It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Learning to walk (to the Moon) all over again.

page: 4
0
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 9 2005 @ 02:43 PM
link   
It seems to me, that after it became clear that the argument that the astronaut’s space suits wouldn’t protect them form the radiant heat from the sun (i.e. 253F) was absolutely wrong, you changed tactics.

Now you are claiming that the suits would not protect them from levels of ionizing radiation present in space. This is different from your original argument that heat alone was a deterrent.

I am not going to deny that space radiation wasn’t a major concern for the Apollo astronauts, but I will point out that it is not an insurmountable issue.

To begin with, the length of the period of exposure was relatively short for the Apollo astronauts. Secondly, in the absence of any major solar storms, the radiation levels experienced by the astronauts were not that high.

Were the astronauts were exposed to varying does of space radiation? yes.

Was it instantly fatal as you would have us believe? No.

Was it high enough to cause long term health problems? maybe

Is it an issue for long term space flight? Yes.

Does this prove that we did not go to the moon? No.

More info: www.braeunig.us...




posted on Feb, 9 2005 @ 03:07 PM
link   
Seriosuly this is the oldest and over played subject!!!!
the US WENT to the moon...get over it...
its not a fake....and honestly if it was....with how heated the "space race" was back then...Russia would have had a field day with this...IF it was true.....BUT its not!!!



posted on Feb, 9 2005 @ 09:06 PM
link   
You are playing with my words to give disinformation about what I said, here let me explain what I said AND what I ment: Heat is defined as the vibration or movement of molecules within matter. The faster the molecular motion the higher the temperature. The slower the molecular motion the colder the temperature. Absolute zero is that point where all molecular motion ceases. In order to have hot or cold molecules must be present.

A vacuum is a condition of nothingness where there are no molecules. Vacuums exist in degrees. Some scientists tell us that there is no such thing as an absolute vacuum. Space is the closest thing to an absolute vacuum that is known to us. There are so few molecules present in most areas of what we know as "space" that any concept of "hot" or "cold" is impossible to measure. A vacuum is a perfect insulator. That is why a "Thermos" or vacuum bottle is used to store hot or cold liquids in order to maintain the temperature for the longest time possible without re-heating or re-cooling.

Radiation of all types will travel through a vacuum but will not affect the vacuum. Radiant heat from the sun travels through the vacuum of space but does not "warm" space. In fact the radiant heat of the sun has no affect whatsoever until it strikes matter. Molecular movement will increase in direct proportion to the radiant energy which is absorbed by matter. The time it takes to heat matter exposed to direct sunlight in space is determined by its color, its elemental properties, its distance from the sun, and its rate of absorption of radiant heat energy. Space is NOT hot. Space is NOT cold.

Objects which are heated cannot be cooled by space. In order for an object to cool it must first be removed from direct sunlight. Objects which are in the shadow of another object will eventually cool but not because space is "cold". Space is not cold. Hot and cold do not exist in the vacuum of space. Objects cool because the laws of motion dictate that the molecules of the object will slow down due to the resistance resulting from striking other molecules until eventually all motion will stop provided the object is sheltered from the direct and/or indirect radiation of the sun and that there is no other source of heat. Since the vacuum of space is the perfect insulator objects take a very long time to cool even when removed from all sources of heat, radiated or otherwise.

NASA insists the space suits the astronauts supposedly wore on the lunar surface were air conditioned. An air conditioner cannot, and will not work without a heat exchanger. A heat exchanger simply takes heat gathered in a medium such as freon from one place and transfers it to another place. This requires a medium of molecules which can absorb and transfer the heat such as an atmosphere or water. An air conditioner will not and cannot work in a vacuum. A space suit surrounded by a vacuum cannot transfer heat from the inside of the suit to any other place. The vacuum, remember, is a perfect insulator. A man would roast in his suit in such a circumstance.

