![]() Many people inquired of us whether the (fictional) backstory given on about the video clip was real. (This cynicism was turned into popular entertainment in the 1978 film Capricorn One.)Ī less elaborate video twist on the moon landing hoax was featured at, where web surfers could view a re-creation (or perhaps we should say "pre-creation") of the first moon landing, purportedly filmed in 1965 the footage is revealed to be studio fakery when a bank of arc lights breaks loose, intruding into the shot sending the film crew swarming onto the set to prepare for another "take." Perhaps because Americans' confidence in their government was at a low ebb due to the nation's controversial military involvement in Vietnam, perhaps because people felt threatened by the rapid onrush of technological progress the space program represented, or perhaps just because some people enjoy the furtive thrill of disseminating the "secret knowledge" encapsulated conspiracy theories, the moon landings have become a locus for cynical disbelief in America's tremendous achievements in space exploration. ![]() The key is to allow enough time for the light from the stars to hit your camera sensor - or in the case of NASA's analogue cameras, the film stock.The fanciful notion that the six Apollo lunar missions launched by the USA between 19 which landed a total of twelve men who walked on the moon were elaborate hoaxes staged in top secret desert locations and movie studios here on Earth has been a familiar aspect of popular culture and conspiracy theory since the first moon landing in 1969: You might be surprised how many stars suddenly appear in your photo despite you not being able to see them with the naked eye. If you have a camera with an adjustable shutter speed, like a DSLR, go outside in the evening and take a five to 10-second exposure of the sky. "In that situation, faint objects like stars simply aren't going to show up." In order to snap their photos, the astronauts had to fire their cameras at fast shutter speeds, which would not reveal the twinkle of stars.Įxperts at the Royal Observatory Greenwich said: "If you're going to take a photo of a brightly lit scene, your camera's shutter speed needs to be fast and your aperture incredibly small. Well no, and this is because the Moon's surface is lit up by harsh, direct sunlight. ![]() If NASA's photos were truly taken by astronauts on the Moon, then surely the sky should be filled with thousands upon thousands of stars? This is another popular conspiracy but one that can be debunked by anyone with a camera. NASA's astronauts couldn't snap pictures of stars from the surface of the Moon The Apollo 11 astronauts flew on a trajectory that would minimise their exposure to radiation.ĭata collected on nine Apollo flights also found the astronauts' exposure was in the range of 0.46 rads - less than that experienced by some nuclear power plant workers.ģ. "They insulated the spacecraft from radiation with an aluminium shell." And it is the reason scientists behind Apollo 11 made sure they protected the astronauts as best they could. "This was a genuine concern before the Apollo missions. The IOP explained: "Some people believe humans couldn’t have passed through these belts without being exposed to lethal doses of radiation. However, according to the UK and Ireland-based Institute of Physics (IOP), this is simply not true. These doughnut-shaped belts are known as the Van Allen belts and conspiracy theorists claim they are too dangerous for humans to cross. The Van Allen belt of radiation would not fry astronauts heading into deep spaceĪ popular claim against the Moon landing is the presence of radiation belts around our planet.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |