Why Didn't Astronauts See Stars on The Moon?

[@TheDanEdwards]

Anyone who has done some photography knows the answer.

[@1701_FyldeFlyer]

It's nothing to do with photography. Take your camera and point it at the sky during the day any where on Earth. How many stars excluding the Sun are in the picture? Answer none unless you use a telescope. The landings were on the lunar DAY. The sky being black on the Moon doesnt mean night.

[@PeloquinDavid]

Even the highest of high dynamic range (HDR) in cameras isn't typically as broad a range as human sight. But even the latter struggles with the enormous range of contrast between direct sun-illuminated features of the moon itself and the blackness of space...

[@simonallan9941]

Also Its not rocket surgery to know that stars are very very dim, and they're not easy to see during the day, on earth or the moon.

[@Duendito]

I came here to say this. 😁

[@tubecated_development]

@@PeloquinDavidI think Canon just developed a sensor that beats the human eye in the dynamic range stakes. Maybe 24 stops.

[@rozzgrey801]

It was predicted that astronauts would not be able to see stars from the daylit Moon's surface in an essay by Arthur C Clarke published in 1954.

[@Jonn3371]

But the Astronauts were there for three days.

[@rozzgrey801]

@@Jonn3371 But you didn't know the lunar day is 2 weeks long, so the astronauts were always on a sunlit surface, even though they were there for several days. You deniers never ever do any research at all, or you'd know these important details.

[@rozzgrey801]

@@Jonn3371 The Moon's daytime is two weeks long, so the astronauts were in sunlight for all the days they were there.

[@Jonn3371]

@ The van Halen radiation belt would have fried them first

[@SaintDomingo1]

I heard one of the astronauts said they could see stars if they stood in the shadow of the lander.

[@perigee1275]

It's simply because the exposure on the camera is to accommodate the brightness of the earth and moon.

[@cbnewham_ai]

Correct. One of the few correct answers in the comments.

[@simonallan9941]

And sun... try filming stars on Earth during the day

[@shiro.kyodaioo9526]

In a nutshell, you can't see stars in daylight. 😆

[@cbnewham_ai]

That's not the reason on the lunar surface. 🙃

[@zounds010]

@@cbnewham_ai It pretty much is. Anyone standing in lunar daylight is forced by that large amount of light to contract the pupils, meaning not enough light is gathered to see stars. The only difference is that the moon has no atmosphere to scatter light, so if you block the sunlight from reaching your eyes you can accommodate to the darkness and see the stars.

[@cbnewham_ai]

@@zounds010 You can, by standing in the shade and looking away from the surface. It was done by one of the astronauts, so very much doable.

[@zounds010]

@@cbnewham_ai Yes, that's what I said in the last part of my answer.

[@davepowell7168]

You can in crepuscular moments on earth and Venus

[@MeanGeneSanDiego]

Yes, astronauts could see stars with the naked eye on the moon if they were in the shadow of the lander. The moon's surface is very bright during the day because of the lack of an atmosphere to scatter sunlight. The astronauts' eyes adjusted to the bright landscape, making it difficult to see the faint stars. The Apollo astronauts' cameras were set to capture the moon's surface and each other, so the stars in the background didn't register in the photos. However, stars are visible from the moon, but they appear differently than they do on Earth.

[@nmclaren1980]

Are u sure about that because they all changed their minds after they started bringing books out and at press meetings?

[@enadegheeghaghe6369]

​@@nmclaren1980nobody changed their minds

[@johnd1466]

Michael Collins commented he didn’t remember seeing stars and he wasn’t on the moon, he was orbiting it quite a few times

[@maxvaessen]

Awesome stuff again, Chris! Very informative and fun ❤ keep it up!

[@billweaver6092]

A small aside -at the time of the moon landings it’s worth remembering that astronauts used Hasselblad cameras which were inside enclosures , and used FILM!

[@carlgrove8793]

Of course they used film! Everyone was using film until digital cameras were invented.

[@JP5466]

Celluloid film would outgas in a vacuum and the radiation would've destroyed it. Just more proof that no man ever went/walked to the moon.

[@supercat380]

@@billweaver6092 yes, miraculous 70mm Kodak film that could endure 180,°C heat and minus 200°C on the extreme conditions of the moon. How easy it is to fool people, indeed

[@dominiclester3232]

Yes, 2 mins in Daytime says it all to me. I’m sure many people see the black sky and think Nighttime...

[@michaelharrington75]

Do the astronauts see stars while traveling to the moon? Neil Armstrong said they couldn't.

[@ghj290]

The astronauts did see stars; they don't show up in the pictures due to the aperture being too low so that the image sn't over exposed.

[@TheWokeFlatEarthTruth]

Yes you are correct, some of the Apollo astronauts on the later missions, such as Gene Cernan, did mention that he was able to see the brighter stars after spending some time in the shade of the LM with his visor down. Take care.

