See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/268895007

Did We Actually Land on the Moon: An Activity and Symposium

Chapter · January 2012

CITATIONS READS
0 647

1 author:

Andrew Fraknoi
University of San Francisco
380 PUBLICATIONS   292 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Silicon Valley Astronomy Lectures View project

Developing a Free, Open-source, Professionally-produced Introductory Astronomy Textbook View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Andrew Fraknoi on 30 November 2014.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Debunking Pseudoscience • K4

Did We Actually Land on the Moon?

An Activity and Symposium
Activity K4
Grade Level: 6–12

Source: This activity was written and is © copyright 2010 by Andrew Fraknoi. All rights reserved. For permis-
sion to use, contact the author at: fraknoi {at} fhda {dot} edu. Distributed as part of The Universe at Your
Fingertips by the Astronomical Society of the Pacific. www.astrosociety.org

What’s This Activity About? Tips and Suggestions

A popular conspiracy theory on the Web and in the
media suggests that NASA never landed on the Moon
and that the Apollo landings were somehow faked on a
studio set. Students can use this “Moon Hoax” idea as
a way of thinking about how we decide what the best
hypothesis is in science.
What Will Students Do?
Students find or are given some of the key points that
the conspiracy theorists make and then do research to
find appropriate responses. They come up with respons-
es in a small group (where each group is researching a
different issue). Then all the groups come together to
have a symposium and decide whether or not the Hoax
Hypothesis holds up.
• S tudents will want lots of time to discuss and react
to the presentations, so it’s good to plan this at a time
when time is available. Some teachers like to do this
activity with writing and public speaking components,
so that it can spill over into the language arts parts of
the students’ curriculum.
• I f there is time, and you can get a copy, an excellent
video on this subject is the “Moon Hoax” episode (104)
of the Myth Busters program on Discovery Channel:
http://dsc.discovery.com/videos/mythbusters-moon-
hoax/ (The ideas behind the show are described in
this article: http://www.popularmechanics.com/
science/space/4279691 and a summary is at: http://
mythbustersresults.com/nasa-moon-landing)

What Will Students Learn?

Concepts Inquiry Skills Big Ideas

• The Scientific Method • Inferring • Science versus Pseudoscience
• Conditions on the Moon • Experimenting • Models and simulations
• Reasoning
• Communicating
• Recognizing bias
• Explaining

