The Moon Landing Conspiracy (aka the dumbest conspiracy theory of all time)

     Somehow, someway, the idea that the moon landing in 1969 was faked has stuck around. While it has been noticeably toned down in recent years, the idea itself is still preposterous. As someone who loves space and NASA, it pains me to see certain folks unwilling to admit that we achieved this pinnacle of human engineering (with less technology than in a current cell phone, I might add). I would say a large chunk of my own national pride, not to mention others', comes from the moon landing, so to say it's fake is somewhat treasonous (just kidding, but not really...). At any rate, the following is an explanation of what exactly these hoaxers believes, who exactly these hoaxers are, how the conspiracy theory has evolved, and how the theory is spread. 

What Is Believed?

    At its core, the moon landing conspiracy claims that Apollo 11 did not actually land on the Moon in 1969; in actuality, the landing was filmed on a soundstage. Detractors argue that the landing was faked in order to win the Space Race against the Soviet Union. By faking it, they would force the USSR's acceleration of their own cosmonaut program, which would either financially destabilize them or result in the lion's share of government funding being diverted to the cosmonaut program rather than the nuclear program. Various arguments are used by these conspiracy freaks to justify their claim: the American flag was "waving" during the photographs, there aren't any stars in the photographs, the shadows are inconsistent, etc. Some even argue that Stanley Kubrick filmed the shots himself. All of these have been routinely debunked in the decades since the theory's inception. 

Who Believes It?

    Nut jobs, that's who. I'm kidding---just a joke. But in actuality, each time surveyors go around asking questions like these, there's about 5-10% of people who always genuinely believe in the conspiracy. Many respondents share a lot of the same attributes, including distrust in authority (like the government or institutions such as NASA), low scientific literacy (specifically with technology relating to astronauts and outer space), attraction to other conspiracies (conspiracy theorists generally believe in more than just one conspiracy), and a feeling of camaraderie amongst other hoaxers who feel as if they are "in on the secret." Some people also refuse to believe that America had the technology capable of performing such a feat of engineering. 

How The Conspiracy Has Evolved...

    In the 1970s, shortly after Apollo 11 returned home, former Navy officer Bill Kaysing published a book titled We Never Went to the Moon: America's Thirty Billion Dollar Swindle. In it, he argued that NASA did not possess the technical know-how at the time to engineer such a feat and that America feared international embarrassment if the Apollo missions failed, hence the need to fake an overwhelming success. Kaysing's book is credited with kicking off the moon hoax craze in the '70s, the support for which only grew as popular distrust of government increased following the Vietnam War and Watergate. In the '80s and 90's, tabloids and TV specials introduced new swaths of demographics to the theory, further propagating it. In the 21st century, the rise of the Internet has helped the theory maintain steady support, with online echo chambers and fringe sensationalist documentaries hanging around to convince an audience who stubbornly believe they're right. 

How The Conspiracy is Spread...

    In today's current climate, there are four big ways that I think explain how this theory---and lot of others---manage to stick around. 

1. Social media algorithms are designed to feed you content that you seek to consume. Often, these algorithms promote sensational content to either get you hooked or, knowing you're already hooked on a certain topic, only direct that kind of content your way. When you extend this to conspiracies, there's plenty of content on social media platforms for algorithms to play with. 
2. Sensationalist documentaries, either released on YouTube or on some television channel in the high 400s, use pseudo-scientific visuals and highly charged rhetoric to craft an atmosphere and narrative designed to trick and convince you of unlikely things. Delivering the information they have straight up would never convince a rational person, which is why they must resort to sensationalism. Still, if it piques your interest long enough to watch a sliver of their program, there's an opportunity there to gain another believer.
3. Indirectly responsible is pop culture. Pop culture, in my opinion, doesn't promote conspiracies, just keeps them alive via references and jokes at their expense. Family Guy, for instance, has an episode where Neil Armstrong leaves a studio set dressed in his astronaut garb and is confronted by a fan who asks why he's not on the Moon; in response, Armstrong attacks the fan with his helmet, a direct reference to Buzz Aldrin punching conspiracy theorist Bart Sibrel in 2002. 
4. Cycles of distrust, particularly when it comes to the government and its institutions (like NASA), create a constant atmosphere where any misstep, concealment, or polarizing announcement can reignite claims of cover-ups, the government lying to you, or "nothing being as it seems." It makes things easier that way, when you can assign a simple villain (i.e. the government) to a simple mystery (i.e. why the photos seem off). If a conspiracy theory is more easily understood and digested, it stands a better chance of gaining more ears. 

    All in all, though, I think it's pretty clear that the moon landing genuinely happened. I mean, if we think about the photos for more than two seconds, things start to click. For example, stars aren't visible because the camera's exposure settings meant they couldn't be caught in frame; shadows are inconsistent because of the camera's wide-angle lenses and the fact that the lunar terrain is uneven; the American flag is "waving" because NASA designed it to look that way---a horizontal crossbar was added to give the flag the appearance of being extended and "waving" in the vacuum. Without the crossbar, the flag would remain limp. 

    Ultimately, people believe what they want to believe, which I suppose is fair. I simply wish that those feelings would stop extending to this moon landing folly.