Originally Posted by smartcooky
There is a lot more than that, for instance the lunar topography in 2001 is all jagged and sharp (a common belief at the time because there was no atmosphere to erode sharp peaks) but in reality it is very round and smooth (because the impacts of millions of micro-meteors acted as the eroder,) also the Earth is clearly too large as seen from the surface, and the phase of the Earth changes multiple times throughout the scenes. I believe that Kubrick and the cameraman are visible as a reflection in the visor of Bowman of one of the others in one shot as well.
The funniest part of the whole "Apollo was faked" thing though is that films like 2001 were based on what we believed the Lunar surface was like, and what Apollo did as make us rethink all of our previous assumptions, from what the surface was really like, to even how the Moon came to exist in the first place. If they
were going to fake it, then the very last thing they
would have wanted to do was totally rewrite our contemporary beliefs about the moon, because that just makes scientists work harder at trying to figure out the mysteries of why what they got back was not what was expected, and that would be more likely to result in any duplicity being uncovered.