NASA claims the spacesuits were cooled by a water system which was piped around the body, then through a system of coils sheltered from the sun in the backpack. NASA claims that water was sprayed on the coils causing a coating of ice to form. The ice then supposedly absorbed the tremendous heat collected in the water and evaporated into space. There are two problems with this that cannot be explained away. 1) The amount of water needed to be carried by the astronauts in order to make this work for even a very small length of time in the direct 55 degrees over the boiling point of water (210 degrees F at sea level on Earth) heat of the sun could not have possibly been carried by the astronauts. 2) NASA has since claimed that they found ice in moon craters. NASA claims that ice sheltered from the direct rays of the sun will NOT evaporate destroying their own bogus "air conditioning" explanation.

Remember this. Think about it the next time you go off in the morning with a "vacuum bottle" filled with hot coffee. Think about it long and hard when you sit down and pour a piping hot cup from your thermos to drink with your lunch four hours later... and then think about it again when you pour the last still very warm cup of coffee at the end of the day.

The same laws of physics apply to any vehicle traveling through space. NASA claims that the spacecraft was slowly rotated causing the shadowed side to be cooled by the intense cold of space... an intense cold that DOES NOT EXIST. In fact the only thing that could have been accomplished by a rotation of the spacecraft is a more even and constant heating such as that obtained by rotating a hot dog on a spit. In reality a dish called Astronaut a la Apollo would have been served. At the very least you would not want to open the hatch upon the crafts return



posted on Feb, 9 2005 @ 09:21 PM
link   
This site pretty much debunks everything about the Moon "hoax"



How could the astronauts survive in the heat of the Moon's day? Objects that are heated cannot be cooled by space.

This is true, to a point, however spacesuits can radiate heat. All objects above absolute zero radiate heat; therefore some of the heat energy received from the Sun is radiated back into space as infrared rays. Also, much of the Sun's radiant energy can be reflected away. The astronaut's spacesuits were white because this color reflects the most radiation, thereby minimizing the amount absorbed. Finally, the spacesuits where equipped with a cooling system that utilized water as a medium to carry away excess heat. Water sprayed into a vacuum experiences a very rapid drop in pressure and, consequently, temperature. Hence, when a small amount of water was sprayed onto a cooling element on the rear of the spacesuit, its temperature dropped so much that it would immediately freeze onto the element. The cooling water of the spacesuit was then pumped through this element. The heat of the cooling water melted the ice, which then rapidly boiled off and carried into space the unwanted heat.



www.braeunig.us...

It goes on to debunk most if not all doubts about the landing

let me say it for you

AMERICAN LIES LIES LIES



posted on Feb, 9 2005 @ 09:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by SiberianTiger

Radiation of all types will travel through a vacuum but will not affect the vacuum. Radiant heat from the sun travels through the vacuum of space but does not "warm" space. In fact the radiant heat of the sun has no affect whatsoever until it strikes matter. Molecular movement will increase in direct proportion to the radiant energy which is absorbed by matter. The time it takes to heat matter exposed to direct sunlight in space is determined by its color, its elemental properties, its distance from the sun, and its rate of absorption of radiant heat energy. Space is NOT hot. Space is NOT cold.

Objects which are heated cannot be cooled by space. In order for an object to cool it must first be removed from direct sunlight. Objects which are in the shadow of another object will eventually cool but not because space is "cold". Space is not cold. Hot and cold do not exist in the vacuum of space. Objects cool because the laws of motion dictate that the molecules of the object will slow down due to the resistance resulting from striking other molecules until eventually all motion will stop provided the object is sheltered from the direct and/or indirect radiation of the sun and that there is no other source of heat. Since the vacuum of space is the perfect insulator objects take a very long time to cool even when removed from all sources of heat, radiated or otherwise.


