Anyone who thinks that Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin did not walk on the moon is ignorant of a few things, in my opinion, which make such an accusation of the moon landing being a hoax ridiculous. There are conspiracy theories for just about every area of knowledge, whether it be politics, religion or history, and most of them turn out to be not only incorrect at closer observation but preposterous and illogical, not based on much at all.
Those who believe the moon landing was faked use a few reasons to justify this, such as that the United States of America had a motivation in doing this hoax, in order to beat the Soviet rivals at something and try to impress them. But lets put aside these various explanations the conspiracy theorists and their followers use to justify their beliefs, and look at the cold hard facts.
If the landing was a hoax, then it would be known to many people. Even if it was a top secret operation there would be bound to be leaks of this information, and researchers and scientists would claim it was a hoax as well as everyday individuals. But this is not the case. Scientists do not make up an overwhelming majority of conspiracy theorists. Thus if it was faked, it is likely that by now we would have proof of the fact.
Also there are moon rocks and lunar vehicles to consider. These have been displayed around the world and examined by scientists. Putting this aside, why would the government build an expensive rocket and waste a third of the national budget on a program that ultimately was not for any purpose besides special effects, and then stage the landing on film? The government would not waste so much money on rocket equipment, lunar vehicles and research, not to mention launching sites and other areas connected with the program where large investments were made, merely to create the illusion they were doing something, only to make a few short films in a studio for the actual landing.
Conspiracy theorists argue that there is no wind on the moon but the flag planted there was waving. In my opinion this is probably caused by the motion of the individual planting it, but there are other rational explanations for it. The lack of stars in the sky is if anything an argument for the landing being real, as in most science fiction movies of the time stars were visible, and as such viewers at home would be expected to be familiar with such scenes, and if the government did not know what it looked like on the lunar surface they would probably make use of these films landscapes as inspiration. A look at films of the time reveals that the knowledge of the lunar surface was not exactly that in depth or precise.
Most of their evidence has been researched and found to be nonsense, so lets skip the various other points they use in defense of the landing being a hoax and go to the theoretical hoax situation again. Imagine if it was all fake, and imagine if the government really did spend all that money from the budget. Would they would spend all that money on faking a moon landing but not on improving education, health care or living standards? Highly unlikely in my opinion. But even if this were the case then surely the other moon landings were fake? The theorists do not deny the existence of satellites, the International Space Station for instance. So if they believe that satellites exist, why not the moon landing?
It is highly illogical to think that one program would be a hoax and all others real, especially the other moon landings staged not long after the first, and despite having the motivation of the cold war, would that not also be motivation to do the landing for real? Would the government really want years later to be found out and shown inferior to the Soviets?
There are many more reasons why the landing could not have been faked, such as the fact that many people were involved and scientists around the world agree it took place as well as the data gained in experiments on the trip being found correct with later data.
Besides, if the films were shot on Earth, how was the limited gravity simulated? And how were the signals from the moon simulated? If the signals had been transmitted from Earth or another position in Space the radio telescope operators would surely know. Also if the government was so fine with faking the landing, why not do it before 1969?
Thus I say the landing was not faked. I have only scoured the surface of the great iceberg of reasons why it could not have been faked, but suffice it to say that many of the conspiracy theorists who believe it was are the sort who believe George Washington was an alien, or that the Loch Ness Monster is real.
