The Moon rocks have been independently studied by scientists in many countries. There's a consensus that faking the makeup of the rocks would have been a nearly impossible task in 1969 when they were returned to Earth. That evidence alone should be compelling.
It is also surmised that the astronauts were probably lucky that there wasn't a strong Solar wind during the mission as they could have been bombarded with lethal doses of radiation. It's just luck of the draw in terms of timing.
I'm not that familiar with the radiation levels on the Moon itself. It's something I'll look into. But against the mountain of evidence that the Moon landing was real it's not likely to dissuade me that humanity went there and back.
From a related article: "The team found that the radiation exposure on the Moon is 1,369 microsieverts per day - about 2.6 times higher than the International Space Station crew's daily dose." So for the short time they were on the Moon it was negligible.
Thank you for a reasonable reply. Yes, then that makes sense. So, even though it's higher radiation than on Earth, it wasn't deadly in small doses. That's what I was wondering.
Also it isn't "close enough." Think of the difference between Super Mario Bros. (1985) and, say, Super Mario World (1990.) The difference is out the door! It would probably be an even bigger difference in the 70s and 60s.