[@tubecated_development]

They didn’t really see stars on the daylight side of the moon and stated as much. They would need to dark-adapt your eyes, which is not really possible when working in bright sun light Apollo commanders were issued an eye-patch for use to dark-adapt one eye when needing to see stars for navigation purposes.

[@michaelharrington75]

@@ghj290 Armstrong said in a 1970 BBC interview that the earth was the only visible object other than the sun. Not only from the surface of the moon, but also in cislunar space. So he's saying that the whole time they were in space, they couldn't see stars. Go watch the interview. Something is fishy about the different accounts of seeing stars from the astronauts.

[@zounds010]

@@michaelharrington75 There's nothing fishy about the 'different accounts'. They were talking about different circumstances. Armstrong was talking about being on the lunar surface and in cislunar space, in both cases the astronaut was in full sunlight. Collins orbited the moon, and was able to see the stars while in the shadow of the moon, if he switched the CM interior lighting off. Young and Cernan stood in the shadow of the LM, looked up to make sure the bright surface was not in their field of view and could see stars after waiting for their eyes to accommodate.

[@carlgrove8793]

The astronauts could see the stars, but their cameras were unable to do the long exposures that would have been needed to record them.

[@zounds010]

When you're standing on the lunar surface in bright sunlight, you can't see the stars: your eyes, just like a camera lens reduce the amount of light coming in. You have to go stand in the shadow, look up to ensure the bright surface is not in your field of view, then wait for your eyes to accommodate to the much lower light level. John Young did this on Apollo 16.

[@joseoncrack]

@@zounds010 So John Young saw stars?

[@zounds010]

@joseoncrack Yes.

[@TheMightyCookieShow]

The moon itself in combination with the suits that they wore were so bright and so white that the exposure for the camera had to be turned really really down just so they could actually capture the picture without it being a blown out glowing ghost. As a result of doing this the camera was now not sensitive enough to actually register the stars in the sky

[@just_passing_through]

5Te same place all the stars are when you look up from the earth in the daytime. They are still there, even though you can’t see them. The moon has a dark side and a light side. They landed in the light side.

[@rodevans602]

Duh! We don’t see stars during the daytime on earth either!

[@bigpuppy9923]

Always a laugh when people who know nothing about photography, think they know everything about photography. Heaven forbid these idiots do any basic research. Maybe they've never had an SLR camera & don't know about 'f stops'.

[@tubecated_development]

Dunning-Kruger effect is busy in 2025

[@michaelharrington75]

This isn't just about photography. Neil Armstrong said in a 1970 BBC interview that they were never able to see stars. That the earth was the only visible object other than the sun. He also added that this wasn't just the case while on the surface of the moon, but the whole time they were in the space between the earth and moon. Different astronauts give different accounts on whether they could see stars from space. Watch the two goofballs at 8:47 , how they look at each other after reading the question. When one of them says "yea", the other quickly says "yea, all the time!" Then if you watch the full clip, they start trying to out do each other on what they can see.

[@tubecated_development]

@ You’re not so bright. Seeing stars while in space depends on time, location , whether any light and/or shadow, and if or not dark-adaption is in effect. The ISS is real. Astronauts are real. Earth is an oblate spheroid orbiting the sun.

[@zounds010]

@@michaelharrington75 Again, different circumstances. 8:40 is astronauts talking about being able to see stars from the ISS. The ISS spends half of its time in Earth's shadow. That's when stars are visible. On the daylit side of Earth, stars are only visible if you block out all the sunlight.

[@bruceheadley7191]

Can you see stars during daylight? There's your answer.

[@bobwitkowski6410]

Possibly once we establish a lunar base those pictures can happen and the people could see the stars quite well because they well. Had we expanded from the Apollo program we would already have such bases. The moon would be a quite an active location with workers going to and from the moon quite regularly.

[@joseoncrack]

This is a pretty common video topic that comes back on a regular basis by tens of youtubers. Is it because it's a popular topic or because we need to constantly "remind" people that people were actually on the moon?

[@zounds010]

It's a common question. Unfortunately, moon landing deniers have latched onto that question and use it as an argument to claim the landings were faked.

[@tubecated_development]

See the flat earth. Whatever is popular is profitable.

[@tubecated_development]

are you sure it’s not crescent Earth? The odd bright planet did show up in the photos if you look at Apollo 14 Crescent earth and Venus over the lunar module for example

[@RandyJames22]

Great video, Chris! A question: How exactly are a pulsar's radio signals "sent" from its surface? It has to do with their magnetic field, right? Is it the poles sweeping across the radio dish? Thanks

[@GlenJDiamond]

With your naked eye you can do this test.. get yourself one of those large plasma balls - you know.. the balls where you can touch the glass and the plasma gets attracted to your finger! They look pretty bright don't they? OK.. now get one of those large 2 million candle power torches and shine it at 90 degrees either left or right from your viewpoint to the plasma ball so that the light from the torch travels through the plasma ball. Turn the torch off and on. The Plasma dissapears when the strong light from the torch is travelling through the plasma ball - the plasma is always there but we can't see it because of the strength of the torchlight which makes the ball look empty with no plasma. Sunlight is also mainly invisible.. we only see the reflected light, otherwise we would be continually blinded by sunlight. Obviously we can see the sun as a light source but not all of our daylight sky is blindingly bright.. that would be a nightmare!! That's why you can't see stars when it's daylight on the moon. Also the brightness of our planet will bounce sunlight across the view of where the stars are.

