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.
Originally posted by AgentSmith
Originally posted by FoosM
It makes you wonder... did they use the Apollo astronauts as guinea pigs?
Cause I dont recall any biology going to the moon to test for radiation poisoning.
That's not surprising really, for a start Jarrah won't have mentioned it as it threatens his ideas and you would have to carry out research to find out.
But it wasn't NASA that sent animals and plants to the Moon I''m afraid, it was the Russians aboard Zond 5 which flew around the Moon and returned to Earth with it's living payload healthy and alive.
On September 18, 1968, the spacecraft flew around the Moon. The closest distance was 1,950 km. High quality photographs of the Earth were taken at a distance of 90,000 km. A biological payload of two russian tortoises, wine flies, meal worms, plants, seeds, bacteria, and other living matter was included in the flight. On September 21, 1968, the reentry capsule entered the Earth's atmosphere, braked aerodynamically, and deployed its parachutes at 7 km. The capsule splashed down in the Indian Ocean and was successfully recovered, safely returning the biological payload, first in history animals made Moon-flyby.
en.wikipedia.org...
EDIT TO ADD:
Oh Foos, you might also be interested in this document regarding the radiation doseage experiments on Zond-5 and Zond-7 (by the USSR, not NASA). You probably won't like the conclusion though
Cosmic Radiation Measurements using Nuclear emulsions aboard the Zond-5 and Zond-7 automatic stations
Originally posted by AgentSmith
Better than that, he's completely ignored the ACTUAL EXPERIMENT carried out by the USSR after his article was written, in which the RUSSIAN scientists conclude that the trip is perfectly safe.
As for his arguments that it was 'too risky', pathetic! Since when are half the things we do not risky? Last time I checked people still bungee jump, race cars, ride horses, basejump, etc and those are just RECREATIONAL! Not everyone are WIMPS that are held back by risks and frankly if humans had not ever done anything because it was dangerous we wouldn't have got where we are today. Just because radiation seems dangerous and makes you cry because you don't understand it doesn't mean everyone else is affected by this.
So AgentSmith, why dont you give us readers a quick summary of their findings?
Originally posted by ppk55
Hello my lovely moon hoax believers / nonbelievers,
I had a thought last night.
It struck me how disorganised and unprofessional the entire NASA catalogue is regarding the moon landings. This was supposedly the greatest of human endeavours, the greatest scientific accomplishment.
So in 2010 why are QUALITY video and images of this monumental feat so hard to obtain?
Years later, it emerged that the Soviet specialists had not been able to manufacture radiation-hardened film that would survive the journey through the radiation belts and the translunar environment. Instead they used American film retrieved from Gentrix ballons-
Mars-4 and Mars-5 orbiters carried the Mars-3 style phototelevision cameras on their 1973 mission. The operation was essentially the same as the Zond-3 camera, with various technical improvements in the optics of the film scanner, using a newer FEU-103 photomultiplier tube. It held 480 frames on 20 meters of 25.4mm film, stored in a radiation-shielded magazine.
The M-69 orbiter, a 1969 Mars attempt, contained three cameras of more advanced design, with lenses of 35, 50 and 250 mm. A wheel of glass filters (red, green, blue, clear) is used by one camera (or perhaps shared by two cameras) to take color photographs. They each held 160 images on a specially designed film. Upon arrival, the film was chemically activated, so it would not be exposed by cosmic radiation during the long flight. Images were scanned at 1024×1024 resolution and transmitted by pulse position modulation on 6 GHz. Unfortunately, the two M-69 probes were destroyed in launch failures of the new Proton rocket.
Analysis of biological samples found... some mutations in seeds as a result of radiation. Overall, radiation dosages seemed to be well within acceptable limits, not posting a danger to cosmonauts and not significantly different from conditions in Earth orbit.
Given what we now know, from radiotherapy to the legacy of the attacks on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, it is clear that radiation safety limits are far too conservative. Evidently, our bodies have learned through evolution to repair or eliminate damaged cells, with a low failure rate. I suggest the upper limit might be reset at a lifetime total of 5 sieverts, at no more than 0.1 sievert per month. That would be a fraction of a radiotherapy dose, spread over a lifetime.
