Ten Things You Didn't Know About the Apollo 11 Moon Landing

A documentary for the 40th anniversary of moonland. Interesting information in it. You can see the video on
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DdaBwh20nIk

I hate these "things you didn't know titles", really. Let me check off the things in your list I *did* know.

1. Duh

2. Ditto

3. Duh except for the anti-diarrhea drug business

5. Covered in lots of other articles

6. Duh, seen the movies?

10. Again, well covered in lots of materials over many years

Why don't you title these things, "Interesting facts about..."

All this info is false, they never landed on the moon duhhh

About Number 7...

What if a gust of wind had blown the door shut?!

(I'm joking)

This is not rocket science. It is simple.
1. Where's the dust? There is no atmosphere to suspend the dust particles. Any 'moon dust' that gets kicked up will simply fall back to the ground within seconds. Watch the astronauts as they walked around...they kicked up a lot of 'moon dust' and it immediately fell back to the ground. Any dust stirred up by the exhaust of the lander did the exact same thing.

2. The waving flag? I remember this as clearly as if it happened yesterday. It was explained that the flag was held out by the use of a stiff wire otherwise it would have simply fallen limp and would have been difficult to see. Nasa wanted the world to see the US flag. Any waving motion that may have been indicated was created simply when the astronauts were moving it around trying to secure it into the ground. Once they got it secured..it stood completely motionless...no wind on the moon.

3. Where's the stars? Any second rate photographer understands this. The surface of the moon is very bright and reflects a large amount of the suns light energy. Stars are not very bright...that's why its dark outside at night. I'm not sure what kind of film was used in the cameras...probably a relatively low ASA (ISO) film speed to create sharp and clear images...But, the brightness of the moons surface would require an exposure that would not be capable of capturing the low intensity of star light.

4. What about the shadows? Some appear to be angled differently than others as though there was more than one source of light. It's all a matter of perspective...Again, any second rate artist understands this. A photograph, like a painting or drawing, is a two dimential reproduction of something that is three dimential. When the image is captured on film, all the shadows, lines, angles, tend to converge toward a single point called a vanishing point somewhere in the distance. That is what gives us the illusion of three dimentions on a two dimential plane. Objects farther away from the camera have a vanishing point that is slightly different than objects closer to the camera. The sun being the main source of light on the moon creates very strong and harsh shadows...all of which converge toward that one distant point.

But What about the fact that the Lunar Lander appears well lit even when back lit by the sun?

Again, the surface of the moon is very bright and reflects a lot light. The shadowed part of the Lander is illuminated by this reflected light and with proper exposure compensation on the camera, the details of that shadowed area will be captured on the film. Our astronauts were pretty good photographers.

5. Finally...the knuckleheads who think we didn't land on the moon were probably the same knuckleheads who sat thru science class in school with their hands down their pants instead of paying attention. They are also the same crowd who readily jump on the UFO coverup bandwagon (an even more rediculous concept) while at the same time fail to grasp the significance of one of the most remarkable adventures mankind has ever acheived.

krbrid - I agree with everything you said except the last thing. I have seen Ufos up close and personal. It's doubters like you that helps keep the cover-up seem legit. I understand that seeing is believing and had it not been for my personal experiences I would not be a believer either.

My uncle was an engineer on the Apollo 11 program. I believe him when he says we went to the moon. Don't you think that the Soviet's would have known about a massive hoax and conspiracy like this. It would have been in their best interest to reveal this as a hoax to the world, after all they were competing to be the first on the moon. That would have been the biggest feather in their cap against the American Capitalist Pigs.

There's another pesky little detail that moon-landing conspiracy theorists fail to explain. One task of our manned lunar program was to position a mirror on the moon that we could bounce signals off of so we could measure it's distance from the Earth. We are still using that today. Unless, of course, they are part of the grand conspiracy.

I remember watching this broadcast with my dad on our new Zenith color, tube TV - moonlanding broadcasting was on all 3 channels!! - on a warm July day.
What a rush for the country this was at a time we needed it.
Happy 40th anniversary to all of the men and women who made this possible and God Bless America!

One item that is frequently overlooked in the hoax argument is that we possessed the technology then to make the trip. We did not possess the technology then to create a fake that would fool the entire world for 40 years.
To people that had read works by Werner von Braun and Willy Ley in the fifties, the only question is "What took so long?"

Ok That's it I'm tired of the moon landing conspiracy theorists. Consider this... we had the technology to go to the moon. Hundreds of people watched the launch in person the world watched on t.v. the return of those brave guys was also well witnessed. If your gonna spend all that money and effort to send them up there and have the ability to go to the moon why wouldn't you. Seriously someone who really thinks it's a hoax please tell me where were the astronauts really at if they didn't go during the time between launch and return? In orbit? why spend the money and effort to put them in orbit and fake the moon landing when they could actually go to the moon? it wouldn't make sense! They actually went to the moon.

on another side I don't see why we are now doing reconnaissance on the moon for a return mission. I think we would have noticed if anything had changed and it's pretty well mapped out. seems a waste of time and money to do recon. spend that on getting NASA's s**t together and get back there already.

