The majority of conspiracy theories focus on the Moon landing itself:

There are many misconceptions that arise regarding the Moon landings. Many of these occur because people compare events in the Apollo pictures with how they would expect those events to occur on Earth. They fail to take into account the reduced gravity on the Moon and the fact that there is no atmosphere there.

• The lunar module did not create a blast crater when landing.

1. The lunar module did not hover for long over the landing site. There was no need for an enormous amount of thrust to be used due to the reduced gravity on the Moon, and the exhaust gasses were quickly dispersed into the vacuum; they could not cause disturbance of air molecules around them as they would on Earth.
2. "Moon dust" is not the same as dust or sand on Earth. There is no weathering on the Moon and the particles are jagged in nature; when compressed they stick together. Any particles that were ejected from the lunar surface, by direct contact with exhaust gasses, would have simply have dropped back to the surface. Large clouds of dust cannot form on the Moon as there is no atmosphere in which to suspend the particles.
3. There is evidence that where the module landed, most of the lunar dust was blown away by direct contact with exhaust gasses, revealing the rock below:

• The astronauts made clear footprints in a totally dry medium.

This is because lunar dust is not like soil or sand on Earth. The dust, formed by meteorite impacts, remains in the same condition over time as there is no weathering or oxygen on the Moon. When compressed, the jagged shaped particles stick together because they can interlock, and they can form molecular bonds with each other as the bonding sites formed on creation were never filled by oxygen as they would be on Earth.

• The American flag was waving in the breeze, yet the Moon is airless.

This is one of the less serious theories. The only time the flag is seen waving is when it is being planted in the ground. As the astronaut is planting the flag he is twisting the pole back and forth. This induces quite a pronounced waving of the flag. This is because of the lack of an atmosphere. There is nothing to dampen the flag's motion.It is interesting to note that in other footage astronauts quickly move past the flag, something which could induce motion from disturbed air, yet the flag remains completely still.

Many conspiracy theorists believe that the Moon landings were faked in Area 51, in the Nevada desert, USA. To support this idea they look for inconsistencies in the video and photographic evidence shown by NASA.

• The sky is black, yet no stars are visible in the photographs.

This is an illusion caused by the lack of an atmosphere on the Moon. Although the sky, or lack of it, is black, it was still daytime on the lunar surface and the sun was very bright. Photographs taken had to be of short exposure time and the comparatively dim stars did not have time to be recorded on the film.

More than one light source was used, this is shown by unparallel shadows.

The obvious answer is that if two light sources were used the astronauts would each have two shadows. This is clearly not the case.

This anomaly is caused by perspective. The ground is not perfectly flat; different slopes will cause shadows of different lengths and angles to form. If the astronauts were viewed from above, then their shadows would be seen to be parallel.

• There is a photograph of an astronaut standing on the lunar surface, saluting the flag, yet he casts no shadow.

This is another much used photograph, produced to prove that the photographs were faked in some way:

At first glance the photograph looks unconvincing. The astronaut, John Young, does not seem to be standing on the ground in a natural manner, and there is not a shadow where one would be expected.

The answer, however, is very simple. The astronaut had jumped up from the surface. His shadow can be seen to his left, exactly where it would be expected to be. There is also a video of this event which confirms this simple explanation.

For an in-depth explanation of photographic anomalies see:http://www.iangoddard.net/moon01.htm

The first group of conspiracies question the feasibility of the mission:

• The odds of a successful Moon landing were calculated to be 6000 to 1 against (or probability 0.000167).

This figure of 6000 to 1 against a successful mission is put forward by Bill Kaysing, although it is unclear exactly how the figure was calculated or from which data.

NASA and GEC did computer simulations involving every aspect the mission. The results consistently gave a projected success rate of over 90%.

• The Lunar Module (LM) crashed in testing on Earth, yet worked perfectly six times in space.

