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.

 

Young Aussie genius whipping NASA in Moon Hoax Debate!

page: 171
377
<< 168  169  170    172  173  174 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 17 2010 @ 12:25 PM
link   
reply to post by Tomblvd
 


Nicely done.

...cognitive dissonance ensues...




posted on Aug, 17 2010 @ 12:26 PM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 


Yes but for Luna 2 the russians were angry when Jodrell gave information to the press about the probes crash into the moon before he sent the information to the russians, implying that they relied on him for their information in atleast that part of the probes mission.



posted on Aug, 17 2010 @ 12:30 PM
link   
reply to post by epsilon69
 


Okay. In fairness there were a few occasions when the USSR asked for Jodrell's assistance either directly or by conveniently publishing transmission times and frequencies in the paper. (Subtle, eh?) But they never "contracted" with them, nor did they lack the capacity to eavesdrop on significant portions of every manned US spaceflight.



posted on Aug, 17 2010 @ 12:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by Tomblvd

Originally posted by epsilon69
[
Exactly in the article it says one very very important thing. It shows why the soviets needed to use Jodrell Bank to track the satellite around the moon.

And yes they did need him to track their satellite during key hours of its mission.


Wait. Did the Soviets actually use Jodrell Bank? I'm not aware of any cooperation between the UK and USSR.

Also, you said the Soviet Union was not in line of sight for the landing of Apollo 11. Correct me if I'm wrong, but Honeysuckle Creek was the earth station to recieve the first signals from the moon. If Australia was in line, so was the eastern part of the USSR.


No, the eastern part of the USSR was not in line of sight because it was in the northern hemisphere. The focal point if you will of the moons line of sight during the apollo 11 landings was focused directly into the middle of the pacific ocean around Hawaii, only the eastern part of australia was in line of sight and I believe although i may be mistaken also the most western parts of the U.S.



posted on Aug, 17 2010 @ 12:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by epsilon69


I'm not sure exactly what you mean but i'm going to take a stab at it. Yes the soviets can track american spacecraft and america can track russia spacecraft as long as they have line of sight of these craft or a satellite in line of sight.

What i was saying is they needed Jodrell Bank because during crucial parts of their moon probes mission russia was not in line of sight of their own spacecraft, but Jodrell Bank was so they enlisted his help to track their probe as it crashed into the moons surface.


Are you saying the Soviet Union did not have tracking stations outside of their own country?

(be back later)



posted on Aug, 17 2010 @ 12:33 PM
link   
reply to post by Tomblvd
 


Well when the soviets tried to build a missle base in cuba WW3 almost started, i do not know where they had bases around the world but i do know that the U.S was doing everything it could at the time to stop communism from spreading (remember what happened in vietnam).



posted on Aug, 17 2010 @ 01:44 PM
link   
reply to post by epsilon69
 

The Soviets had a fleet of ships for tracking their own (and undoubtedly, US spacecraft).



During 1965 and 1966, Bezhitsa and Ristna command and control ships replaced older Krasnodar and Ilichevsk.

Five brand-new ships joined the command and control fleet in 1967:

* Cosmonaut Vladimir Komarov
* Kegostrov
* Morzhovets
* Nevel
* Borovichi

www.russianspaceweb.com...


On September 18, 1968, Zond 5 flew around the Moon, coming as close as 1,950km. Upon its return, the astronavigation system again failed but the wayward capsule splashed down in the Indian ocean and was successfully recovered by a Soviet tracking ship.
www.daviddarling.info...


[edit on 8/17/2010 by Phage]



posted on Aug, 17 2010 @ 01:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by FoosM
 

Yes. That's right. 10 Earth radii over the equator. Much less their northern and southern limits, where Apollo passed through them. The belts are not spherical. As this illustration from your link shows.

source
[edit on 8/16/2010 by Phage]


Do you think that picture to scale? If not, what is the point of using it?

This is exactly the subtle mind manipulation that has been going on.
That picture, as well as many others give the impressions that the belt is not gigantic in comparison to the Earth.

Does that look like 10 radii wide? If not, Imagine how high and low the belts go long. So when scientists say things like, it will only take a few minutes to pass through, or they can cut through and skip the hot spots by flying at a certain angle, its easier for that to be believed the unsuspecting masses.

For our readers, take a look at this picture:



Now imagine the belts extends five Earths wide. And they go about two Earths high and low. Now imagine a tiny tiny dot leaving from surface of the Earth and flying through that belt all the way to the moon. And an even more tiny dot flying off the moon back to the Earth passing through the belts, again. Meanwhile, between the end of the belt and the moon, you have interplanetary space, a sea of radiation from the powerful Sun and other stars that our tiny tiny craft has to fly through. Imagine this trip was made nine times with no loss of life.