You are correct in principle, however you underestimate how quickly a good radiative heat exchanger can dissipate heat in space. For example, consider the sensitive electronics in the multitude of sattelites in space (or better yet - Space shuttles/space stations). These have to undergo extreme cold and heat (in fact, because the moon has no atmosphere - exactly the same cold and heat experienced on the moon) - and yet keep their occupants and electronics at a fairly constant temperature. If you pump heat (via an AC like system) to a very efficient radiator (typically a massive black object) you can in fact dissipate plenty of heat, even in a vacuum.

Also, even at very low pressue if water is released into a vacuum it will first freeze - then evaporate. The energy that it can carry aware is extremely large (water cooling is extremely efficient), therefore a large amount amount of water would not have been neccisary. If you ever go to the desert on a very hot day and get out of a pool you will understand what I mean. The lower the pressure and ambient temp (basically right around 0 Kelvin because of the lack of atoms) the more efficient this is.



posted on Feb, 9 2005 @ 09:40 PM
link   
ST, the water was sprayed on the nickel plate in a shaded portion of the backpack, thus the plate was not warmed by the sun. thus it was only warmed by the internal heat of the suit. thus the plate was warm enough to cause the ice to sublimate.

Are you familiar with the concept of latent heat?



posted on Feb, 9 2005 @ 10:46 PM
link   
If NASA was able to land men on the Moon with such great success, why are there no plans to return and why haven't the Russians sent anyone?
Despite the apparent ease with which NASA landed six crews on the lunar surface between 1969 and 1972, traveling to the Moon was difficult, dangerous and very expensive. The advanced planning and preparation of the spacecraft and astronauts resulted in spectacularly successful missions that succeeded despite the inherent difficulties and dangers. The United States landed men on the Moon while the Soviet Union failed in its attempt to do the same. Once the U.S. succeeded, the Soviets' reason for going to the Moon was eliminated. To fly to the moon today would be nearly as difficult and likely more expensive than it was three decades ago. Until there is sufficient motivation to do so, it is unlikely man will return to the moon any time in the near future.

This staement is ABSOLUTELY a DISinformational LIE and can be figured out by using simple commen scense::=

If NASA had tech to launch to the moon (without ever testing robots or remote controlled machines, they some how got 3 humans to do some thing so dangerous that there IS not WAS but IS a 50/50 chance they could DIE) they should have tech that is NOW 2005 cheaper and better to go to the moon why don't they go back ? 1.cuz the Apollo artifacts are not there 2. NASA did go to the moon but as I said in my previous posts it was with different tech and Apollo programs are fake AND the reasons they really did go was fore military puposes not scientific as they like people to believe ( so your tax Dollars can keep flowin in)

[edit on 9-2-2005 by SiberianTiger]



posted on Feb, 9 2005 @ 10:50 PM
link   
HAS ANY of you Moon Landing Beleivers seen the actuall Apollo 11 film in there intirety do any of you have family member's who saw it in it's entierty? would any of YOU have tryed back in 69 to go to the moon knowing fully that 1. This has never been tested by Animals, or Knowing that NASA never even remote controlled the L.M. with no humans in it on the moon before they actually tryed it with real humans in it? I assure you Niegther would Armstrong,Aldrine or Glenn.

[edit on 9-2-2005 by SiberianTiger]

[edit on 9-2-2005 by SiberianTiger]



posted on Feb, 10 2005 @ 11:13 AM
link   
Sure it was dangerous. That is why they picked the best of the best to go there.

Armstrong, Aldrin and Collins had big cojones, that is for sure. You sound jealous.



