Loading presentation...

Present Remotely

Send the link below via email or IM


Present to your audience

Start remote presentation

  • Invited audience members will follow you as you navigate and present
  • People invited to a presentation do not need a Prezi account
  • This link expires 10 minutes after you close the presentation
  • A maximum of 30 users can follow your presentation
  • Learn more about this feature in our knowledge base article

Do you really want to delete this prezi?

Neither you, nor the coeditors you shared it with will be able to recover it again.


Was the Moon Landing Fake?

No description

Megan Beere

on 23 June 2014

Comments (0)

Please log in to add your comment.

Report abuse

Transcript of Was the Moon Landing Fake?

"Starless, Starless Night"
The picture to my left is claimed to have been taken on the moon... Why does this photo show a "Starless, Starless Night"?

NASA claims the stars were washed out by the camera. But think about it...

In space, the stars shine even brighter than they do on Earth. Typically, on Earth, even on a cloudy night, you can see the stars.

This being said, why can you not see them in space?

NASA could not properly map out and place ALL of the stars. People would notice it. Even if they did photo shop stars into the (set) back round they wouldn't be mapped correctly.

Therefore photos taken on the "moon" are starless and fake.
No stars in the space sky?
"Cross Hair Oops"
Cross Hairs
"Something is Not Right..."
If the Lunar Module weighs TONS, why did it not leave an imprint? Especially if there were footprints left behind...

Footprints on average are about 5 pounds of indentation, or pressure. They could be more depending on the persons body mass.

So, why would something that is a few tons not leave an imprint? Or even at the very least create a dust cloud as it landed? Seeing as how NASA claims that the moon is a dry environment.

But, saying that, why does the footprint look as it was left in wet sand?
Lunar Module That Left NO Imprints
"Crispy Clear"
The photo quality is unusually high for photos taken on the moon or in space. Even if they could take this quality of photo, how would it be achieved in space?

There is a belt in space called the Van Allen belt. There is HIGH levels of radiation coming off of that belt. The astronauts supposedly traveled near it...

With such high levels of radiations, how did the astronauts survive the trip? A side from that how did the camera lens not fog from the radiation?

Also, the amount of photos taken is implausibly high. There were about 1 photo taken every 50 seconds. Technology has improved in order for us to do this now, but when the moon landing happened, technology could not do this.
Photo Quality and Amount
Was the Moon Landing Fake?
Many people have different thoughts and opinions on the moon landing. Was it real or was it fake? I personally think it was all staged and it is fake. Multiple people think other wise. But, regardless I am going to share with you why I think that the landing fake. Hopefully, you will agree with me.
"C Rock"
On this rock, there is a C... NASA claims it may have been hair. But, creators and set designers marked their objects with their initials.

Could this "C" be a marking? On purpose?

(Need I mention the fact that you see the cross hairs yet AGAIN? I'm sure you will see them in multiple slides...)
Prop Label?
Identical Background
"Match Up"
NASA claims these photos were taken MILES away from each other, if so, why are the back rounds identical?

If you look at the photo compilation on the left, the back rounds are the same, then, the photos are overlapped and you can CLEARLY see that the backgrounds make exactly.
"Different Angles"
In this photo, you see two different angles of shadows, behind (back) and to the right (front).

In order to have different shadow angles, you need to have different lighting angles.

Does this make sense?


If your in space, you have only ONE source of light, the sun. If you have only one light source, why do you have two different shadows?
One major thing that NASA screwed up in the pretend moon landing was the cross hairs.

In usual photos, cross hairs are placed to center photos... The cross hairs overlap objects.

But, on sets, they are placed BEHIND objects in order to center the set...

The cross hairs in the photo on the left are placed behind the objects.

If this was a taken photo, cross hairs would be on top of the objects, but if it was a set, cross hairs would be place behind objects.

Lastly, the point that doesn't even need a photo to explain...
The delays... The delays in the time. From the "moon" to the Earth...

There was only a two second delay in time. The "moon" is 400,000 km away from earth.

On a news show, delays are about five seconds for people who are two FLOORS apart.

Why is the delay only two seconds if they are supposedly 400,000 km away?

Sure typical delay time is 0.5 of a second but that is delay time for now, not for back then.

Again, with the level of technology that they had when the landing happened, its not possible if you are that far apart. Maybe if you are two doors down but not if you are 400,00 km apart.
Interrelated System
Many people used to and still do think that the earth is the center of the universe. But, contrary to popular belief, it is not. The earth is only a small part of a huge galaxy. It is all an interrelated system consisting of planets, comets, asteroids and stars.


The earth relates to the moon in multiple ways. The moon controls the tides on earth. The moon also controls many different cycles on earth from of course the lunar cycle to even the menstrual cycle.The moon contributes to the temperature here on earth as well.

As humans, we are naturally curious about unexplored factors of life. This is of course the same with the wonders of space, but it has remained the same. We haven't explored the moon and we have only explored a very limited amount of the galaxy.

I am not saying that we cannot and never will do these things, I am simply stating that it has not been done as of yet.

Extreme amounts of fuel (to get there and back of course)
Very upgraded technology
Trained, talented, willing and experienced crew members

Going off of the technology point, I am not saying that they did not have the technology to do the moon landing when it happened, I am saying that something like the technology for the cameras more than likely would not have worked in space.

In conclusion, I do not believe that the moon landing happened. I think this because of the various things previously stated from the prop marks, to the cross hairs, to even the footprints and delays. I hope that it soon will as I think it will majorly further technology and the ways of society.
Full transcript