关于美国登月最流行的阴谋论是什么?
What are the most popular conspiracy theories about the US moon landing?
译文简介
网友：迄今为止，最流行的理论是，登月的过程与记录、拍摄和录像中的情况完全一样。任何民意调查都证实了这一点。事实是：美国政府、美国宇航局（NASA） 和数十万承包商共同努力，将人类送上了月球，并安全地让他们返回地球。我无法理解为什么会有少数几个人不认可这个说法......
正文翻译
What are the most popular conspiracy theories about the US moon landing?
关于美国登月最流行的阴谋论是什么?
评论翻译
很赞 ( 7 )
收藏
Far and away, the most popular theory is that the moon landings happened exactly the way they were recorded, photographed and filmed. Any poll confirms that.
It’s true: the US government, NASA and hundreds of thousands of contractors conspired to land a man on the moon and return him to earth safely.
I cannot fathom why some single-digit percent of the population believes otherwise.
迄今为止，最流行的理论是，登月的过程与记录、拍摄和录像中的情况完全一样。任何民意调查都证实了这一点。
事实是：美国政府、美国宇航局（NASA） 和数十万承包商共同努力，将人类送上了月球，并安全地让他们返回地球。我无法理解为什么会有少数几个人不认可这个说法。
1. The Waving Flag
Conspiracy theorists have pointed out that when the first moon landing was shown on live television, viewers could clearly see the American flag waving and fluttering as Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin planted it. The obvious problem here is that there’s no air in the moon’s atmosphere, and therefore no wind to cause the flag to blow.
旗帜飘扬之谜
阴谋论者指出，在人类首次登月的电视直播中，观众可以看到美国国旗在尼尔·阿姆斯特朗和巴兹·奥尔德林插旗时明显飘扬。但月球上没有空气，自然也没有风，这让人质疑旗帜是如何飘动的。
The claim goes as follows: had NASA really landed us on the moon, there would be a blast crater underneath the lunar module to mark its landing. On any video footage or photograph of the landings, no crater is visible, almost as though the module was simply placed there. The surface of the moon is covered in fine lunar dust, and even this doesn’t seem to have been displaced in photographic evidence.
缺失的着陆坑
有人声称，如果美国宇航局真的成功让人类登陆月球，那么登月舱下面应该有一个着陆时形成的撞击坑。然而，在所有登月视频和照片中，都没有见到这样的坑，仿佛登月舱是被直接放置在月球表面上。
On the moon there is only one strong light source: the Sun. So it’s fair to suggest that all shadows should run parallel to one another. But this was not the case during the moon landing: videos and photographs clearly show that shadows fall in different directions. Conspiracy theorists suggest that this must mean multiple light sources are present -suggesting that the landing photos were taken on a film set.
光源异常
月球上只有太阳一个主要光源，按理说所有物体的阴影应该平行。但登月照片中的阴影却指向不同方向，这让阴谋论者推测可能存在多个光源，暗示这些照片可能是在地球上的摄影棚里拍摄的。
In order to reach the moon, astronauts had to pass through what is known as the Van Allen radiation belt. The belt is held in place by Earth’s magnetic field and stays perpetually in the same place. The Apollo missions to the moon marked the first ever attempts to transport living humans through the belt. Conspiracy theorists contend that the sheer levels of radiation would have cooked the astronauts en route to the moon, despite the layers of aluminum coating the interior and exterior of the spaceship.
范艾伦辐射带的挑战
为了抵达月球，宇航员必须穿越危险的范艾伦辐射带。这是由地球磁场捕获的高辐射区域。阿波罗任务是首次尝试带人类穿越这一区域。阴谋论者认为，宇航员在穿越过程中受到的辐射量足以致命——即便飞船内外都有铝层防护。
One compelling argument for the moon landing hoax is the total lack of stars in any of the photographic/video evidence. There are no clouds on the moon, so stars are perpetually visible and significantly brighter than what we see through the filter of Earth’s atmosphere.
缺少星星
月球登陆造假论者的一个主要论点是，所有登月照片和视频中都没有星星的痕迹。月球上没有云层遮挡，星星应该始终清晰可见，且比地球上看到的要亮得多。
I wonder how many times I am required to say this. I'm not against the man on moon. Man on moon is a great milestone in human history. The achievement is so huge that it often becomes unbelievable. Conspiracy theories will be born around it. What is the harm in questioning...when answers are ready to flow in?
我好奇我得重复多少次：我并不反对人类登月，这是人类历史上的巨大成就。但当围绕它的疑问出现时，提出问题又有何妨？毕竟，答案总是准备好了的。
I think the most compelling evidence is the duplicate backdrop one where there are two images taken at different locations having the same background which match very accurately. What are the chances of that happening ?
