How NASA’s chief historian Bill Barry shoots down those moon conspiracy theories

NASA’s chief historian has heard all the moon conspiracy theories before, and he’s got an answer to silence the sceptics for each one. There’s just one nagging problem that won’t go away.

As chief historian for America’s space agency and a lifelong scholar and former fighter pilot, Bill Barry can easily point to plenty of evidence proving the Apollo 11 mission, 50 years ago this month, actually did occur.

There’s only one issue when he’s called to answer conspiracy theorists positing crazy questions about the authenticity of the historic mission: “The problem with conspiracy theories is that often, if you have a killer answer to them, that’s part of the conspiracy.”

Dr Barry says he “generally takes a policy not to argue with people about it”, but with the world now turning its attention not just back to marvel at the achievements led by Neil Armstrong, Buzz Aldrin and Mike Collins in July 1969, but forwards to a new era of space exploration, NASA’s chief historian admits he’s getting the questions more and more.

“But, there are all those rocks, 800 pounds of rocks, how do you explain where those came from, you know?,” he says of samples brought back by the Apollo astronauts.

“They’re clearly not from planet Earth. And the thousands of scientists that got samples of rocks that came back from the moon landing all over the world, not just in the US.

“Four hundred thousand people in America worked in the program, how could you possibly have kept a secret like that for this long? I could go on and on.”

Bill Barry became NASA’s chief historian in September 2010. Picture: Supplied

The biggest persuader for Dr Barry is how very tight the space race was between Cold War enemies, Russia and America, and how close the Soviet efforts came to beating the Apollo program to the moon.

“The Soviets were very serious about beating the US to the moon. They had three completely separate efforts that they made, all of which failed, and then they covered them up until the Soviet Union collapsed,” said Dr Barry, who was completing his doctoral dissertation in the late 1980s and was able to access never publicly available evidence of the Russian-led endeavours.

“(Russian President Leonid) Brezhnev was in charge of the Soviet Union at the time and he was very tightly associated with the people who were in charge of the space program, and so part of his political legitimacy was based on beating the US into space very early,” Dr Barry explains.

“And internationally, it was really important to them to prove to all the developing countries in the world that the Soviet system was better than the US system. The space program was really the only way, the only evidence they had. So they were heavily invested in beating us to the moon. And the moon race actually ended on July 20, 1969, when their attempt to send a robot to the moon to bring a sample back crashed on the moon while Neil and Buzz were on the surface.

Apollo 11 Command Module (CM) pilot Mike Collins practising docking hatch removal in a simulator prior to the mission. Credit: NASA

“It was that close. If that (Russian) probe had succeeded, they would have got their soil sample back from the moon about the same time the Apollo and this crew landed, and they could have said ‘Hey, it was a tie’,” Dr Barry says.

“It really was a space race. And unfortunately, for us, most of the evidence of that was not obvious because, of course, they did not want to admit they were racing us to the moon anyway. So, to me, the killer answer on this is: if we tried to fake landing on the moon, they (the Russians) would have busted us so bad. They would have loved that, if they could’ve proved it. And they were carefully following us.”

One small step. In this July 24, 1969 photo made available by NASA, flight controllers at the Mission Operations Control Room in Houston celebrate the successful conclusion of the Apollo 11 lunar landing mission. Picture: NASA via AP

Dr Barry, who has consulted with several recent NASA-focused movies including last year’s First Man, about the private life of Neil Armstrong, was speaking to promote the film at the Kennedy Space Centre in Orlando. He said the renewed focus on the 50th anniversary of Apollo 11 was helping to correct some false narratives that had been created at the time.

“The typical historical narrative of the Apollo program is (they were) knights in shining armour, (who) literally almost do a series of missions. Aren’t they wonderful, they go to the moon, and all these great things, (the) families are supportive, and everybody waves the flag, and wasn’t it great!” he said.

“There was a cost, both personal and internally for the astronauts themselves, but also for the families. And that story has never really been told in a public manner before. And a large part, because people didn’t want to hear that, and NASA probably wasn’t a hurry to publicise it either at the time.”

Such films are part of the renaissance underway for America’s aerospace industry, which has seen record applicants pouring in for the astronaut program, new US government funding to put man back on the moon for good by 2024 and a slew of private companies launching their own space exploration efforts.

In this file photo taken on July 20, 1969 astronaut Buzz Aldrin walks on the surface of the moon. This actually happened. Picture: NASA/AFP

MOON LANDING: Aussie stars share their memories

Meanwhile the NASA symbol has risen to the sort of cult status enjoyed by the likes of superhero franchises Marvel and DC Comics.

“We’re getting to that point now where we have enough industry and technology (to make space travel viable for more people),” he says.

“Getting to space is still rocket science, it’s still hard and dangerous, but we’ve been doing it for 60 years now, so it’s well-known.

“We kind of know the parameters and you can do it reasonably safely, which is why the United States is now going to be buying rides to space from American companies rather than flying people up to the space station on our own space craft like the space shuttle, because varied companies know how to do this stuff now.

“That will be happening within the next year or so. That way, that allows NASA to spend what part of the budget we have on going further out into space. So I think there’s a lot of stuff in play at the moment.

The official crew portrait of the Apollo 11 astronauts (l-r): Neil Armstrong, Commander; Michael Collins, Module Pilot; Edwin ‘Buzz’ Aldrin, Lunar Module Pilot. Picture: HO/ NASA/AFP

“It’s close enough that people can see that it actually is a potential reality that in a few years, there will be hotels in space and you’ll go up and, people who have a lot of money, probably, initially. But, later on, there’ll be more of that available. A lot of people out at the moon, a lot of international partners out at what we’re calling the Gateway out there … an orbital station near the moon.”

Dr Barry said America would borrow from some of its former space-race combatant Russia’s expertise on display in the International Space Station, as it moves towards the eventual colonisation of Mars. Using current propulsion systems, such a trip would currently take three years, including nine to ten months flying each way, and the time needed to wait on Mars until it is in the right position with the orbits of Earth and the sun for a mission to return.

“We’ll work out the things we need to know to have a long term expedition to Mars, because getting to Mars is hard. It’s a long trip, and you need to make sure all your stuff works before you leave,” he said.

“Because if the toilet breaks on the way to Mars, you need to get it fixed. And, actually, Russian toilets are the ones that are most reliable so far, by the way.

“They’re very well engineered and easy to repair. That’s the sort of stuff you can’t afford to have fail.”

This reporter is on twitter: @sarahblakemedia