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.

 

Sunset and Sunrise Crepuscular Rays on the MOON

page: 6
28
<< 3  4  5    7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 8 2009 @ 03:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by ArMaP the representation of something to subtle to appear on a photo must be represented or to enhance some parts that are most important,



AH See?

But when we do that... 'enhance' or highlight some parts to subtle for most to see... we get pounced on


Can't have it both ways




posted on Sep, 8 2009 @ 04:31 PM
link   
reply to post by zorgon
 

Only when you post only the altered version.



posted on Sep, 8 2009 @ 05:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by Somamech
reply to post by Esoterica
 


So does every known interaction that we know on Earth also occur as the NORM outside of Earth knowing that NASA is a Propaganda Machine ?





Once again, not quite sure what you're asking. I can say that the laws of physics will be the same whether you're on the Earth or the moon. The end results of those laws may be different due to different conditions on the Earth as oppsoed to the moon.



posted on Sep, 8 2009 @ 06:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by ArMaP

Originally posted by Libertygal
I even learned at one point, astronauts could have stayed outside the lunar module with no suit on, for just less than a minute or so. That implies some atmosphere doesn't it?
No.
As you can see on the first link you posted, people can live in a near vacuum for around two minutes, but faint after some 15 seconds.

Staying outside for only 10 seconds will not be very useful.


And there's a NASA page with that question and answers, here.


thank you for the link, however I had found that one also.
Very interesting subject, though, considering I grew up taking it as common knowledge.



posted on Sep, 8 2009 @ 06:39 PM
link   
reply to post by weedwhacker
 

I will be sure to review think information again. I did read about the bends and such, and that most people would faint in 15 seconds.

While I was reading the thread, the scene from the Space Odyssey movie did come to mind, especially when I read the don't hold your breath part. Intrigueing!



posted on Sep, 9 2009 @ 05:29 AM
link   
mmmm... always wondered, if the moon gets bombarded with radiation then how did the astonauts walk around on it without lead lined suits


things that make you go mmmmmm



posted on Sep, 9 2009 @ 05:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by hisshadow
mmmm... always wondered, if the moon gets bombarded with radiation then how did the astonauts walk around on it without lead lined suits



NASA should have lent out some of those suits to help clean up Three Mile Island.



posted on Sep, 9 2009 @ 07:20 AM
link   
reply to post by Exuberant1
 

The radiation in space is nothing when compared with the levels near a failed nuclear reactor, the protection that we get from the atmosphere does not protect us from high energy radiation, that's why some years ago IBM had to shield their mainframe's memories and put them in basements, the cosmic rays were strong enough to affect the memories they used, creating random errors.



posted on Sep, 9 2009 @ 07:34 AM
link   
reply to post by ArMaP
 


But you trust the information given to you by NASA - which is why you are using it now. It is like trusting a murderer to do the DNA test and give you honest results.

I am skeptical of their facts (of which there are usually two sets; one for the public, and the other for those with a need-to-know).

It is entirely possible that NASA employed a still-classified form of radiation shielding in order to accomplish the Apollo missions.

If I was NASA, I'd give you guys fake blueprints and plans with all the classified things omitted. You'd even believe they were real and be convinced that you have access to all the information regarding the spacesuits and the technology that went into them - especially after I create version of the suits for the public to see and touch. *It is not like it would be my money and besides; there will always be people who will defend the version of Apollo that I gave them whenever anyone suggests otherwise.



posted on Sep, 9 2009 @ 07:48 AM
link   
reply to post by Exuberant1
 

If you don't use NASA data, where did you get the radiation levels for the Lunar surface or just outside of the Earth's atmosphere?



posted on Sep, 9 2009 @ 07:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by ArMaP
reply to post by Exuberant1
 

If you don't use NASA data, where did you get the radiation levels for the Lunar surface or just outside of the Earth's atmosphere?


Where did I that I don't use NASA's data?

I though I was pretty clear when I said that I was skeptical of it.


Sometimes it seems you just ignore words that you don't want to read.






I am skeptical of their facts (of which there are usually two sets; one for the public, and the other for those with a need-to-know).





[edit on 9-9-2009 by Exuberant1]



posted on Sep, 9 2009 @ 09:49 AM
link   
reply to post by Exuberant1
 

I don't ignore them, but sometimes I forget the exact words while I write my posts, specially those made during my lunch time, that are written with less care, sorry about that.


What I should have said was that if you don't trust NASA data where do you get the idea (suggested by your post about the suits) that the space suits are or were good enough to stop the level of radiation present in Three Miles Island (I suppose that you were talking about the atomic power plant accident and not about any normal day).


jra

posted on Sep, 9 2009 @ 06:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by hisshadow
mmmm... always wondered, if the moon gets bombarded with radiation then how did the astonauts walk around on it without lead lined suits


Lead would actually make things worse, at least when it comes to beta radiation. When high-energy electrons hit lead, it creates a secondary radiation referred to as "Bremsstrahlung".

