Neil Armstrong and the Apollo Moon Landing Conspiracy by John-Paul Hess

           

           July 20, 1969, Neil Armstrong took his first steps on the moon, and recited his eternally famous, “That’s one small step for a man; one giant leap for mankind” (Armstrong). That July day has been and will forever be remembered as the time mankind was challenged, developed an operation, and (supposedly) made it to the moon. At the time, the United States was in a race to the moon with Russia; due to the occurrences of the time a plethora of conspiracy theories have surfaced: did man make it to the moon? Were the moon missions a front to simply seem superior than all other nations? Was the entire occurrence simply a smokescreen to prove U.S. superiority? The moon missions have been accepted as fact, but through time, conspiracies have swayed the scope of history: multiple conspiracies of the alleged moon landings must be examined – as must the story which has so far stood the test of time.

            To understand such an extravagant event, one must understand the characters who are involved in the story. As with many who have been exposed to the public eye, Neil Armstrong significantly differed from the stereotype of an American hero in private. In fact, it was John Glenn, another American hero, astronaut, and close friend to Armstrong who said, “He was a humble person, and that is the way he remains after his lunar flight, as well as before.”  (Pettinger).Moreover, his family considered him a “reluctant American hero.”(Hansen) Armstrong was considered by many to be somewhat of a recluse. He ceased to appear in the public eye, he stayed quiet on his small amount of property moving from Colorado to Ohio. It is likely that he was considered to be such an “odd-ball” by many because he was such an average man in extravagant situations. To understand Armstrong’s actions of his latter life, his early life must be examined.

            Armstrong was born August 5, 1930, near Wapakoneta, Ohio, to Stephen Armstrong and Viola Engel. He had two younger siblings, and his father worked as an auditor for the Ohio State Government (Britannica). In his youth, Armstrong was tied tightly to the Boy Scouts of America, a reoccurring theme of his life, he tried to exhibit all 12-points of the Scout Law. At the Age of 16, Neil would become Eagle Scout rank and for the rest of his life, would continue his advocacy for the program (Britannica). Neil had always been fascinated by flying. Due to his fathers position in the state government, the Armstrong family was often relocated amongst 16 towns over the first 14 years of Neil’s adolescent life (Britannica). To connect with Neil, his father took him to the Cleveland Air Races, at the age of six, Neil experienced his first plane ride where his father took him for a ride in a Ford Trimotor, also known as a “tin goose.” The family’s final move was in 1944, back to Wapakoneta; in their ultimate settling, Armstrong attended Blume High School and took flying lessons at the Wapakoneta airfield where he would earn his license and begin solo flying months before his earning of Eagle Scout. Neil was soon to begin his collegiate studies at Purdue University at the age of 17 under the Holloway Plan; meaning his college tuition had been paid for but he owed the federal government military service as a pilot in the Navy (Britannica). Evidently, Neil had a love for flight as that was the field he intended to devote his life to. Neil was entirely “all-in” for flying as his career path, soon he would being building his resume which would ultimately fit the position NASA was seeking for. Due to his high movement as a boy and his lack of a full-time father figure, Neil likely had personality problems, evidence of this can be found in his distant relations with his future families and his inability to project proper emotions when experiencing near death experiences or the accidents which ultimately resulted in the death of his comrades. Thus is why he was considered to be such an odd individual, hiding many of his thoughts and emotions in the time surrounding the Apollo 11 mission.