The Universe at Your Fingertips • Astronomical Society of the Pacific Page 1

Debunking Pseudoscience
Did We Actually Land on the Moon?
An Activity and Symposium
by Andrew Fraknoi
(Foothill College & ASP)
Background
Among the many conspiracy theories that grow on
the Web (like fungus grows in a wet climate) is the
“Moon Hoax” — the notion that NASA never landed
astronauts on the Moon. Instead, the claim is made that
NASA faked the Moon landings on a studio set. It’s hard
to trace how such crazy ideas get (pardon the expres-
sion) launched, but one good starting point could be the
1978 Hollywood film Capricorn One (in which desper-
ate NASA officials fake a Mars landing using an Earth
movie set.)
The rise of the Internet gave the “true believers” in the
Moon Hoax a world-wide forum to spread their ideas.
In 2001, Fox News aired a “documentary special” called
Conspiracy Theory: Did We Land on the Moon? — which
publicized the hoax notion to a much larger and more
mainstream audience. A general disappointment in and
distrust of large government agencies has perhaps also
helped keep the hoax myth alive. Many older students
have now heard about this suggestion from friends, e-
mails, or the media and may be genuinely concerned
when teachers begin discussing the Apollo landings and
the Moon. (Teachers should see the article from the Sci-
ence@NASA website appended to the end of this activ-
ity for more background.)
A major step forward in debunking the Moon Hoax
came in 2009, when the Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter
took direct images showing the Apollo artifacts on the
Moon. See the Resources section for a link to these pic-
tures.
Some educators feel that to address the “Moon Hoax”
in a science class is to give the ideas of the conspiracy
theorists undeserved legitimacy. But we don’t agree.
Helping students to decide for themselves what the evi-
dence shows is a skill that every science class ought to
emphasize — and one that will stand students in good
stead for the rest of their lives. Why not use a fun (al-
The Universe at Your Fingertips • Astronomical Society of the Pacific
K4 • Did We Actually Land on the Moon?
though crazy) idea like the Moon Hoax to give students
experience with gathering real evidence and learning to
choose among alternate hypotheses?
Activity
Explain that the class is going to think about how sci-
entists decide among competing ideas and about the
nature of evidence. But rather than do something ab-
stract (like read that first chapter that every textbook
has about how science works), the class is going to talk
about an idea that is out there on the web and in the
media and think about it like scientists do.
After the class has studied a bit about the Moon and
you have discussed (or perhaps viewed a video) about
the Apollo Moon landings, introduce the notion that
some people claim that NASA never went to the Moon
and that the Moon landings were faked on a movie set.
The people who claim this have a variety of “evidence”
for their claim and the class’ job is to examine that evi-
dence like scientists would.
If the students are able to do this, you could let them
find a particular piece of evidence that they would like
to do research about. For other students, you may want
to put up a list of some of the “evidence” that the Moon
Hoax enthusiast feel supports their claim. For example:
1. Images taken by astronauts on the moon should
show stars in the black sky, but they don’t.
2. The exhaust of the lunar lander would have blown
all the dust underneath away for a large area, so the
astronauts would not have had to deal with dust or
left footprints in the dust.
3. The flag on several video segments is shown waving
in the breeze. There is no breeze on the Moon.
4. Our telescopes should easily show the landers and
other artifacts left by the astronauts, and yet there
are no pictures showing these.
Page 2
Debunking Pseudoscience K4 • Did We Actually Land on the Moon?

Other examples are given in the readings and web

sites listed in the Resources section (along with answers
from scientists.)
Ask each group to take one question and do research
on what the evidence actually shows. You probably
should share the list of resources provided below with
the students, since the amount of misinformation about
this topic on the Web can be overwhelming.
Then ask each group to prepare a brief oral presenta-
tion to the class and hold a “Moon Hoax Symposium.”
As groups share detailed information about their ques-
tions, the understanding that the Moon landings were
real should dawn on even the most skeptical of class
members. If other students raise objections that the
group members cannot respond to, you could give them
time to do more thinking and find more information,
and then report back to the class.
You can explain that this is, in fact, the very process
scientists follow these days. They often work in small lunar sky and you can even identify them.
groups at their own universities or labs, and then bring Plait, Phil “Appalled at Apollo” Chapter 17 of Bad
their results to larger meetings (symposia) of scientists Astronomy. 2002, Wiley. Good ammunition for
in their fields. Based on the critiques and discussions debunking the notion that NASA never went to the
they have at these meetings, they go back to their group Moon point by point.
and refine their thinking and obtain new research re- Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter Images:
sults. http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/LRO/multime-
If there is time, the groups might produce a poster dia/lroimages/apollosites.html
about their question which can be exhibited to the http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/LRO/multime-
whole school in the hallways or in the library. dia/lroimages/lroc_20090903_apollo12.html
Resources
Phil Plait’s response to “Moon Hoax”:
http://www.badastronomy.com/bad/tv/foxapollo.
html
Hoax Comments by astronomer Jim Scotti:
http://pirlwww.lpl.arizona.edu/~jscotti/NOT_
faked/
Science at NASA discussion of hoax:
http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2001/ast-
23Feb_2.htm
Moon Base Clavius Site (a group effort at debunking):
http://www.clavius.org/site.html [note that you © copyright 2010 by Andrew Fraknoi. All rights re-
need to click on the small arrows at the bottom to served. For permission to use, contact the author at:
get to the next pages] fraknoi {at} fhda {dot} edu
Keel, W. “The Earth and Stars in the Lunar Sky” in Distributed as part of The Universe at Your Fingertips
by the Astronomical Society of the Pacific.
Skeptical Inquirer, Jul/Aug. 2007, p. 47. The ultra-
www.astrosociety.org
violet camera on Apollo 16 did record stars in the

The Universe at Your Fingertips • Astronomical Society of the Pacific Page 3

Debunking Pseudoscience K4 • Did We Actually Land on the Moon?

