Coming out of the "landed" spacecraft in 1969, Apollo 11 commander Neil Armstrong uttered the historical phrase: "This is a small step for man, but a giant leap for mankind." When the euphoric attack subsided, the first skeptics appeared. And after a while, even the Americans themselves began to talk about the fact that the materials confirming the fact of a man's landing on the moon were falsified.
Space exploration by humanity is just beginning. Only 56 years have passed since the launch of the first artificial satellite. At the dawn of astronautics, it seemed that very little remained before flights to the nearest planets.
The great powers of the world competed behind the scenes for the right to be the pioneers of space. As you know, the palm in this area belonged to the Soviet Union, which first launched a man into outer space.
After the start of Yuri Gagarin, the world community recognized the unconditional leadership of the USSR. But the main competitor, the United States of America, did not share the stormy enthusiasm for the next giant leap in progress. And if the phrase “Catch up and overtake America!” Was common in the USSR, then NASA members were faced with the task of restoring the undermined national prestige, ahead of the Soviet Union in the space race.
Three weeks after the flight of the first American astronaut into space, John F. Kennedy solemnly promised America that within ten years the Americans would land on the moon.
Indeed, on July 21, 1969, the first American astronaut set foot on the lunar surface. For Americans, this event was no less significant than the discovery of America or the declaration of independence.
Pictures of the discoverers of the moon under the Stars and Stripes have spread around the globe, and later - filming footage of a historic moment. It was with them that the dispute about the lunar program, which has not yet subsided, began.
Promotional video:
Photo materials provided by NASA have alerted professional photographers. In some shots, the shadows of objects for some reason fall in completely different directions (which is impossible with sunlight), and their density is different. There are black, gray, almost transparent shadows. But in a vacuum, the contrast between light and shadow is very sharp.
Further, in the panoramic image of the lunar surface, light sources are clearly visible, which simply could not be on the moon. It is they who are "to blame" for the wrong arrangement of shadows. When the image is enlarged, it is clearly visible that two of them are surrounded by a shining halo, which is possible only in the atmosphere, due to the scattering of rays.
But that's not all. For some reason, not a single star is visible in photographs from the lunar surface. Only the Earth. Yes, and the astronauts themselves in their memoirs emphasize that they have not seen either stars or planets.
Quite strange, especially when you consider that Soviet cosmonauts describe a whole sea of sparkling stars … Another famous shot - the imprint of a footprint on the lunar surface - did not cause any complaints from photographers. But experts from other industries joined the discussion.
Metallurgist Yu. I. Mukhin, who has repeatedly dealt with all kinds of soil samples, is absolutely sure that the imprint on the lunar soil would look completely different. There is no water on the moon, and absolutely dry fine suspension could not perfectly follow all the contours of the grooved sole of the boot.
A clear print, at best, could remain in the center (like the prints of the tracks of Soviet lunar rovers), but in the photo we see clear relief lines everywhere. Such a trace could only remain on wet sand.
The same shot caused bewilderment among physicists. With the help of simple calculations, they found out that the weight of an American astronaut in full gear on the lunar surface was as much as … 27 kg. Using the formulas included in the secondary school curriculum (Soviet - in American schools, the programs are completely different), they were able to calculate the pressure 'the soles of the astronaut's shoes on the ground. It turned out to be ridiculously low: less than 0.1 kgf / cm2, which is clearly not enough to leave a mark on the moon …
Let's turn to the film showing the American landing on the moon. There are many things that are incomprehensible in it: the frivolity of the astronauts and the predominance of game episodes. At the same time, the really important and dramatic scenes are missing. For example, for some reason, the moment of docking is not reflected anywhere.
In order for Armstrong and Aldrin to be able to move into the cockpit of the descent module, on the way to the moon, they had to undock the main Apollo block from the third stage of Saturn, turn it 180 ° and again dock to the lunar cabin so that the upper hatch of the main block combined with the upper hatch of the lunar cabin. Neither the scene of the transition of the astronauts to the lunar block nor their return is shown. And what got into the chronicle looks very unconvincing.
Observant people are always and everywhere. And it could not go unnoticed that in the airless space the American flag for some reason flutters cheerfully in the wind. Opponents tried to explain this effect by vibrations of the entire structure, but this explanation was rejected by the counter argument: elastic vibrations propagate in both directions from the zero point, and the panel deviates only in one direction.
The next discrepancy occurred with the movement of astronauts. They move in short and rather awkward jumps, while simple calculations show that with a decrease in gravity, both the length and height of the stride quadruple. By the way, it was with these conditions in mind that the astronauts were trained to move by jumping: it is easier to control the process.
But in the film, for some reason, they demonstrate the opposite: both the step width and the height of the jumps are much less than on Earth. Were you afraid? But falling on the moon is not that dangerous. And shooting "moon" jumps would serve as an excellent proof of the film's authenticity: in those days on Earth it was impossible to shoot such a thing.
