“That’s one small step for man, one
giant leap for mankind” were the first words spoken by astronaut Neil Armstrong
when he set foot on the moon in 1969 (Dunbar 1). But what if those words were
not spoken on the moon at all? The landing on the moon was monumental in United
States history; on July 16, 1969, the Apollo 11 mission, initiated by President
John F. Kennedy through NASA, was launched into lunar orbit, reaching Earth’s
moon just four days later (1). The landing was broadcasted heavily, and quickly
became a global sensation, especially to those in other countries, as at this
time, the United States was heavily involved in the Space Race. However, after
such an incredible and triumphant event, many conspiracies ensued relating to
the feasibility of the lunar landing. Was the moon landing faked in order for
NASA to save money for further space research? Was the moon landing faked by
NASA to show superiority in the space race against the Soviet Union? Let’s
investigate the case of the moon landing, and the theories that have followed
it, with the most plausible theory being that NASA faked the moon landing to
show superiority in the Space Race against the Soviet Union.
Neil Armstrong made history in 1969
when he became the first man to set foot on the moon (Dunbar 1). Becoming the
first man on the moon, Armstrong had to hold certain special qualities to
handle such a history-changing task. Neil Armstrong’s passionate, meticulous,
and timid attitudes shaped the man who changed United States history.
Neil Armstrong was passionate about
aviation and spacecraft. According to a
2001 interview with the Johnson Space Center, Armstrong was adamant about his
field of profession from a very young age:
I began to focus on aviation probably at age
eight or nine, and inspired by what I'd read and seen about aviation and
building model aircraft, why, I determined at an early age—and I don't know
exactly what age, while I was still in elementary school—that that was the
field I wanted to go into, although my intention was to be—or hope was to be an
aircraft designer. (Ambrose 1)
Armstrong continued to work persistently towards his goals
throughout his adolescence, eventually earning his pilot license at the age of
16, as well as a scholarship to Purdue University through the US Navy, where he
studied aeronautical engineering and served as a Navy pilot (Editors 1). Once
Armstrong finished college, he was so passionate about continuing a career in
spacecraft that became part of the National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics,
which later became NASA, and “moved his entire family to Houston” (1). There, Armstrong was allowed to expand his craft
by working on various air force and spacecraft, and his passion grew further as
he continued his lunar voyages. In 1969, he was appointed as the mission
commander on Apollo 11 mission, which reached the moon on July 20, 1969 (Dunbar
1). Armstrong became the first man to set foot on the moon, an accomplishment
that only increased his love for aeronautics. After
the Apollo 11 voyage, Armstrong was so passionate about a career in aerospace
that he became NASA’s “deputy associate administrator” for aeronautics and
remained so until 1971 (1). Even in his old age, Armstrong was committed to
spacecraft. He taught aerospace engineering at the University of Cincinnati
until he retired (1). Even though he wasn’t in space, Armstrong’s involvement
in the space program contributed greatly to NASA’s success. Despite being
exposed to a variety of interests, Armstrong always followed a passion for aviation
and aeronautics that contributed greatly to United States space travel.
As well as being extremely
passionate in his craft, Neil Armstrong was very methodical and specific about
the way he approached tasks, especially the Apollo 11 mission. Sources from a
2001 interview with Armstrong reveal that while in the planning process,
Armstrong thought deeply about the best way to make the moon landing
successful, “I remember the discussions earlier that we'd had at conferences on
these subjects of blunt shapes and flying bodies and winged vehicles and so on,
which were the best configurations and what were the pluses and minuses of
different routes to go into space,” (Ambrose 1). Armstrong thought carefully
about the way everything should run, though it was extremely difficult, because
the moon landing was such a complex task to complete for its time. Armstrong’s
meticulous attitude applied not only to the success of landing on the moon
itself, but the efficiency of the moon landing, seen in an interview with Neil
Armstrong, where he stated he and his crew “were looking for not a range of
stuff, but the best method that we could find that would give us ability to go
at the earliest possible time, maximum speed, and with the highest level of
confidence” (1). Armstrong did not want his plans to fall through, he deeply
wanted to change history for the U.S. and the space program, especially in the
Space Race against the Soviet Union. Armstrong thought so much about the steps
needed to achieve success in lunar voyages before any other country, that he
planned steps for the missions before it was necessary to. As stated in a 2012
article by James Clash, Armstrong thought constantly about how to operate the
moon landing logically before space exploration even started, “I had been very
concerned about the technical details of assuring that [on the moon] the ascent
engine could be started and would do the job of getting us back into lunar
orbit. But that was in the two years prior to the flight. On the lunar surface,
it did not weigh on my mind at all” (Clash 1).
Armstrong’s success took a huge weight off his shoulders once he arrived
on the moon, but prior to that, Armstrong’s main priority in life was ensuring
the safety and functionality of everyone and everything involved in the space
program. Armstrong’s analytic thinking shaped the man that he was and allowed
the Apollo 11 mission to be a victory for the U.S.
