.jpg)
14 months before landing on the Moon, Neil Armstrong was practicing to land the Moon Lander on the Earth itself, but this experiment failed miserably because Neil Armstrong failed to land this prototype. He was lucky that in the last two seconds, he saved his life with the ejector, but after that, when the Apollo 11 Moon Lander successfully landed on the Moon, Thorin's conspiracy was that he could not control it on the ground, so how did it land on the Moon? 54 years have passed since Neil Armstrong stepped on the moon, but even today many people believe that it was all a sham created by NASA and America. Listened to these conspiracy theories. If we go, they have a lot of power, and they talk very logical things, listening to which a common man is forced to think whether America had really lied to us, were these moon landings not shot in some desolate desert? Now, is this a coincidence or a conspiracy theory? Every once in a while, these theories find some excuse to come back to life, as in 2002, when a man named Bart Sibley, who considered the Moon landings fake, did the same thing when Apollo When Astronaut Edwin Buss of 11 asked Aldrin some blunt questions in front of the media, Aldrin got angry and punched Bat Sibble in the face. This was the point when the theory against the Moon landings once again started making rounds among the people. It was said that Buzz Alert, who took the second step on the moon, probably thought of the conspiracy theory and that is why he got angry, but what is the reality, was NASA's moon landing real or was it really an attempt to humiliate the Soviet Union in the eyes of the world? The secret plan was that at the beginning of the space race during the Cold War, it was the Soviet Union that had sent the first satellite into space. Not only this, the Soviet Union had sent the first unmanned spacecraft to touch the moon, 10 years before NASA's Apollo 11 mission. Then what happened was that the Soviet Union could not send humans to the moon even once whereas NASA has done this work six times. Let us crack these theories one by one and try to find out the truth.
The first thing That creates doubt in people's minds is the camera with which photographs were taken on the moon. Marcus Allen is a photographer who is very fond of this camera. He says that when I see photographs taken on the moon, I believe it. I don't understand how astronauts would have operated such a complex camera on the moon and that too from inside a space suit. The space suit is not normal but it is fully pressurized, that is, in simple words, it is filled with air inside, due to which the hands and fingers are protected. It is not possible to move the press. Conspiracy theory Ralph Rennie did an experiment in which he put his hands inside a container wearing astronaut's gloves. At first, he was able to move his hands and fingers freely but as soon as he put them in that container When all the air was taken out with the help of a compressor, the gloves became stiff. It had now become very difficult to move the hand in this vacuum chamber. He said that in this condition it is not possible to press the trigger of a camera or set the focus. If this is really so, then how is this memorable photo taken on the moon so sharp and perfect? Aerospace engineer Jay Widley says that the camera with which the astronauts took the photo on the moon was a Hessel Blood 500 L camera which was specially designed for lunar photography.
It was modified for missions. It was attached by sliding to the astronaut's suit so that there was no need to hold the camera with hands. Apart from this, the shutter button of this camera was also kept very big so that it could not fit in the astronauts' gloves. It could be pressed easily and the focus ring was also modified so that it could be rotated even with a stiff glove because they would not be able to see much left, right, or up and down through the helmet of the space suit, that is why the astronauts first This thing was practiced a lot on the Earth itself so that he could capture the best photos on the moon. Conspiracy in these great photos also Thorin Shadows A former head of the American Rocket Dion Company believes that the shadows seen in the photos are proof of this. That we had never gone to the Moon. He said that the shadows seen in many photographs taken on the Moon are not parallel to each other. When the astronauts of Apollo 11 were present on the Moon, at that time the source of light was only If there was the sun, the shadows falling here should also have been parallel to each other, which is why many people believe that these photos were taken in a studio by installing artificial light source because the closer the light, the more the shadows will be far away from each other.
