecrle ok fine if you non believer thinks it’s not real I’m just gonna throw evidence out the window and now I’m gone. Say liek you probaly want HEY THE MOON ANDING IS FAKE

[@jen4um]

Strange how they “lost” the 1969 technology to get back to the moon.

[@Jan_Strzelecki]

"Strange" how? What do you imagine happens to a tech of a program that's been cancelled?

[@inharmonywithearth9982]

Yes! NASA astronaut Don Petitt said " I'd go to the moon in a nano second but they lost that technology and it's a painful process to get it back!" It would be impossible to fool todays people the way they used to with a couple dollars worth of cheap black and white 35 mm film and a cheap projector. Nowadays that would require taking away independant information like the worldwide web and bringing people back to the days of completely controlled radio and TV airwaves like we had in the 1960s. Now we have to hire dishonest people to work for the worldwide military industrial complex to do psyops on youtube videos, news programs. It works but very, very hard. We simply dont have the technology at this time.

[@Jan_Strzelecki]

@@inharmonywithearth9982 _NASA astronaut Don Petitt said " I'd go to the moon in a nano second but they lost that technology and it's a painful process to get it back!"_ Yes, he did. Your point being? It's not strange in the least. What do you imagine happens with hardware of a project that's been cancelled? _It would be impossible to fool todays people_ Not so - with CGI, it would be easier than ever. _Nowadays that would require taking away independant information like the worldwide web_ As opposed to taking away independent information from other countries, organisations, and foreign scientists? Your "completely controlled radio and TV airwaves" excuse doesn't work here.

[@leelunk8235]

@@Jan_Strzelecki 1967 MY GUY, WE DIDN'T EVEN HAVE COLOR TV'S, HUMANS CAN'T GO THROUGH THE VAN ALLEN BELTS, IMPOSSIBLE, SPACECRAFTS THROUGH THOSE BELTS WOULD GET DESTROYED FROM HIGH RADIATION

[@Jan_Strzelecki]

@@leelunk8235 Except that we did have colour TVs in 1967, and the radiation in the Van Allen Belts isn't as high as you were misled to believe.

[@gqdaddy8544]

Always loved the Mythbusters. Never saw this episode. My thoughts on Moon Landings always revolved around the fact that In the 1960's Russia and China were in a cold war with the USA and if they had sniffed out any kind of BS with the moon landings they would have exposed it and told it to the world. They were watching the US efforts closely. It was a series of space races that the US and Russia each won different events in (first animal into space, first human into space, first to orbit, first to the moon) but once all the events had been completed they stopped pushing one another - the space race was over. We need a new modern day space race to push humanity again.

[@seigeengine]

Our allies and unaffiliated countries were also watching... and so were third party organizations and civilians. Schools watched it with telescopes, hell, amateur radio operators triangulated it's position the entire mission.

[@cigarettesister]

@robert punu You do realize there was no good CGI back in 1969 right? You also realize that the moon reflects light correct? Some people will just cling to their bs beliefs in spite of any evidence. Smh just as bad as creationists.

[@cigarettesister]

@robert punu The moon does not emit its own light source my guy. Why are people still bringing up that whole laser thermometer BS? That's not hard to debunk. I saw that video where a guy tries to "confirm it" but all he does is measure cold temperature in the direct moonlight, but the shade he measures is near a building, which is clearly gonna be warmer than the open ground. As for the video, try using your brain, a bright object is gonna shine through clouds. I mean, what else is there to say? You do realize that it's still brighter when it's cloudy during the day than when its night. The moon literally cannot be in our atmosphere else gravity send it crashing down. By all means, show me even one scientific peer reviewed paper that refutes the mountains of evidence that supports a basic fact like the moon being a celestial body orbiting our planet. So how do you explain tides? Tides happen because of gravitational interaction between the Earth moon and sun, this is literally third grade science class shit. But I'm willing to bet that you don't actually believe it you just wanna be the edgy conspiracy theorist who ignores anything that doesn't confirm what they want to see.

[@cigarettesister]

@robert punu As someone with an amateur telescope, I have see the moon very often. It most certainly does not give off it's own light, this is clearly evidenced by the fact that the moon has phases that it goes through that perfect correspond with the position of the Earth and Sun. Secondly, it's possible to use some trigonometry to calculate the actual distance of the moon. As well as astronauts on the Apollo 11, 14 and 15 missions positioned retro-reflectors (a bit like the cat’s eyes you see on roads) on the surface of the Moon. Physicists bounce a pulse of laser off one of these reflectors, timing how long it takes for the laser beam to make the return trip - about two and a half seconds. Since we know the speed of light, they can then work out how far away the Moon is to within a few millimeters. Lunar laser ranging measurement data is available from the Paris Observatory Lunar Analysis Center. polac.obspm.fr/llrdatae.html The sun is orders of magnitude brighter than anything anywhere near our planet, obviously it's gonna shine through a tiny gas cloud. You're gonna have to do better than that poorly shot video "evidence" and again I asked for peer reviewed studies not easily explainable videos of the sun shining through a cloud. Something like this tmurphy.physics.ucsd.edu/apollo/doc/JGW96.pdf that shows the implications of general relativity that would also have to be wrong if the earth was flat. I'm gonna have to say I trust Einstein more than some conspiracy theorist who either can't do basic research or is just willingly denying the tons of scientific evidence that refutes your silly claim.