posted on Feb, 10 2005 @ 01:10 PM
link   
You sound childish and you didn't get what I'm saying, going to the moon was never tested o.k. when they supposedly went that was the first time anything (let alone humans) supposedly left earths orbit and went out of the V.A.B. no human being who knew what space was really like would have tried such a thing IF they knew that no other humans or tests we're ever done on the moon, If you still don't understand what I'm saying I explain it like this ALL three astroNUTS Aldrine, Glenn, Armstrong if they knew basic knowledge of space VanAllen Belt would have asked::, NASA 1. "Has any other humans ever left earths orbit and the Van Aleen Belt?" NASA's answer= "NO" 2. AstroNUTS next question= "Have you (NASA) even tested this by trying to send animals outside the Van Allen Belt and to the moon?" NASA's answer= "NO". AstroNUTS next question = Are you ( NASA) telling us we are the first to ever do this with out any other tests ever done?" NASA's answer= "YES." AstroNUT'S REAL REPLY if they found this out= NO WAY well then we're not about to risk our lives trying this out!!" Be real Howard would YOU try it knowing no animal, or remote controlled L.M. was sent to the moon to see if it could be acomplished uh ? Your answer would be NO, I know it, and I FULLY asure niegther would Aldrine,Armstrong and Glenn. SO are you (Howard) going to now tell us that NASA didn't bother informing the Aldrine, Glenn, Armstrong that this has NEVER been tested before ,and thats how NASA really go them to go along with the mission? I can't wait to hear your answer on this one. hahahaahah


[edit on 10-2-2005 by SiberianTiger]



posted on Feb, 10 2005 @ 01:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by SiberianTiger
You sound childish and you didn't get what I'm saying, going to the moon was never tested o.k. when they supposedly went that was the first time anything (let alone humans) supposedly left earths orbit and went out of the V.A.B. no human being who knew what space was really like would have tried such a thing IF they knew that no other humans or tests we're ever done on the moon, If you still don't understand what I'm saying I explain it like this ALL three astroNUTS Aldrine, Glenn, Armstrong if they knew basic knowledge of space VanAllen Belt would have asked::, NASA 1. "Has any other humans erer left earths orbit and V.A.B.?" NASA's answer= "NO" 2. AstroNUTS next question= "Have you (NASA) even tested this by trying to send animals outside the VAB and to the moon?" NASA's answer= "NO". AstroNUTS next question = Are you ( NASA) telling us we are the first to ever do this with out any other tests ever done NASA's answer:: YES AstroNUT'S real REPLY if they found this out:: NO WAY we ain't goin NO WAY. Be real Howard would YOU try it knowing no animal human has even bein tested ? Your answer would be NO, I know it. SO are you (Howard) going to now tell us that NASA didn't bother iforming th AstroNUTS Aldrine, Glenn, Armstrong and thats how NASA really go them to go along this most dangerous mission hahahaahah

SiberianTiger,
By your statements above, then, we should still be in caves.
If our ancestors, "knew about fire" that it would burn them, choke them etc. then they would never had experimented then conquered fire.
This would go for every discovery, not only in tools / utensils flight (proving the world is round) would never had happened.
The very food that we eat on a daily basis was experimented by someone in the past who had the intestinal fortitude to try something new.



posted on Feb, 10 2005 @ 01:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by SiberianTiger
SO are you (Howard) going to now tell us that NASA didn't bother informing the Aldrine, Glenn, Armstrong that this has NEVER been tested before ,and thats how NASA really go them to go along with the mission? I can't wait to hear your answer on this one. hahahaahah


[edit on 10-2-2005 by SiberianTiger]


They were test pilots, that was their job. They knew the risks better than anyone, but they did it. They took those risks because they wanted to.

They were real men, with "The Right Stuff."
Like I said, you sound jealous of them.



posted on Feb, 10 2005 @ 02:13 PM
link   
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHHAHAAHHAHAHAHAHAA YOU ARE SO GULLABLE MAN HAHAHAHAHAAHHAHAHAHAHAAHHAHAHAHAAHAH HEY DID YOU BOTHER TO CHECK THAT YOUR AMERICAN CONSTITUTION DOESN'T ALLOW YOU TO BE A MEMBER OF NATO NOR THE U.N. AND YOU CAN'T PHYSICALLY ENTER INTO A WAR OUTSIDE OF YOUR WESTERN, SO TECHNICALLY U.S. WAS NOT SUPPOSED TO BE IN WW1, WW2, KOREAN, VIETNAM, BOSNIA, GULF WAR1 AND 2 NOW IRAN, HAHAHAAH YO DUMMY AMERICANS CAN'T SEE THE GLOBAL ELITE ARE USING YOUR MILITARY FOR THE NEW WORLD ORDER, WELL IF YA CAN'T RELISE APPOLO A HOAX THEN YA CAN'T EVEN RELISE DIS, HAHAHAHA



