關(guān)于美國登月最流行的陰謀論是什么?
What are the most popular conspiracy theories about the US moon landing?
譯文簡介
網(wǎng)友：迄今為止，最流行的理論是，登月的過程與記錄、拍攝和錄像中的情況完全一樣。任何民意調(diào)查都證實(shí)了這一點(diǎn)。事實(shí)是：美國政府、美國宇航局（NASA） 和數(shù)十萬承包商共同努力，將人類送上了月球，并安全地讓他們返回地球。我無法理解為什么會有少數(shù)幾個人不認(rèn)可這個說法......
正文翻譯
What are the most popular conspiracy theories about the US moon landing?
關(guān)于美國登月最流行的陰謀論是什么?
評論翻譯
很贊 ( 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.
迄今為止，最流行的理論是，登月的過程與記錄、拍攝和錄像中的情況完全一樣。任何民意調(diào)查都證實(shí)了這一點(diǎn)。
事實(shí)是：美國政府、美國宇航局（NASA） 和數(shù)十萬承包商共同努力，將人類送上了月球，并安全地讓他們返回地球。我無法理解為什么會有少數(shù)幾個人不認(rèn)可這個說法。
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.
旗幟飄揚(yáng)之謎
陰謀論者指出，在人類首次登月的電視直播中，觀眾可以看到美國國旗在尼爾·阿姆斯特朗和巴茲·奧爾德林插旗時明顯飄揚(yáng)。但月球上沒有空氣，自然也沒有風(fēng)，這讓人質(zhì)疑旗幟是如何飄動的。
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.
缺失的著陸坑
有人聲稱，如果美國宇航局真的成功讓人類登陸月球，那么登月艙下面應(yīng)該有一個著陸時形成的撞擊坑。然而，在所有登月視頻和照片中，都沒有見到這樣的坑，仿佛登月艙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.
光源異常
月球上只有太陽一個主要光源，按理說所有物體的陰影應(yīng)該平行。但登月照片中的陰影卻指向不同方向，這讓陰謀論者推測可能存在多個光源，暗示這些照片可能是在地球上的攝影棚里拍攝的。
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.
范艾倫輻射帶的挑戰(zhàn)
為了抵達(dá)月球，宇航員必須穿越危險的范艾倫輻射帶。這是由地球磁場捕獲的高輻射區(qū)域。阿波羅任務(wù)是首次嘗試帶人類穿越這一區(qū)域。陰謀論者認(rèn)為，宇航員在穿越過程中受到的輻射量足以致命——即便飛船內(nèi)外都有鋁層防護(hù)。
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
月球登陸造假論者的一個主要論點(diǎn)是，所有登月照片和視頻中都沒有星星的痕跡。月球上沒有云層遮擋，星星應(yīng)該始終清晰可見，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?
我好奇我得重復(fù)多少次：我并不反對人類登月，這是人類歷史上的巨大成就。但當(dāng)圍繞它的疑問出現(xiàn)時，提出問題又有何妨？畢竟，答案總是準(zhǔn)備好了的。
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 ?
我認(rèn)為最有力的證據(jù)是兩個在不同地點(diǎn)拍攝的圖像，卻有著相同的背景，并且匹配得非常精確。這種情況發(fā)生的概率有多大？
原創(chuàng)翻譯：龍騰網(wǎng) http://nationgridbenifitservices.com 轉(zhuǎn)載請注明出處
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.
旗幟之所以會擺動，是因?yàn)橛幸桓饘俳z支撐，否則它就會顯得松垮，影響觀感。宇航員在將旗桿插入地面時，旗幟隨之?dāng)[動。
如果你仔細(xì)觀察，可以看到著陸坑，它只是不夠深，看起來不太明顯。
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.
月球表面反射光線很好，基本上整個表面都可以看作是一個光線反射的表面。
范艾倫輻射帶并不厚，而阿波羅飛船速度很快。而且，范艾倫帶中的主要輻射是粒子輻射，除非你吸入或攝入，否則不會特別危險。
Hope this helped
照片中沒有星星是因?yàn)楫?dāng)時沒有拍攝它們。你可以試試在白天用相機(jī)拍星星，就會明白為什么它們沒有出現(xiàn)。太陽太亮，星星的光芒被掩蓋了。要拍攝星星，需要用較長的曝光時間和較小的光圈，而阿波羅任務(wù)中的相機(jī)并不是為此設(shè)計(jì)的。如果那樣做了，你可能會得到星星的照片，但月球、地球、宇航員等所有東西都會變成一片白光。
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.
這些論點(diǎn)已經(jīng)被回答過無數(shù)次了。重復(fù)它們有什么意義？
“你可以有自己的觀點(diǎn)，但不能篡改事實(shí)?！痹虑虻顷懯遣蝗葜靡傻臍v史事實(shí)。
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?
