质疑者：星条旗看起来似乎是迎风招展，然而在没有大气的情况下这是不可能的。
Sceptic: The stars and stripes appears to be waving in the wind, which is impossible without an atmosphere.
美国宇航局的某些所谓科学家应该把功课再做足一点。
Some of those so-called scientists at Nasa should have done their homework a bit better
支持者：旗帜并不一定需要有风才能动，而且在所有的录像中它都没有动过，除非被人碰到。
Believer: The flag did not need wind to move, and does not move in any of the videos unless touched.
一旦旗子被动过，由于月球没有大气，也就没有了空气阻力，它反而要过很久才能停下来。
When it is set in motion, the lack of atmosphere and hence air resistance mean the flag takes a long time to settle.
质疑者：每个物体投射出的阴影方向均不同，这说明当时有数个光源——就像电视摄影棚中的情况。
Sceptic: Shadows cast by objects on the surface point in different directions, which proves there were several light sources – as in a TV studio.
支持者：高度较低的太阳以及月球凹凸不平的表面会扰乱照片上影子的角度。而且如果说有多个光源的话，为什么每个物体只有一个影子呢？
Believer: A low sun and uneven surface can distort the angles of shadows in images. And if there are multiple light sources, why does each object only cast one shadow?
质疑者：当登月舱从月球表面起飞时，它的下部没有喷出火焰。显然这是一个用线拉起来的模型。
Sceptic: There was no exhaust flame spurting from beneath the lunar module when it blasted off from the moon. It`s clearly a model being pulled up on a wire.
支持者：将阿波罗送入太空的土星5号火箭携带的燃料是煤油和液氧，所以出现了非常大的火焰。
Believer: The Saturn V rocket that carried Apollo into space burnt liquid oxygen and kerosene, creating a dramatically fiery plume.
但是，登月舱起飞时的推进力来自于四氧化二氮和Aerozine 50（译注：二甲基肼）的反应，这种反应不产生火焰，它释放出来的气体是透明的。
The lunar lander, on the other hand, was propelled by a mixture of nitrogen tetroxide and Aerozine 50, which doesn`t. Its exhaust gases were transparent.
质疑者：如果阿波罗号的宇航员真的到达了月球，他们会被一条巨大而致命的空间放射带给烤熟。
Sceptic: If the Apollo astronauts had really travelled to the moon, they would have been cooked by a giant belt of lethal space radiation.
支持者：这些所谓的“范艾伦带”（Van Allen belts），也就是地球磁场浓缩太阳辐射的地方并不致命，只有当人们于此逗留数天才会是危险的。
Believer: These `Van Allen belts`, where the Earth’s magnetic field concentrates solar radiation, would be dangerous only if people lingered there for several days.
事实上，宇航员们仅用了几个小时就穿过了这一层，受到的辐射量和接受一次X光透视检查差不多。
In fact the astronauts whizzed through in a matter of hours, receiving a radiation dose no greater than a medical X-ray.
质疑者：阿波罗16号执行任务时拍摄到的一块月面岩石上标有字母C。这是个假货，从而也暴露了整个事件都是一场表演。呸！
Sceptic: A moon rock photographed during Apollo 16’s mission is marked with the letter C. It’s a prop, which shows the whole thing is staged. Doh!
支持者：这个C在美国宇航局的原始胶片和照片上都是没有的。经过放大观察，这东西看起来像是一根在后来的复制过程中掉进去的毛发或者纤维。
Believer: The C doesn’t appear in the original Nasa negatives or prints. Under close magnification it looks like a hair or fibre that has contaminated a later reproduction.
质疑者：只有在潮湿的表面上，靴子才可能会留下脚印。试试看你能否在干燥的沙滩上留下脚印。
Sceptic: Boots would only have left their imprint on the lunar surface in moist material. Try leaving your footprint on a dry sandy beach.
支持者：月面尘土的尺寸和形状与沙子完全不同，因此并不需要潮湿就可以留下被压出的痕迹。
Believer: Particles of moon dust have a different size and shape from sand and don`t need moisture to hold a compressed shape.
地球上也有许多这样的粉末状物体。试试在滑石粉上面走几步。
Many powders on Earth can behave in the same way. Try walking in spilt talcum powder.
提问：宇宙空间遍布星辰，这连10岁的小孩都知道，那么，为什么这些在月球上拍摄的照片上没有星星呢？
Claim: Space is full of stars, as any 10-year-old will tell you, so why do they not appear in photographs taken on the moon?
回答：宇航员们拍摄的是一些光照度很高，闪闪发亮的浅色物体。
Response: The astronauts were taking pictures of brightly lit, shiny white objects.
在这种情况下拍摄者会使用很短的快门时间并调小光圈，
Under those conditions photographers shoot with a fast exposure time and small aperture.
这样就不可能拍摄到黑色背景上那些很暗的物体，如星星。
That makes it impossible to capture faint objects in a dark background, such as stars.
质疑者：一位名叫尤娜-罗纳德的澳大利亚妇女在阿波罗11号着陆月球的过程中看到一只可乐瓶飞过月球。真是太不小心了！这一定是在摄影棚里拍的。
Sceptic: An Australian lady called Una Ronald saw a coke bottle kicked across the moon during the Apollo 11 landing. How careless! It must have been filmed in a studio.
支持者：这话从何说起呢？如果这个尤娜真的存在的话，她看到世界上所有其他人都没看到的东西，而且没有留下任何证据。
Believer: Where to start? Una, if she exists, saw something that the rest of the watching world missed, and of which zero evidence survives.
本文来源：网易教育频道综合
责任编辑：
王晓易_NE0011
