Introduction

Conspiracy theories can affect anyone. According to Yougov, 20% of Americans subscribe to the belief that the attacks of September 11th, 2001 were planned by the U.S. Government. A whopping 54% believe that not only did Lee Harvey Oswald kill John F. Kennedy, but he had accessories to the assasination. 18% of Americans believe that the Apollo 11 Moon landing of 1969 was a series of cleverly made photos, videos, and artifacts made here on planet Earth. (Orth) During the Cold War, people all over the country became more and more distrustful not only of one another, but the government as well. Seven years after Kennedy made the decision to send Americans to the Moon, Apollo 11 touched down on the Lunar surface. Bill Kaysing, author of We Never Went to the Moon: America’s Thirty Billion Dollar Swindle, had previously worked for Rocketdyne, a company subcontracted by NASA. His book claims that NASA never really sent astronauts to the Moon. The claims made by Kaysing are showcased in a video, stated in simple terms, and accompanied with pictures providing evidence for his points. The arguments made by Kaysing are false, and can be easily deconstructed with simple research or basic knowledge of the situation. 

Section I: The credibility of Bill Kaysing

William Charles Kaysing, former employee of Rocketdyne, wrote the book We Never Went to the Moon in 1976. While employed at Rocketdyne, a rocket manufacturing company, Kaysing worked as Head of Technical publications. Rupert Cornwell, with The Independent, reports that upon leaving the company in 1963, Kaysing moved West and became a freelance writer. (Cornwell) In the years between the Moon landing and the publication of Kaysing’s book, America was shocked by the Watergate scandal, and distrust of governmental affairs was at a high point. Rick Perlstein, writing for Britannica, explains that the Watergate scandal was an event featuring the arrest of burglars breaking into the Watergate Hotel, and the involvement of President Richard M. Nixon. (Perlstein) Two years after Nixon resigned, Kaysing published his own book, titled We Never Went to the Moon. The book mirrored many Americans’ beliefs and distrusts in the seventies, with about 30% of the population not trusting the legitimacy of the Moon landing. After publishing We Never Went to the Moon, Kaysing continued to publish other books and articles, as well as a newspaper known as “The Better World News.” (Cornwell) Today, people still deny the Moon landing ever happened. The Youtube video expressing Kaysing’s claims about the Moon landing declares, “The information that you have watched are [sic] not fake. The reference is [sic] been from the great author Bill kaysing [sic]” (Daily Stock 1:44). This is only one example of people who still believe Kaysing’s teachings. In addition to the Moon landing hoax, there were other conspiracy theories that made their way across America. According to SPLCenter, in 1982, a radical Republican group known as Posse Comitatus released a newsletter claiming the Federal Emergency Management Agency, created by Jimmy Carter, was planning to imprison “Hardcore Patriots” (Keller). The theory took off, with many believers today. This is a prime example of conspiracy theories in the late twentieth century. 

Although it seems to some that Kaysing is reliable, there are several reasons not to trust his work, specifically We Never Went to the Moon. One example of Kaysing’s untrustworthiness is his reference to his employment at Rocketdyne. While he really did work there, there are two ways this argument can be disassembled. First of all, he only worked at Rocketdyne until 1963. In 1962, John F. Kennedy had delivered a speech rallying Americans to work toward going to the Moon. Kaysing left the company only one year after Kennedy exclaimed, “We choose to go to the Moon,” and it was another six years until the Apollo 11 mission. Having worked with Rocketdyne for only one of the seven years between Kennedy’s speech and the lunar landing, Kaysing couldn’t have known the specifics of the rocket’s engines. Another reason Kaysing’s former employment is invalid is his type of employment. In 1956, he was hired as head of technical publications. As Cornwell points out, “Kaysing brought a veneer of credibility to his work” (Cornwell). Although he essentially wrote reports and worked in the literary field, Kaysing did work at Rocketdyne, which was enough background for his followers to place their trust in him. Another reason many people were swayed by Kaysing’s ideas was because the 1970’s was an era of distrust. As previously mentioned, conspiracy theories such as the FEMA conspiracy, erupted during that time period. Kaysing took advantage of the American population’s skepticism, introducing them to a new idea: the Moon landing never happened. 

