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: 258
377
<< 255  256  257    259  260  261 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 5 2010 @ 09:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by SayonaraJupiter
I'll gladly concur with these statements;
Reaper2137 - Trust no one..

Smack - Simple logic will suffice to expose a falsehood. It does not require any 'qualification', other than the ability to read and reason.

Tomblvd - I don't depend on anyone to tell me what the truth is. As far as things like the Apollo landings go, I trust the science. If someone tells me something, I only believe it if I can confirm it from other sources. NOBODY has a monopoly on the truth.


FoosM - nice scoop on the JW interview Dec 3 upload by un4g1v3n1 but the pt.3 and pt.4 didn't seem to make it up. FYI.
edit on 12201012/4/1010 by SayonaraJupiter because: edit to add a smiley


And what "science" concerning the Apollo landings do you find compelling?

Perhaps you missed this post about Jarrah that shows he cannot be trusted:

Jarrah White invents an expert

He is a fraud.




posted on Dec, 5 2010 @ 10:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by backinblack
reply to post by Smack
 


I have a PHD in common sense..
But then I'm not saying others are fools and hoaxers..
WW will be proud of you



Well if you believe Jarra then get a refund on your PHd MATE watch his videos re photographic evidence ie whats wrong with the pictures taken on the Moon, many on here are very keen amature and even professional photographers and we KNOW JARRA is talking S**T about that subject



posted on Dec, 6 2010 @ 06:23 PM
link   
reply to post by Tomblvd
 


Tomblvd, I have a neutral stance on the sub-topic of radiation. I'd like to see a private space company launch a copy cat Apollo 8 and stream every second of the radiation data back to Earth in real time, open source formatting using open source communications channels. And I'd like that data to be publicly examined by scientists, skeptics & believers. If the experiment can not be reproduced then the original claim would lose credibility and maybe even reach the point of being falsified.

If there were already such a mission(s) that I was not aware of then I do apologize. JW's greatest #1 is the science of the radiation. Radiation is actually the easiest & best way to flim flam the public who don't know anything about such things (this includes myself).

Remember that old Thomas Dolby tune - She Blinded Me With Science? Enjoy! www.youtube.com...

JW's greatest #1 is the science of the radiation. The radiation is the weakest link in the official story, imo.



posted on Dec, 6 2010 @ 06:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by SayonaraJupiter
reply to post by Tomblvd
 


Tomblvd, I have a neutral stance on the sub-topic of radiation. I'd like to see a private space company launch a copy cat Apollo 8 and stream every second of the radiation data back to Earth in real time, open source formatting using open source communications channels. And I'd like that data to be publicly examined by scientists, skeptics & believers. If the experiment can not be reproduced then the original claim would lose credibility and maybe even reach the point of being falsified.

If there were already such a mission(s) that I was not aware of then I do apologize. JW's greatest #1 is the science of the radiation. Radiation is actually the easiest & best way to flim flam the public who don't know anything about such things (this includes myself).

Remember that old Thomas Dolby tune - She Blinded Me With Science? Enjoy! www.youtube.com...

JW's greatest #1 is the science of the radiation. The radiation is the weakest link in the official story, imo.


Could you please give us the most complelling radiation argument, in your opinion?

Considering there have been numerous probes sent through the Van Allen belts over the past few decades by many countries, it is impossible that the observed measurements would deviate much from the published data. lest the probes fry. In addition, there are literally hundreds of satellites in both geosynchronous and geostationary orbit that reside completely within the VA belts. Scientists and engineers from all over the world who make these satellites depend on exact measurements of radiation in order to properly shield their spacecraft.

If what NASA published is not accurate, there would be a lot of dead satellites up there, and, more importantly, a lot of pissed off insurers.



posted on Dec, 6 2010 @ 06:45 PM
link   
reply to post by SayonaraJupiter
 


NO need to "recreate" Apollo 8.

The primary (and incredibly uneducated and false) claim by Apollo "HB"s (hoax believers) relate to the Van Allen Belts. And the need to traverse the area, both outbound, and again inbound. Brief exposure times, by selecting trajectories that minimized exposure. IN any event, such exposure merely slightly increased the dosage of rads, over what could be expected in a normal person's lifetime. The equivalent, really, of a few more chest x-rays than the average.

The VABs are not some sort of "instant death ray" of science fiction.

In fact, we have plenty of data on the VABs, since there are many (I saw a reference that mentioned as many as 200) artificial satellites currently, that encounter the Belts on their orbits....over and over and over again, for years and years....other satellites have been used to specifically chart the Belts, and obtain precise measurements.

"Jarrah White" uses (as you seem to have correctly intuited) the word "radiation", and plays on peoples' general lack of understanding of the phenomenon.