As you see in this photo, the shadow of the landing gear of the lander is going on one side but the shadow of the astronaut is on the other side. Now it may seem that perhaps these shadows are really being formed due to artificial light sources but experts believe that even on the ground it often happens that the shadows are not parallel to each other. For the shadows to be parallel both the objects must also stand parallel to each other. Apart from this, if the photo is taken at a wide angle then in that case Also, then shadows will not appear parallel, or if the surface is not smooth.
Even then the shadows will not be parallel. Another theory that is often considered a conspiracy is that Thorin Aldrin is descending the stairs of the lunar lander and there is no sunlight falling on the side of the lander but still Aldrin looks well lit, so what is the reason that the lander The shadow of the moon is completely black while the light is falling on the astronaut's body. Conspiracy theorist Marcus Allen says that this is possible only if some other soft light is falling on them, of course, due to the different atmosphere on the moon. Sunlight is not able to spread, but when this light falls on the surface of the Moon, it reflects and bounces back. Just like our Earth is illuminated on the night of a full moon, in this photo, there is a backlight falling on Astronaut Aldrin, which is reflected on the Moon. If we talk about lightning being reflected from its surface, then the light passing through the American flag is also viewed with suspicion. The conspiracy theory is that if sunlight is falling on one side of the American flag, then How is the other side also perfectly illuminated? Actually, the American flag that was placed on the moon was made of nylon and the specialty of this material is that it allows light to pass through easily, but if there is no air on the moon, then the American flag Apollo 11 astronaut Bus Alwin says that we had not previously practiced planting the flag in the lunar soil and we had to twist the rod on which the flag was planted to bury it in the ground.
The flag had to be pushed downwards because the gravity on the moon is very low, hence the astronauts were asked to apply more force and then the flag was shaking excessively due to which the viewer would feel as if the wind was waving it secondly, this It was said that the flag was already designed in such a way that there was an aluminum rod on its side but a rod was also placed on its upper part so that the flag would not fade on the moon. Conspiracy theory and famous author Ralph Raney wrote about the moon landing. He raised a question about which it is not possible to explain in the Earth's atmosphere. He says that when a blower is hit on the soil or even on small stones, the air pressure shakes the soil and stones and makes a small crater. So it definitely has much less power than the thruster of the Moon Lander, then what is the reason that it removed a lot of soil and stones but did not make even the slightest crater under the Apollo 11 lander, whereas it should have happened that the time of landing, the Moon's The soil flying from the ground would have completely covered these landing gears, but there is not even a little soil on it, on this the physicist says that the rocket motors of the lander were switched off a few feet before the landing and at the time when the moon and When it touched the ground, the thrust had already reduced to 75, that is why it did not make any crater, but if you look carefully in the pictures, this thrust has definitely removed some soil which is seen scattered in different directions. But not so much that it could cover the landing gear.
Let's assume that if the thrust was left at 25 kg then it would be 1250 kg. If this much thrust had fallen on the Earth, it would have definitely created a big crater, but why did it not do so on the Moon? This could not be explained yet in the Earth's atmosphere. Another big question is that in the photos taken on Conspiracy Thorin, the sky appears completely black, like it is visible on Earth at night, but why stars are not visible in it. The lens of the incoming camera also works like human eyes. When we look in complete darkness, the stars in our eyes become bigger so that more and more light can enter. Similarly, when we look in the light, the stars in our eyes become smaller. Let us see if you have ever got a chance, then you must have noticed that during star gazing, the surroundings are kept completely dark so that the stars in our eyes become bigger and even the slightest light of the stars can reach the eyes, but if in this situation no light is If you turn it on, the stars stop being visible. Similarly, in the Apollo 11 mission, when photos were captured on the moon, the entire surface of the moon was shining with sunlight, due to which the camera lens did not capture the stars. Because already a lot of light was going inside it which was much more than the light of the stars. At that time, despite sunlight falling on the moon, the sky was black because there was no atmosphere on the moon. The atmosphere of our earth blocks the sunlight. Due to this, we see the sky as blue during the day but in reality, the sky behind this atmosphere is black. Do you think America had really sent humans to the moon or not or if in your mind If you have any questions, please let me know in the comment section.