Section II: The supposed fabrication of photos: A lack of stars in Lunar photography

One argument made in Kaysing’s book is that the photos taken on the Moon are fake. According to the video, “The picture is taken [sic] by astronauts who reach there [sic]… But [sic] in the clear Sky [sic] no Stars [sic]?” (Daily Stock 0:39). This summarizes the claim, emphasizing that without a blue sky or cloudy atmosphere, one should be able to see the stars from the lunar surface. A photo accompanying the claim depicts the Moon’s surface with Earth shown in the background, but no stars in the sky. There are many people with different pieces of evidence who believe the starless photos were taken in a photo studio here on earth. For example, a video titled “13 reasons the Moon landing was fake” was posted by JP Sears, a Facebook influencer. Being posted in 2018, it shows that people agree with Kaysing’s ideas more than forty years after the debut of We Never Went to the Moon. On the topic of stars, Sears implies that without light pollution, the stars should be visible. “Now, were the stars just blotched out from the intense inner city street lights that are on the Moon?” Sears asks sarcastically, “Or are there just no stars visible from the inside of a pretend Hollywood sound stage?” (Sears).  Both Sears and Kaysing uphold the idea that the photos of the lunar surface are fake because there are no stars visible in the background. 

Although many Moon landing denialists support Kaysing’s claim, it can be disproved with minimal research. To argue Kaysing’s claim, one needs only a simple understanding of the Moon and the mechanics of a camera. Because of the Moon’s lack of a dense atmosphere, it reflects light very easily. When the sunlight hits the Moon, it reflects a lot of the light, which makes it appear very bright. According to Ashley Hamer with Discovery, a narrower aperture setting on one’s camera “keeps the light-collecting area on the lens small to avoid letting in too much light: the same reason your pupils constrict in bright sunlight” (Hamer). The aperture setting alone would not affect the stars’ visibility much if it were not for shutter speed. Shutter speed, or exposure, and aperture go hand in hand, as they both determine the amount of light in a given photograph. Discovery continues to state,“[One would] speed up the shutter speed so the camera sensor would only let in light for a brief moment” (Hamer). Shutter speed is the amount of time for which the shutter of a camera is open. A longer exposure would allow more light into the lens, thus creating a brighter photograph. This provides a simple explanation as to why you cannot see stars in many photos of the lunar surface: The Moon appears brighter than the stars, so to capture any detail of the Moon’s surface, one must adjust the camera’s settings.

Section III: The supposed fabrication of photos: The reflection of sunlight

Another way Kaysing and his followers defend their disbelief is by, once again, using the photos taken on the Moon. The video asserts that “[the faceplate] should be in deep shadow, as sun [sic] is behind the figure. Also [sic] if the source of light is artificial , [sic] it should be reflected from the faceplate” (Daily Stock 1:21). This suggests that the source of lighting in the particular photo was, in fact, artificial. The claim is shown together with a photo of Buzz Aldrin standing on the Moon. Although the video claims to be based on Kaysing’s ideas, it is unclear whether Kaysing really made this claim. Unlike the photographs of stars, the argument involving the light in the astronauts’ helmets is less common. However,  there is a similar claim made by other Moon landing denialists such as JP Sears. In his video, 13 reasons why the moon landing was fake, Sears asserts, “[In] photos where the astronauts are backlit by the sun, [one] can still see the detail in front of the astronauts. Hashtag studio lighting” (Sears). Although this claim is slightly different from Kaysing’s, it illustrates a similar claim concerning the light source shining on the Moon. However, it is unclear whether Sears is referring to the visibility of the Moon’s surface in front of Aldrin, or the reflection in his shield, as he only briefly mentions the idea. The photograph in the original video obviously shows light of some form reflecting off the helmet. In the photo, one can indeed see the Sun in the background.     