Despite Neil Armstrong being a
public figure, he was very reticent and shy to the public. Following the moon
landing, Armstrong taught at the University of Cincinnati rather than
attempting to stay in America’s spotlight, “Neil Armstrong turned down many
offers of more money and more fame to teach aeronautical engineering” (Dean 1).
He did this because he felt happier near his hometown, and could avoid the
press easier than if he attempted to stay public. Armstrong refused to give interviews, making
him appear rude and boastful to the public, though he was just not comfortable being
the center of attention. Bloomberg writer James M. Clash revealed that
Armstrong “guarded his privacy fiercely. But it wasn’t because he was arrogant
-- he was intensely shy.” (Clash 1).
Armstrong believed that the moon landing was not about him, but rather
about the accomplishments of the United States as a whole, a goal reached for
all mankind. In the years after the moon landing, Armstrong stopped giving
interviews altogether, and would hardly appear in public settings, stated by
Huffington Post author Margaret Dean, “Neil Armstrong was never comfortable
with the attention that his historic achievements brought with them, and at a
certain point he stopped granting interviews or making public appearances
almost entirely.” (1). He felt he was not special enough to make scenes about,
and was likely happier with his family and in the comfort of his own home. The
general public was not satisfied with this, and in the rare chance he was in
public, would taunt him and try to harm him for not giving out autographs or
speaking to them (1). People who were closer to Armstrong however, were aware
of his shy tendencies and were gracious of the time he did spend with the
public (1). Armstrong cherished his privacy and was reluctant, he never saw
himself as special, just as doing his job.
Being the first man on the moon,
Neil Armstrong had quite unique qualities instilled in himself. His strong
desire to be in space, his detailed thinking, and his shyness towards the
public all contributed heavily to the success of the moon landing and the
events that followed. The mixture of his disdain towards the public eye, as
well as his hope for success of the space system, could possibly lead to
motivation behind faking the 1969 moon landing for the betterment of United
States during the Space Race.
The Apollo 11 mission of 1969 was
revolutionary to United States and global history. Because nothing similar to
the mission had ever been accomplished before, the authenticity of the landing
was challenged. The moon landing led to the formation of two conspiracy theories:
the theory that the moon landing was faked in order for NASA to save money so
they could further their space research, and the theory that the United States
faked the moon landing in order to show superiority against the Soviet Union
during the Space Race. Though these theories are interesting and provide
insightful information, neither theory is plausible.
The first theory culminated revolves
around the 1969 moon landing being faked to save money for further research.
Throughout the period of 1960 to 1968, NASA spent over $30,297 towards
research, about 2.6% of all government spending, the highest spending
percentage the government has ever spent on NASA (Rogers 1).
Since NASA
overspent in the years leading up to the launching of the moon, they needed to
save money efficiently so they could feasibly further their space research. The
theory goes that, in order to accomplish this, the United States government
decided to create a set that looked similar to what they believed the
composition of the moon looked like (“Conspiracy Theories 1”). They used
“astronauts” as actors to believably “land” on the moon, “with Armstrong and
Buzz Aldrin acting out their mission on a secret film set” (1). Researchers
support this theory because of many oddities found throughout the filming of
the moon landing. In an analysis from EarthSky, videos recorded of the moon
landing reveal “no stars in
the lunar sky”, which is highly unlikely from the view from the moon (Byrd
1). Furthermore, footage of the American flag placed on the moon appeared to be
waving, which is impossible, as stated by Time Magazine, “The flag's movement,
they say, clearly shows the presence of wind, which is impossible in a vacuum”
(“Conspiracy Theories” 1). Researchers at The Washington Post speculate the
flag could be moving because of fans placed on the set (Noack 1). Also,
reported by Time, “Theorists have even suggested that filmmaker Stanley Kubrick
may have helped NASA fake the first lunar landing, given that his 1968 film 2001:
A Space Odyssey proves that the technology existed back then to
artificially create a spacelike set,” (“Conspiracy Theories” 1). Lastly,
according to interviews conducted at Reuters, “NASA itself admitted that it had
erased the original video recordings of the first moon landing among 200,000
other tapes in order to save money” (Noack 1). Could the files have been
falsely “erased” from the archives because they never actually existed? The
theory is quite intriguing, however, this theory can be debunked. The cost of
creating a set to stage an “authentic” moon landing would have been just as
expensive as funding NASA to go to the moon. In addition, reports from
Washington Post inform theorists that “NASA has since restored copies of the
landing,” in which “the recordings' quality is superior to the original one
that has gone missing,” (Noack 1).