[@THEfonz-s5u]

Even easier, just do an image search of photos of the ‘zoomed full moon’ and see the lack of stars in the black sky in those photos of the moon.

[@CLERIC_58]

Venus was just about bright enough to make it into a few photos.

[@CLERIC_58]

The best known ones are from Apollo 14 and include the Earth. www.nasa.gov/history/alsj/a14/a14Venus.html

[@SenuliRupasena]

why is no one talking about the picture at 7:50 there is a star

[@smallduck1001001]

One should be able to simulate this in a large room with small faint lights on the ceiling and a floor consisting of bright LED panels. Or with a white or light gray floor and a single spotlight illuminating it from above. Hmm, in addition to the point lights on the ceiling, I guess it and the walls would have to be covered with a black, light absorbing material. I'm not sure if anyone has built a room like this.

[@gmonorail]

ok but can astronauts see stars while on the moon? because that's your actual question.

[@someguy-g4r]

Not during the day. Can you see stars during the day on earth? Lunar Day is 14 earth days.

[@cbnewham_ai]

Yes. It doesn't matter if it is day or night on the Moon - there is no atmosphere and so, yes, you can see the stars. However, during the Lunar day you'd need to be standing in shadow to avoid glare and you'd probably only see the brightest stars because of surface glare.

[@cbnewham_ai]

@@someguy-g4r Yes, you can actually, but only the brightest (Sirius, Canopus) under ideal conditions and if you know where to look. Venus is a lot easier because it is brighter - I've seen it many times without optical aid.

[@TheWokeFlatEarthTruth]

@@cbnewham_ai Some of the Apollo astronauts on the later, longer missions reported being able to see some of the brighter stars after spending some time in the shade of the LM with their visor up. Take care.

[@cbnewham_ai]

@TheWokeFlatEarthTruth you must be replying to someone else and got me by mistake. I know this already 😀

[@stephenking8754]

Great video chris , imagine stars that dont twinkle 🚀 🛰🛰 🌙 🌞🌞🌞

[@michaelharrington75]

Armstrong said they weren't able to see stars in cislunar space. That means nowhere in the space between the earth and the moon. Collins said, I don't remember seeing any?" Collins was orbiting the moon. So he couldn't see stars while on the dark side.

[@tubecated_development]

Yeah you changed what they said. This is the transcript, I just went and watched it to save you doing any more lazy misquotes. Patrick Moore (British astronomer): “When you looked up at the sky could you actually see the stars and/in(difficult to hear whether he said ‘and’ or ‘in’.) the solar corona, in spite of the glare?” Armstrong (likewise didn’t seem to understand/catch the question in full): “We were never able to see stars from the lunar surface or on the daylight side of the moon by eye without looking through the optics, I don't recall during the period of time that we were photographing the Sonar corola (mispronounces) what stars we could see” Collins: “I don’t remember seeing any” So Collins confirmed they didn’t remember seeing any stars in the solar corona. It makes sense. The solar corona would not allow dark adaption of their eyes. So why did you misquote them and remove the context? Is it because you are intellectually dishonest and have an agenda. If not, then why do you do this?

[@zounds010]

Collins writes in his autobiography that he could see the stars while in the shadow of the moon.

[@michaelharrington75]

@@tubecated_development I was referring to a different interview on the Armstrong quote. Not the initial press conference after the return.

[@tubecated_development]

@ so what was the full Armstrong quote and in what context and where from? And you cherrypicked Collin’s quote with no context whatsoever. As another respondent notes, Collins mentions how many stars he could see on the shadowed/night side of the moon, (alone in orbit when not looking into/photographing the solar Corona)

[@michaelharrington75]

@@tubecated_development In the 1970 BBC interview Armstrong is ask about what he could see from the surface of the moon. Armstrong replies, "The sky is a deep black from the moon, AS IT IS IN CISLUNAR SPACE, the space between the earth and the moon. The EARTH IS THE ONLY VISIBLE OBJECT OTHER THAN THE SUN THAT CAN BE SEEN. Although there have been some reports of seeing planets, I myself did not see planets from the surface, but I suspect they might be visible."

[@TheWokeFlatEarthTruth]

It would have been extremely difficult for the Apollo astronauts to see stars from the bright, daytime lunar surface for obvious reasons. However, it worth noting that some of the astronauts on the later, longer missions did report being able to see some of the brighter stars after spending some time in the shadow of the LM with their visor up. Take care.

[@timmo971]

If you are in sunlight that’s all that you can see. If they were on the surface at lunar night (a new moon from earths perspective) it’d be no problem.