So whenever you see a diagram of the belts like:



Just imagine bigger, at about 4 to 5 Earths wide and one to two Earths high and low. Could Apollo avoid the intense regions of the belt?
Im very very doubtful. Not if you see the belts as horns vs donuts!


As the plasma movement the particles are tending to move from pole to pole and to drift from East to the West at the same time. The particles of the Van Allen belts are doing the same. Instead of drawing the clouds as soft donuts it would be more correct to draw the clouds as sharp "horns" which have their ends on the poles. On the points of the horns the particles hit neither the atmosphere and are lost for the belts, or they are rejected along the magnetic field into space.





Three types of motion of energetic charge particles in the magneto- sphere. Gyro motion, Vg, is the circulation of the particle about the magnetic field. Bounce motion, Vb, is the periodic motion of the particle along the field the two magnetic mirrors caused by the converging and strengthening field at low altitudes.

www-ssc.igpp.ucla.edu...

They began to understand this prior to Apollo moon launches:

By the mid-1960s a very detailed, though by no means complete, picture of what the magnetosphere was like had evolved, as illustrated in figure 35. In the magnetospheric paradigm of 1964 the existence of the solar wind had been established.



At times when the sun was disturbed, the magnetosphere and the radiation belts were affected. The spatial extent of the magnetosphere varied appreciably and trapped radiations were enhanced. following solar storms. [184] There was a question as to whether during these disturbed conditions new particles were injected into the radiation belt or energy was transferred by hydromagnetic waves from the interplanetary plasma to particles already in the magnetosphere.


Once again, look at these horns:



Only way to escape those horns is to fly from the poles.


to be continued:



posted on Aug, 17 2010 @ 01:47 PM
link   
continued:

Now lets talk about the SAA


The South Atlantic Anomaly is of great significance to astronomical satellites and other spacecraft that orbit the Earth at several hundred kilometers altitude; these orbits take satellites through the anomaly periodically, exposing them to several minutes of strong radiation, caused by the trapped protons in the inner Van Allen belt, each time. The International Space Station, orbiting with aninclination of 51.6°, requires extra shielding to deal with this problem. The Hubble Space Telescope does not take observations while passing through the SAA.[7] Astronauts are also affected by this region which is said to be the cause of peculiar 'shooting stars' seen in the visual field of astronauts.[8] Passing through the South Atlantic Anomaly is thought[9] to be the reason for the early failures of the Globalstar network's satellites.
NASA have reported that modern laptops have crashed when the space shuttle flights passed though the anomaly


What is it?

(SAA) refers to the area where the Earth's inner Van Allen radiation belt comes closest to the Earth's surface. This leads to an increased flux of energetic particles in this region and exposes orbiting satellites to higher than usual levels of radiation.


So basically its part, and extension of the inner van allen belt. Now take a look at this:



...radiation belts over the South Atlantic with indication of speed of particles, coloured schema.


See that, that little small area is causes so much trouble for anybody or anything that passes by a little too close for "several minutes of STRONG RADIATION". Lets take a look how strong that region is.



See how strong that small area is at 500km above the Earth's surface? That looks like 10^3 power at the most intense area.


Yeah... 10^3, although, 10^2 might not be a hot potato too.
That SAA is an extension of this:

The proton belt is located from about 500 kilometers above Earth's surface and extends to 13,000 km. This Inner Belt contains protons with energies greater then 10 million volts. Scientists currently think that these protons are trapped cosmic ray particles from outside the solar system, or from the Sun itself possibly during severe solar flares. Here is what this belt looks like if you were to slice in like a watermellon:




Inner Van Allen radiation belt with protons: Diagram with the particle speed, coloured schema.


Now wait a minute. The intense region of the Inner proton belt is far greater than the SAA intensity. We are talking about 10^5 . Its Green is the SAA's Red.

So we know why people say that Apollo missed that region of 10^5 of the inner belt because that part is very dangerous, not only to astronauts but to equipment. Because we know that even 10^3 is dangerous for the more heavily shielded space stations and satellites.

After the Inner Proton Belt we got a:


The low-energy electron belt actually overlaps the volums of space where the proton belt is located in the Inner Belt. The electrons carry between 1 - 5 million volts of energy, on average.


That doesn't sound so bad. And as I understand thats where they place some satellites. But sometimes this region becomes excited and then... bye bye satellite.

Ok, but does that mean Apollo would have skipped any area's greater than 10 million volts, or even greater than SAA's 10^3?