11th fact: The First to touch moon surface are Canadian.....landing gear made by canadian company Heroux Devtek Longueuil,Quebec,Canada ....
http://www.herouxdevtek.com/aboutus/history.php

lnwolf41 Some stuff I knew other stuff didn't.
For the doubters out there, at the time we went to the moon, we had submarines that held a crew of 100 underwater for over six months at a time how hard to keep 3 men alive for a week?

Laced, arguing with conspirators on this matter is futile and only raises the blood pressure. Currently, the LRO and the LCOSS are in orbit around the moon snapping photos. The hi-res images of the lunar surface will yield two important finds:

1: Helium3 (He3). The energy rich material is abundent in small pockets and is the primary reason to recon the surface. A shuttle bay full of this stuff can power the US electric grid for one year with zero carbon emissions.

2: The survey of the entire surface will reveal images of the abandon lunar rover complete with visible tire tracks and foot prints leading towards and away from the US flag.

No rover, no landing; plain and simple.

J.Day
Annapolis, MD

6 is misleading. The 'small step' was when Armstrong stepped off the foot of the LM, not when he descended the ladder.

Another one you might not know. The first thing Aldrin did when he got on the Moon was to empty his bladder.

How sad and pathetic people that read popsci or the magazine are on here doubting our scientific endeavours, still. Even with photographic evidence now it will never end until they themselves go to the moon and see the landing sites in person. Every argument a skeptic can raise with me will be shot down in piles of proof.
My one trick is asking any skeptic how they can believe it was faked if when we returned we gave samples of the moon rocks to several countries, including Russia. Why would we fake that? Why would we want to? Why wern't we caught if they were "fake?" Anybody? I dare you...

I agree with joker5delta that argueing with the knuckleheads is futile.The majority of these clowns couldn't find the moon in the sky with both hands and a road map.They only do so to get people riled up.You know these people,they are the ones who would argue with a stop sign about things of which they are ignorant.
Highdobb,these people are the LAST people you want at the landing site.They would be stealing everything that isn't nailed down,throwing empty beer squeeze-bulbs everywhere and trying to piss on a leg of the lander (THAT I would like to see them try,if you follow my thinking).
Gosh,what a heady time in our history that was!! Summer of '67,Woodstock,all the manned missions that,with our technology at the time,shouldn't have been possible. But somehow,with spit and determination,we managed to pull it off.We could use a good chunk of that spit and determination right now.

deanmyrick@mac, the moon-hoax theorists all label your uncle and you as liars and frauds. They somehow even include the Soviets as part of the conspiracy.

I think they should take some conspiracy theorists with them next time they land on the Moon. Since they believe it's all fake, they can find their own way back.

To joker5delta, He3 will only be useful after we have a workable Fusion Reactor! That's like drilling for oil in the early 1800's, they knew where the oil was but we didn't need it in large enough quantities to go after it.

Hey you missed THE MOST IMPORTANT Thing That Nobody Knows:

Armstrong was SUPPOSED to say:

"That's one small step for A man, one giant leap for mankind" ...

which of course makes sense and was quite clever ...

But instead he missed or swallowed the 'A' and it came out as a not quite so profound:

"That's one small step for man, one giant leap for mankind" ...

(since Man and Mankind are the same thing in that one -- no cleverness).

They tried recently to try to extract the 'A' sound from the recordings but without luck and so it still stands the way he said it rather than the way he meant it. If I were Neil I'd be peeved about that -- probably as much as Obama was when the oath of office got all messed up (thru no fault of his own really).

If we didn't go to the moon, then how in the crud did we get the moon rocks? Conspiracy theorists are a bunch of morons who just want to stir things up and refuse to believe the truth.

Man, some of you are so damn ignorant. It's no wonder why people hate some people.

Check out:
http://fusionfilter.com/?p=1048

For a great article on the Apollo Anniversary and some footage weblinks NASA has to offer.

Funny thing about number 7. When you think about it, the handle on the outside of the door might have been a little bit important. Can't you just see them getting locked out and going- "Huston, we have a problem..."

#10: The Apollo computers didn’t have ROM chips, they had magnetic core memories. The programs were made from permanent core memories; data used rewriteable core technology.

See here: http://history.nasa.gov/afj/compessay.htm

It’s unlikely that Raytheon used “little old ladies” to weave the cores. The probability of error would be way too high.