The Great Moon Hoax

Moon rocks and common sense prove Apollo astronauts really did visit the Moon
by Tony Phillips
[from NASA’s Science@NASA Web Site]

F
ebruary 23, 2001 — Last week my phone rang. It was my mother ... and she was upset. “Tony!” she exclaimed,
“I just came from the coffee shop and there’s an [adjective omitted] man down there who says NASA never
landed on the Moon. Everyone was talking about it ... I just didn’t know what to say!” That last bit was hard to
swallow, I thought. Mom’s never at a loss for words.
But even more incredible was the controversy that swirled through her small-town diner and places like it across
the country. After a long absence, the “Moon Hoax” was back. All the buzz about the Moon began on February 15th
when Fox television aired a program called Conspiracy Theory: Did We Land on the Moon? Guests on the show ar-
gued that NASA technology in the 1960s wasn’t up to the task of a real Moon landing. Instead, anxious to win the
space race any way it could, NASA acted out the Apollo program in movie studios. Neil Armstrong’s historic first
steps on another world, the rollicking Moon Buggy rides, even Al Shepard’s arcing golf shot over Fra Mauro — it
was all a fake!
Fortunately the Soviets didn’t think of the gag first. They could have filmed their own fake Moon landings and re-
ally embarrassed the free world. Shows like Conspiracy Theory ought to be as tongue-in-cheek as they sound. Unfor-
tunately, there was an earnest feel to the Fox broadcast, enough to make you wonder if the program’s makers might
have fallen under their own spell.
According to the show NASA was a blundering movie producer thirty years ago. For example, Conspiracy Theory
pundits pointed out a seeming discrepancy in Apollo imagery: Pictures of astronauts transmitted from the Moon
don’t include stars in the dark lunar sky — an obvious production error! What happened? Did NASA film-makers
forget to turn on the constellations?
Most photographers already know the answer: It’s difficult to capture something very bright and something else
very dim on the same piece of film — typical emulsions don’t have enough “dynamic range.” Astronauts striding
across the bright lunar soil in their sunlit spacesuits were literally dazzling. Setting a camera with the proper expo-
sure for a glaring spacesuit would naturally render background stars too faint to see.
Here’s another one: Pictures of Apollo astronauts erecting a US flag on the Moon show the flag bending and rip-
pling. How can that be? After all, there’s no breeze on the Moon.
Not every waving flag needs a breeze — at least not in space. When astronauts were planting the flagpole they
rotated it back and forth to better penetrate the lunar soil (anyone who’s set a blunt tent-post will know how this
works). So of course the flag waved! Unfurling a piece of rolled-up cloth with stored angular momentum will natu-
rally result in waves and ripples — no breeze required!
The best rebuttal to allegations of a “Moon Hoax,” however, is common sense. Evidence that the Apollo program
really happened is compelling: A dozen astronauts (laden with cameras) walked on the Moon between 1969 and
1972. Nine of them are still alive and can testify to their experience. They didn’t return from the Moon empty-hand-
ed, either. Just as Columbus carried a few hundred natives back to Spain as evidence of his trip to the New World,
Apollo astronauts brought 841 pounds of Moon rock home to Earth.
“Moon rocks are absolutely unique,” says Dr. David McKay, Chief Scientist for Planetary Science and Exploration
at NASA’s Johnson Space Center (JSC). McKay is a member of the group that oversees the Lunar Sample Laboratory
Facility at JSC where most of the Moon rocks are stored. “They differ from Earth rocks in many respects,” he added.
“For example,” explains Dr. Marc Norman, a lunar geologist at the University of Tasmania, “lunar samples have
almost no water trapped in their crystal structure, and common substances such as clay minerals that are ubiquitous
on Earth are totally absent in Moon rocks.” “We’ve found particles of fresh glass in Moon rocks that were produced
by explosive volcanic activity and by meteorite impacts over 3 billion years ago,” added Norman. “The presence of

