\nYes, we landed on the moon, but it's been almost 45 years since we've been back there. Heck, it's been almost 45 years since we went beyond low Earth orbit. And when I say \"we,\" I mean the United States. Only 12 humans have ever walked...\nYes, we landed on the moon, but it's been almost 45 years since we've been back there. Heck, it's been almost 45 years since we went beyond low Earth orbit. And when I say \"we,\" I mean the United States. Only 12 humans have ever walked on the surface of the moon, all of them men, and all of them American. The last two to be there were Eugene Cernan and Harrison Schmitt. That was in December of 1972, of the Apollo 17 mission. It's easy to understand why people would be skeptical. Skeptics often point to the motive for wanting to fake the whole thing. The race to the moon was part of the Space Race, during a particularly tense time during the Cold War. The United States and Soviet Union were battling it out to get there first. Skeptics say the United States would have wanted to fake it to show they won the Space Race even if they knew it actually wasn't possible to go. The Soviet Union had epically failed to ever get even near the moon, so they argue it seems suspicious that the United States able to land men safely on the moon six times in 3 and a half years, yet never do so since. Was this just a publicity stunt, faked in order to strongly discourage the Soviet Union and give the United States a huge advantage in the Cold War while saving its lots of money? But how could this hoax be pulled off? Skeptics argue the technology did exist to recreate a fake mooning landing in a film studio. Sure, they argue the astronauts really did take off into space, but they likely just orbited the earth for several days before landing back on Earth, while faked footage was distributed to the masses. But what evidence do that have of the moon landings being faked? For the rest of this video, I will first give you evidence that creates doubt, then give you NASA's response, and then give you my conclusion. The first thing that causes doubt is the footage showing the American flag on the moon waving. Skeptics say the flag waving shows the presence of wind, which should be impossible on the moon because it doesn't have much of an atmosphere and is surrounded by a vacuum. NASA insists that the flag moved due to astronaut Buzz Aldrin twisting the flagpole, causing it to move like that. Apparently the astronauts also accidentally bent the horizontal rods that were supposed to hold the flag outward. The next evidence that causes doubt is the fact that there were no stars in any of the footage or photographs taken by NASA on the moon. Skeptics say stars were left out because astronomers would have been able to use them to determine whether the photos were taken from the Earth or Moon. NASA, as well as many many others, argue that of course you wouldn't be able to see the stars because the moon's surface is so bright. It's the same reason why you can't see the stars standing on a bright football field at night. Some astronauts were able to take long exposure UV photographs of bright stars and Venus from the moon, though. But skeptics would probably argue these photos were taken from earth. What about the fact that there was no blast crater from the lunar module on the moon, especially when scientists before predicted one would be created? Well NASA says those scientists predicted wrong. The fact is, the pressure on the moon was simply too low for the lunar module to create a crater. Quite a bit of discussion by skeptics revolve around the discussion of lighting and shadows in photographs taken on the moon. Shadows are inconsistent and often intersect in photographs. Skeptics argue that the shadows should be completely black and run parallel to each other. NASA and others argue that shadows are weird on the Moon due to many light sources and lunar dust. Also, the unique terrain of the moon alters how the shadows are seen. Skeptics also say the photographs on the Moon show the same exact background, despite astronauts saying the photos were taken far away from each other. They argue that the backdrop was basically kept the same, even for different Apollo missions. Take this photograph, for example. Skeptics have combined the two pictures and claim the backgrounds match. Pretty crazy, eh? Well, NASA says that because the Moon is much smaller than Earth, horizons appear closer to the naked eye than they really are, and thus may look identical from different viewpoints.\n
\" data-title=\"Get Full Access\" data-container=\"body\" rel=\"popover\" tabindex=\"0\" href=\"/subscription/new\">Video Preview\n
\n
\n
\n
Concepts
\n
\n
solar flares, evidence, stars, space, time, nasa
\n
\n\n\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
Additional Tags
\n
\n
skeptics argue, faked, skeptics point, soviet union, give nasa, argue, apollo missions, surface, party evidence, mr. beat, moon, give, back, cold war, people, lunar module, united states, 45 years, moon landings, space race, footage, skeptics, left, american flag, understand, keith hughes, debunked claims, moon dust, skeptical, thing, show
\" data-title=\"Get Full Access\" data-container=\"body\" rel=\"popover\" tabindex=\"0\" aria-label=\"Play video: Did We Really Land on the Moon?\" href=\"/subscription/new\">\n\n\n\n
![\"Did](\"https://statictemp.lp.lexp.cloud/images/attachment_defaults/resource/large/missing.png\" "\\"Did")
\n