One major detail overlooked by Kaysing, as previously mentioned, is the reflective nature of the Moon’s surface. The Moon is approximately 238,855 miles away from Earth, according to NASA’s Spaceplace. (How Far Away). Caela Barry, a writer for NASA states, “The Moon does not make its own light —”moonlight” is actually reflected sunlight” (Barry). Although the Moon is not shining in and of itself, one can see its reflection of sunlight shining all the way back to Earth. This is just one way to show how reflective the Moon’s surface is. The helmets worn by the astronauts in the Apollo 11 mission were, like the Moon, extremely reflective. NASA explains that “[t]he sun visor has a special gold coating that works like the astronaut’s sunglasses” (Spacewalk Spacesuit Basics). Furthermore, photographing the helmet after the mission proved to be a challenge for the National Air and Space Museum. Jim Preston, supervising photographer for the Smithsonian explains, “we placed the lights strategically, knowing that the highly reflective face shield would be the biggest challenge of the shoot [of Neil Armstrong’s space suit]” (Preston). In the photographs showcasing the space suit, one can clearly see the reflection of the museum’s photographer and the lights surrounding the figure. (see fig. 1.) Furthermore, when one takes a closer look at the photographs of Aldrin, one can see the detail of the Moon’s surface as well as Neil Armstrong and the lunar module reflected in the helmet’s mirror-like surface. The above points help to prove that artificial lighting was not the source of reflection in Aldrin’s helmet. It was, in fact, the Moon itself.

Fig. 1. Smithsonian’s photographer Jim Prestons’ photograph of the space suit (left) (Preston), a similar photo taken of Buzz Aldrin on the moon (middle) (Why Do People Persist), and a photo shown in the video (of Aldrin on the moon), a pixelated and zoomed out version of the middle photo (right) (Daily Stock 1:21).

Section IV: The supposed fabrication of photos: Old Glory flapping in the breeze 

Clearly, photos taken on the Moon are controversial to Moon landing denialists such as Kaysing. In addition to the photos’ lack of stars and the reflection in Aldrin’s helmet, Kaysing and his followers claim the photos of the American flag waving on the Moon are a clear indication of a hoax. The video stating the claims made in “We Never Went to the Moon” declares, “There is no atmosphere at Moon [sic]. So how the American flag is waving.[sic] It is [sic] been faked ” (Daily Stock 1:33). Alongside the claim, a picture of the American flag on the Moon is shown. The flag does seem to be waving, and one can see ripples in the material. The flag is flying in the traditional way, perpendicular to the flagpole. (see fig. 2.) As previously established, the Moon’s atmosphere is very minimal in comparison to that of mother Earth. In fact, the gasses on the Moon are actually considered an exosphere. (Sharp) Tim Sharp from Space.com states that the Moon has “no breezes to make the flags planted there by the Apollo astronauts flutter” (Sharp). However, the photos of the American flag on the Moon are also among the most popular lunar photographs. So why hasn’t the rest of America agreed that the photos are fake?

Fig. 2. The video exhibits one of Kaysing’s claim alongside a photo shown for evidence (1:33)