Radiation in space is not constant. There are periods of low and high amounts of radiation. The Apollo missions all happened during periods of low solar activity. Plus they were only out there for a short period of time. Radiation becomes a big concern for missions that will last for long periods, like a trip to Mars or spending months on the Moon.


Originally posted by Exuberant1
But you trust the information given to you by NASA - which is why you are using it now. It is like trusting a murderer to do the DNA test and give you honest results.


So you're comparing NASA to a murderer? Are you serious?


Also NASA is not the end-all, be-all source for radiation in space. Plus, if all that data was false. I think you'd see many commercially built satellites failing pretty quickly as those companies rely on that data for designing and building there satellites.


I am skeptical of their facts (of which there are usually two sets; one for the public, and the other for those with a need-to-know).


If there's a "need-to-know" set, then how do you know? It's one thing to be skeptical, but to claim there are two sets without any evidence? Come on...


It is entirely possible that NASA employed a still-classified form of radiation shielding in order to accomplish the Apollo missions.


How does one keep a classified form of radiation shielding a secret in an open and public project? You do realize that it wasn't NASA itself that built everything right? Most of the stuff was built by contracted companies. Were there any classified materials, a lot of people would have to be in on it. And for a project that wasn't classified in any way shape or form, that would be difficult to keep a secret I'd think.


If I was NASA...


But you aren't. You assume it's as simple as just omitting bits of info here and there and presto, no one knows. I'm sorry, but that's not how things work in the real world.



posted on Sep, 9 2009 @ 07:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by ArMaP

If you don't use NASA data, where did you get the radiation levels for the Lunar surface or just outside of the Earth's atmosphere?


Well see? That is the Marvelous thing about NASA... they have documentation to heavily support both sides of the arguments


THAT is how they keep us guessing



posted on Sep, 13 2009 @ 10:57 AM
link   
Sorry I missed some in this thread but when I was talking about The Moons Atmosphere I was referring to the General Public...


Without going through beginning of the thread I know that it was acknowledged at some point here that the Moon has an atmosphere from Nasa itself!

Well look at what Nasa Teach aspiring space cadets here Dated 2002:

spaceplace.jpl.nasa.gov...



Because Earth is a larger target and has stronger gravity to attract more space debris, it is hit by far more of these particles than the moon is. On the ground, we are protected by the atmosphere, which we rely on for so much. This blanket of air slows down the material that slams into it, keeping us safe. But the moon has no atmosphere, so its surface is hit directly. The meteoroids travel at such high speed, that if one of them hit an unprotected person there, it could be disastrous.





posted on Sep, 13 2009 @ 11:54 AM
link   
reply to post by Somamech
 

It's a question of defining at what density it could be considered an atmosphere.

If we consider that only a perfect vacuum has no atmosphere then I think that all the Solar system is inside its own atmosphere.



posted on Sep, 13 2009 @ 12:22 PM
link   
reply to post by ArMaP
 


I agree to some part as what's good for the gander may not be good for the goose


In saying so we are led to believe that life can only occur under certain circumstances provided by Nasa who provide contradictions faster than I can make a bad joke mate


But I was more illustrating that Nasa slipped up! As we have seen in this thread Nasa state some atmosphere then they turn around and teach kids NO atmosphere



posted on Sep, 13 2009 @ 12:40 PM
link   
reply to post by Somamech
 

Yes, that's the most noticeable thing about NASA, what they say depends on who is saying it and to who (or whom?) they are saying it.

No wonder people don't trust them.



posted on Sep, 13 2009 @ 12:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by Esoterica

Originally posted by Somamech
reply to post by Esoterica
 


So does every known interaction that we know on Earth also occur as the NORM outside of Earth knowing that NASA is a Propaganda Machine ?





Once again, not quite sure what you're asking. I can say that the laws of physics will be the same whether you're on the Earth or the moon. The end results of those laws may be different due to different conditions on the Earth as oppsoed to the moon.



Those "So called Laws" are a little "Earth Minded" aint they ?

There's a great infinite Universe out there and to apply what Laws based on half truths purposefully in place due to propaganda campaigns is truly limiting to people here residing and learning on Earth



posted on Sep, 14 2009 @ 12:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by Somamech

Because Earth is a larger target and has stronger gravity to attract more space debris, it is hit by far more of these particles than the moon is. On the ground, we are protected by the atmosphere, which we rely on for so much. This blanket of air slows down the material that slams into it, keeping us safe. But the moon has no atmosphere, so its surface is hit directly. The meteoroids travel at such high speed, that if one of them hit an unprotected person there, it could be disastrous.






Here is another one:




On average, 33 metric tons (73,000 lbs) of meteoroids hit Earth every day, the vast majority of which harmlessly ablates ("burns up") high in the atmosphere, never making it to the ground. The moon, however, has no atmosphere, so meteoroids have nothing to stop them from striking the surface.

www.nasa.gov...



And another one:




The Moon is different. Having no atmosphere, it is totally exposed to meteoroids. Even small ones can cause spectacular explosions, spraying debris far and wide.

science.nasa.gov...


[edit on 14-9-2009 by Exuberant1]



new topics

top topics



 
28
<< 3  4  5    7 >>

log in

join