[@israelgalvez6365]

I read somewhere that China too landed on the moon, only to be called out by NASA in 69. Have you zoomed into the lander? I saw PVC pipe, Tape Missing screws, Aluminum foil and a giant rocket engine that was for looks only, Not a single grain of sand was moved, also to many errors in all the moon landing photos.

[@dyingmeme2283]

“Moon Dust” sounds like an alien drug

[@michaelolin2219]

20 kremulans a gram, good stuff...

[@leusername]

You wanna buy some moon dust?

[@keithboddey]

Is there anything else that we could do over 50 years ago, they we can not do now?

[@michaelfuchs]

How about jump on a supersonic airliner for a flight across the Atlantic?

[@coolperson962]

We can do it now, but there are other factors we need to take into account. 1. The moon landing was a flex of power. Both the United States and The Soviet Union were racing to get there. It was an intellectual war. Both sides were throwing everything at it. There isn't any real power now for the United States to compete with. It's basic competitive economics. The United States has the monopoly on global power, at the moment, that is. 2. Due to the competitive nature of the moon landing, the United States and the Soviet Union threw a hell of a lot of money at the projects. Referring to my first point, the US government could in now way justify doing it again today. People are just not as patriotic as they were in the mid 20th century and really, the US have nothing to prove. 3. The US was basically better off in the 1960s. They still are the single global power. However, referring to point 1 and 2, they couldn't justify doing it, especially when the country is poorer. Put it this way, Baby Boomers could, in general, afford bigger houses than todays young adults. Using your logic, today's generation would be able to afford even bigger houses. In conclusion, it all comes down to money and power. Technological speaking, we could easily go back. Financially speaking, it's much harder.

[@xwarx1000]

Yesss music they couldnt produce good music now.

[@Findingthecalm]

Go to school without a teacher trying to convince me I was born the wrong gender. Stand up and pledge allegiance to our American flag in our classroom.

[@teachmehacks]

@@coolperson962you hit the nail on the head. The money just doesnt make sense. Especially because we havent tripped over 1. a life form threatening or non threatening to make research and resources worth it. 2. We also havent discovered a vast amount of resources nor has our planet started to run dry of most elements needed to sustain life.

[@grantlentz440]

I challenge somebody to give me evidence that it was faked that cannot be proved wrong

[@ShipMyPants]

Ikr NASA knew they would’ve been caught in the future if they faked it so they didn’t besides if that was the case someone would’ve leaked it by now. We’re going to the moon in 4 years on the Artemis mission and they’ll show the site where Neil and Buzz once step on unless people want to claim that the astronauts going there put those “props” there

[@scott-o3345]

kzbin.info/www/bejne/nH7GoX6AZp2ho9E

[@rupertstratton7890]

He's actually lit by the reflection of Neil Armstrong's suit. That's Buzz coming down the ladder.

[@JD_tcb]

No that's fking stupid lmao.

[@ikaika7439]

@@JD_tcb How is it stupid?

[@justnoah2073]

People are really dumb.

[@abbirezac1982]

Ikr

[@beezmanit2683]

*Always has been*

[@legalfictionnaturalfact3969]

Right? The believe anything the government, including NASA, tells them!

[@justnoah2073]

@@legalfictionnaturalfact3969 my oh my.

[@legalfictionnaturalfact3969]

@@justnoah2073 i'm sayin! lol.

[@stuka4223]

When they talk about moon landing being fake, I always think about the Apollo 1 incident.

[@ohmagod]

@@elijahhernandez3108 The Apollo 1 was the first rocket in the Apollo Program. What happened? The entire spacecraft was exploded.

[@BigPPwhofckedyourmomWoW]

@@ohmagod 😂

[@skrtskrt2063]

What if they did exactly what you guys did but on a bigger scale, with more moon dust and a bigger substitute sun?

[@seigeengine]

Then you wouldn't be able to, from home, prove that we've been to the moon yourself... but you can.

[@isaacflores6192]

Me after watching the entire video and reading the thumbnail again and saying “soooo is it fake???”

[@ntnblr]

It's fake. It's impossible to land on the moon due to non-atmosphere

[@ChiefsNation3peat]

They just proved that the moon landing was real. Maybe you should watch the video again or just stay dumb I guess

[@youngjayzgh.]

