The Mythbusters had an episode a few days ago where they tested several myths about this. They concluded that all the supposed evidence was false. They proved the shadow thing wrong by building a scale set based off one of the photos, then positioning a camara at the same angle the photo was taken. They found that the shadows that led in opposite directions, supposedly, were actually caused by the terrain of the moon.
In other words though the shadows looked like they were going in diffrent directions, in actuality, they were going in the same direction, but a decently sized mound caused one to be wider, which, from the angle the camara was at, made it look like a straight line.
The hoax-belivers have made a ffew mistakes. That may or may not be one of them. There is some irrefutible evidence of a hoax that they did not address.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Watch how the corner of Collins' jacket moves in this clip.
youtube (dot) com/watch?v=I_CMgqitv98
(50 second mark)
It swings back and forth the way it would in gravity.
Look at the corners of the jacket the woman astronaut is wearing in this clip.
uk (dot) youtube (dot) com/watch?v=TejsnPThmd4
This is real zero-gravity and they behave quite differently.
One possible explanation is that they were trying to fake zero-gravity in a diving plane and the plane wasn't diving fast enough at that point.
Look at pages three and four of the comment section of the first YouTuve video. Three different pro-Apollo people have given three different explanations for the swinging jacket corner. The person who made the video (svector) won't answer requests that he comment on it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
They tried to speed up the footage of the buggy to try and make it look like it was driving at Earth gravity, but what about the dust being kicked up? In accordance to a vacuum, it does not float around as it would do on Earth. It would look odd to say the least if you were driving on a dirt road without hanging dust trailing your car.
It's possible to treat sand to make it dust-free.
Jay Windley (the webmaster at Clavius) 3W's (dot) clavius (dot) org/about (dot) html got caught lying about that issue.
apollohoax (dot) proboards21 (dot) com/index (dot) cgi?board=theories&action=display&thread=1094
3W's (dot) geologyrocks (dot) co (dot) uk/forum/q_and_a/a_strange_scenario_re_sifted_sand
There's more on that issue here.
3W's (dot) youtube (dot) com/watch?v=9S30XLds5gc
As to the Moon landings, none were faked and the people who claim that they were are conveniently avoiding the best evidence of all:
Each and every Moon shot was tracked by stations around the world which were operated by every modern country on the globe. In addition to that, the US was in a race with the USSR to get there - and Russia never ONCE made any claims of "hoax." You can be SURE they would have SCREAMED if there had been even the slightest bit of evidence to support it. But, unlike all the conspiracy nuts, their scientists were smart enough to understand that the photos, films, etc. were genuine. So they said nothing.
We are told the missions were tracked but there are several plausible scenarios.
That might not be true at all. The press may be lying to us.
Those countries may have been bribed or blackmailed to announce they were tracking the missnions.
Unmanned craft might have actually gone to the moon and orbited for the length of the alleged missions and returned.
3W's (dot) nardwuar (dot) com/vs/bill_kaysing/index (dot) html
(excerpt)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Well, how did the media fall for this?
Well, the media doesn't fall for anything. The media is controlled by the government. The Dutch papers on July 21 [1969] said that the moon landing was a hoax, was a fake, and I have been unable to find any of those Dutch papers, although it's well documented that they did publish information, with proof, that the U.S. was spoofing everybody.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I wish Chomsky's analysis of the cold war were still on line but it isn't. This video series explains a lot of what Chomsky explains.
3W's (dot) youtube (dot) com/results?search_query=moonfaker+cold+war&search_type=&aq=f
As a geologist the best evidence of all is the geochemistry of the moonrocks. It is wholly different from anything that was imagined and has led to intrepretations and understandings that were unimagineable.
I make that last statement with care and deliberation. I was an undergraduate at the time of the first landing. Trust me, half the geologists on the planet were coming up with bizarre predictions of what would be found. Not one predicted what we actually found.
For me, that is the clincher.
There are alternative scenarios for the rocks.
Scientists can be bought so some of them might have lied. Some of them might have been fooled by bogus rocks and NASA might have collected some real rocks with robot craft to fool the ones who couldn't be bribed or bought.
Read the comment section of this video.
3W's (dot) youtube (dot) com/watch?v=VCN7qWrLHVw
Here's more about the rock "Proof".
3W's (dot) youtube (dot) com/watch?v=4AQQHTjeMkA
The rock "Proof" is pretty much debunked.
Sorry but I wasn't able to post hot-links. This site seems to be having technical problems. I've made more than twenty posts but I got a notice saying I'd only made nineteen posts. I trust the moderators will correct the problem.