It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


Richard Hoagland proves the moon has no atmosphere!!

page: 2
<< 1   >>

log in


posted on Apr, 23 2008 @ 12:43 PM
reply to post by ipsedixit

Yup - passing through it quickly will minimise the exposure to dangerous radiation, reducing it to a (more) safe level.

posted on Apr, 23 2008 @ 01:34 PM
reply to post by dave420

Apparently they also did some course plotting to go through the Van Allen belts where they weren't as thick. The belts aren't uniform. The link above to the website which discusses radiation issues related to space flights goes into some detail about this.

You could avoid the belts entirely if you launched from either of the earth's poles, but there are other issues related to launching from those points, beyond the simple one of extreme cold and it's effects. I think they might need much larger booster rockets to get off the planet from there, if memory serves. The closer you are to the equator the more of a rotational boost you get on launch, I believe.

Just had a thought. I wonder if that last fact accounts for why the Russian rocket boosters have always been larger than those of the US. I think virtually all of the former Soviet Union is above the lattitude of Florida.

[edit on 23-4-2008 by ipsedixit]

posted on Mar, 5 2010 @ 12:24 PM
This has really been bugging me it's about the stars issue...
NASA claims that when you are in outter space ie Apollo missions, you cannot see any stars they become invisable .. can anyone give me some feedback on this I searched in ATS but could not find anything..
I would like to hear some views on how these missions steared clear of crashing into any stars out there ?????

posted on Mar, 5 2010 @ 05:18 PM
The infinite aura that surrounds any celestial object does not have to be within the spectrum of your vision.

The spectrum of light we can not see and even the ones we do see, can sometimes be referred to as the metaphysical.

Metaphysical realty can be seen from a perception that is above our 3rd dimensional senses.

Which means that the moon has a life energy equal to the power of it's resonance. vibrational state.

I think to say that a moon does not have an atmosphere, is like saying that it is a black hole void of any outward vibrating energy. I'm not sure if a zero vibratory manifestation exists inside the 3rd Dimension. I couldn't find any info on how close Cryogenics has gotten. Since I'm talking galactic time scales, I still believe that even our cryogenic technology can not keep an atom still for millions of years on the third dimension.

Even if it could the next step of quantum science would dictate that the very act of looking at that object makes it send you back the image you are requesting. Which means vibrations must take place for this to happen.

[edit on 5-3-2010 by manbird12000]

posted on Mar, 5 2010 @ 05:22 PM
I wasn't even aware that anyone ever claimed the moon had an atmosphere. I always thought that the common consensus was that it didn't have one.

top topics
<< 1   >>

log in