What pains me is a mission some people dedicated and risk their lives for has been discredited by a bunch of cowards

[@q_rkmghow7083]

funny how they have that guy with the white reflective tshirt stay right where you would need to put a reflective surface... they think they demonstrated the conspiracy theory false, but they actually proved it true... the white tshirt if put to real life scale wound not only be as big as conspiracists claims, but it would be giant compared to the lander and astronauts... aka more than capable of illuminating the astronaut in the shadow...

[@yazzamx6380]

@@q_rkmghow7083 - Irrelevant. The hx claim says Buzz should be completely black inside the shadow with no detail seen, and yet no hx believer in history has carried out that experiment and shown the object in the shadow to be black! Instead ALL those who have carried out that experiment using objects and lights and even computer simulations have shown that objects in shadow will be illuminated by light reflecting off the surrounding surface. Therefore the hx claim is wrong.

[@leelunk8235]

1967 MY GUY, WE DIDN'T EVEN HAVE COLOR TV'S, HUMANS CAN'T GO THROUGH THE VAN ALLEN BELTS, IMPOSSIBLE, SPACECRAFTS THROUGH THOSE BELTS WOULD GET DESTROYED FROM HIGH RADIATION

[@LieMac]

@@leelunk8235Uh oh! better put on my tinfoil hat 😂🤣😭🙀🤓👆

[@leelunk8235]

@@LieMac I THINK YOU OWN MANY OF THOSE HATS

[@DarienRosa]

Brilliant... and here I thought the moon was made of cheese.. it's actually covered in regolith?! 😱

[@ravenlord4]

It's what happens to cheese when you leave it out too long. It gets hard and dusty.

[@kilgoretrout3966]

Actually, there was a "fill light" they failed to take into account. Neil Armstrong was standing in bright sunlight with his Hasselblad, reflecting photons a-plenty toward Buzz Aldrin.

[@softdrink-0]

Kilgore Trout I don’t know what the hell you just said but I’m just going to agree with it.

[@kilgoretrout3966]

@@softdrink-0 Neil, in his suit, was equal to a big white reflector, shining more light on Buzz.

[@jobloggs7400]

Ah! Because the freak photo has far less shadow contouring... that’s explains it.

[@justinmadrid8712]

Then why do the astronauts suits act as a fill light for dozens of other photos? For example there are many photos of the astronauts standing by shadowed objects, but they are not lit up as you see here. While you’re at it, how can you explain the moving flags? (No astronaut is touching the flag at all)

[@kilgoretrout3966]

@@justinmadrid8712 Yes, i can explain every detail.

[@ihasbagus849]

The amount of people who think it is fake show how legendary of an accomplishment it is!

[@user-s1gma]

Yea

[@AdamSelvig]

Plus there were live witnesses watching the original launch in 1969

[@coltendoyle7589]

Let me guess you believe in Jesus Christ also 😅😅😅😅

[@blkrr1349]

@@coltendoyle7589 wtf?

[@barrontrump3943]

@@AdamSelvig live witnesses lol!

[@davidhepburn9328]

Why would I be stupid enough to believe a show(MythBusters)when their expertise is in "special effects"

[@yassassin6425]

Why would anyone be stupid enough to listen to you or the dumb conspiracy theory that you mindlessly parrot?

[@willoughbykrenzteinburg]

It makes them MORE qualified. If the moon landings were faked, then the footage would require special effects of some kind. So, have two special effects experts determine if the footage could have been faked with the aid of special effects.

[@glitched_ai]

Maybe because many of the claims made about the Moon landing would revolve around the usage of special effects. So, two special effects guys would know a lot about if what they're seeing was or was not special effects. Also, good special effects require a decent understanding of chemistry, physics and engineering, not to mention they have many other experts in their respective fields working on the show.

[@CaptainDerek101]

Wait but if we didn't go to the moon then how would we know what made the moon reflect in order to recreate the reflectivity of the moon's surface?

[@sinistermoon]

Meteorites

[@NicNico]

@@sinistermoon And telescopes with spectroscopy.

[@simplydifferent7712]

Because the fake thing is easy to remake. Or better said, to refake.

[@BirolKanmaz]

God i miss this show and how Adam always made fun of Jamie's mustache.

[@Techfieldspaceguy]

Dog :Woof Cows: Moo Idiots: Fake

[@zorreid5191]

The majority of people on TikTok believe it was faked.......

[@LRinor1]

Kinda weird seeing a someone comment on a 12 years old vid but i shouldnt be speaking XD

[@geometrygraham3337]

majority of tiktok is completely oblivious of anything.

[@Woahthatisnotfair]

You mean the brainrot gen-z retards who use Tiktok? oh yeah

[@joshuastevens172]

Tik Tok isn't known for having the brightest people or conversations either. Watch at your own risk.