Cool facts! It is good to know. Fact number 7 is quite scary though: the Eagle's doorhas no outer handle... Imagine what could have happened...

http://www.squidoo.com/lensmasters/ggonzo

yait is scary. they would of died from to much CO2

Actually, #9 is wrong. The flags were made by Annin & Co., which is one of the nation's oldest flagmakers. It was actually a last minute decision to bring a flag along; originally, NASA was abiding by a gentlemen's agreement between the US, the Soviet Union, and other European countries that the first to reach the Moon would not plant a flag there and technically "claim the Moon". In the weeks before the launch, however, NASA directors decided that, if the American taxpayer was shelling out billions of dollars to put an American on the Moon, then an American flag was going up. NASA then quickly had several flagmakers submit flags for review, and Annin's was the one picked, partially because they were a NASA supplier (they also made the American flag patches for the Apollo uniforms and EVA suits). To solve the issue of where the flag should go on the Lunar Module (LM), a NASA engineer rigged a pretty simple solution: on the ladder leading from the "front porch" of the LM down the front landing strut, a 4-inch wide, 3-inch deep, 4 foot long metal box was bolted on, and inside was the folded flag, as well as an extendable flagpole with a spring loaded arm on the top to make sure the flag wouldn't simply sag due to the lack of air (wind) on the Moon. That way, it would be really easy for the Astronauts to retrieve it when heading down to the lunar surface.

I worked at an Aerospace museum on Long Island, NY, where we had on permanent display one of the only 3 Lunar Modules left in existence (besides the descent stages of the ones that are still on the Moon). The LM was built by Grumman on Long Island, and I was told this story about the flag on the Moon by a bunch of former NASA engineers who worked on building and prepping all the LMs for their landings.

It is strange that the dust of the propulsion from the craft is not suspended anymore at the time of the photograph. If there's no gravity, then the dust can't settle very soon. In any kind of propulsion, even placing your boot down, will cause upward propulsion, even if there is no air. The lack of dust in the picture does spread some doubt since the craft IS on the ground, and there was propulsion to land it.

Another question, where is the wire leading to?

To kput, who posted on July 18th:
Actually, although you would probable like to continue to make your claim that the first thing to touch the Moon was a piece of Canadian hardware, the first thing to actually touch the Moon (via a SOFT landing) was the Surveyor 7, which was launched on Jan 6, 1968 and soft-landed on the moon three days later, on Jan 9.

Prior to that soft landing, there were several missions where probes (both Russian and American-made) crashed into the Moon's surface, taking photos all the way down until impact.

Americans, however, were NOT the first to perform a soft landing on the moon. The Ruskies soft landed Luna 6 on Jan 31, 1966. Here's the link:

http://www.russianspaceweb.com/spacecraft_planetary_lunar.html

Sorry to burst your Canadian bubble...

The appollo astoronausts blasted off, cirled the earth for a few days they crashed lnded into the ocean....meanwhile Stanley Kubrick and the gamng faked the lunar landings.

1)The space suits were not safe for traversing the moon. In the sunlight the moon is boiling hot, in teh shadows it's absolute zero...come on man

2)Russian scientists abandoned putting a human on the moon after they figured out it would take 1 foot of lead to surround and protect the space craft through the van allen belts....come on!?

3) Where are all the photographgs from the moon (2 million missing) and what's up with all the anamolies they forgot to air brush out? Come on man!

#6 - He didn't jump from the ladder to the surface. He jumped from the ladder to the foot of the lander, then jumped back up to make sure he could. Then his small step was from the foot onto the surface.

Um, some of this is WRONG...

5.)Practically nobody was worried he would CRASH. The Lunar Module could land with an attitude of 30 degrees and still touch down successfully. Besides, had the DPS (Descent Propulsion System -- I inform you of this because you clearly don't know much about Apollo) ran out of fuel, the APS (Ascent Propulsion Stage) would perform an abort. Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin got the 30 seconds (Until Abort) call about 12 seconds before landing.

6.) It WAS a small step. Neil didn't jump from the Eagle's bottom rung, he stepped carefully from the one meter footpad onto the Lunar Surface. Have you even watched the video of his first steps or are you just making things up? The ladder was SUPPOSED to be that high from the surface... it didn't "deploy" at all like you say.

7.) WRONG AGAIN. The LM could be opened from the outside, but Buzz blocked it from closing all the way in case of accidental cabin repress. If the cabin repressed on it's own while the door was closed, there would be no way to get back in, as the hatch would be under too much pressure. It was a simple safety precaution. The two of them didn't want it to be all the way open, however, as Neil and Buzz confessed concerns that they were afraid people might ask, "Were you born in a barn?"

------------------------------------------------

Everything else was either somewhat correct or pretty damn obvious to EVERYONE. The main reason the LM was thrown off course, by the way, was because they separated 4 minutes off schedule.

You just got smoked by a 15 year old...

@ Aldron's Last Hope.

You are very sadly misinformed and especially ignorant.