Well.... remember how we talked about those horns? Take a look at this.



BAM! What is that!?
Well thats...

The high-energy electron belt is located further out than the two overlaping inner belts... Electrons in this Outer Belt carry between 10 to 100 million volts of energy, on average.

I mean there are parts that are white hot!


Unlike the inner belt, the outer belt is very dynamic, changing on time scales of a few hours in response to perturbations emanating from the outer magnetosphere.


See how that Outer belt has horns or teeth about to bite our planet?
Well that results in this:




And this is why:

The Space Shuttle usually flies to minimize radiation dose by avoiding the POLES and the South Atlantic region and by keeping the altitude BELOW 500 KM (-300 miles).

Emphasis mine. They are scared.




See that! Near the poles? Thats basically surrounding the whole planet. Any craft to escape Earth will eventually have to pass through 10^5 million volts of energy!
Remember, satellites, space stations, people and the hubble have issues with going for a few minutes through 10^3 !

A little about the outer belt:


Killer electrons are highly energetic particles trapped in Earth's outer radiation belt, which extends from 12,000 km to 64,000 km above the planet’s surface. During solar storms their number grows at least ten times and they can be dislodged, posing a threat to satellites.

As the name suggests, killer electrons are energetic enough to penetrate satellite shielding and cause microscopic lightning strikes. If these electrical discharges take place in vital components, the satellite can be damaged or even rendered inoperable.


So keep that in mind. Many here love to use www.braeunig.us... as a source. So lets take a look at what he plotted

www.braeunig.us...

See that, Apollo passed through regions from the inner belt up to and greater than 10^3. This took about 30 minutes.
Outer belt, killer electron region... Overall 60 minutes, that one very hot zone about 20 minutes. Also regions at or above 10^3 continuously.
And this drawing is only going up to 6 radii not 10.

So all together thats about 90 minutes of travel.

So can anybody tell me how is it that traveling near the tip of the VABs (SAA) at energies excited at 10^3 for several minutes can be
is so hazardous, but traveling 180 minutes through even greater excited energies is a piece of cake?

The hull of an Apollo command module rated 7 to 8 g/cm2.
A modern space shuttle has 10 to 11 g/cm2.
The hull of the ISS, in its most heavily shielded areas, has 15 g/cm2.


www.geschichteinchronologie.ch... -farbig.gif
image.gsfc.nasa.gov...
www-ssc.igpp.ucla.edu...
en.wikipedia.org...
science.nasa.gov...
www.irpa2010europe.com...
www.astrobio.net...
books.google.nl...=onepage&q=south%20at lantic%20anomaly%20rem%20dose&f=false



posted on Aug, 17 2010 @ 01:48 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Aug, 17 2010 @ 02:05 PM
link   
reply to post by FoosM
 

Once again you demonstrate your lack of understanding. You have no idea what you are talking about.


Any craft to escape Earth will eventually have to pass through 10^5 million volts of energy!

10^5 million volts. You are claiming that particles in the Van Allen belts are carrying 10^5 Mev? I don't see that anywhere in any of your own sources.

Do you know the difference between volts and electron volts? If so, maybe you can work out how that translates to human radiation dosages (keeping in mind the shielding of the CM). BTW, did you notice? The "horns" are the narrowest part of the belts, resulting in the least transit time. Did you forget once again about the importance of exposure times? Maybe you should look at those animations of the Apollo trajectory again.



posted on Aug, 17 2010 @ 02:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by ppk55
 

Idiotic nonsense.
Russia was perfectly capable of tracking their spacecraft as well as the Apollo spacecraft.
As pointed out here:
www.abovetopsecret.com...


Russia tracking the Apollo is a bogus claim, busted here:
www.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on Aug, 17 2010 @ 02:35 PM
link   
post removed because the user has no concept of manners

Click here for more information.



posted on Aug, 17 2010 @ 02:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by bokonon2010

Russia tracking the Apollo is a bogus claim, busted here:
www.abovetopsecret.com...



This is how bokonon "busts" claims:

Regarding Bill Keel's webpage about tracking Apollo he totally eviscerates it by saying


and other routinely repeated 'Third-party evidence for Apollo Moon landings' quickly lead to the jokers like:


And he proceeds to give the webpage address and a link to a silly picture Keel and his cat.

DEBUNKED!

No wonder the mods delete so many of your posts......



posted on Aug, 17 2010 @ 02:50 PM
link   
reply to post by Tomblvd
 

and here the part that you have missed:


Originally posted by ngchunter

Originally posted by Exuberant1
So you would have us believe that the mighty American HAM could do what the Soviet Union could not...