[@braden6122]

Yes the moon landing was fake but the actor Neil Armstrong was such a perfectionist that he wanted it to be filmed on the actual scene

[@kinglevidevicusvg6400]

Not to mention.. the moon reflects, yes. But so does earth.. people tend to forget earth is an indirect light source.

[@jakejones5736]

Absolutely. That's why you can see the rest of the moon when it's less than full; because of Earth's reflection.

[@michaelt.5672]

The earth is as much of a light source on the moon as the moon is on earth during daytime. They did forget one huge secondary lightsource though; the astronaut behind the camera, who's white spacesuit reflects A LOT of light.

[@TheBjossi80]

So earth being a great light source and much bigger than moon, why isn't the moon blue then from all the light casting of the blue marble?

[@RustyNickels]

The people who think the first moon landing was faked are just mad because nobody has invited them to Uranus.

[@nhmooytis7058]

Rusty Nickels I’m not touching that ;)

[@joelpouteau2053]

This is absolutely true: No one has ever been to the Moon. Yesterday, I was talking to Inspector Monk, who investigated the subject, and he said to me, as usual: "this is how it happened": NASA needed a sequence showing the astronauts walking on the moon, but they had to find a director capable of shooting this short film on Earth, in a credible way, and they asked Stanley Kubrick. He agreed, on the condition that the images be as realistic as possible. Some sequences were thus shot in the studio, and others outside. And, since he is a perfectionist, he asked that the outdoor shots be done on the Moon, so they discreetly took all the equipment, the cameras, the spotlights, and even the actors, to the Moon, in the middle of the night, so as not to be noticed, they shot the sequences they needed, and then came back down to Earth, with the recorded images. These were then broadcast on television news, without anyone noticing the deception. 😂😅😂

[@priestgoober5160]

aint noone reading allat

[@mikey4483]

Waste of time! People who don’t believe, will never believe. And the mythbusters certainly won’t convince them.

[@movieman175]

It's still interesting to test ridiculous theories. So it's not a complete waste of time. Though I agree there is no convincing people that will believe bullshit no matter what evidence they see.

[@ferganozkan5275]

Fakes it to show its not fake

[@casecao8412]

Fergan Özkan You do realize the technology has improved between 1969 and 2018 right? This is about 40 years later. Back then it would literally be more expensive to fake it then to actually go to the moon.

[@Films-ce7im]

Almost half a century has passed since the Americans landed on the moon, and such a powerful Russia has not been able to prove that it did not happen at all, why would it change in the near future ?! After all, all you need to do is send a space probe with a good camera and take pictures of the landing sites of the Apollo mission. Well, the Kremlin prefers to soak up the eyes of its poor citizens and ridicule the international arena, even without realizing that in the eyes of real enthusiasts of space exploration it looks extremely pitiful.

[@alfie2113]

Witcherx the technology used to go to the moon was destroyed by the Americans according to them, why would they do that, there’s no reason at all to do that. Also funny how the Russians beat the Americans on every front in the space race yet the Americans were first on the moon. It doesn’t add up.

[@casecao8412]

@@alfie2113 Why wouldn't the Americans disassemble the technology? It is no longer needed. The desire to go to space diminished after the Space Race. It could be used for other purposes (also a lot of that stuff went to museums). Also how do the results not add up? The Americans were only able to win the Space Race because the founder of the Soviet Space Program, Sergei Korolev, passed away due to cancer. Without him, they basically just fell apart. Please, do some research for once.

[@liukang85]

@@casecao8412 Lol not too expensivr. Plus Stanley Kubrick's work proves that it was very much feasible.

[@zac-oros]

All of the comments are complaining about the comments

[@zacharybarnard7789]

Dude the flag was waving in what air that doesn't exist and there's no sound in space Hollywood forgets it all the time and it drives me f****** crazy

[@TheWokeFlatEarthTruth]

A flag will wave a lot easier on the moon as there is no atmosphere to remove energy from it. The flags only waved when the astronauts moved them. Take care.

[@RonaldRaygun-tg4zl]

" the flag was waving" It wasn't. "and there's no sound in space " The Sound travels through the space suit. "in space Hollywood forgets it all the time" Hollywood has nothing to do with the moon landings.

[@jennifermayberry3736]

Armstrong's highly reflective suit also provided an additional light source as well.

[@jeremydyar7566]

@Christine Ford is CIA what makes that inconvenient is all the astronauts that made it past the belt

[@tobyellingwood8204]

I think they should have used the same suit material on the model astronaut as well. I just feel the mythbusters could have gotten even better results using the space suit material to reflect more light.

[@jokiklos7009]

If you were to watch the Earthrise movies that were shot from the moon, notice anything wierd? The moon is tital lock to the Earth so that one side can only face the Earth. So from the surface of the moon the Earth CANNOT rise.Apollo debunked in one paragraph.