[@MadawaskaObservatory]

Doesn't matter. The brightest stars would still appear, albeit you would need to process the images to show the extremely faint stars as the exposures are short.

[@BGTats144]

My flat earth twin brother is always with that where's the stars BS and I tell him do you see stars in the day time on earth well same thing with the moon .

[@leonardgibney2997]

I did find it curious that a representative of Hasselblad said he didn't believe the official version.

[@zounds010]

Working for Hasselblad doesn't prevent people from taking leave from their senses.

[@ObservantHistorian]

Were you curious enough to look any further?

[@another3997]

That "representative" hasn't been to the moon, nor has any idea about the light levels and reflectivity of surfaces found on the moon. They may well have been lacking in common sense too... but let's be charitable and assume they were just uninformed.

[@Ian-lx1iz]

Yeah ...I've always wondered about that, because: On any bright, fully sunlit _day_ here on Earth, the stars really pop out at you, as if you could touch them. (Come on!)

[@peterbaldwin6573]

Exposure ...---...

[@Rafaga777]

Thanks a lot for this informative video.

[@nickdiamond7595]

A couple astronauts almost saw stars from stumbling in the regolith. 🤩

[@PeloquinDavid]

Night on the moon gets VERY cold and would require specialized suits and equipment that the Apollo program didn't need because it made sense to focus on the two-week daylight periods for their brief explorations. An eventual moonbase will be another matter entirely.

[@rformetoknow479]

No star. No lights on the Christmas tree either. Sad.

[@joseoncrack]

Exactly.

[@RTCarterful]

First quess, just like we don't see stars during the day on earth the sun is to bright, they were on the lite side of the moon, must have been blinding on the surface. My first guess.

[@valentincuc4101]

to see stars from moons ground... need to land on the dark side, cause moon doesn't rotate like earth, it's always shows same side towards sun or earth.

[@zounds010]

No. The moon shows the same side towards Earth only. So it rotates on its axis once every 28 days, in sync with its orbit around Earth. This means every part of the moon gets 14 days of sunlight, followed by 14 days of darkness.

[@tubecated_development]

Moon rotates very much like Earth you don’t understand the movement involved. Sunlight reaches all sides of the moon it has night and day just like we do, but it’s much longer.

[@NoahSpurrier]

Also the light is much brighter than the hottest day you’ve spent on a beach on Earth.

[@simonallan9941]

Because it was in the middle of the day...

[@THEfonz-s5u]

It was in the morning, the middle of the day would have been very, very hot.

[@SideWalkAstronomyNetherlands]

You cannot see start in light so bright....duh... you can see them in the night, eyes and cameras adapt to the intensity of the light..

[@janmueller6807]

Just try to see stars in a stadium with floodlights on.....

[@nmclaren1980]

So me taking random family shot in garden and I can see random stars/planets?

[@gitmoholliday5764]

but they could see stars.. only the cameras didn't "see" them

[@zounds010]

No. When you're standing on the lunar surface in bright sunlight, you can't see the stars. You have to go stand in the shadow, look up to ensure the bright surface is not in your field of view, then wait for your eyes to accommodate to the much lower light level. John Young did this on Apollo 16.

[@gitmoholliday5764]

@zounds010 you said "no" and the rest of your own reaction is debunking the "no"

[@zounds010]

@@gitmoholliday5764 No, it's *qualifying* the no: presenting an exception. On 5 out of the 6 landings, none of the astronauts spent long enough in the shadow to see the stars.

[@danohanlon8316]

Where are all the brains-that should know the simple answer to this simple question?

[@jamesbarry1673]

But all the stars live in Los Angeles

[@joseoncrack]

And yet, they're not very bright.

[@poppingbubblewrap-t3x]

Are you seriously looking for stars in daytime? Wow...

[@bradleyrex2968]

I've seen one.

[@graxxor]

You might need to bring your mic closer and stop shouting. And maybe add some sound conditioning to your room. The echo is a bit “shouting in a shoebox” stylee…

[@mariuquidiello]

Because in space in the day you see the black sky and in the night in space you do see the stars! Just see the videos from the satélites!

[@zounds010]

In space you can see the stars, IF there are no objects in your field of view that are much brighter than the stars. When you're on the lunar surface in daylight, the surface is 100,000 times brighter than the stars and you won't be able to see the stars.

[@tubecated_development]

Those are timelapse videos from satellites/ISS. At night. Yes, you have to be in the Earth’s (or some other) shadow for it to be ‘night’ in space.

[@A3Kr0n]

I wasn't going to like this video, but then I did.

[@reeyees50]

Short answer, because it was MORNING on the moon. Mystery solved

[@CharlesWessel]

To much light reflecting off the surface

[@misaelescobarruiz1193]

Lógico es muy brillante más la radiación solar en la luna que en la tierra y tu puedes ver una estrella en la tierra de día verdad que no pues en la luna es peor

[@Peter.L.Rodin.B]

a lot of explination for some thing pretty simple

[@byaran1]

I start to think, they never did really went to the Moon. If they did, why such a challenge to go back. How do you explain the shadow, and lack thereof not to mention the wavy flag.