The simplest answer to this question requires minimal research. Before the Apollo 11 mission, a team including Tom Moser was charged with a seemingly simple task: find a way to get the American flag planted on the Moon. An article from ABC News explains that after purchasing a standard flag,“[t]he Technical Services department at the Johnson Space Center then developed a collapsible flagpole with a telescoping horizontal rod sewn into a seam on the top of the flag to extend it outward” (Why Does the U.S.). During a lecture reported by Royal Museums Greenwich in 2019, professor Anu Ojha disproves many common conspiracy theories involving the Moon landing. On the topic of the American flag on the Moon, Ojha explains, “ ‘Because it’s been set up like this, it appears to be waving in the wind’ ” (Moon Landing Conspiracy). This provides an extremely simple explanation as to how the flag is positioned perpendicular to the flagpole. As for the ripples shown in the flag’s material, that can be explained easily as well. A 2019 Forbes article explains that the “the flag had just spent the last three days packed tightly in an insulated steel tube attached to the lunar module’s ladder, so it arrived at Tranquility Base looking pretty wrinkled” (Smith). The astronauts had a limited range of motion and poor dexterity, so the installation of the flag was more difficult than anticipated. The same Forbes article further explains the wrinkled flag by arguing that a crossbar that wasn’t fully extended could cause the flag to hang unevenly, thus giving the “illusion of rippling in a nonexistent lunar breeze” (Smith). The general consensus of scientists and journalists concerning the flag flapping in the breeze seems to be that the flag appears to be flying due to a simple metal pole and wrinkly fabric. The points above provide an explanation as to why the flag on the Moon appears to be flapping in the wind.

Section V: The supposed fabrication of photos: The lack of dust on and around the astronauts

Another claim made by the video is that “[t]here is no dust on the face shield or in the environment although [sic] there would have been if they truly landed on [sic] Moon” (Daily Stock 0:52). A pixelated photo alongside the claim depicts an astronaut, presumably Buzz Aldrin, standing in a seemingly clean, clear environment on the Moon. In many pictures of the astronauts and their supplies, everything appears to be mostly clean. The claim is mirrored by many other Moon landing denialists, including the previously mentioned Facebook creator, JP Sears. Sears’s video features an image of the foot pad of the lunar module, which appears to be completely dust-free. Sears uses this photo to help prove his fifth claim of thirteen, mockingly exclaiming, “Guess what? The Moon’s surface is covered in dust! It’s not like landing in a Walmart parking lot covered in pavement, so it would be impossible to land on the Moon’s surface without kicking up a dust storm” (Sears). The Moon’s surface is, indeed, covered in fine dust. According to the Smithsonian, Moon dust “doesn’t merely sit on the surface of a material; it hooks on and embeds itself into it” (Lewis). Given the characteristics of lunar dust, it seems the astronauts’ suits would be positively filthy.

Though Kaysing and the video seemed to have made an impressive argument, there are several factors proving they are mistaken. First and foremost, the photo shown by the video is moderately pixelated. Thus, one cannot clearly see the astronaut’s spacesuit and helmet to determine whether they have dust on them. Additionally, as the lunar module began to make its ascent, the crew discovered a large crater in their trajectory. According to Science Daily, this “caused [Neil Armstrong] to take over manual control and fly horizontally” (Flying the Final). The horizontal path of travel allowed the lunar module to make a slow, smooth landing on the site known as Tranquility Base. As has been previously established, one could describe the unique nature of Moon dust as sticky or clingy. Therefore, due to the gentle landing and the nature of Moon dust, minimal debris was kicked up. Furthermore, a timeline from the National Air and Space Museum reports that the astronauts did not immediately walk on the Moon after touchdown. The Apollo 11 module landed at 4:17 pm, eastern time, initiating the chorus, “The Eagle has landed.” However, “Armstrong [began] his descent from the lunar module and [took] humankind’s first steps on the Moon” at 10:51 pm, eastern time. (Apollo 11 Timeline) The time between the module’s touchdown and Armstrong’s descent was over 6 and a half hours, which provided ample time for any dust expelled from the surface to settle down. Due to the video’s lack of clear evidence and a logistical explanation as to why the astronauts didn’t appear to be covered in dust, one can conclude that the claim made was incorrect. 

