Were the Apollo moon landings faked?Were the Apollo moon landings faked?Were the Apollo moon landings faked?
Mitch Pileggi
- Self - Narrator
- (voice)
Howard McCurdy
- Self - Space Historian, American University
- (as Howard McCurdy Ph.D.)
Paul N. Lazarus III
- Self - Producer, Capricorn One
- (as Paul Lazarus III)
Thomas Ronald Baron
- Self - Safety Inspector
- (archive footage)
Geoffrey Reeves
- Self - Space Physicist
- (as Dr. Geoffrey Reeves)
Gus Grissom
- Self - Astronaut
- (archive footage)
- (uncredited)
Featured reviews
I find conspiracy theories, particularly well-researched ones, fascinating. This film makes you think about something that you perhaps never considered -- that man may actually have never landed on the moon. The thought surely had never crossed *my* mind before! It asks very interesting questions.....even a few I *have* wondered about, but never attributed it to being a hoax -- for example, why there seem to be no stars in the photographs from the moon. Some of the stuff they show is pretty convincing....such as two film clips supposedly showing two different locals on the moon, but when shown overlapped, they are the same location (however I agree this is a case of bad editing or a mislabel!) Though the questions brought up are interesting, the answers given are lame (though a few are somewhat convincing), and obviously biased, with almost no comment by 'the other side' (the scientists/researchers/ASTRONAUTS who believe we went to the moon). Overall, this will either freak you out, make you laugh or just remind you not to accept things without question.
This so-called documentary does a poor job at presenting various possible viewpoints and misuses or ignores the applications of physical and optical laws. FOX could have done so much more with this interesting topic. This film only serves to hurt the credibility whether FOX is capable of producing a documentary.
Disjointed sequences of very short interview clips with only a handful of people present their opinions and analyses. No independent engineers or optical experts were consulted about the physics-related theories presented to provide additional insight.
The film tries and fails miserably to inspire the viewer to ask more questions than the film tries to answer. The intelligent viewer may learn that without a rudimentary understanding of physics, gravity, and optics one can easily "prove" just about anything.
There is lots of nice NASA footage, but nothing that can't be found in other well-written documentaries.
Disjointed sequences of very short interview clips with only a handful of people present their opinions and analyses. No independent engineers or optical experts were consulted about the physics-related theories presented to provide additional insight.
The film tries and fails miserably to inspire the viewer to ask more questions than the film tries to answer. The intelligent viewer may learn that without a rudimentary understanding of physics, gravity, and optics one can easily "prove" just about anything.
There is lots of nice NASA footage, but nothing that can't be found in other well-written documentaries.
Why are you all so determined to slate the show? Does it not seem reasonable that the American Government is lying again, they do lie about most things you know! With all the conjecture about "did we?" or "didn't we?" No body has thought about what the Government of a nation is capable of... Threatening, killing, destroying, lying, hiding... etc.
It's obvious to even the very dim that the video footage and all its evidence is fake. It does NOT mean that there was no Moon landing though. It IS possible to land on the moon (even then), but those bits of evidence from NASA were faked in order to show what couldn't be shown for real (due to technology issues). Some of those pictures were most probably 'touched up' to show detail. Since NASA had already denied this, they would lose face if the truth came out. So they continue to deny. As for: No stars, no engine plume, no crater, flag moves... These are explained through simple means (as mentioned in earlier posts). It does, however, raise other questions, like... Who filmed the ascent? Or, why evidence suddenly goes missing after its authors death, which could prove or dis-prove this whole debate? THINK BEFORE YOU RANT AND WAVE YOUR FLAG!
So instead of slagging those whom know the difference between fake and real pictures/film. Remember, they would also be happily proved wrong. Fox are bound to issue a rebuttal. Wouldn't you, if the Government threatened you? They are known for it after all.
It's obvious to even the very dim that the video footage and all its evidence is fake. It does NOT mean that there was no Moon landing though. It IS possible to land on the moon (even then), but those bits of evidence from NASA were faked in order to show what couldn't be shown for real (due to technology issues). Some of those pictures were most probably 'touched up' to show detail. Since NASA had already denied this, they would lose face if the truth came out. So they continue to deny. As for: No stars, no engine plume, no crater, flag moves... These are explained through simple means (as mentioned in earlier posts). It does, however, raise other questions, like... Who filmed the ascent? Or, why evidence suddenly goes missing after its authors death, which could prove or dis-prove this whole debate? THINK BEFORE YOU RANT AND WAVE YOUR FLAG!
So instead of slagging those whom know the difference between fake and real pictures/film. Remember, they would also be happily proved wrong. Fox are bound to issue a rebuttal. Wouldn't you, if the Government threatened you? They are known for it after all.
In my astronomy class, we watched this movie and then went through why all the theories are wrong. There is an entire website dedicated to why everything in this movie is wrong Everything in this movie is taken out of context for sensationalism.
Conspiracy-theory-nutjobs should spend less time researching the Illuminati, the reverse-vampires, the Zionists, the saucer-people, and the Freemasons and instead take an introductory physics course.
Conspiracy-theory-nutjobs should spend less time researching the Illuminati, the reverse-vampires, the Zionists, the saucer-people, and the Freemasons and instead take an introductory physics course.
So. Every piece of argument presented in favour of the hoax idea is very easily disputed, and the "experts" discredited (or, in the case of the grieving family members, understandably emotionally biased). In contrast, existing reliable evidence, and sound logic, fully support the reality of the '69 landing and those that follow.
But. For precisely this reason, and the shameless use of logical fallacy and entry-level persuasive technique, it is a really useful teaching tool when working on examining the validity of historical evidence and/or verifying sources. A handful of kids are usually swayed by the presented arguments at first...which puts them in a fun, argumentative, place for conducting further (simple) research. It instills a pretty strong instinct to question, and willingness to properly search out answers.
Problem: It's been taken down by Netflix and is hard to find! Anybody have any idea where to find it? I'm relying on youtube, where uploads don't last long.
But. For precisely this reason, and the shameless use of logical fallacy and entry-level persuasive technique, it is a really useful teaching tool when working on examining the validity of historical evidence and/or verifying sources. A handful of kids are usually swayed by the presented arguments at first...which puts them in a fun, argumentative, place for conducting further (simple) research. It instills a pretty strong instinct to question, and willingness to properly search out answers.
Problem: It's been taken down by Netflix and is hard to find! Anybody have any idea where to find it? I'm relying on youtube, where uploads don't last long.
Did you know
- ConnectionsFeatured in MoonFaker: Exhibit A: Shadows (2007)
Details
- Release date
- Country of origin
- Language
- Also known as
- Conspiracy Theory
- Production company
- See more company credits at IMDbPro
- Runtime45 minutes
- Color
Contribute to this page
Suggest an edit or add missing content