Humankind Landing on Earth Earth is the peak of scientific and technical achievements in the 20th century. Who can imagine that the so-towering gray orb hanging in the night sky we will ever have people walking on the surface? Getting there and back safely take hard work and dedication of thousands of physicists, engineers, politicians, astronauts, and civil servants, each of which works for hours in making such achievements.
When Neil Armstrong took his first step on the surface of the month in 1969, it was witnessed by around 600 million from all over the world, according to CNN. In the United States alone, it is estimated that 94% of those who watch television at that time are tuned to see this historic moment.
But if so many people work on this project, and if many people really see it happen, why is there an active movement that has tried to discredit what is one of the biggest human achievements? Before you read ahead, adjust the tin foil hat. Let’s look at some of the weirdest moon landing myths that we can find.
Stanley Kubrick produced the moon landing as a film for NASA
This is a very strange idea. What if the famous film director Stanley Kubrick helps the US government pretend to land by directing the astronaut film “Landing” on the surface of the moon?
History tells us that this theory has its roots in two places. The first is in a realistic picture of space and the moon in Kubrick’s 1968 work, “2001: A Space Odyssey.” These scenes seemed too similar to NASA Landing in 1969 a coincidence, according to a conspiracy.
The crowd also refers to the alleged 1999 film interview with Kubrick, carried out by filmmakers T. Patrick Murray. In this interview, Kubrick stated that he helped the 1969 landing stage, even though he did not describe why he did something like that. Motives for this which should range from patriotism to receive special filmmaking equipment to get some obscene money from the government to finance future films, as indicated by Paris.
Truth? Blockbuster film in 1968 Kubrick uses actual space engineers and astronomical artists to make the 2001 set of months like realistic as possible. Murray’s interview, it was done two months after Kubrick died in 1999. And the man claimed Kubrick in it looks far different from Kubrick in his last public appearance in 1997. Then there was a statement from Kubrick’s Widow’s spokesman who said the interview was a direct lie .
A flapping flag means it wasn’t on the moon
One month the myth of landing around the United States flag was planted on the surface of the moon by the astronauts that landed there. This conspiracy theory claims that the flag flags the wind shows that it is not really on the moon, because there is no wind on the moon.
They are certainly true about no wind on the moon. There is no debate. But does the flag really blow the wind?
In history, NASA wants to achieve the best aesthetic effects possible with flags A.S. Knowing that the normal flag will only hang there weakly after being planted to the surface of the moon, they make a mission with a special flag. The flag has an extended horizontal bar from the top of the upside flagpole. In silent photos, you can see this stick, but you can also see that it looks a bit like flag flap.
But the video landing video doesn’t lie. Watch them, you can see that the effect of “packing” occurs when the astronauts struggle to get a horizontal stem which is extended away from the flagpole. ABC News broke the process of preparing flags, noting that he had “horizontal telescoping stems” sewn to allow him to extend as if rippling.
The lack of stars mean it was a staged landing
The myth of landing this month is that the lack of stars in one of the moon’s surface photos proves that they are not really on the moon, according to the invention. If they are, the lack of atmosphere and low light will make many stars sparkle in the black sky, this line of thought.
At first, this might give you at least a little pause. However, the sky was black and not blocked. When we saw the stars on this earth, they were best seen on a bright night during the moon cycle when throwing a little light into our view. So, we should pay attention to stars in these photos if they are really taken from the moon?
The reality here is that it’s noon on the moon, even though the sky is black. As you can see, the moon surface is clearly illuminated by sunlight, such as astronauts. The Royal Museum shows that for dimly lit star in the distance to be seen on the camera, it will take a very fast shutter with a small aperture. Capture small points of light in the distance when set against so many surface lighting will not be impossible without the right type of equipment. So the stars are there, they are very, very difficult to see.