posted on Feb, 10 2005 @ 02:21 PM
link   
SiberianTiger,
You definately are not helping your arguments nor are you providing a real response to the topic of this thread which is "Learning to walk (to the moon) all over again" with psts that go so far off tangent that they are not even in the same ballfield.
Yes, everyone here knows that you have a political agenda. How about, applying your views to the proper threads / forums instead of supurious postings?



posted on Feb, 10 2005 @ 02:22 PM
link   
What the hell was that rant about? Where in the U.S. Constitution do you get any of that SiberianTiger?

U.S. Constitution



posted on Feb, 10 2005 @ 02:56 PM
link   
Siberiantiger, your most recent posts on this thread have been strange rants that make little sense and have nothing to do with the subject at hand.

You have failed to provide any scientific or engineering proof to back up your claims.

When you have been confronted with facts that prove that your arguments are wrong, you rave off topic about the U.S. constitution (which you do not understand).

If you continue to try to change the subject, then I must conclude that you have conceded.


So be it.



posted on Feb, 10 2005 @ 03:03 PM
link   
so people still think we did not go to the moon???

ok...

we can send robots to mars and titan and even farther (all those probes) but we cannot send men to the moon???

comon...

we are planning to send men to mars...





posted on Feb, 10 2005 @ 05:37 PM
link   
I was using the Constitution as an example, to show YOU don't know how to DISern DISinformation from FACTS, so answer my question I already posted = ALL three astroNUTS Aldrine, Glenn, Armstrong if they knew basic knowledge of space VanAllen Belt would have asked::, NASA 1. "Has any other humans ever left earths orbit and the Van Aleen Belt?" NASA's answer= "NO" 2. AstroNUTS next question= "Have you (NASA) even tested this by trying to send animals outside the Van Allen Belt and to the moon?" NASA's answer= "NO". AstroNUTS next question = Are you ( NASA) telling us we are the first to ever do this with out any other tests ever done?" NASA's answer= "YES." AstroNUT'S REAL REPLY if they found this out= NO WAY well then we're not about to risk our lives trying this out!!" Be real Howard would YOU try it knowing no animal, or remote controlled L.M. was sent to the moon to see if it could be acomplished uh ? Your answer would be NO, I know it, and I FULLY asure niegther would Aldrine,Armstrong and Glenn. SO are you (Howard) going to now tell us that NASA didn't bother informing the Aldrine, Glenn, Armstrong that this has NEVER been tested before ,and thats how NASA really go them to go along with the mission? I can't wait to hear your answer on this one.


[edit on 10-2-2005 by SiberianTiger]



posted on Feb, 10 2005 @ 09:13 PM
link   
You really don't understand Americans and American culture, do you?

Do you realize that if the astronauts had any reservations or concerns that NASA was not bieng totally upfront with them in regards to the risks that they had an easy soution to the problem. The Press back then just as now would have had a field day with something like that.

These men were test pilots. Do you have any idea what that meant in that era? Do you have nay idea how many test pilots were killed in that era?

They were no strangers to calculated risks. Most of them flew combat missions in Korea.

Like I said, they had Cojones*










*google the word if it is unfamiliar to you.










[edit on 10-2-2005 by HowardRoark]



posted on Feb, 11 2005 @ 06:13 PM
link   
If a Space suit on earth was pumped up to 6 psi and the astronot went onthe moon would his suit be still be 6 psi on the moon?



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in

join