The Artemis II moon mission was a full success. Its crew of four astronauts splashed down safely on earth last week after traveling further into outer space than any humans before them. Like most Americans, I followed the mission with a sense of wonder and pride that felt out-of-place in 2026–this was actual history being made, and even my blackened heart swelled. But not everyone was excited; some people are not buying this whole "orbiting the moon" thing and are convinced that the mission never happened. Everyone is lying, the images and videos we've seen are bogus, and spaceflight doesn't even make sense.

I've spent a lot of time digging into the many conspiracy theories online surrounding Artemis II, and there are two rough categories. The first is people who nitpick video feeds for "evidence" that the mission wasn't genuine. I'll address some of those theories later, but first, I want to talk about the more interesting kind of space-skepticism—the kind that comes from a failure of imagination.

Science-based Artemis II conspiracy theories

Science-based skepticism questions specifics of this mission and space travel itself with a sense of "it couldn't possibly be real." And I get it. The idea that people, just like you and me, strapped themselves onto a rocket and blasted past the damn moon, then returned safely to earth is so awe-inspiring, it can be seem unbelievable. So I got in touch with Joel Meyers, a theoretical cosmologist and professor at Southern Methodist University, to get some science-based, down-to-earth answers about how space flight really works.

You May Also Like

But let's get this out of the way first:

Stephen Johnson: Was the Artemis mission fake?

Joel Meyers: Absolutely not.

SJ: ...That's the official line. But off the record, just between you and me, it was fake, right?

JM: Still no. It was not faked.

SJ: Okay, then.

"The rocket's trajectory would lead back to Earth."

Many online conspiracy theorists have taken issue with Artemis' trajectory. The rocket did not shoot straight into the sky toward the moon. Instead, it looked like it was heading back to earth to land in the Bermuda Triangle:

According to Meyers, that's by design. "The biggest challenges are getting out of the atmosphere, and then getting out of the gravitational well of the Earth," he said. "But it doesn't go vertically upward, but rather on a trajectory that puts it marginally in orbit around the Earth."

To put Orion in Earth orbit, NASA chose a trajectory where the curve of its fall matches the curve of the Earth, so the craft is essentially always falling towards the planet but missing the ground. To get to the moon, you first orbit Earth, then widen your orbit until the moon is in your way.

"Going straight up, on a straight line trajectory from the Earth to the moon, would be extremely challenging. It would use much more energy, and there's no reason to do it." Meyers said.

"How could they see anything on the 'dark side' of the moon?"

Credit: NASA

Many online took issue with the astronauts' stunning photos of the "dark side" of the moon. "If it's dark, how can they take photographs of it?" people asked. This is mainly a problem with the phrase "dark side of the moon," and I blame Pink Floyd for this (and many other things.)

"The same side of the moon always faces the Earth, and we refer to the opposite side of the moon as, more technically, the far side of the moon," Meyers said. "When the side of the moon that's facing the Earth is dark, when it's a new moon, that means the other side of the moon, the far side of the moon, is illuminated. From the perspective of where that picture was taken, the sun was just behind the photographer, so it was illuminating the far side of the moon."

"That somebody was up there to take a picture, with the far side of the moon illuminated, actually gives stronger evidence that indeed this was not fake," he added.

"How could the speed of the ship be slowed down by just a couple of parachutes?"

The Artemis' Orion Crew Module returned to Earth at a speed of around 25,000 miles per hour. Then it slowed down to around 20 mph for splashdown with just three dinky parachutes. How is this even possible? According to Meyers, most of the slowing-down doesn't come from the parachutes. "The drag, or passing through the atmosphere, does a significant amount to slow down the vessel," Meyers said, "They passed through miles of atmosphere that burned off much of the speed by the time the parachutes are deployed ... the parachutes are deployed only at a later stage to slow the descent to a degree that's comfortable for humans to land and splash down."

Video evidence of Artemis conspiracy theories

With the science out of the way, let's take a look at the video footage conspiracies. There are many videos online that pick apart specific details in the footage sent back from the Artemis mission to indicate it didn't happen. But all of them do more to prove the missio

What People Are Getting Wrong This Week: Was the Artemis II Mission Fake?