            Neil had surpassed adolescence and was now on his way to manhood. He had experience as an Eagle Scout, a pilot, and now was seeing action in the military. After attending Purdue University studying aeronautical engineering, Armstrong became a midshipman in 1949, and a naval aviator in 1950. Armstrong flew a Grumman F9F Panther in the Korean War from the USS Essex (Britannica) (Slater). In 1951, Armstrong saw action by being hit with anti-aircraft fire and was required to bail-out. After the war, Neil returned to Purdue to finish his studies and ultimately earn his Aeronautical Engineering degree, due to his experiences in the military, he also became a test pilot for the National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics (NACA) which would eventually become NASA. During his time at NACA, Armstrong would be a test pilot for various manned space flight programs and a pilot of the North American X-15. Due to his experiences in Korea, Armstrong could somewhat detach himself from the fear of death, which is why he was/would prove to be such a valuable asset in the perspective of test piloting. Moreover, Neil likely did not know how to approach the concept of death thus causing him to lack any sense of empathy or sympathy when approaching it. When he flew Apollo 11, he knew the odds of death, yet he disregarded how it would affect him and those around him (i.e., his family) this is partially why his first wife would divorce him later in life; he appeared to have an utter disregard for those who he claimed to care most for. Armstrong would join the second NASA astronaut corps in 1962, make his first space flight commanding debut on Gemini 8, and eventually carry on throughout his career, touching the surface of the moon during Apollo 11 (Britannica). All throughout his NASA career, Armstrong would see tragedy and danger; the most notably included the experience he encountered during his last training simulation of Apollo 11 where he had to jettison from the Lunar Landing Module before a fiery crash. Evidently, Neil had seen his fair share of danger, yet it was not over. He would continue on living a life of risk-taking which would ultimately flourish into a successful astronaut career of fame, yet one which he was reluctant to accept. Possibly Armstrong experienced some sort of post-traumatic stress disorder from his time in Korea and at NASA thus causing his emotionless appearance when looking directly into the face of death.

            Finally, after his days at NASA is when Armstrong’s personality began shining in the public eye, he quickly recognized this and went into hiding. Neil resigned from NASA in 1971 and returned back to his home state. He taught Aerospace Engineering at the University of Cincinnati until 1979, he seldom worked with NASA aside partner-shipping with them to investigate the Apollo 13 crash (Slater). After the decade of the 1970s, Neil Armstrong became even more of a recluse. He continued his advocacy for the Boy Scouts of America, however later in life would do it in a much more subtle fashion. During the time after Apollo, Armstrong was granted unparalleled fame, a comment from a friend and author Michael Collins, really sums up Armstrong’s actions after Apollo saying it was like he, “retreated to his castle and pulled up the drawbridge.” (Hansen 36) Armstrong used to autograph essentially anything asked of him but ceased signing objects once he found out that his signatures along with forgeries were being sold online; this also caused him to stop signing congratulatory letters to Eagle Scouts, claiming that, “those who knew the Scouts should write the letters.” For the program which Neil Armstrong grew up with and advocated for his entire life with, he began taking his first steps away from the Boy Scouts of America and retreating even further into solitude. Ultimately, for the latter portion of his life, Armstrong stayed out of the public eye. His first wife divorced him in 1994, and he soon met his second wife (Britannica). He lived out his final decades on his Cincinnati dairy farm, seldom appearing in a public fashion. Not much was heard from Neil Armstrong nor his family until his untimely death in August of 2012 (Britannica; Slater).

    Armstrong’s character was one which could ultimately be considered mundane and dry. There was nothing in particular wrong with him, but for the same reason he was such a valuable test-pilot, he also appeared out of the ordinary. Due to his involvement in the War in Korea and the many accidents he experienced as a test pilot, he possibly could have experienced some sort of PTSD. Sadly, however, little was known about PTSD or the indicators of it in those days; by the time such knowledge had arisen about the subject, Armstrong was already in absolute solitude. He could be described as so ordinary that it was abnormal. In his relations with his immediate family, Neil was cited as almost unfeeling during his Apollo missions purely because of his disassociation with the fear of death (Britannica). Sometimes it was questioned whether or not he even understood risks he was facing, but this is why he was such a great test pilot; Neil Armstrong would fulfill the status-quo. Although the risks could be immeasurably high, Armstrong would get the job done and stay calm, cool, and collected the entire time. A man of flight, Armstrong exhibited the 12-points of the Scout Law his entire life, was an extraordinarily successful test-pilot when his nation needed it the most. Finally he went on to live his life essentially fulfilling his agenda after the Apollo missions. Armstrong was not a bad man, but merely an individual whom experienced some of the most extreme circumstances. Seemingly, the most unique aspect of his personality was his normalcy, especially in the face of abnormality which is why he was believed to be such a recluse; possibly he was just highly misunderstood.