我非常希望相信它們是歷史事實(shí)。但一些觀察讓我無法完全信服。每當(dāng)有新理論出現(xiàn)，我都感到失望。你能回答每一個提出的問題嗎？
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。正如我說的，這是歷史事實(shí)，已經(jīng)得到了最高標(biāo)準(zhǔn)的學(xué)術(shù)驗(yàn)證，不容置疑。繼續(xù)回應(yīng)每一個選擇相信無稽之談的人的問題是無意義的。
原創(chuàng)翻譯：龍騰網(wǎng) http://nationgridbenifitservices.com 轉(zhuǎn)載請注明出處
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.
針對第3點(diǎn)：如果有多個光源，應(yīng)該會投下多個陰影，而不是平行的陰影。試試在晴天用普通鏡頭（非望遠(yuǎn)鏡頭）拍攝街道上的陰影，你會發(fā)現(xiàn)陰影在照片中并不平行。如果在一個不完全平坦的地方，陰影會更加不平行。
All of these have been repeatedly debunked, not that conspiracy theorists will take any notice.
這些論點(diǎn)已經(jīng)被反復(fù)揭穿了，不過陰謀論者可能并不會留意。
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，并不存在陰謀論。
下次當(dāng)你遇到一個堅(jiān)信登月是場騙局的陰謀論者時，不妨請他們完整地敘述一下整個故事。這個故事應(yīng)該能夠解釋工業(yè)界人士所見、我們在電視上所看到的、全球人們所接收到的信號，以及從始至終的所有事情。你要么將它錄下來，要么寫下來，然后發(fā)布到Quora上。我保證，會有數(shù)百人對這個故事進(jìn)行猛烈的抨擊。然后，陰謀論者會試圖修改一些細(xì)節(jié)，以應(yīng)對這些問題。
現(xiàn)在，如果去問其他人發(fā)生了什么，他們會給出一個非常簡短且一致的答案：成千上萬的人共同努力，將三名宇航員用火箭送入太空，其中兩人成功登上月球，另一人留在軌道上，最終三人都安全返回了地球。當(dāng)面對一些棘手的問題時，他們不會改變自己的故事去嘗試回答每一個問題；故事始終保持一致。這就是真實(shí)發(fā)生的事情和某些人瘋狂宣稱的事情之間的區(qū)別：真實(shí)的版本能夠經(jīng)得起推敲，而虛假的版本則經(jīng)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.
問得好！在首次登月的照片中，美國國旗似乎在飄揚(yáng)，但這并非因?yàn)轱L(fēng)或大氣，畢竟月球上沒有這些條件。實(shí)際上，國旗之所以看起來在擺動，是因?yàn)橛詈絾T在插旗時的動作引起的。這些動作讓國旗短暫地出現(xiàn)了波動，給人一種運(yùn)動的錯覺。
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.
國旗掛在旗桿頂部的一個水平支架上，在宇航員操作時會隨之?dāng)[動。同時，國旗中嵌有金屬絲，沿著條紋伸展，讓旗幟保持挺括，其中一些在第二張照片中可以看到是彎曲的。
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.
我真心希望你是在開玩笑。你該不會真的認(rèn)為登月是假的吧？當(dāng)時全世界幾乎所有國家都在關(guān)注這一事件，包括俄羅斯。難道你認(rèn)為它們會為了美國而保守這個秘密？這種想法聽起來多么荒謬。如果登月是假的，蘇聯(lián)早就揭露我們了。
原創(chuàng)翻譯：龍騰網(wǎng) http://nationgridbenifitservices.com 轉(zhuǎn)載請注明出處
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.
問題并不在于美國國旗的顏色，很多愛好者已經(jīng)給出了多種解釋。真正的問題在于這一系列照片中，宇航員生命支持系統(tǒng)上有一根線纜伸出，它指向上方，在陽光中閃爍。如果你仔細(xì)觀察，你會看到它（如果你想看的話）。順便提一句，生命支持系統(tǒng)（LSS）上并沒有天線。
原創(chuàng)翻譯：龍騰網(wǎng) http://nationgridbenifitservices.com 轉(zhuǎn)載請注明出處
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.
月球上的天空看起來是黑色的，因?yàn)樵虑驔]有大氣層來折射光線。沒有大氣層對光線的散射作用，陽光都是直接照射的，這使得陽光下的一切都非常明亮——這也是宇航員需要佩戴變暗面罩的原因——而陰影中的一切除了反射光之外，都處于完全的黑暗中。因此，天空的顏色可能會誤導(dǎo)人——月球上的陽光實(shí)際上非常強(qiáng)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.
