DID WE REALLY LAND ON THE MOON?

The Science of Conspiracy Theory

The Background Information

Space Race and the Cold War United States VS. Soviet Union (U.S.S.R.) Power by who had the best weapons

NUCLEAR WEAPONS! Space – ultimate advantage point for setting

up missiles Who was winning?

Space Race Music Video More Formal Video

Key Ideas to Apollo Missions

Russia was Absolutely winning Space Race First Satellite Sputnik First Animals in Space Dogmonauts First Cosmonaut Yuri Gargarin First Woman in Space First Moon Walk

President Kennedy Raises the Stakes Sets a Mission to Land Men on Moon Sets End of Decade as Deadline July 20th, 1969

Neil Armstrong Video of actual Moon Landing

Fox “Documentary” Good Science:

Flag is Waving

Shadows

Cross Hairs

Radiation

Light in Shadows

Student Examples

Bad Science: Like the Movie

“Capricorn 1”

Mysterious Deaths

Area 51

Student Examples WHAT NOW?

Critical Thinking & Analysis Who made this?

Research

GOOD SCIENCE?FLAG WAVINGThe fact of the matter is ... "the video you see where the flag's moving is because the astronaut just placed it there, and the inertia from when they let go kept it moving," said spaceflight historian Roger Launius, of the Smithsonian'sNational Air and Space Museum in Washington D.C. 

SHADOWSAgain there is a sound explanation; it is a simple a matter of perspective. A photo is a two-dimensional representation of a three-dimensional world, hence parallel lines may not appear as such on film. … Another important factor that comes into play here is the slope of the ground. … if viewed from high above, they would be seen as parallel. In other words, looks can be deceiving.

CROSS HAIRSWhat's happening here is the intense light reflecting off the white surface is bleeding in around the crosshair and saturating the film, thus obliterating the crosshair. This phenomenon is commonplace and is in no way evidence of fraud.

What do these two pictures have in common?

RADIATIONSolar flares were a NASA concern as well, but the radiation doses claimed by the hoax advocates are again greatly exaggerated and unsubstantiated. Although low-intensity solar flares are common, they posed no real threat to the astronauts. High-intensity solar flares could have endangered the astronauts' health, but these large eruptions are infrequent. … No large solar flares occurred during the Apollo missions and typical radiation doses received by the astronauts was very low.

This is a claim the hoax advocates often make, but it is a gross exaggeration and simply not supported by the data. …It took Apollo only about an hour to pass through the worst part of the radiation belts - once on the outbound trip and once again on the return trip. The total radiation dose received by the astronauts was about one rem. A person will experience radiation sickness with a dose of 100-200 rem, and death with a dose of 300+ rem. …

The hoax advocates also make the mistake of limiting themselves to two-dimensional thinking. The Van Allen Radiation Belts consist of a doughnut-shaped region centered on Earth's magnetic equator. …Apollo bypassed all but the edges of the radiation belts, greatly reducing the exposure.

LIGHT IN SHADOWSThe problem with this statement is that it fails to consider reflected sunlight. Next to the Sun, the largest source of light on the Moon is the lunar surface itself, which reflects large amounts of sunlight. … Since the Moon's surface reflects about 10% of the light it receives, each square foot of surface reflected about 340 lumens. This is equivalent to the luminosity of a 35-watt light bulb. This amount of light easily explains the illumination observed in the Apollo photographs.

CONCLUSION OTHER ARGUMENTS?

Websites: Debunk Article Bad Astronomy Site Many More Arguments Explained

CONCLUSION – They are all BAD SCIENCE JUST BECAUSE SOMETHING CLAIMS TO BE

SCIENTIFIC DOES NOT MEAN IT IS Medicines, diets, cosmetics, learning tools … etc.

BE AWARE THAT SOME CLAIMS ARE USING ….