As to learning some actual facts, (absent "JW"s ridiculous hyperbole), this is just one place to start:

A Radiation Primer.

It is also linked form this site:

www.xmission.com...

Of course, charlatans like "JW" will poo-poo those linked sites....however, certainly there are oodles and oodles of OTHER sources online. The "clavius" website simply brings it all to ether in an easy-to-read format.

Too bad, the facts get in the way of the fear-mongering and ignorance spreading of the likes of "Jarrah White"!



posted on Dec, 6 2010 @ 08:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by Tomblvd

Could you please give us the most complelling radiation argument, in your opinion?



Sayonara, to save time, and against my better judgment, perhaps you can just point to the JW video that gives this compelling information on radiation...

We'll do our best to explain where he goes astray.

Guys, be nice.



posted on Dec, 7 2010 @ 06:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by Tomblvd

Originally posted by Tomblvd

Could you please give us the most complelling radiation argument, in your opinion?



Sayonara, to save time, and against my better judgment, perhaps you can just point to the JW video that gives this compelling information on radiation...

We'll do our best to explain where he goes astray.

Guys, be nice.


Tomblvd, it would be tough to single out JW's best video on radiation argument. Let us suffice to say that it his main argument. Besides, JW has already stated his conclusions and this thread is pretty good evidence to me that his conclusions are not accepted by your side of the debate which says NASA sent men to the moon.
Second, if I linked to a specific JW video I could be criticized for Argumentum YouTubum (or whatever it translates to Latin)
I wouldn't want to argue JW's argument for him nor would I wish to defend JW's from you guys.

I wouldn't mind working from a different thread because this radiation topic might be a substantially off-topic for this thread. That being said I was looking at some non JW sources here just to get some better understandings with the launch histories and the returned data that were available in the NASA Apollo era.

This article "Intel... The Orbiting Vehicle Series (OV1)
author: Jos Heyman, FBIS, Tiros Space Information"
www.milsatmagazine.com...

And this article "Title : OV1-12 Dose Rate, Spectral and Flux Measurements."
oai.dtic.mil...

This second link informs us that "Contour maps of the data collected over the satellite's 9-month lifetime are presented in both geodetic and B-L coordinates. A summary of the minor proton events observed by this satellite is also presented. " I was unable to locate any NASA OV1-12 data to look at.

I am looking at OV1-12 because "The 140 kg OV1-12 satellite made biophysical and physical measurements of the space environment during solar flare activity as part of an overall programme to assess the effect of space radiation on humans. The experiments, which were collectively known as WL701 Flare Activated Radio biological Observatory (FARO), were:
a Tissue Equilibrium Ion Chamber
a Linear Energy Transfer Spectrometer
a 20 to 40 MeV Proton Detector
a 45 to 110 MeV Proton Detector
a 3.5 to 5.0 MeV Electron Spectrometer
a Solar Flare Detector
a X-Ray Scintillator
a Solid State Radiation Monitor
a High Energy Particle Detector
a Dose Spectrometer
an Omnidirectional Proton/Electron Spectrometer"
Source: www.designation-systems.net...

The OV1 series of experiments were going from OV1-1 (21-Jan-1965) through to OV1-21 (7-Aug-1971). There are many notable mission failures in the series. What do you think?
edit on 12/7/2010 by SayonaraJupiter because: add 3rd source



posted on Dec, 8 2010 @ 06:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by SayonaraJupiter

Tomblvd, it would be tough to single out JW's best video on radiation argument. Let us suffice to say that it his main argument. Besides, JW has already stated his conclusions and this thread is pretty good evidence to me that his conclusions are not accepted by your side of the debate which says NASA sent men to the moon.
Second, if I linked to a specific JW video I could be criticized for Argumentum YouTubum (or whatever it translates to Latin)
I wouldn't want to argue JW's argument for him nor would I wish to defend JW's from you guys.


This entire thread is about Jarrah White ("young Aussie genius"), so debating his conclusions is well within the parameters of discussion. And argumentum ad youtubum is not specifcially posting youtube videos, it is posting only youtube videos without discussion, as Foos was apt to do. If you want to post a JW radiation video, we'll look at it.

And it has nothing to do with accepting conclusions. The radiation argument is pretty straightforward. Either the numbers add up or they don't. It isn't a matter of belief.


The OV1 series of experiments were going from OV1-1 (21-Jan-1965) through to OV1-21 (7-Aug-1971). There are many notable mission failures in the series. What do you think?
edit on 12/7/2010 by SayonaraJupiter because: add 3rd source


Think about what? I'm not sure of your point here.



posted on Dec, 8 2010 @ 10:18 AM
link   
reply to post by SayonaraJupiter
 



I wouldn't mind working from a different thread because this radiation topic might be a substantially off-topic for this thread.