There were two types of training vehicle: the Lunar Landing Research Vehicles (LLRV); and the more advanced Lunar Landing Training Vehicles (LLTV). These vehicles were different to the actual LM, having jet engines to mimic the reduced weight of the LM in space, and rocket thrusters to simulate the LM's guidance thrusters.

There is footage of Neil Armstrong ejecting from an LLRV after its steering guidance system failed. This is the evidence that conspiracy theorists focus on. In reality, hundreds of successful tests were completed.

The actual LM was tested continuously also: its components on Earth; and its performance in space, notably during other Apollo missions. The only untested aspect of the LM was its ability to land on the Moon. Due to the extensive testing undergone, the LM landed safely on the Moon's surface using its computer controlled guidance and gyroscopic inertial control systems.

• Apollo's computer system was not powerful enough for such a complex mission.

It is true that by today's standards the computer system used on Apollo would be thought of as very basic. The misconception, however, is that too much emphasis is placed on the role of the computer in the missions. The onboard computer was only used for one purpose: guidance. A task for which it was perfectly adequate.

The real computer work was done on Earth using mainframe computers. Results of complex calculations were transmitted to the onboard computer which could act upon them.

• The Apollo craft never left Earth's orbit.

This is not a very credible theory. Satellites in orbit are easily tracked by radar, and many are actually visible to the naked eye. The Apollo craft, being much larger than satellites, would have been the brightest object in orbit. It is inconceivable that it could have remained in orbit without being noticed by anyone.

• The crew could not survive the journey through the Van Allen radiation belts.

The Van Allen belts are two belts of radiation that surround the Earth and are held in place by the Earth's magnetic field. They are doughnut shaped and are more intense around the equator. High energy particles exist in these belts and can be a hazard to both humans and electronic equipment.There are two reasons why the radiation was considered to be of little risk:
It only took one hour for the craft to pass through the radiation belts therefore reducing exposure time.
The spacecraft avoided the centre of the belts, and therefore the most intense radiation.The astronauts received a radiation dose of less than 1% of that which is considered lethal.

Was the Moon Landing Faked !!

President Kennedy set a challenge in 1961 for the USA to put a man on the Moon by the end of the decade. The fact that they managed this, is one of the greatest feats of mankind. Conspiracy theorists, however, claim that the USA did not actually put men on the Moon at all: they claim the entire mission was faked to affirm the USA's lead in the space race.

The critical question is: why would the USA risk its reputation by perpetrating a hoax that would be incredibly difficult to pull off?

The Soviet Union would have had the most to gain from exposing the hoax. With their involvement in the space race, they would be the best qualified to spot any cheating going on. Why then, with more motivation than anyone to expose a hoax, did they remain silent? The truth is that the USSR tracked the Americans all the way to the Moon and back. They had no doubt that the mission was successful.

There were six Apollo missions between 1969 and 1972, landing a total of twelve astronauts on to the lunar surface. If NASA had managed to pull off this hoax, why did they feel the need to carry out a further five hoax missions, each one increasing the likelihood of exposure?
Conspiracy theorists have a multitude of hypotheses regarding the "official" version of events, most conspiracies revolving around the Apollo 11 mission which first placed a man on the Moon. Here we will look at some of the more popular ones and offer explanations as to why they are not valid.

Apollo 11 Mission

Apollo 11 mission was the first manned mission to land the man on the moon.It was the successfull mission led by the crew consisiting of Neil Alden Armstrong(Mission Commander),Micheal Collins (Command Module Pilot),Edwin buzz Aldrin(Lunar Module Pilot).It was launched on 16th July of 1969. On July 20th Neil Armstrong and Aldrin became the first ever men to land on the moon -:)

Apollo 11 mission was the fifth human spaceflight of project Apollo and the third human voyage to the Moon /Moon Orbit. This mission fullfilled the president John Kennedy's goal of reaching the moon by the end of the 1960's which he had expressed during the speech delivered on may 25th 1961. His statement was like "I believe this nation would commit itself to acheiving the goal of landing a man on the moon and returning him safe to the earth before the end of this decade "

తెలుగు బాషా