Did NASA really land on the moon? https://blossom.primal.net/092505559557fbdd4320ac7742ce3034416c76b1aa805b508feaa4d4d114f4ef.3gp
》 The primary and most authoritative website with extensive **photographic evidence** from the Apollo missions themselves (showing the USA's six successful crewed Moon landings between 1969 and 1972: Apollo 11, 12, 14, 15, 16, and 17) is NASA's official resources and related archives.
For the original photographs taken **by the astronauts on the lunar surface** (thousands of high-resolution Hasselblad camera images across multiple missions):
- The **Apollo Lunar Surface Journal** (hosted by NASA but maintained with detailed enhancements): https://www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/ (or the companion site https://apollojournals.org/alsj/). This includes transcripts, maps, and thousands of photos from all six landing missions, with images embedded throughout.
- The **Project Apollo Archive** on Flickr (public domain high-res scans): https://www.flickr.com/photos/projectapolloarchive/. This has over 15,000+ restored images from the missions.
- NASA's main Apollo imagery galleries: https://www.nasa.gov/specials/apollo50th/photos.html or specific mission pages like https://www.nasa.gov/gallery/apollo-11.
For independent photographic confirmation (third-party evidence) that the landings occurred multiple times, including modern orbital photos showing the landing sites, hardware (like descent stages, rovers, and astronaut footprints), and disturbances on the surface:
- The **Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter Camera (LROC)** site: https://lroc.im-ldi.com/image_tags/Apollo (or the featured sites section at https://lroc.im-ldi.com/featured_sites). This includes high-resolution images from NASA's LRO spacecraft (launched in 2009) capturing all six Apollo landing sites in detail, with labels and close-ups. These are modern photos from lunar orbit, not from the 1960s/70s, providing objective proof of the physical remnants left behind.
These resources collectively show evidence from the missions themselves and later verification by lunar orbiters (including non-NASA ones like Japan's SELENE, India's Chandrayaan-2, and others that have imaged the sites). The sheer volume of photos—over 8,000–15,000 from the surface alone—plus orbital imagery, makes the case overwhelming for the multiple landings.《
For the original photographs taken **by the astronauts on the lunar surface** (thousands of high-resolution Hasselblad camera images across multiple missions):
- The **Apollo Lunar Surface Journal** (hosted by NASA but maintained with detailed enhancements): https://www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/ (or the companion site https://apollojournals.org/alsj/). This includes transcripts, maps, and thousands of photos from all six landing missions, with images embedded throughout.
- The **Project Apollo Archive** on Flickr (public domain high-res scans): https://www.flickr.com/photos/projectapolloarchive/. This has over 15,000+ restored images from the missions.
- NASA's main Apollo imagery galleries: https://www.nasa.gov/specials/apollo50th/photos.html or specific mission pages like https://www.nasa.gov/gallery/apollo-11.
For independent photographic confirmation (third-party evidence) that the landings occurred multiple times, including modern orbital photos showing the landing sites, hardware (like descent stages, rovers, and astronaut footprints), and disturbances on the surface:
- The **Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter Camera (LROC)** site: https://lroc.im-ldi.com/image_tags/Apollo (or the featured sites section at https://lroc.im-ldi.com/featured_sites). This includes high-resolution images from NASA's LRO spacecraft (launched in 2009) capturing all six Apollo landing sites in detail, with labels and close-ups. These are modern photos from lunar orbit, not from the 1960s/70s, providing objective proof of the physical remnants left behind.
These resources collectively show evidence from the missions themselves and later verification by lunar orbiters (including non-NASA ones like Japan's SELENE, India's Chandrayaan-2, and others that have imaged the sites). The sheer volume of photos—over 8,000–15,000 from the surface alone—plus orbital imagery, makes the case overwhelming for the multiple landings.《