Such a revision would relax current regulations by a factor of 1000....
Originally posted by ppk55
So in 2010 why are QUALITY video and images of this monumental feat so hard to obtain?
For instance, the stills.
They were extremely high quality 70mm frames.
So you’d expect to be able to download the very best scans, at the highest resolution possible at one central website. Not so.
I just dont recall the US going through all that trouble with their Apollo film.
Originally posted by AgentSmith
Originally posted by ppk55
So in 2010 why are QUALITY video and images of this monumental feat so hard to obtain?
For instance, the stills.
They were extremely high quality 70mm frames.
So you’d expect to be able to download the very best scans, at the highest resolution possible at one central website. Not so.
Unsurprisingly, wrong again.
Originally posted by AgentSmith
If you just search there is a vast repository here:
Lunar and Planetary Institute - Apollo Image Atlas
Thousands and thousands of high resolution images, knock yourself out!
Originally posted by AgentSmith
Yawn, wrong again. You should really, really have looked at the resource before posting.
That is in reference to the medium size images and as it says you should use the high resolution product for research purchases that if you looked is available when you view an image at the bottom of the information section.
The clue is where there is a link saying 'High resolution Image'
Does this look like a small 450x450 low resolution JPG for instance?
www.lpi.usra.edu...
Nope, looks like it's a 3900x3900 high res image to me!
They have been in the process of updating the catalog for some years with high resolution images which is no small task and it's still continuing!
[edit on 10-8-2010 by AgentSmith]
So you’d expect to be able to download the very best scans, at the highest resolution possible at one central website. Not so.
Perhaps this imaginary website would be called ‘The Celebration of Apollo.'
Here, there would be ALL the 16mm movies, TV broadcasts, and images in a readily accessible format.
Not only that, they would be of the highest quality possible.
However this is not the case.
Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by FoosM
I just dont recall the US going through all that trouble with their Apollo film.
How long were the Apollo missions?
How long were the Mars missions?
Did you forget that little detail of exposure times?
Originally posted by DJW001
reply to post by FoosM
Given what we now know, from radiotherapy to the legacy of the attacks on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, it is clear that radiation safety limits are far too conservative. Evidently, our bodies have learned through evolution to repair or eliminate damaged cells, with a low failure rate. I suggest the upper limit might be reset at a lifetime total of 5 sieverts, at no more than 0.1 sievert per month. That would be a fraction of a radiotherapy dose, spread over a lifetime.
Such a revision would relax current regulations by a factor of 1000....
www.newscientist.com...
So long as we're playing the "cut and paste game," I thought I'd throw this out there. Very interesting article.
So still no reaction to Jarrah's admission of being a liar? No refutation?
Originally posted by AgentSmith
Yawn, wrong again.
Originally posted by AgentSmith
You should really, really have looked at the resource before posting.
That is in reference to the medium size images and as it says you should use the high resolution product for research purchases
Originally posted by AgentSmiththat if you looked is available when you view an image at the bottom of the information section.
The clue is where there is a link saying 'High resolution Image'
Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by FoosM
Once again, since you seem to have missed it (or something): The command module was well shielded. The astronauts would not have been exposed to damaging levels of radiation even if a major flare had occurred during the mission.
During the missions the Sun was monitored. If there was any likelihood, any likelihood at all, of a major flare the astronauts would not have left the CM. There is an average period of about 15 hours between the time the xrays produced by a flare are detected and the time that the high energy particles arrive. Had a flare occurred while the astronauts were on the surface there would likely have been time for them to return to the CM.
It was a known risk level. The probability of a major flare during any particular one week period is not high (remember, .3%). It was a calculated risk. Space exploration is risky. The astronauts who live on the ISS are risking their lives and they know it and they accept that risk. So did the Apollo astronauts.
[edit on 8/10/2010 by Phage]
I believe I have given my observations on your claim that he lied on his video. What more is there to say?
I invented a story about an Apollo capsule orbiting around the northern polar region. I never believed that...
I really cant believe that your comrades are letting you stick your neck out like that. Your going to get your head chopped-off making such statements.