The Americans have chosen another way to prove that they are indeed on the moon. In front of the camera, they conducted a small experiment. The astronaut took a hammer in one hand, a bird's feather in the other, and at the same time released it.
As you know, in a vacuum, both objects simultaneously touch the ground. And so it happened. The desire for clarity played a cruel joke with the falsifiers: they did not take into account that the footage allows you not only to make sure that objects are falling in an airless space, but also to calculate the acceleration of gravity. Which physicists did not fail to do.
Free fall acceleration was 4.1 m / s2. And on the Moon, this value should be 1.6 m / s2. This means that the shooting took place anywhere, but not on the moon! By the way, observing the "behavior" of various objects gives physicists many reasons for doubts. A stone accidentally dropped by one of the astronauts falls with an acceleration of 6.6 m / s2.
And at the moment of takeoff, judging by the trajectory of stones flying out from under the nozzle, the acceleration of gravity rises to an unthinkable value: 320 m / s2. Could it be that the American conquerors of space were brought to the Sun by mistake?
Further, during landing, the jet stream, beating from the nozzle, was supposed to scatter dust within a radius of hundreds of meters. During the "lunar landing" of the Soviet modules, it soared high above the surface; settling several kilometers from the ship. But in the film, astronauts walk on pristine ground, the state of which suggests that the laws of physics do not work on the Moon.
But that's not all. In contrast to theorists, practitioners are interested in more "material" questions. First of all, it was about the equipment of the lunar expedition. It is not worth dwelling in detail on minor curiosities (for some reason, there was no place for a propulsion engine on the Apollo diagram presented by NASA), but the astronauts' spacesuits, the spacecraft design, and the lunar car caused bewilderment among specialists.
According to American experts, in order to protect the ship from radiation during the flight to the Moon, its walls had to be multi-layered, one of the layers being 80 cm of lead. And in the 1960s, NASA ships had a shell of aluminum foil only a few millimeters thick. Astronauts in such conditions had to receive a lethal dose of radiation and die, as the monkeys sent into space before died.
For some reason, this did not happen … Perhaps, the main protection was in spacesuits? But no additional reinforcement was made. Moreover, according to experts, the Americans in the film are dressed in costumes that are completely not designed for lunar conditions.
Even with the current level of development of space technologies, it is impossible to fit in their volume a supply of oxygen for four hours, a radio station, a life support system, a thermal control system and much more, which, according to legend, the conquerors of the Moon had.
The fuel consumption during the first flight was so great that Armstrong and Aldrin landed the device on the surface with just the last drops of fuel. But the much heavier (more than four times) Apollo 17 landed on the moon with exactly the same fuel supply without any problems.
In addition to direct inconsistencies (in addition to those already listed, there are others mentioned in the book "NASA Deceived America" by the famous scientist and inventor Rene), there are also indirect ones. First of all, the Americans' achievement was not questioned just because they had at their disposal a Saturn-5 launch vehicle, the technical characteristics of which were high enough to support a lunar expedition.
But all other components of the project were not up to the task. A manned lunar landing in 1969 was still impossible: the technology had not reached the required level. In addition, much of NASA's experience so far has consisted of disasters and failures.
Even if we assume that a miracle happened and the expedition was successful, it is completely unclear why the project was not continued. After all, the leading institutions of Europe and Japan, representatives of astrobusiness, various corporations offered to finance flights to the moon. NASA deliberately rejects all "lunar" projects, citing either lack of time or lack of interest in the problem.
In response to the arguments in favor of falsifying the results of the expedition, it was planned to publish a book. She never saw the light. Like all scientific materials that the expedition was supposed to bring.
Not a single gram of the lunar soil brought by Apollo 11 fell into the hands of foreign scientists. Not a single truly complete report has ever been published in serious journals. Officials in the United States refuse to provide voters with information about the lunar project, which has spent about four billion dollars.
Supporters of the hypothesis that the Americans never visited the moon suggest that all the film footage and photographs of astronauts on the lunar surface were taken in a specially equipped film studio.
Flights to the Earth's satellite were made by unmanned vehicles after all the material had been filmed. This version finds more and more confirmation. Sometimes the most unexpected. In Aldrin's memoirs, there is a description of a party for the elite, at which the audience watched a film about Fred Hayes's stay on the moon.
Hayes did all sorts of steps, then tried to stand on the step of the lunar rover, but the step crumbled as soon as he stepped on it. All would be fine, but Hayes was a member of the infamous Apollo 13 expedition. So he certainly wasn't on the moon.
The time is approaching when the truth about the first American landing on the moon will be known to everyone. Both Europe and Japan are already thinking about the development of lunar minerals. According to forecasts, the first lunar bases will appear in 10-15 years. Until then, it remains to rely on attentiveness and common sense.