[@zounds010]

It's a challenge to get back to the moon, just like it was a huge challenge for Apollo. Apollo was the largest engineering project in history. They spent $300 billion. 450,000 people worked for a decade. NASA ran 28 missions to the moon before the first Apollo landing, and half of those failed. Now, for Artemis, the goals are more ambitious, but the annual budget is 1/25 of what was available for Apollo, so it's going to take longer than Apollo's 8 years to get humans to the moon.

[@zounds010]

The shadows in all of the Apollo photos and videos are correct. The claims made by moon landing deniers don't hold up. E.g. they complain about shadows converging, and they ignore the fact that shadows often converge due to perspective. The flag doesn't wave. It only moves when the astronaut is planting the flag, and when the LM takes off. In between, we have hours of footage of the flag staying perfectly still.

[@bradleyrex2968]

Easy, computers & technology. Manned space flight in the 60s was easier than unmanned space flight. Manned space flight was little more expensive, but men can fly spacecraft pretty well. But as computer power got smaller and cheaper by orders of magnitude, feeding some guy, giving him air and diapers did not. Today manned space flight costs around 100X more than unmanned. In 2024 5 unmanned spacecraft went to the moon. Zero men did because nobody wants to pay for it.

[@zounds010]

@@bradleyrex2968 Manned spaceflight was a lot more expensive than unmanned missions, back then as well as now. To give you an idea: the Surveyor program, 7 unmanned missions of which 5 managed to land successfully land on the moon, cost just under $500 million (in 1960s dollars). The Apollo program cost $28 billion.

[@ARWest-bp4yb]

Thank you Chris, though I doubt this will convince the moon landing hoaxers/tin hat crowd!🤣👍👍

[@davepowell7168]

Conspiracy theorist:Why did the lander look like a homeless shelter? 😅

[@xlostlovex]

Who say they cant see? U mean the images sent back ain't got any?

[@91vasi]

Can you see stars from earth at daylight?

[@zounds010]

The astronauts have said they couldn't see stars from the lunar surface. John Young, on Apollo 16 found a way to see the stars: at the end of one of the EVAs he had a few minutes. He went and stood in the shadow of the LM, looked up (so he wouldn't have the brightly lit lunar surface in view) and waited for his eyes to accommodate. Then he could see stars.

[@xlostlovex]

@@zounds010 Interesting thanks for sharing the story. However what I meant was the stars are always there, of cause the glare and brightness from Sun covers and because of how our retina works and how the sun takes up all the spectrum available for our eyes. And also @91vasi, our atmosphere has part to do why we can't see stars during the day but mostly, yes, the sun luminous takes up large part of what our retina process

[@moritzheintze7615]

Why there are no stars in the Apollo pictures: Simply because the studio designers had been skimping on the stars.

[@ApolloKid1961]

No self-respecting film director is going to make the same movie SIX times from the same set in a vacuum with bad camera equipment and only different actors.

[@moritzheintze7615]

@@ApolloKid1961 It depends on what he is ordered to do by the President.

[@zounds010]

No "studio designer" was involved with Apollo. They went to the moon.

[@tubecated_development]

@@moritzheintze7615you’re not so bright

[@ApolloKid1961]

@@moritzheintze7615 Kennedy's orders were to put a man on the moon and return him safely to Earth before the decade was out.

[@J-CBertrand-tp6bg]

Anyone who has a brain knows the answer😂‼️This has been scientifically explained many times so even MAGAts, who only have a couple of functional brain cells, should be able to understand 😉‼️

[@SCIPs-xx5yl]

Try less focus on you, more else

[@AlexanderIIIYanson]

No stars? They used a pitch black backdrop!

[@poppingbubblewrap-t3x]

Can you see stars mid morning on Earth? Same on the moon.

[@MocoLocura]

Maybe because they never actually went tobthe moon ?

[@ApolloKid1961]

They did.

[@zounds010]

We know for certain that they did go to the moon.

[@poppingbubblewrap-t3x]

Six times.

[@davetekannon]

Why didn't the first man on the moon in a BBC interview after coming back from the moon only explain things in 3rd person singular? That's right! American hero, Neil Armstrong, never once said, "I saw this or that," or "I did this or that." He never once used first person singular. As someone once said, if your wife asks you how was your night at the pub and you answer: "When you go to the pub you meet friends and drink few pints. Some people tell jokes. You laugh a lot and play pool. When you go to the pub, you have a lot of fun." When you experience the most incredible achievement in human history, you are at least going to say, "I couldn't believe when we landed. I looked out and saw no stars." Never once did Armstrong use first person singular in the greatest achievement mankind has ever achieved?

[@zounds010]

I looked up that interview (BBC 1970), and within the first minute Armstrong refers to himself as "I", not "him", proving you wrong.