理解你的觀點(diǎn)。有些人確實(shí)認(rèn)為登月照片可能是在地球上拍攝的，或者對月球任務(wù)存在疑慮，甚至提出了其他未被證實(shí)的理論，如三艘船的著陸或月球上發(fā)現(xiàn)的古代建筑物。
不過，主流科學(xué)和歷史記錄表明，阿波羅登月任務(wù)是經(jīng)過嚴(yán)格驗(yàn)證和證實(shí)的。以下是一些重要的澄清：
原創(chuàng)翻譯：龍騰網(wǎng) http://nationgridbenifitservices.com 轉(zhuǎn)載請注明出處
照片的真實(shí)性：阿波羅任務(wù)的照片和視頻經(jīng)過了多個獨(dú)立的科學(xué)團(tuán)隊(duì)和專家的驗(yàn)證。雖然在拍攝過程中可能會遇到各種挑戰(zhàn)，但技術(shù)和設(shè)備的記錄表明這些照片確實(shí)是在月球上拍攝的。
月球表面發(fā)現(xiàn)：關(guān)于月球上發(fā)現(xiàn)古代建筑物或其他異物的說法并沒有得到科學(xué)界的支持。月球的探測數(shù)據(jù)和分析表明，它的表面是由巖石和塵土構(gòu)成的，沒有發(fā)現(xiàn)任何類似建筑物的跡象。
音頻和視頻記錄：阿波羅任務(wù)的音頻記錄和視頻資料在公開和科學(xué)審查中經(jīng)過了嚴(yán)格的檢查。宇航員的通信和影像數(shù)據(jù)與任務(wù)記錄一致，并且與任務(wù)的其他部分相符。
這些數(shù)據(jù)和證據(jù)表明，阿波羅任務(wù)的月球著陸是一個經(jīng)過科學(xué)驗(yàn)證的歷史事件。雖然對這些事件的解釋可能存在爭議，但主流科學(xué)觀點(diǎn)和大量證據(jù)都支持登月任務(wù)的真實(shí)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.
月球上既沒有風(fēng)也不存在大氣，那首次登月照片中的美國國旗為何看起來在飄動呢？這是因?yàn)橛詈絾T在將旗桿插入月球表面時需要搖擺它以確保固定。這個搖擺動作使得國旗產(chǎn)生了波動，而月球上缺乏大氣的阻尼作用，導(dǎo)致這些波動持續(xù)了較長時間。
國旗上還出現(xiàn)了一些褶皺，這是由于一個伸縮桿機(jī)制造成的，該機(jī)制沿著國旗的頂部延伸，以保持旗幟的垂直狀態(tài)。（順便一提，這面國旗實(shí)際上是從政府供應(yīng)公司訂購的標(biāo)準(zhǔn)尼龍旗幟）。
將這兩點(diǎn)結(jié)合起來，國旗看起來就像是在風(fēng)中飄揚(yáng)。
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.
顯然，他們要讓旗幟立起來遇到了重重困難，因?yàn)槟抢锏牡孛媸潜粔m土覆蓋的巖石。
當(dāng)他們點(diǎn)火升空時，爆炸的沖擊波竟然把它吹倒了，我覺得這其實(shí)挺有趣的。盡管有那么多高科技和所謂的“巨大飛躍”的宣傳，他們卻連旗幟都立不住。
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，現(xiàn)在那面旗幟已經(jīng)沒有任何圖案了。
我在歷史頻道的一個節(jié)目中看到，由于大量的太陽輻射照射，那面旗幟的顏色早已被漂白。
So when the Martians arrive they'll think we've surrendered given that's the first human signal they'll see!
所以，當(dāng)火星人到達(dá)地球時，他們可能會誤以為我們已經(jīng)投降了，因?yàn)槟鞘撬麄兛吹降牡谝粋€人類的信號！
原創(chuàng)翻譯：龍騰網(wǎng) http://nationgridbenifitservices.com 轉(zhuǎn)載請注明出處
Mars is a red planet, so red is the colour of home and safety. Surely they will see the white flag of war.
火星是一個紅色的星球，因此紅色代表家鄉(xiāng)和安全。他們肯定會注意到代表戰(zhàn)爭的白色旗幟。
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."
這種說法存在一個重大問題。在沒有氧氣的環(huán)境中，紫外線的降解作用會明顯減弱。以下是我強(qiáng)調(diào)的部分：
"可能受到攻擊的常見合成聚合物包括聚丙烯和低密度聚乙烯，這些聚合物鏈結(jié)構(gòu)中的叔碳鍵是攻擊的主要目標(biāo)。紫外線會激活這些鍵，形成自由基，然后這些自由基與大氣中的氧氣進(jìn)一步反應(yīng)，生成主鏈上的羰基。產(chǎn)品的暴露表面可能會因此變色和開裂，嚴(yán)重時甚至可能導(dǎo)致產(chǎn)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.
紫外線降解
但嘿，這故事聽起來挺酷的，不是嗎？
順便提一下：那些旗幟是由尼龍制成的，它既不是聚丙烯（PP）也不是低密度聚乙烯（LDPE）。與這些純碳?xì)浠衔锞酆衔锊煌?，尼龍含有酰胺鍵，這些鍵可能會抑制自由基，并且比聚丙烯或低密度聚乙烯更有可能參與親電-親核化學(xué)反應(yīng)。話雖如此，如果構(gòu)成尼龍的單體足夠長，它可能會表現(xiàn)出一些類似于低密度聚乙烯這樣的碳?xì)浠衔锞酆衔锏奶匦院托袨?。但無論如何，尼龍需要與某些物質(zhì)發(fā)生反應(yīng)才能發(fā)生降解。