Section VI: The ostensibly uninhabitable temperatures of the lunar surface

Last but not least, the video mentions the extreme temperatures of the Moon. Alongside a photo of an astronaut on the Moon, the video states “Exposure to the Moon produces the temperature of the [sic] molten lead plus [sic]. In the shadow, temperature go [sic] to absolute zero. No indication of the extreme contrast is shown in picture [sic]” (Daily Stock 1:12). Kaysing is essentially suggesting that the temperatures of the Moon are so severe, that one should be able to see differences in the photographs of the atmosphere, the equipment, or the Moon’s surface. Another implication of his argument is that humans wouldn’t be able to survive on the Moon, due to the harsh conditions. According to NASA, “Temperatures near the Moon’s equator can spike to 250°F (121°C) in daylight, then plummet after nightfall to -208°F (-133°C)” (Barry). The Moon does, in fact, reach extreme temperatures. So why do the photos of light and dark areas appear the same, as though they were taken here on Earth?

When one looks at a shadowed area, such as beneath a tree, the only difference appears to be the amount of light in the area. Even if the shadowed area feels cooler than the sunlit area, there will be very little visible indication of temperature. The surface of the Moon reacts to light and shadow very similarly to that of Earth. Although the difference of temperature between light and shadow is more extreme than on Earth, the condition of the Moon’s surface doesn’t appear any different whether it is in light or shadow. According to Britannica, “The most common minerals in lunar rocks are silicates”(Burke). Feldspar, a silicate commonly found on the Moon, has a melting point of 1,832 degrees Fahrenheit (1,000℃), which is much higher than the high temperature of the Moon, 250 degrees Fahrenheit. The video claims the moon reached the temperature of molten lead, although molten lead is over 600 degrees Fahrenheit. (Metal Man Knows). However, the argument made in the video is essentially a nonstarter, as the creator is woefully misinformed about the Moon’s temperatures. The video asserts that the Moon reaches the temperature of “molten lead” (Daily Stock 1:12). This is false, because molten lead reaches a temperature 350 degrees higher than the temperature of the Moon’s surface. The video also argues that the shadowed areas of the Moon reach “absolute zero” (Daily Stock 1:12). Absolute zero refers to the state of having no thermal energy. It is measured in Kelvin, which is different from Fahrenheit, so zero degrees Kelvin would be about -460 degrees Fahrenheit. As previously stated, the moon does not reach -460 degrees Fahrenheit, but only -208 degrees. Given these points, it can be concluded that, given the right equipment, one could actually walk on the Moon, despite the harsh conditions.

Conclusion

Although the claims in the video may appear believable at first glance, each can easily be disproved through logic and research. The video asserts that one should trust “the great author Bill kaysing [sic]” (Daily Stock 1:44), although he led his readers to believe he was an expert in rocket science, while he was truly in the bookkeeping department. After leaving Rocketdyne, Kaysing wrote the book We Never Went to the Moon, which kickstarted the Moon landing denialist movement and still has many followers, as shown by a video exhibiting his claims. Many of the video’s claims center around the idea that the photos taken upon the moon were clever forgeries for four reasons. One claim is that one should be able to see stars in the background of the moon’s photos. However, this can be easily debunked: the camera’s settings and the reflective quality of the moon make it difficult for stars to show up in photos. Another claim involving photos is that one can see light in the astronauts, but upon closer inspection, it turns out that it is just the reflection of the moon’s surface. A third claim involving photos is that the flag appears to be flapping in the wind, although there isn’t wind on the Moon. The simple explanation of this is that a team of engineers created a metal bar to hold the flag upright. The final argument on the topic of photos is that one should be able to see dust on and around the astronauts. However, the lunar module did not send up a cloud of dust upon landing, as it was traveling very slowly. There were also over six hours between landing and the spacewalk, which allowed time for any dust above the Moon’s surface to settle back down. One more argument made in the video is that the photos of light and dark areas on the Moon should appear differently, as it reaches the temperature of both molten lead and absolute zero. This argument is false because the Moon reaches neither the temperature of molten lead nor absolute zero. The claims disproved above show that the video made false arguments and thus should not be trusted. The only source used by the video is the book We Never Went to the Moon, whose author is a questionable source in and of himself. Although Bill Kaysing’s book was written in 1976, his ideas have attracted many followers since with one uniform creed: we never went to the Moon.