From Pablo Novi on an earlier thread:
The reasons I believe they faked them are quite a number. Here's a few that stand out to me:
All the computer tech they had back then is less than we have now on a calculator - you can't control a 6-9 million part machine with that little.
The video of the "final take off" from the Moon seems way too precision (with the capsule within the frame despite the ever-changing acceleration). The would-be camera was supposedly remote-controlled from Earth - just the time delay for the relaying of signals would seem to make that impossible.
The quality and content of the photos - taken from cameras attached to their space suits where they couldn't even see precisely what they were looking at.
The tiny amount of space within their capsules as compared to the necessary huge amount of space to take all that would have really been needed: lots of batteries (both primary and back-up), a lunar rover ...
The totally flimsy looking "walls" (seemingly connected by duct tape).
Photos that show parts of the Lunar Module clearly, when they were in the shadows and thus un-illuminated.
That the US was well over a decade behind the Soviets, yet "caught up" in just a very few years - while the Soviets never got there. (I don't find it convincing the claim that the Soviets would have exposed the farce - because there are endless examples of the buying off of politicians; if the price is right.)
We still don't have anything close to fold-up cars almost 50 years after they supposedly had ones they took to and drove on the Moon.
#1: The Van Allen Belts (and beyond) would require manned capsules to be enclosed by thick amounts of lead - something NASA has never claimed they had.
no country has sent humans above LOW Earth Orbit since then. I don't buy one bit that there supposedly no reason to go back to the Moon.
Bonus points: NASA supposedly lot almost all the original tapes (cartons and cartons of them) of what was supposedly THE most historic achievement humans ever made. That they didn't have/make copies and lost the only ones seems totally unreasonable. and ...
There is no crater underneath ANY of the Lunar Landers; to slow the descent to nearly zero, so as to land without harming ship or crew, they had to use powerful rockets - that HAD to have left a super-visible crater directly below the craft. Not one photo shows one.
Along the same lines, such a landing should have kicked up a HUGE dust storm (heck the Lunar Rover driver said that THEY, with just that un-powerful machine, were driving thru a cloud of dust they were kicking up. Yet, in ALL pictures of the Lunar Landers, not one, not one shows a bit of dust on the landing pads! They should have had lots of it.
I wonder, when no human has "gone back" to the Moon in 50 years, in 60 years, in 70 years ... how long before people finally get it that we haven't gone BACK because we never went in the first place?