The Universe at Your Fingertips • Astronomical Society of the Pacific Page 4

 Debunking Pseudoscience K4 • Did We Actually Land on the Moon?

water on Earth rapidly breaks down such volcanic glass in only a few million years. These rocks must have come
from the Moon!”
Fortunately not all of the evidence needs a degree in chemistry or geology to appreciate. An average person hold-
ing a Moon rock in his or her hand can plainly see that the specimen came from another world. “Apollo moon rocks
are peppered with tiny craters from meteoroid impacts,” explains McKay. This could only happen to rocks from a
planet with little or no atmosphere... like the Moon. Meteoroids are nearly-microscopic specks of comet dust that fly
through space at speeds often exceeding 50,000 mph — ten times faster than a speeding bullet. They pack a consider-
able punch, but they’re also extremely fragile. Meteoroids that strike Earth’s atmosphere disintegrate in the rarefied
air above our stratosphere. (Every now and then on a dark night you can see one — they’re called meteors.) But the
Moon doesn’t have an atmosphere to protect it. The tiny space bullets can plow directly into Moon rocks, forming
miniature and unmistakable craters.
“There are plenty of museums, including the Smithsonian and others, where members of the public can touch and
examine rocks from the Moon,” says McKay. “You can see the little meteoroid craters for yourself.”
Just as meteoroids constantly bombard the Moon so do cosmic rays (atomic particles from space), and they leave
their fingerprints on Moon rocks, too. “There are isotopes in Moon rocks, isotopes we don’t normally find on Earth,
that were created by nuclear reactions with the highest-energy cosmic rays,” says McKay. Earth is spared from such
radiation by our protective atmosphere and magnetosphere.
Even if scientists wanted to make something like a Moon rock by, say, bombarding an Earth rock with high energy
atomic nuclei, they couldn’t. Earth’s most powerful particle accelerators can’t energize particles to match the most
potent cosmic rays, which are themselves accelerated in blast waves that come from exploding stars and from the
violent cores of galaxies. Indeed, says McKay, faking a Moon rock well enough to hoodwink an international army
of scientists might be more difficult than the Manhattan Project. “It would be easier to just go to the Moon and get
one,” he quipped.
And therein lies an original idea: Did NASA go to the Moon to collect props for a staged Moon landing? It’s an in-
teresting twist on the conspiracy theory that TV producers might consider for their next episode of the Moon Hoax.
“I have here in my office a 10-foot high stack of scientific books full of papers about the Apollo Moon rocks,” add-
ed McKay. “Researchers in thousands of labs have examined Apollo Moon samples — not a single paper challenges
their origin! And these aren’t all NASA employees, either. We’ve loaned samples to scientists in dozens of countries
[who have no reason to cooperate in any hoax].”
Even Dr. Robert Park, Director of the Washington office of the American Physical Society and a noted critic of
NASA’s human space flight program, agrees with the space agency on this issue. “The body of physical evidence that
humans did walk on the Moon is simply overwhelming.”
“Fox should stick to making cartoons,” agreed Marc Norman. “I’m a big fan of The Simpsons!”

The Science and Technology Directorate at NASA’s Marshall Space Flight Center sponsors the
Science@NASA web sites. The mission of Science@NASA is to help the public understand how
exciting NASA research is and to help NASA scientists fulfill their outreach responsibilities.

The Universe at Your Fingertips • Astronomical Society of the Pacific Page 5

View publication stats