我认为最有力的证据是两个在不同地点拍摄的图像，却有着相同的背景，并且匹配得非常精确。这种情况发生的概率有多大？
原创翻译：龙腾网 https://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处
1) flag waved because there was a metal wire to keep it up, otherwise it would just go limp and look less impressive the flag waved as the astronaut was twisting it force the spike at the base into the ground.
2) there is a crater if one looks closely enough, it's just not all deep and fairly wide so it looks like it's not there.
旗帜之所以会摆动，是因为有一根金属丝支撑，否则它就会显得松垮，影响观感。宇航员在将旗杆插入地面时，旗帜随之摆动。
如果你仔细观察，可以看到着陆坑，它只是不够深，看起来不太明显。
4) the Van Allen radiation belts aren't all that thick and the Apollo CSM was traveling quite fast. Also the main radiation in the Van Allen belts is particle radiation which isn't super dangerous unless you inhale it or somehow ingest it.
月球表面反射光线很好，基本上整个表面都可以看作是一个光线反射的表面。
范艾伦辐射带并不厚，而阿波罗飞船速度很快。而且，范艾伦带中的主要辐射是粒子辐射，除非你吸入或摄入，否则不会特别危险。
Hope this helped
照片中没有星星是因为当时没有拍摄它们。你可以试试在白天用相机拍星星，就会明白为什么它们没有出现。太阳太亮，星星的光芒被掩盖了。要拍摄星星，需要用较长的曝光时间和较小的光圈，而阿波罗任务中的相机并不是为此设计的。如果那样做了，你可能会得到星星的照片，但月球、地球、宇航员等所有东西都会变成一片白光。
Each of these claims has been answered many times. What is the point of repeating them?
'You are entitled to your own opinion, but not to your own facts'. The Moon Landings are historical facts.
这些论点已经被回答过无数次了。重复它们有什么意义？
“你可以有自己的观点，但不能篡改事实。”月球登陆是不容置疑的历史事实。
I would love to believe that they are indeed historical facts. But some observations simply stop me from doing so. I am equally disappointed every time a theory stating otherwise comes up. Could you please answer each point stated?
我非常希望相信它们是历史事实。但一些观察让我无法完全信服。每当有新理论出现，我都感到失望。你能回答每一个提出的问题吗？
NO. As I said, this is an historical fact, established beyond all doubt and to the very highest possible standards of scholarship. Continuing to answer every nimrod who --chooses-- to believe nonsense is pointless and irrational.
不。正如我说的，这是历史事实，已经得到了最高标准的学术验证，不容置疑。继续回应每一个选择相信无稽之谈的人的问题是无意义的。
原创翻译：龙腾网 https://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处
3. Multiple light sources would cause multiple shadows not unparalleled ones. Also try to make a photo of shadows on the street at the sunny day with the average lens (not the tele lens). Guess what you'll see - shadows are not parallel on your photo. And they would be even more unparalleled if you go some place that is not as flat as table.
针对第3点：如果有多个光源，应该会投下多个阴影，而不是平行的阴影。试试在晴天用普通镜头（非望远镜头）拍摄街道上的阴影，你会发现阴影在照片中并不平行。如果在一个不完全平坦的地方，阴影会更加不平行。
All of these have been repeatedly debunked, not that conspiracy theorists will take any notice.
这些论点已经被反复揭穿了，不过阴谋论者可能并不会留意。
The interesting thing is there isn’t one.
There are no complete conspiracy theories. Next time you are talking to a moon landing conspiracy theorist ask them to tell you the whole story. One that explains what people in industry saw, what we all saw on TV, what signals people all round the world received, everything from beginning to end. Record it or write it down and post it on Quora. I gurantee that it would be torn to shreds by hundreds of people. The conspiracy theorist would then try and change a bit to get round the problem
有趣的是，并不存在阴谋论。
下次当你遇到一个坚信登月是场骗局的阴谋论者时，不妨请他们完整地叙述一下整个故事。这个故事应该能够解释工业界人士所见、我们在电视上所看到的、全球人们所接收到的信号，以及从始至终的所有事情。你要么将它录下来，要么写下来，然后发布到Quora上。我保证，会有数百人对这个故事进行猛烈的抨击。然后，阴谋论者会试图修改一些细节，以应对这些问题。
现在，如果去问其他人发生了什么，他们会给出一个非常简短且一致的答案：成千上万的人共同努力，将三名宇航员用火箭送入太空，其中两人成功登上月球，另一人留在轨道上，最终三人都安全返回了地球。当面对一些棘手的问题时，他们不会改变自己的故事去尝试回答每一个问题；故事始终保持一致。这就是真实发生的事情和某些人疯狂宣称的事情之间的区别：真实的版本能够经得起推敲，而虚假的版本则经不起推敲。
Good question! The US flag in the pictures of the first Moon landing appears to be flapping, but it's not due to wind or atmosphere since the Moon doesn't have those. The flag actually appears to be waving because of the movement astronauts made while planting it. This caused the flag to ripple briefly and give you the illusion of motion.