While the idea that the moon landing
was faked to save money for further space research was growing, another,
slightly more plausible theory came to light. Theories about the moon landing
being a hoax in order to show superiority in the Space Race throughout the Cold
War were brought to light. In the mid 1900s, the United States was heavily
involved in the Cold War against the Soviet Union, tensions were high
concerning nuclear weaponry and the idea of going to war again (“The Space
Race” 1). One of the key parts of the Cold War was the Space Race, as told by
editors at A&E, “space would become another dramatic arena for this
competition, as each side sought to prove the superiority of its technology,”
(1). The Soviet Union showed their adamancy, “On October 4, 1957, a Soviet R-7
intercontinental ballistic missile launched Sputnik (Russian for ‘traveler’),
the world’s first artificial satellite and the first man-made object to be
placed into the Earth’s orbit,” (1). The U.S. was trailing far behind, and could
not afford losing in such a tense time, “it was
crucial not to lose too much ground to the Soviets,” (1). In response,
President John F. Kennedy made a bold claim in 1961, stating the United States
would “put a man on the moon by the end of the decade” (“May 25, 1961: JFK's
Moon Shot Speech to Congress” 1). Americans were not certain this goal could be
accomplished within the next nine years, but the government would stop at no
lengths to show superiority against the USSR. What is believed to have happened
as a response, theorized by Time, was the United States government, “desperate
to beat the Russians in the space race, faked the lunar landings,”,
collaborated with NASA to create a set that appeared similar to the moon, and
filmed the first man, Neil Armstrong, walking on the “moon” to create a video
of the landing (“Conspiracy Theories” 1). If the United States was truly
serious about winning the Space Race, they would do whatever was necessary to
show they were a threat to the Soviet Union. However, there is no true evidence
that Kennedy did not put a man on the moon. His speech was simply
misinterpreted as going to extreme measures to accomplish a desperate goal for
the United States, whereas it was truly meant to establish a national
precedent, and only cause further tension between the United States and the
Soviet Union. Though this theory is more believable than the first concerning
funding, this theory can also be proven not plausible.
The 1969 moon landing was a
groundbreaking moment in the 20th century, but theories have
surfaced questioning the validity of the lunar voyage. In fact, a study at
College of the Mainland suggests that 25 out of 47 students believed the moon
landing was faked by NASA and the United States Government. Two major theories that
resulted from the mission were the theory that NASA faked the moon landing in
order to conserve money for further space research, and the theory that the
United States faked the moon landing in order to show superiority in the Space
Race against the Soviet Union. Though neither of these theories is actually
plausible, they both do provide ideas and evidence that help one understand the
moon landing and the motives behind it more efficiently.
United States history was changed
forever when footsteps were “taken on the moon for the first time on July 20,
1969” (Dunbar 1). However, such an
incredible accomplishment led to speculation on whether the moon landing was
real or not. Two main conspiracies rose from the idea that the moon landing was
a hoax:
1. Was the moon landing faked by NASA
in order to save money for further space research?
2. Was the moon landing staged by the
United States government and NASA to show superiority in the Space Race against
the Soviet Union?
Though both theories provide outstanding evidence, the case
concerning the Apollo mission’s actuality remains unsolved. The most plausible
result, however, is that the moon landing was not falsified, and Neil Armstrong
truly was the first man on the moon.
Works Cited
Ambrose, Stephen E, and Douglas
Brinkley. “NASA Johnson Space Center Oral History Project Edited Oral History
Transcript Neil A. Armstrong .” NASA, NASA, 16 July 2010, www.jsc.nasa.gov/history/oral_histories/ArmstrongNA/ArmstrongNA_9-19-01.htm.
Byrd, Deborah. “Apollo and the
Moon-Landing Hoax.” EarthSky, Human World, 20 July 2018,
earthsky.org/space/apollo-and-the-moon-landing-hoax.
Clash, James M. “Memories of Neil
Armstrong, Shy Hero, American Patriot.” Bloomberg.com, Bloomberg, 2
Sept. 2012, 4:56 AM, www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2012-08-26/memories-of-neil-armstrong-shy-hero-american-patriot
“Conspiracy Theories.” Time,
Time Inc., 20 Nov. 2008,
content.time.com/time/specials/packages/article/0,28804,1860871_1860876_1860992,00.html.
Dean, Margaret Lazarus. “Neil
Armstrong's Second Act.” The Huffington Post, TheHuffingtonPost.com, 28
Oct. 2012, www.huffingtonpost.com/margaret-lazarus-dean/neil-armstrongs-second-ac_b_1834065.html.
Dunbar, Brian. “July 20, 1969: One
Giant Leap For Mankind.” NASA, NASA, 19 Feb. 2015, www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/apollo/apollo11.html.
“May 25, 1961: JFK's Moon Shot
Speech to Congress.” Space.com, Space.com, 8 Mar. 2016, www.space.com/11772-president-kennedy-historic-speech-moon-space.html.
“Neil Armstrong.” Biography.com,
A&E Networks Television, 28 Apr. 2017, www.biography.com/people/neil-armstrong-9188943.
Noack, Rick. “Russian Official Wants
to Investigate Whether U.S. Moon Landings Actually Happened.” The Washington
Post, WP Company, 17 June 2015, www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2015/06/17/russian-official-wants-to-investigate-whether-u-s-moon-landings-actually-happened/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.cfe3fb1dd8a7.
Rogers, Simon. “Nasa Budgets: US
Spending on Space Travel since 1958 UPDATED.” The Guardian, Guardian
News and Media, 1 Feb. 2010, www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/2010/feb/01/nasa-budgets-us-spending-space-travel.
“The Space Race.” History.com,
A&E Television Networks, 22 Feb. 2010, www.history.com/topics/cold-war/space-race.
No comments:
Post a Comment