Let's address your "evidence" one at a time.

"The appollo astoronausts blasted off, cirled the earth for a few days they crashed lnded into the ocean....meanwhile Stanley Kubrick and the gamng faked the lunar landings."

You have no proof to back this up. This is just a thesis and you have not supported it at all.

---------------------------------------------------------

"1)The space suits were not safe for traversing the moon. In the sunlight the moon is boiling hot, in teh shadows it's absolute zero...come on man"

Those temperatures apply to practically anywhere within 240,000 miles through space. Be it on the Lunar Surface or the International Space Station. The suits were specifically made with a Water Cooled Undergarment and were colored WHITE to block radiating heat, as there is no convection or conduction on the Moon. The same space suits have proven to work during Skylab, Apollo 9 and other missions. The current ISS EMU's aren't much different and astronauts don't die from that. For your theory to be true, you'd have to state that all space walks since 1961 have been faked.
-------------------------------------------------
"2)Russian scientists abandoned putting a human on the moon after they figured out it would take 1 foot of lead to surround and protect the space craft through the van allen belts....come on!?"

Oh, I'm sorry. I didn't realize you were a scientist and not a conceited hoax nut that's probably only 12. Russian Scientists abandoned their Moon Program because their N1 rocket could not take off from the pad without blowing up. The LK lander was smuggled into Earth Orbit, but the bottom line was, they simply didn't have a rocket capable of a lunar mission. For your information, one foot of lead is worse for Radiation Shielding than a few layers of aluminum. This is because photons tend to fragment and cause secondary particles when they hit dense surfaces. Had they hit lead, the astronauts inside would have been pelted with thousands of more particles.. The shielding rating (8cm^3 of 2.7g/cm^3) aluminum was sufficient to block high energy photons during the quick transit through the outer VABs.

----------------------------------------------------

"3) Where are all the photographgs from the moon (2 million missing) and what's up with all the anamolies they forgot to air brush out? Come on man!"

OK, first of all, you're wrong right off of the bat. There are not 2 million photographs missing. In fact, there is only one magazine missing and it was left on the Lunar Surface by Apollo 12 by accident. Bean and Conrad caught hell for that. There are not 2 Million photos missing like you say. 2 Million?? REALLY!? You know how many that is? The Apollo photos number out to about 10,000 and not a SINGLE "anomaly" has ever stood up to scrutiny in the past 42 years. There was never anything "airbrushed" out. Go take a look at the Apollo Lunar Surface Journal. They have every Apollo photo ever brought back to Earth.

There's a reason why nobody on your side of the argument is a credentialed scientist. Everyone peddling this hoax nonsense is just looking for attention or is just downright dumb.

@Dubbieelttjie "It is strange that the dust of the propulsion from the craft is not suspended anymore at the time of the photograph. If there's no gravity, then the dust can't settle very soon. In any kind of propulsion, even placing your boot down, will cause upward propulsion, even if there is no air. The lack of dust in the picture does spread some doubt since the craft IS on the ground, and there was propulsion to land it.

Another question, where is the wire leading to?"

Why would dust be suspended on the Lunar Surface? There is no air resistance and so it falls right back down at gravitational acceleration. This is confirmed by Neil Armstrong on the Apollo Lunar Surface Journal (ALSJ for short). He claims that when he shut the DPS down, the regolith particles flew out towards the horizon and instantly disappeared. "It was like I had the engine shut off for two weeks" he said. I don't know what moron told you there is no gravity on the Moon. What a stupid thing to say... The Moon has 1/6th Earth's gravity, or about 1.8 m/s^2.
As for your "other question", there is no wire in this photograph. What you see above Buzz Aldrin is part of the Lunar Module's support structures.

All of these hoaxers getting owned by a 15 year old. LOL

It is my understanding that during the Cold War, both sides were technologically advanced, and both were making equal strides in space exploration. But, while USA sent a man to the moon 39 years ago, Russia was not able to. Not only that, but after 39 years for Russia to advance their technology, they still can't do it. USA used technology that was 39 years older than today, and was able to do it, but today with all the modern technology, Russia still can't do it.

Why the U.S did not try to go again or even Russia, Japan and China even:

1- the Budget now is 100 times better than the budget in 1969.
2- Space Technology of U.S, Russia, China, and Japan is a way powerful than the space technology of the U.S in 1969.

3- The experience that U.S Nasa had from the 1969.

The answer is easy. NO One could Land on the moon and if there is a light back from the laser beam then prove one thing (where is the Flag and the materials they left on the moon): MIT university sent two satellites can snapshot a high quality of an inch of a rock on the surface but they never could see the American flag on the moon... did Aliens stole it?? Funny, beside Japanese satellite was sent 3 years ago took a snapshot of all Apollo landing areas but they did not find anything on the moon such Flag and foot prints... just Stop believing something never happened and get over it.