问得好！在首次登月的照片中，美国国旗似乎在飘扬，但这并非因为风或大气，毕竟月球上没有这些条件。实际上，国旗之所以看起来在摆动，是因为宇航员在插旗时的动作引起的。这些动作让国旗短暂地出现了波动，给人一种运动的错觉。
It’s hanging from a horizontal support at the top of the pole and wiggling around as it is handled by the astronaut. Also, it is stiffened by wires running along the stripes and some of them in the second picture are bent.
国旗挂在旗杆顶部的一个水平支架上，在宇航员操作时会随之摆动。同时，国旗中嵌有金属丝，沿着条纹伸展，让旗帜保持挺括，其中一些在第二张照片中可以看到是弯曲的。
I really hope you are joking. I guess you believed it was fake? Almost every country in the world followed it, including Russia. Just so they could keep the lie secret for the US. See how dumb that sounds. The USSR would have immediately called us out.
我真心希望你是在开玩笑。你该不会真的认为登月是假的吧？当时全世界几乎所有国家都在关注这一事件，包括俄罗斯。难道你认为它们会为了美国而保守这个秘密？这种想法听起来多么荒谬。如果登月是假的，苏联早就揭露我们了。
原创翻译：龙腾网 https://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处
The issue isn’t the US’ colours, plenty of explanations have been provided by all sorts of enthusiasts. The real issue on this sequence, and the sticking point, is the wire coming out of the life support system of the astronaut, and pointing upwards, gleaming in the sunlight (?). Just watch very carefully and you’ll see it (if you want to). Oh, by the way, the LSS did not have an antenna.
问题并不在于美国国旗的颜色，很多爱好者已经给出了多种解释。真正的问题在于这一系列照片中，宇航员生命支持系统上有一根线缆伸出，它指向上方，在阳光中闪烁。如果你仔细观察，你会看到它（如果你想看的话）。顺便提一句，生命支持系统（LSS）上并没有天线。
原创翻译：龙腾网 https://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处
The sky looks black because there is no atmosphere to refract light. That also means that with no scattering of light that an atmosphere affords, all sunlight is direct, meaning everything in sunlight is very bright (hence the astronauts’ darkened visors) and everything in shade is completely dark except for reflected light. So the colour of the sky is misleading - sunlight on the moon is very bright.
月球上的天空看起来是黑色的，因为月球没有大气层来折射光线。没有大气层对光线的散射作用，阳光都是直接照射的，这使得阳光下的一切都非常明亮——这也是宇航员需要佩戴变暗面罩的原因——而阴影中的一切除了反射光之外，都处于完全的黑暗中。因此，天空的颜色可能会误导人——月球上的阳光实际上非常强烈。
Understand your viewpoint. Some people do believe that lunar photos may have been taken on Earth, or have doubts about lunar missions, and even propose other unconfirmed theories, such as the landing of three ships or the discovery of ancient buildings on the moon.
理解你的观点。有些人确实认为登月照片可能是在地球上拍摄的，或者对月球任务存在疑虑，甚至提出了其他未被证实的理论，如三艘船的着陆或月球上发现的古代建筑物。
不过，主流科学和历史记录表明，阿波罗登月任务是经过严格验证和证实的。以下是一些重要的澄清：
原创翻译：龙腾网 https://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处
照片的真实性：阿波罗任务的照片和视频经过了多个独立的科学团队和专家的验证。虽然在拍摄过程中可能会遇到各种挑战，但技术和设备的记录表明这些照片确实是在月球上拍摄的。
月球表面发现：关于月球上发现古代建筑物或其他异物的说法并没有得到科学界的支持。月球的探测数据和分析表明，它的表面是由岩石和尘土构成的，没有发现任何类似建筑物的迹象。
音频和视频记录：阿波罗任务的音频记录和视频资料在公开和科学审查中经过了严格的检查。宇航员的通信和影像数据与任务记录一致，并且与任务的其他部分相符。
这些数据和证据表明，阿波罗任务的月球着陆是一个经过科学验证的历史事件。虽然对这些事件的解释可能存在争议，但主流科学观点和大量证据都支持登月任务的真实性。
Since there is no wind or atmosphere on the moon, how can the US flag be flapping in pictures of the first moon landing?