[@davetekannon]

@@zounds010 Great to hear from you; I am an artist and not a word analyst. Peter Hyatt is a word analyst and he did the synopsis of the interview I saw. Peter Hyatt and his wife could not believe what they heard of Neil describing things like "we never saw any stars, etc. Aside from that, a 180 pound man on the moon would weigh just 30 pounds. The guys that jumped only jumped a few inches--even in spacesuits they should have been able to get a few feet off the ground; they would not need to climb the ladder either, but should have been able to pull themselves up without their feet no problem at all. There were footprints under the landers and not one speck of dust on the landing pads, and no crater. A rocketship lands with a 10,000 pound thrust engine and not even blast marks let alone a hole. Rocketdyme, the company that built the lander were most worried about the landers blasting out a hole so big the lander would fall in. There are no craters! You can find Peter Hyatt's interview of the Apollo 11 crew, along with the interview of the father of Madeleine McCaine. Laslty, Look at Armstrong's face when President Nixon looked through the porthole to greet the spacemen on the ship that picked up the capsule. He sure does not look like someone who achieved the greatest ever event in human history. The truth is out there, we can only listen to the experts.

[@zounds010]

@@davetekannon That 180-pound man was wearing a space suit that weighs another 180 pounds, and it's pressurized which limits his mobility. On Apollo 11 in particular, they were being very cautious. Taking high jumps was pointless and potentially dangerous, so they didn't do that.

[@zounds010]

@@davetekannon When it landed, the LM descent engine was producing 1300 kg of thrust. That 1300 kg was spread out over an area of several square meters, creating a ground pressure less than that of a hovercraft. Hovercraft don't make craters. The lunar surface consists of a thin layer of dust, sitting on top of larger and larger rock fragments. In the landing video, you can see the thin layer of dust being blown away from about 1 minute before touchdown. The larger fragments were too large and heavy to be dislodged by the exhaust flow.

[@zounds010]

@@davetekannon Having no dust on the landing pads is an indication that they're on the moon. In a vacuum, the dust kicked up by the descent engine can't swirl and billow into clouds, it just gets launched away from the LM, which means none of the dust lands on the pads. It lands hundreds of meters away instead.

[@michaelnarramore3415]

There are no stars in a Hollywood basement, only wind blowing a flag and no dust created by rocket motors. You got to go first before you can go back.

[@zounds010]

6 Apollo missions provably landed on the moon.

[@TheWokeFlatEarthTruth]

You think that a basement would have wind? Interesting. Take care.

[@lostgleammedia]

Why are we never shown stars in space in any kind of human context.. they don't show the space station perspective when in the shadow of the Earth.

[@zounds010]

Plenty of photos taken by astronauts on the ISS show stars, disproving your "never" claim.

[@lostgleammedia]

@zounds010 well ive never seen them in common circulation.. must be you have to specifically look for them.. thats my point

[@ObservantHistorian]

@@lostgleammedia Yes, you have to make an effort sometimes, to know things.

[@lostgleammedia]

@ObservantHistorian but why os my point, why don't they show us the reality, why do they only show is what we expect to see

[@ObservantHistorian]

@@lostgleammedia Repeating the same stupid comment doesn't make it any smarter. Make an effort to educate yourself. No one is responsible to spoon feed you. Every conspiracy assertionist idiot is exactly the same - knows how to repeat talking point but can't use the same Internet to simply learn for themselves. It's the bottomless arrogance of the willfully ignorant.

[@supercat380]

THE ASTRONAUTS CONCENTRATED MORE ON PLAYING GOLF, RACING THE MOON BUGGY, JUMPING UP AND DOWN, AND SHORT PLAYFUL RUNS, RATHER THAN VIDEO THE EARTH AND STARS FROM THE MOON.

[@zounds010]

False. they took hundreds of photos of Earth from the moon and from lunar orbit. They didn't have good tools for photographing the stars: no tripod.

[@supercat380]

@zounds010 yes, and the film they used was Kodak 70mm special thin perforated. Must be miraculous enduring the temperatures of 130,°C and minus 135,°C. Which prevail on the moon. Indeed, this world is full of gullible and susceptible people

[@zounds010]

@@supercat380 The film didn't have to endure those temperatures. The temperatures you list are for rock on the surface of the moon. 130ºC is reached in the lunar afternoon, and -135ºC is reached near the end of the lunar night. The Apollo missions landed early in the lunar morning, with a ground temperature of 0ºC. That eliminates the whole low end of the temperature scale. The camera was coated with reflective paint, which reduced the amount of incoming sunlight by 95% which kept the internal temperature in the camera near room temperature. Nothing miraculous, just careful engineering.

[@supercat380]

@zounds010 nice explanation. However, I find it almost impossible to believe that the astronauts travelled in thin aluminum- clad capsules through the Van Allen belt and encountered Gamma - rays, x- rays, Beta- radiation, Aloha radiation amd other deadly exposures in space without being severely exposed and made ill by these deadly radiations . Seven missions to the moon and not one life lost over the 500 000 mile return journey. Yet, 3 space shuttles ended in tragic disaster during the attempt to orbit at low earth orbit.

