Nobody with any knowledge of physics believes Brian's findings. Since most hoax believers don't know anything about physics, they eat it up. Brian is a mathematician, not a physicist. His computations, "too complicated to go into here," suffer from his inability to locate the so-called neutral point.

The purported 64% gravity figure would indeed make for some interesting ocean tides. And of course it doesn't seem to ring any warning bells with Brian that in order for his theory to be correct, Newton has to be entirely wrong.

I'm reminded of the story of a mother watching her son Jim march with other soldiers in a parade. She turns to the woman beside her and says, "Look, they're all out of step except for my Jim."

Brian's only unique contribution to the hoax theory is his wrong computations buried in the appendix and comprehensible to none of his readers. His "proofs" are laughable.

Apparently because astronauts didn't jump to the limit of their theoretical capability, they couldn't possibly have done it. First, I search the cuff checklists in vain for an item reading, "Jump as high as you possibly can, and make sure it's caught on camera." Second, I note that Armstrong lept to the third rung of the LM ladder (about 5 feet off the ground) at the end of his EVA. Just what Brian predicts is possible.

Huffing and puffing astronauts? Inertia, Mr. Brian. We learned about it physics. Getting 360 pounds of mass moving takes energy. Weight is largely irrelevant, and in fact reduces one's traction. Plus, the suits are restrictive.

Blowing "starched" flags? Inertia again, Mr. Brian. Wiggle the post and the flag will Newtonianly resist that wiggle. Oh, wait. Mr. Brian thinks Mr. Newton is full of crap.

Craggy peaks? Only Stanley Kubrick expected that. Scientists expected everything to be buried in dust. They were actually surprised to find hardpack. Dry riverbeds? Then why no smooth river rocks?

Atmospheric diffusion? No, just indirect lighting, Mr. Brian. Yes, the atmosphere on earth diffuses sunlight. But that's not the only way indirect sunlighting can be achieved. Any photographer worth his 18% gray reflector knows how to do it.

Blue haze around the moon? Let's see, Apollo 10. Nobody stepped outside a spacecraft on that one, so every photo has to be taken through a spacecraft window. Spacecraft windows sometimes fog over due to gasket outgassing, the same thing that occurs on new cars. Fogged-over windows scatter light, and blue light scatters best. So Brian pins his theory to the testimony of one photograph, despite the millions and millions of photographs taken of the moon by people from every country since photography was invented, that don't show a blue haze.

Neil Armstrong didn't say what color that sky was, now did he?

"The feather probably concealed a heavy object." And Brian's book probably concealed an ulterior motive: bilk the gullible.