The astronaut had to wiggle the flag pole to get it set into the ground properly. That wiggle induced a wave in the flag, that without an atmosphere to dampen it, continued for quite a while.
There are also folds in the flag that are caused by the telescoping mechanism that ran along the top of the flag to keep it vertical. (Incidentally, the flag is a regular nylon flag ordered from a government supply company).
Put the two together and it looks like it is flapping.
月球上既没有风也不存在大气，那首次登月照片中的美国国旗为何看起来在飘动呢？这是因为宇航员在将旗杆插入月球表面时需要摇摆它以确保固定。这个摇摆动作使得国旗产生了波动，而月球上缺乏大气的阻尼作用，导致这些波动持续了较长时间。
国旗上还出现了一些褶皱，这是由于一个伸缩杆机制造成的，该机制沿着国旗的顶部延伸，以保持旗帜的垂直状态。（顺便一提，这面国旗实际上是从政府供应公司订购的标准尼龙旗帜）。
将这两点结合起来，国旗看起来就像是在风中飘扬。
Apparently they had a lot of trouble to get it to stand up at all, the ground there being dust covered rock.
When they lifted off the blast knocked it over which I think is quite sweet really. All that high-tec and "giant leep" pomp and they couldn't get the bloody flag to stay up.
显然，他们要让旗帜立起来遇到了重重困难，因为那里的地面是被尘土覆盖的岩石。
当他们点火升空时，爆炸的冲击波竟然把它吹倒了，我觉得这其实挺有趣的。尽管有那么多高科技和所谓的“巨大飞跃”的宣传，他们却连旗帜都立不住。
Saddest thing is the flag is blank now.
From a show I saw on the history channel, were talking about the massive amounts of solar radiation hitting said flag. It would have bleached the color out long ago.
最悲哀的是，现在那面旗帜已经没有任何图案了。
我在历史频道的一个节目中看到，由于大量的太阳辐射照射，那面旗帜的颜色早已被漂白。
So when the Martians arrive they'll think we've surrendered given that's the first human signal they'll see!
所以，当火星人到达地球时，他们可能会误以为我们已经投降了，因为那是他们看到的第一个人类的信号！
原创翻译：龙腾网 https://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处
Mars is a red planet, so red is the colour of home and safety. Surely they will see the white flag of war.
火星是一个红色的星球，因此红色代表家乡和安全。他们肯定会注意到代表战争的白色旗帜。
There's a significant problem with this claim. UV degradation is significantly slower without oxygen. Emphasis mine:
"Common synthetic polymers which may be attacked include polypropylene and LDPE where tertiary carbon bonds in their chain structures are the centres of attack. The ultra-violet rays activate such bonds to form free radicals, which *then react further with oxygen in the atmosphere*, producing carbonyl groups in the main chain. The exposed surfaces of products may then discolour and crack, although in bad cases, complete product disintegration can occur."
这种说法存在一个重大问题。在没有氧气的环境中，紫外线的降解作用会明显减弱。以下是我强调的部分：
"可能受到攻击的常见合成聚合物包括聚丙烯和低密度聚乙烯，这些聚合物链结构中的叔碳键是攻击的主要目标。紫外线会激活这些键，形成自由基，然后这些自由基与大气中的氧气进一步反应，生成主链上的羰基。产品的暴露表面可能会因此变色和开裂，严重时甚至可能导致产品完全分解。"
But hey, cool story, right?
Side note: The flags were made of nylon, which is neither PP nor LDPE. Unlike those pure hydrocarbon polymers, nylon contains amide bonds that may quench radicals and make it more likely to participate in electrophile-nucleophile chemistry than PP or LDPE. That said, if the individual monomers from which the nylon is made are long enough, it can have some of the characteristics and behavior of hydrocarbon polymers like LDPE. And regardless, nylon needs something which which to react in order to degrade.
紫外线降解
但嘿，这故事听起来挺酷的，不是吗？
顺便提一下：那些旗帜是由尼龙制成的，它既不是聚丙烯（PP）也不是低密度聚乙烯（LDPE）。与这些纯碳氢化合物聚合物不同，尼龙含有酰胺键，这些键可能会抑制自由基，并且比聚丙烯或低密度聚乙烯更有可能参与亲电-亲核化学反应。话虽如此，如果构成尼龙的单体足够长，它可能会表现出一些类似于低密度聚乙烯这样的碳氢化合物聚合物的特性和行为。但无论如何，尼龙需要与某些物质发生反应才能发生降解。