[@zounds010]

@@supercat380 You forgot to consider the fact that radiation is "deadly" depending on two variables: radiation level and exposure time. The longest Apollo mission spent 12 days in space. The radiation level on the moon is low enough that you can spend 6 months on the moon before your radiation dose becomes dangerously high. 2 Space Shuttles, not 3, ended in fatalities not due to radiation, but due to mechanical failures: O-rings being used outside their rated temperature range for Challenger, insulation foam breaking off and damaging the wing for Columbia. The Apollo program had its own disaster: Apollo 13 came very close to killing its crew. Apollo 12 and 14 had failures that came close to needing a mission abort: Apollo 12 was struck by lightning as it launched.

[@Enzo012]

There are no stars on a studio set? The same one they used in that James Bond film, bit of an Easter Egg there.

[@poppingbubblewrap-t3x]

No sunlight either, so there goes your theory.

[@Enzo012]

@@poppingbubblewrap-t3x But they would have studio lighting?

[@tammyphxaz]

Why Didn't Astronauts See Stars on The Moon? because, you can not see start from a place you have NEVER BEEN

[@zounds010]

6 Apollo missions landed on the moon.

[@another3997]

It's true... you cannot see "Start" from where you have never been. You can't see the END either. 😂 And it's true YOU have never been to the moon, and because of that, you can follow the path of all feeble minded people, and wilfully continue in your ignorance. Keep listening to other ignorant and feeble minded people, who will happily tell you nobody went to the moon and many other stupid things too. Here's an amazing "fact". Look out your window at night, then, without averting your gaze, switch on the lights watch how the clouds in the sky and the stars, magically disappear in front of your eyes. They were stolen by the "Light Fairies", and will only be put back when you switch your light off again. True fact.

[@IpsoFacto1966]

because they were never on the moon !

[@zounds010]

The evidence says they were on the moon.

[@IpsoFacto1966]

@@zounds010 Whos evidence, Hollywood's ?

[@zounds010]

@@IpsoFacto1966 Evidence produced by the missions themselves, which we can examine. In all those years, nobody has proven any of it fake. Then there's observations from independent third parties, from astronomers who saw the spacecraft on their way to the moon, to geologists who have studied the lunar samples, to photos of the landing sites taken by spacecraft from 4 countries.

[@poppingbubblewrap-t3x]

​@@IpsoFacto1966Even Russia tracked and confirmed it, in the middle of the Cold War. Why would they do that?

[@Leo_ofRedKeep]

Because stars are in the sky, not on the moon. What a stupid question!

[@THEfonz-s5u]

Please be attempting to make a joke.

[@cdank2475]

Green screens do not have stars in a basement

[@zounds010]

it's pretty dumb to claim the Apollo landings were faked, when we have all this evidence that conclusively proves the landings are real.

[@michaelharrington75]

8:46 These two goofball's looked at each other like, "how are we gonna answer this?" When one finally said, "yeah" the other one said, "Yeah, all the time!" Lol Then they tried to out do each other on what they could see. Neil Armstrong said in a 1970 BBC interview that the only visible object other than the sun was the earth. He said not only while on the surface of the moon were they not able to see stars, but also in the space between the earth and moon. The whole time they were traveling to the moon they couldn't see stars. Something is right here. So the better question would be, why are some astronauts able to see stars, while others can't?

[@zounds010]

The astronauts that could see stars were in the shadow of a large object. Collins saw the stars from lunar orbit, when he was in the shadow of the moon. Young saw stars standing on the lunar surface, when he stood in the shadow of the LM and looked away from the lunar surface.

[@hyperionsixzeroeight5064]

No stars in a studio soundstage.

[@zounds010]

They were on the moon, not on a "soundstage".

[@tubecated_development]

no sunlight either. So you’re wrong straight away.

[@Phonehomefool]

The astronauts could see Uranus from the moon

[@ApolloKid1961]

Nope

[@brandtbollers3183]

Daylight....js.😅

[@tubecated_development]

ikr, everyone knows that once you get to space the sun disappears.

[@universalaw89life]

Hollywood studio

[@zounds010]

Nope. They were on the moon.

[@jaydunstan1618]

Because they never went.

[@zounds010]

The evidence proves you wrong.

[@jaydunstan1618]

@@zounds010 Ask Bart Seibrel!

[@jaydunstan1618]

@@zounds010 They never went.

[@zounds010]

@@jaydunstan1618 Bart Sibrel is a charlatan, nothing more. I've examined his arguments in detail, and they all fall apart.

[@ApolloKid1961]

Sibrel is a taxi driver, not a scientist. He is a con man and a liar who tries to extort money from gullible people. He has never been able to give a scientifically substantiated explanation that the 380 kilos of moon rocks collected by 6 missions were not real. Scientists from 130 countries have been able to prove their authenticity irrefutably.