            Ever since the July 20, 1969, day when Neil Armstrong took his first steps on the moon, multiple conspiracy theories have surfaced. During the time of Apollo 11, NASA was in a space race with Russia. The president was Richard Nixon, and the nation was still knee-deep in the War in Vietnam. All of the theories essentially suggest the same idea: the moon landing was faked on a sound stage in California (Weiner). However, each theory goes about its own means of confirmation.
            The first theory conspiracy theorists highlighted the American Flag which was planted in the supposed surface of the moon. The flag which was used by the Apollo 11 astronauts appears to be waving in the lunar wind, the one problem: there is no such thing as lunar wind. The flag which was designed to appear taught was built with a stiff wire put through the fabric that way it could be seen. NASA’s refutation was in the raising of “Old Glory” the astronauts adjusted the wire, thus causing the appearance of fluttering in the wind (Manual). Conspirators have continuously pointed at this as a paramount example of the entire event being faked; as though it all is a film riddled with inaccuracies not recognized on the cutting-room floor. The original flag (supposedly) remains on the surface of the moon. The only way to prove the event was faked would be by examining the flag which itself would approve or disprove the theory.  This is why this theory is not as widely accepted amongst speculators; there is no way of proving it to be true.
            In the original Apollo 11 film, there is no appearance of stars in space. As we know, looking up towards the night sky, there are a plethora of stars scattered throughout the sky. Why, then are they missing from the original photographs? The refutation provided by NASA – due to the reflection of light off of the moon from the sun, the brightness of the moon contrasts that of space, thus blocking out distant light (Manual). Conspirators have asked for ages why there are no stars present in the nearly 60-year-old footage. Even in the more recent footage of the moon’s surface, however, there is no apparent presence of stars; often typical conspirators will approve of the newer footage of moonwalks, claiming that the original Apollo 11 film was simply to beat Russia in the space race. If people who are hesitant about the moon missions do not quarrel with the absence of stars in the more recent footage, why, then is the original footage’s absence of stars so difficult to grasp?
            During this historical event, historical means of capturing the first steps on the moon were used: film. The film is easy melted/destroyed when exposed to heat and light. Due to the rays of the sun, the Moon’s surface remains 280 degrees Fahrenheit, hot enough to melt the film. Conspirators have questioned how the film was even successfully used during the early Apollo missions as much of the event would be too hot to film. This claim, of course, is easily refutable as in examining the original designs of the cameras used by NASA. The space agency took into consideration the environment which the photography equipment would be used. As many of the conspirators might not imagine, the cameras were not typical cameras one might find being used on earth. The cameras were designed to be left in extreme heat to protect the film from the harmful rays of the sun.

            Multiple second-hand sources, along with NASA have come back with a refutation to all of these claims. The 1960s were a time filled with magnificent events which seemed too much to be true. “Did the United States pose the entire moon landings merely to assume dominance over Russia?” many wondered. The theories themselves beg other questions such as: where is the soundstage, the equipment used, and why wouldn’t NASA assume many of the problems posed in the claims. In contrast to the claims of the conspiracy theorists, many have assessed the technology of the time and deemed the original moon landing impossible to have been faked. Some aspects of the moon landings are quite mysterious, but simultaneously, we are landing on the surface of the moon, how incredible is that (Weiner)?

            In close, we supposedly went to the moon to prove the capability of our country. The

event receives much scrutiny due to its timing and magnificence. Whether or not we succeeded

poses the following questions:

            1.Did we fake the event?

            2.Was it staged on a set in Southern California?

            3.Was it done to beat Russia in the space race?

Much has been called into question regarding the alleged original moon landing. Critiques on each side of the argument make substantial points. In examining the evidence, there is question

into whether the Apollo 11 mission was a hoax.

Works Cited

Britannica, The Editors of Encyclopaedia. “Neil Armstrong.” Encyclopædia Britannica,                            Encyclopædia Britannica, Inc., 4 Oct. 2018, www.britannica.com/biography/Neil-                               Armstrong.editmore horizontal

Hansen, James R. First Man: the Life of Neil A. Armstrong. Simon & Schuster, 2018.

Manual, B. (2018, May 25). Apollo Moon Landing Hoax Theories That Won't Die. Retrieved                               from https://www.space.com/12814-top-10-apollo-moon-landing-hoax-theories.html

Pettinger, Tejvan. “Neil Armstrong Biography |  .” Biography Online, www.biographyonline.net/                          adventurers/neil-armstrong-biography.html.

Slater, Gary. “Neil Armstrong.” Neil Armstrong, the University of Cincinnati                                               Commemorative Website, Nov. 2012, digital.libraries.uc.edu/exhibits/ceas/                                            armstrong/.

Weiner, S. (2017, November 14). Why Faking the Moon Landing Was Impossible. Retrieved                               from https://www.popularmechanics.com/space/moon-mars/news/a28814/moon-landing-faking/