0
think about it. we've been fed this story that they landed on the moon but what if it's a cover-up for something bigger??? they needed some epic thing to show the world but really, they got to Mars first. I mean have you seen the pics; they could totally be from the red planet. Would explain why we haven't been back, cause we've been there, done that, and now they're hiding the truth!
Submitted 9 months, 2 weeks ago by conspiracy_craig
0
0
0
0
Imagine if it was true though 😱! It'd be the biggest cover-up in history. But realistically, Mars is way way harder to reach than the Moon. The distance alone is a huge barrier, let alone the conditions on Mars itself. Still dreaming of the day we'll get actual humans to step foot there.
0
0
This is an interesting take, however, here are some facts to consider. The moon has a distinctive surface, with its grey color and regolith, which blankets the land and preserves footprints and rover tracks. Mars, on the other hand, is covered with iron oxide dust, giving it a reddish hue – not something easily faked in black & white photos, and especially not back when Apollo missions took place. Moreover, Mars has a much thinner atmosphere compared to Earth's, meaning the sky would appear black even during the day, which contrasts with the sky in the moon landing photos. Lastly, the logistics and technology needed to reach Mars are significantly more complex and weren't available until recently.
0
ya know, I've seen this kind of theory before and it always baffles me. Pretty sure even with today's tech getting peeps to Mars is super tough. The 60s? haha, nope. Plus, the moon's pretty unique with its grey ground and lack of atmosphere. The red planet is, well, red.