[@thomaslabantt6625]

BECAUSE ITS BLACK PAINT

[@winterradicallds8353]

Sorry You can't see any stars because our eyes can't see them in free space, here on earth we can see them due to our atmosphere ,on the moon no real atmosphere so stars are not visible to our eyes.

[@zounds010]

That is incorrect. Our atmosphere does nothing to make the stars more visible. Quite the opposite: it absorbs some of the light, and it adds distortion (making the stars twinkle). Stars are visible in space, as long as you don't have a very bright light source in view. The lunar surface qualifies as a very bright light source, so when you're on the lunar surface, you can't see the stars, unless you stand in the shadow and look up.

[@bradleyrex2968]

A great way to see stars is to be someplace the sun is not visible. Night on Earth works pretty well. If in orbit, be on the night side. In open space, look away from the sun. Now you can see... star. The sun is a star, and easy to see.

[@andreitone]

Sir, we can see stars at night from Earth because of Earth's atmosphere, which acts like a magnifying lens. That's why they can't see stars from the lunar modules while traveling to the moon in the empty space.

[@zounds010]

That is nonsense.

[@TheWokeFlatEarthTruth]

The ability to see stars will depend on the local lighting conditions. All the Apollo astronauts were able to see stars while in orbit on the night side of the moon. It is extremely difficult to see stars while on the bright, daytime lunar surface or while in bright sunshine. Take care.

[@Jedithyr]

J'ai déjà lu ça, sur YT français. C'est évidemment une explication complètement stupide.

[@tubecated_development]

You just made this up. It is nonsense. You can see stars at night from Earth because it is dark and your eyes are dark-adapted. The astronauts used stars by which to navigate while travelling to the moon.

[@another3997]

Whilst there is a tiny grain of truth in what you said, as the atmosphere does alter our view of the stars, you are almost totally incorrect. It is simply down to comparative light levels and the physical limitations of our eyes and indeed our cameras. Go to a dark place away from bright lights and look at the night sky... then switch on a flashlight or lantern. The majority of the stars will now 'disappear' until you switch off the light and your eyes can adjust to the lower light levels.

[@toddstevens1806]

They could not fake the stars so they did not show any.

[@zounds010]

They didn't have to "fake the stars" because they landed on the moon for real.

[@another3997]

As any 1950s or '60s sci-fi film will show, the ability to fake stars is trivial. So if it were all faked, with their huge budget, NASA could (and would) have easily added stars just to pander to people's totally unrealistic expectations. In other news, Elvis Presley and Adolf Hitler still jointly run a small bistro in Argentina, and the aliens from Roswell are frequently customers. 😂

[@tubecated_development]

They took hundreds of photos of stars from the lunar surface using a special camera and tripod. Apollo 16 far ultraviolet astronomy. Now you have to invent something else. Ever stopped to think why you feel you need to invent stories!

[@cweefy]

There are no stars " on the moon "

[@cbnewham_ai]

Incorrect! The men who walked on the surface of the Moon became celebrities, so they were effectively stars and were on the Moon. 😆

[@zounds010]

Incorrect. From the moon, if you look at the sky during the lunar night, or you block out the sunlight during the lunar day, you see pretty much the same sky we see here on Earth, the only difference is there's no atmosphere, so no twinkling.

[@another3997]

Well, look at the flags they planted... then count the stars. 😂

[@aporist]

Astronauts??!! From Earth?? Are you kidding!? Or maybe you have interviewed some alien astronauts...

[@zounds010]

12 astronauts from Earth walked on the moon. Learn your history.

[@Tarquin67]

JESUS WEPT…….DO YOU SEE STARS DURING THE DAY ON EARTH…..NO?…..WELL THEN WHY WOULD YOU SEE STARS ON THE DAY SIDE OF THE MOON?!…….IS THAT HARD TO UNDERSTAND?!…..SO TO ALL YOU M ORONS THAT THINK WE DIDNT GO TO THE MOON BECAUSE THERE ARE NO STARS IN THE PHOTOS, THERE IS YOUR ANSWER!

[@troyjohnston7454]

Read Edward leedskalnins writings Rockgate The sun isn't much of a light nor hot until it hits an obstruction like air An arc of sorts lighting up creating heat the sun is local to earth and the planets all have a different reaction

[@oldog2]

I think you should stop over medicating

[@troyjohnston7454]

@@oldog2 have you studied Edward leedskalnins work

[@another3997]

We don't have to have read it. I've read plenty of things, but that doesn't make them all true. Nor does it mean that YOU have understood what you have read. The sun is an extremely bright light source compared to the amount of light we receive from other stars. Even in the darkest places, where you can clearly normally see tens of thousands of stars at night, the light from a small candle a few feet from your face or a camera lens will vastly reduce your ability to see those stars. Try living in the real world.

[@troyjohnston7454]

@@another3997 no one claimed it to be factual just a different perspective No need to get narchy

[@troyjohnston7454]

​@@another3997 no one claimed it to be factual just a different perspective No need to get narchy Rockgate