This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site you agree to our use of cookies. To find out more, see our Privacy and Cookies policy.
Skip to the content

Share this

Free weekly newswire

Sign up to receive all our latest news direct to your inbox.

Physics on film

100 Second Science Your scientific questions answered simply by specialists in less than 100 seconds.

Watch now

Bright Recruits

At all stages of your career – whether you're an undergraduate, graduate, researcher or industry professional – brightrecruits.com can help find the job for you.

Find your perfect job

Physics connect

Are you looking for a supplier? Physics Connect lists thousands of scientific companies, businesses, non-profit organizations, institutions and experts worldwide.

Start your search today

Blog

Apollo conspiracy theories still going strong

buzz.jpg
Apollo 11 photograph: too good to be true? (NASA).

By Hamish Johnston

Today is the 40th anniversary of Neil Armstrong’s stroll on the Moon so it’s not surprising that conspiracy theorists are one again arguing that the Apollo programme was a hoax.

This morning Marcus Allen, UK publisher of Nexus Magazine — which specializes in conspiracy theories — was interviewed on BBC radio.

He thinks the Apollo landings were hoaxes, partly because of the “high-quality” of the photos taken by crews on the moon. In particular, he claimed that it would be impossible to take such nice photos under the extreme conditions on the Moon — and even if you could, the film would be fogged by the ambient radiation experienced by the mission.

Martin Ward, Head of physics at Durham University, was on hand to debunk the debunker. He explained that the extreme temperatures are a red herring because the lack of atmosphere on the Moon means that the camera and film would take a long time to heat up or cool down once outside the lunar module. As for the effects of radiation, Ward pointed out that lots of other photos have since been taken in space and have not been fogged.

You can listen to their exchange here.

Although I have no doubt that the Apollo missions were real — it’s interesting to ask the following question:

“Would it have been much easier (and much cheaper) to fake the Apollo programme and cover it up for 40 years, than to actually put people on the Moon?”

If you apply Occam’s razor to this question, you may find yourself siding with Marcus Allen…which is what makes the the Apollo missions all the more amazing!

This entry was posted in General. Bookmark the permalink.
View all posts by this author  | View this author's profile

Comments are closed.

Guidelines

  • Comments should be relevant to the article and not be used to promote your own work, products or services.
  • Please keep your comments brief (we recommend a maximum of 250 words).
  • We reserve the right to remove excessively long, inappropriate or offensive entries.

Show/hide formatting guidelines

Tag Description Example Output
<a> Hyperlink <a href="http://www.google.com">google</a> google
<abbr> Abbreviation <abbr title="World Health Organisation" >WHO</abbr> WHO
<acronym> Acronym <acronym title="as soon as possible">ASAP</acronym> ASAP
<b> Bold <b>Some text</b> Some text
<blockquote> Quoted from another source <blockquote cite="http://iop.org/">IOP</blockquote>
IOP
<cite> Cite <cite>Diagram 1</cite> Diagram 1
<del> Deleted text From this line<del datetime="2012-12-17"> this text was deleted</del> From this line this text was deleted
<em> Emphasized text In this line<em> this text was emphasised</em> In this line this text was emphasised
<i> Italic <i>Some text</i> Some text
<q> Quotation WWF goal is to build a future <q cite="http://www.worldwildlife.org/who/index.html">
where people live in harmony with nature and animals</q>
WWF goal is to build a future
where people live in harmony with nature and animals
<strike> Strike text <strike>Some text</strike> Some text
<strong> Stronger emphasis of text <strong>Some text</strong> Some text