Yeah, but not nearly small enough.
That’s the one that always seems most completely ridiculous to me.
The theory is that NASA faked the moon landing by shooting all those pictures on a soundstage somewhere. We’re supposed to believe that they had everything laid out, positioned the camera, and then hung little crosshairs from the ceiling, behind the other objects, in the right positions to line up perfectly in the final photograph. There is nothing about that which makes sense.
It doesn’t make sense, but I think I understand why the conspiracy theory has gained any currency at all. First, people love conspiracies–they’re still talking about JFK. And second, sad to say, as the moon landings recede farther and farther into the past–they are as close now to the year of Lindbergh’s flight as they are to this year, it’s no wonder that some people begin to seriously doubt it happened.
Now you’re making me feel really old. 
I was at the Apollo 17 launch. That was real (unless I’m in the conspiracy, of course.) If it was a fake, why wouldn’t NASA have staged the launch is some faraway place, and saved the money on the rockets?
With the tracking stations knowing that the signals were coming from the moon, and the troublesome evidence of the laser reflector which is really up there, it would have been far harder to stage the conspiracy than to just send people up there. With armor plating to protect against those big bad solar flares.
This is the clincher for me.
This is my personal favorite (which I see you participated in Cervaise).
The OP had to be one of the most batshit raving nutters ever to grace this board.
Unfortunately I see the links to his picture site no longer work.
You’re really confusing this. The conspiracy theorists are talking about a photo of an astronaut stepping off the ladder onto the moon. They think the photograph is of Neil Armstrong, and they ask how could anyone be on the moon to take the photo if he was the first on the moon. Again, here is the actual quote from the conspiracy site:
But the famous photo, reprinted everywhere, is actually of Buzz Aldrin, not Neil Armstrong, stepping onto the moon. It was taken by Neil Armstrong. Neil Armstrong took the great majority of the photos on the moon.
But as Tevildo pointed out (and linked to), there is at least one good still photo of Neil Armstrong on the moon (we’re not counting reflections of Armstrong in Aldrin’s visor), taken by Aldrin. But it does not show Armstrong stepping into the moon, it shows him doing some work behind the Lunar Module.
One of us isn’t understanding the other. This space said the photo isn’t of anyone’s first step on the Moon. This is true, no? You said nobody said it was. I’m only saying the nutjobs are. The conspiracy nuts are saying it IS a photo of Neil taking the first step onto the Moon’s surface–and therefore MUST be fake, since there couldn’t have been anyone else there to take it. Is that clearer?
Of course, it’s always possible that I’m the one who’s misunderstanding you. If so, where did I go wrong above?
The nutjobs are not referring to the panoramic photo of Armstrong working behind the Lunar Module. No one is stepping down onto the moon in that photo. They are referring to the very famous photo Aldrin stepping down from the ladder. How much more clear can I make this?
Hold it guys. We saw Armstrong climb down the ladder and step onto the moon on TV in almost real time. While on the ladder one of the first things Armstrong did was to deploy an external TV camera from the side of the lunar lander and it took the pictures.
I watched him climb down and after he stepped of the ladder he said “That’s one small step etc.” and Walter Cronkheit the repeated his words.
Yes, I know exactly which photo you are referring to. But, the nuts are SAYING it’s Armstrong.
But, now that I’ve read back through the thread, I see that’s not the photo that this space was talking about. So, that was my mistake; I thought he was. So, my bad. Carry on.
It would have also helped if you would have referred to the user name This space intentionally blank instead of this space, by which I thought you were referring to “this thread”.
The bold wasn’t enough of a clue? What kinda Doper are you? 
Ok, so misunderstandings all around. Back to your regularly-scheduled nutjob bashing.
What is it with the conspiracy nutjobs that think the moon landing was such an impossibility? The moon landing was not a scientific breakthrough, it was a huge engineering achievment.
The engineers knew the laws of physics and were faced with a task of constructing a machine that would sustain human life for a few days while navigating around a couple of celestial bodies. Not an easy task but one that, with enough man hours, resources and commitment, can be accomplished. It was a matter of solving a million engineering problems, not making scientific breakthroughs, that made the task doable. They promoted and exploited scientific breakthroughs to make the task easier but the mission itself wasn’t a breakthrough.
I’m not downplaying the magnificence of the project. However, I am more mystified that a TV screen can do what it can than the idea that NASA can successfully send people to the moon.
The idea that the apollo landings are a hoax can be put down to the following aspects.
1/ People love conspiracy theories. Love them to bits. They especially like to believe that they are one of the few to have not been fooled. They really like to know that they’re one of the ones with smarts.
2/ People aren’t half as smart as they like to think. They think they understand science/optics/astrophysics/engineering, they know how it works, it’s not nearly as complicated as some of these guys try to make out. So why can’t they, intelligent persons, reach the true conclusion about the moon landings after half an hour web browsing? Who needs doctorates and lifetimes of research? They’re smarter than these guys!
Unfortunately, when you delve a bit deeper into their reasoning, it becomes clear that those who believe the landings were hoaxes only have the sketchiest of understanding of science. They’re using ‘common sense’ understandings that are frequently over simplifications or fallacies. It might get them by on Earth, but not on the Moon.
3/ People on average haven’t the faintest idea how much preparation, research and plain hard work goes into a large project like the Apollo missions. They think that after a bit of thought they have a ‘gotcha’ that no-one thought of before. Something that proves moon landings are actually impossible. They don’t realize that every single aspect of the landings that they are aware of, and hundreds more that they haven’t even the slightest inkling about, had been gone over in exhaustive length in advance.
Not only this, unfortunately for the average hoax believer, their ‘gotcha’ has also been gone over previously in great length by other hoax believers. Every new “aha!” is old news, a rehash of some other. We’ve heard and dismissed them all before and the chances of them coming up with a new one are slim. Why? Because the average hoax believer simply hasn’t done nearly enough research to discover anything new.
4/ The arrogance of the young. Each generation tends to believe that they’re the pinnacle of intelligence and achievement. They can’t believe that it was possible ‘way back’ in the 1960s to achieve something that isn’t being done today.
More than the arrogance of the young, it’s the arrogance of today.
Robert Benchley wrote a funny essay that included an anecdote about a picture of a duck he saw in a book on art. The caption was something on the order of: Remarkably accurate ancient Egyptian drawing of a duck. I know that perspective wasn’t invented (discovered?) until way after ancient Egypt and so did Benchley I assume. His point, though, was why would anyone think that an ancient Egyptian couldn’t draw a pretty good picture of a duck?
Well, you can see some video of the Apollo 11 landing on Google Video.
Yabbut, that video was black-and-white, and pretty poor quality. The photo we’re referring to is a high-quality Hasselblad 50mm film kind of image. Not that the argument deserves defending - if someone at this pro-hoax site knows enough to know that it’s a photo and not a video capture, that a good camera didn’t get in that position until someone carried it down, they should know enough to be able to tell that other aspects of that scene clearly show it wasn’t Armstrong’s first step.
If anyone says that we didn’t go to the monn, Buzz Aldrin will punch you in the mouth.
It was 70mm film. Let’s not give them any more things to pick at. 
Just for old time’s sake, the lens was a 60mm f/5.6 Zeiss Biogon, the camera was a modified Hasselblad 500EL aka the HDC that was even more modified for the rigors of space use (different lubricants that would work in vaccuum, special coatings and finishes, etc…). It had a resseau plate with photogrametric markings on it fitted just in front of the film plane. The 70mm magazines were open spooled and the film was made in a very thin base, allowing for really packing the exposures on per back.