Indeed.


No, the soviet union COULD do exactly what they did.

Pure speculation not supported by facts, ironically the conspiracy type.


Originally posted by Exuberant1
Even the Soviets had to rely on the Aussies (and NASA) to see the telecasts of the moon landing.

Correct. Apollo 11 'moonwalk' show have been retransmitted to Ostankino TV studio for the privileged few [A. Leonov].


Originally posted by ngchunter
now everyone can see you for who you really are. Here's an article describing the Soviet's use of the 32m Simferopol dish to track Apollo.
www.novosti-kosmonavtiki.ru...
Translated:

We "saw",
As Americans
Sat down on the Moon...
E.Molotov specially
For " News of astronautics "

Whether clause(article) of the participant of events of 30-years prescription of E.P.Molotova offered(suggested) to readers throws light on unknown pages of " lunar race " and finally closes a ridiculous question " there Were Americans on the Moon? "

Debunked: manonmoon.ru...

E. Molotov exposed himself as a con and lier:


Tip: read and watch; URL links provided for your convenience.



posted on Aug, 17 2010 @ 02:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by Tomblvd
And he proceeds to give the webpage address and a link to a silly picture Keel and his cat.


I don't know why he posted that? Is it supposed to be embarrassing?
Probably not as much as the HB Hero Jarrah himself....


il.youtube.com...

What a hero, looks like a real font of knowledge there....

Edit: Whoops forgot to add source!

[edit on 17-8-2010 by AgentSmith]



posted on Aug, 17 2010 @ 02:57 PM
link   



Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by FoosM
 

Once again you demonstrate your lack of understanding. You have no idea what you are talking about.


Any craft to escape Earth will eventually have to pass through 10^5 million volts of energy!

10^5 million volts. You are claiming that particles in the Van Allen belts are carrying 10^5 Mev? I don't see that anywhere in any of your own sources.





You dont see that red region 10^5 starting from 10 million?

or a large part of here starting with 1 million:






Did you forget once again about the importance of exposure times? Maybe you should look at those animations of the Apollo trajectory again.


You got something to say then say it.
Dont bother telling me what to remember.
You have some facts and figures to help figure this out, then please do.
If you can demonstrate where I made a mistake, please do. But vague remarks will not move this discussion further.



posted on Aug, 17 2010 @ 03:08 PM
link   
reply to post by FoosM
 

As I said, you don't know what you are talking about.

The color scale is showing particle flux, not particle energy levels.
The first diagram is showing flux levels for protons above 10Mev. The second diagram is showing flux levels for electrons above 1Mev.

I've said it many times, as have others. The exposure times to the radiation in the Van Allen belts were acceptable...not dangerous.



posted on Aug, 17 2010 @ 03:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by Smack
reply to post by bokonon2010
 

Soviet spacecraft and the Soviets themselves can't?!

Have I said that? Could you please provide such quote from my posts.


Originally posted by Smack
What are you smoking, pal?

Could you send this question to the mods. Thanks.



posted on Aug, 17 2010 @ 03:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by FoosM



Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by FoosM
 

Once again you demonstrate your lack of understanding. You have no idea what you are talking about.


Any craft to escape Earth will eventually have to pass through 10^5 million volts of energy!

10^5 million volts. You are claiming that particles in the Van Allen belts are carrying 10^5 Mev? I don't see that anywhere in any of your own sources.





You dont see that red region 10^5 starting from 10 million?

or a large part of here starting with 1 million:






Did you forget once again about the importance of exposure times? Maybe you should look at those animations of the Apollo trajectory again.


You got something to say then say it.
Dont bother telling me what to remember.
You have some facts and figures to help figure this out, then please do.
If you can demonstrate where I made a mistake, please do. But vague remarks will not move this discussion further.


From the website where you got those images:


Apollo astronauts, however, were forced to traverse the most intense regions of the Belts in their journey to the Moon. Fortunately, the travel time was only about 30 minutes so their actual radiation exposures inside the Apollo space capsule were not much more than the total dose received by Space Shuttle astronauts.

This fact counters some popular speculations that the moon landings were a hoax because astronauts would have instantly died as they made the travel through the belts. In reality, they may have experienced minor radiation poisoning if they had been in their spacesuits on a spacewalk, but no spacewalk was ever scheduled for these very reasons. The shielding provided by the Apollo space capsule walls was more than enough to shield the astronauts from all but the most energetic, and rare, particles.


So once again your own source contradicts you. Do you stand by your source?

source



new topics

top topics



 
377
<< 168  169  170    172  173  174 >>

log in

join