How can you fake landing on the moon? It's in the sky and we would see a silhouette or a shadow of Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin. As it is extremely and utterly hard to build a rocket and land on the moon, it would be even harder to fake landing on the moon.
There is very little reason to believe it didn't happen. All reasonable claims made against its happenings have been adequately disproved by significantly more evidence in its favor. Mythbusters did a decent episode on this issue, if you'd like an example. As such, I see little in the rational that goes along with disbelief in the lunar landing of 1969.
Then how did those footprints and whatnot appear?
If it was faked, then where did Armstrong and Co. Really go and why didn't the Ruskies try to disprove it?
In those days, it would actually be cheaper to go to the moon and whatnot than to fake it, due to the tech not being available for another few years.
In short, yes, humans landed on the moon in '69.
Seriously, you conspiracy theorists just want to make trouble. Okay, you say that there is no wind on the moon and so the flag wouldn't blow. Do the research! It is a well known fact that the flag blowing was fake. I think the flag had a cardboard back, so it would look better in the pictures. But we landed on the moon. Where is your evidence that we didn't?
Yes. Why would they fake it? Well it could be said that the publicity stunt made the U.S. world renown. But then again the U.S. has accomplished many more moon landings after the event. Even if it was faked the first time, U.S. still has bragging rights to have made it to the moon first. Who cares anyway? The people that truly believed that it happened? So what if it didn't, it was still cool as heck to watch.
It was all over TV. Everyone saw it. Our government wasn't corrupted, at least not too much. The government at that time wouldn't fake it. Like what TBR said if it was faked why not fake it more. Wouldn't someone have admitted it was fake like Edward Snowden saying America was
spying on us? Of course, there is always that one guy.
Surely, if you think about this logically, if NASA were capable of creating such compelling and well-made fakes (assuming, for the sake of argument, that it was somehow a fake), surely we would have had something more than just a moon landing many decades ago by now? Surely we'd have seen a man on Mars?
America and Russia were in a "space race" to see who could get to the moon first. If it was blaringly obvious that America got there first, then Russia would've said it was fake.
Also, if you look at everyone denying that the moon landing was real, they were all born AFTER, or were very young, at the time it really happened.
There is more than enough solid proof, but lets look only at a logical question. If we wanted to fake it, why fake it again? Why fake it nine times?
Nine times the chance of discovery of the lie. Additional crew, support staff, observers. Why?
No, it would add nothing, only open chances for discovery.
The Moon landing conspiracy theories claim that some or all elements of the Apollo program and the associated Moon landings were hoaxes staged by NASA with the aid of other organizations. The most notable claim is that the six manned landings (1969–72) were faked and that twelve Apollo astronauts did not actually walk on the Moon. Various groups and individuals have made such conspiracy claims since the mid-1970s. Conspiracy theorists (henceforth conspiracists) claim that NASA and others knowingly misled the public into believing the landings happened, by manufacturing, tampering with, or destroying evidence including photos, telemetry tapes, radio and TV transmissions, Moon rock samples, and even some key witnesses.