An article written by Donald Sinclair (July 21 2014), for the International Business Times, gives reasons as to why the Apollo Moon Landings program was not faked. All the issues in his article are covered within this website in detail. In this post I will give a brief reply to his concerns.
A long standing reason for Moon Hoax item is the fact that no photograph taken from the Moon or indeed in orbit around the Moon shows stars. Why? Sinclair's quotes will be marked with [Sinclair] and my replies will be in red.
[Sinclair]The answer is to do with exposure time. Your typical lunar photograph features an astronaut wearing a bright white spacesuit, some white equipment of mysterious and arcane function, and several square kilometres of greyish landscape, all beneath a pitch black sky. Compared to the amount of light falling on the camera from features on the surface, the incident light from the stars is tiny. If the camera had a long enough exposure time to capture enough light from the stars that they would be visible, everything else in the image would be overexposed and bleached out. Even if you take a photo of the stars on Earth, it's unlikely you'll see much if there's anything even a little bright in the foreground [Sinclair].
The astronauts are standing in outer space. There is no atmosphere to diffuse light and thereby spread it out into the sky. The albedo (reflective index) of the Moon is 0.12, that is equivalent to light reflecting off worn road bitumen. This means that reflected light from the Moon's surface (in a small area surrounding the astronauts) is weak and minimal. There is not one image from the moon that show several square kilometers of surface. It would not matter where the astronauts were standing (as long as their backs were to the Sun) because, reflected light from the Moon's surface travels out into space. It does not diffuse into an atmosphere. Therefore, reflected light from the surface would have no effect on the camera being used. The Sun, as seen from the Moon would be a large star that does not twinkle. It would be the same size in the Moon's outer space sky as the Moon is in Earth's sky. Reflection off the astronauts suits would also be minimal, especially since it appears they were blackened by the finer particles of the regolith. The lense of the camera used by the astronauts, at times, must have been set to infinity when taking shots of the LM from a distance and the Rover from a distance. That would allow stars to appear in the photograph. Standing with their backs toward the Sun, all the astronauts would have been able to see stars. Even here in Gold Coast City, Queensland, Australia, I can see some stars with all the light pollution. Another aspect is, that movie cameras do not have to have time for the star light to show. If you go out into a dark night with a digital movie camera, you will be able to film stars without waiting.
The waving flag
Sinclair uses two arguments to 'debunk the waving flag theory. The first is that no-one on such a program would be dumb enough to allow the stage area to be subjected to a breeze. The second is, that the flag is in a vacuum and therefore not subjected to friction. Both these arguments are wrong.
Firstly, the number of people involved in the filming of what is most likely a false moon landing(s) is irrelevant. People under stress make mistakes. In my 48 years in the workforce I've witnessed countless mistakes made, even in highly important IT projects. Humans are human afterall. If the filming was done in an enclosed space, some form of air conditioning would be required. If the actors had have been in those space suits without aircon then they would have been in serious trouble. Why? Because the staged area would have been in an atmosphere and heat is reduced very slowly in a confined space. Had they have been on the surface of the Moon, heat would radiated out into space quickly.
Secondly, even if a flag is in a vacuum, if there is movement caused by an astronaut, the friction from the flags cloth rubbing against the pole extension arm would have slowed it down rapidly. However, it is quite obvious that the flag was in an atmosphere because it waves when no-one is near it. Just the same as the tool belt hanging from the MESA table rocks back and forth with no-one near it.
Sinclairs understanding of outer space is very limited. He suggest that the astronauts travelled through the Van Allen Belts quickly, thereby reducing the effects of radiation. He also states that outer space is quite safe as far as radiation goes. Again on both counts Sinclair is wrong.
The Van Allen belts, primarily two belts of trapped radiation encapsulated, in a donut shape, around the Earth from ~1000 klms out to ~60,000 klms. More detail on this can be found within this library. [megustalazorra] For space travel in general...Van Allen has shown that a field of intense radiation is girdling the earth beyond the 1,000 kilometer mark with doses exceeding the 10 re[m] per hour level[megustalazorra]. That's 240 rem per day. 1 SV = 10 rem. That equates to 2400 SV (Sievert) or 2,400,000 mSv in 24 hours. Two thousand mSv is considered life threatening [theguardian.com] . What this means is that astronauts travelling through the Van Allen belts in the flimsy type of space vehicle such as the command module and LM, would receive a very large dose of extremely dangerous radion indeed. More on this inside.....
Mirror mirror, on the Moon
What he means is
Reflector on the Moon
One simple point here. Lasers can be reflected off the Moon surface to test the distance from the Earth to the Moon. Astronomers do not need a tiny reflective plate sitting on the Moon's surface: somewhere.
[Sinclair]... the conspiracy would necessarily have to extend beyond Nasa. The moon landings were independently confirmed by nations all over the world – including the Soviet Union [Sinclair].
There were ~300,000 people connected to the Apollo program. It would only take a small number to stage a result, not the entire crew and associated contractors. In the Manhattan project, similarly a massive secret, knowledge was on a need-to-know basis. Nations all over the world watched the 'Moon Landings' on TV. They did not have a representative on the Moon to witness the landings. The USSR could not track the Apollo Moon Landings, they simply didn't have the number of satellites needed nor the same telemetry decoding system used by NASA. Also, there is a lot more to this story than meets the eye and can be viewed within this MoonHoax website.....
scribd megustalazorra https://www.scribd.com/document/245571858/Radiation-Dosage-in-Flight-Through-the-Van-Allen-Belt