You obviously haven't read the ENTIRE thread, because if you had you wouldn't suggest radiation discussion warrants another thread, the topic has been address over and over here, so why open another thread?

Next, since you seem to have skipped the thread, I suggest you read the whole thing, so that you understand the fine line that has been walked here by Foosm and others regarding JW ignorant attempts to hack apart Apollo missions, he has failed miserably and to know what has been discussed and what hasn't would benefit you greatly.


The OV1 series of experiments were going from OV1-1 (21-Jan-1965) through to OV1-21 (7-Aug-1971). There are many notable mission failures in the series. What do you think?


You ask Tom what he thinks, yet you haven't asked a question. So what is the point of all this, when you haven't defined what it is you need explained, or what exactly you trying to accomplish?



posted on Dec, 8 2010 @ 05:37 PM
link   
Now you know...
vimeo.com...



posted on Dec, 9 2010 @ 12:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by theability
reply to post by SayonaraJupiter
 



I wouldn't mind working from a different thread because this radiation topic might be a substantially off-topic for this thread.


You obviously haven't read the ENTIRE thread, because if you had you wouldn't suggest radiation discussion warrants another thread, the topic has been address over and over here, so why open another thread?

Next, since you seem to have skipped the thread, I suggest you read the whole thing, so that you understand the fine line that has been walked here by Foosm and others regarding JW ignorant attempts to hack apart Apollo missions, he has failed miserably and to know what has been discussed and what hasn't would benefit you greatly.


The OV1 series of experiments were going from OV1-1 (21-Jan-1965) through to OV1-21 (7-Aug-1971). There are many notable mission failures in the series. What do you think?


You ask Tom what he thinks, yet you haven't asked a question. So what is the point of all this, when you haven't defined what it is you need explained, or what exactly you trying to accomplish?


Sorry that I didn't read past page 100. I was bored with the ad homs. Here is my current idea on the radiation issue, I'm sure you have debunked this already somewhere between pages 100-250.

dsc.discovery.com...
Fake Skin Flying on Moon Probe to Study Radiation
Faux Skin Moon Probe | Discovery News Video June 19, 2009
"That part of the radiation environment has not been well observed in the past," said Boston University's Harlan Spence, the lead scientist for LRO's Cosmic Ray Telescope for the Effects of Radiation, or CRaTER instrument. "There's a huge difference between being in low-Earth [orbit] and deep space."

Crews aboard the International Space Station and the space shuttle, which fly about 225 miles above Earth, are shielded by Earth's magnetic field and particles escaping from the planet's atmosphere.

"When you get about a tenth of the way to the moon, you're basically in deep space and at those altitudes we really don't have a good idea of how radiation interacts with human tissue," Spence said.

First you will come back to say, Apollo astronauts were only in outer space for a few days and radiation was not a serious, life threatening issue.

Then I will come back to say, NASA didn't send any human tissue on the OV1 series between 1965-1971.
And I will also say NASA didn't send any living human tissue beyond the VAB's until Apollo 8 (December 1968) when they dispatched 3 live human test subjects to the moon. This means Apollo 8 was the first scientific test of sending living human tissue beyond the VAB. No dogs, no cats, no monkeys, no critters. Correct me if I am wrong.

There is a substantial gap in the data for the effects of radiation on human tissue in a lunar mission scenario. In 1968 the OV1 series operated in LEO and many of the OV1 experiments were failures. Only now, 40 years later, is the science being conducted in stages, in multiple international platforms, in a step by step scientific process..

My question is do I still need to read pages 100-250 to chat with you guys about it? If JW's radiation argument is wrong then perhaps Harlan Spence and Craig Tooley were also wrong about their statements. Where are the ad homs for Spence & Tooley?

Here is the obligatory NASA link showing the spectacular failures between 1966 to 1969, whyen the U.S. launched three missions in the Biosatellite series.
" The last spacecraft in the series, Biosatellite III, was launched on June 28, 1969. On board was a single, male, pig-tailed monkey (Macaca nemestrina) named Bonnie, weighing 6 kg, for a planned 30-day mission. The mission objective was to investigate the effect of space flight on brain states, behavioral performance, cardiovascular status, fluid and electrolyte balance, and metabolic state. However, after just under nine days in orbit, the mission was terminated because of the subject's deteriorating health. Bonnie died eight hours after he was recovered due to a heart attack brought about by dehydration. " Source history.nasa.gov...

So the OV1 (all in LEO) series with full of fail, and the Biosatellite series (all in LEO) was full of fail. Let's back up to launch day for A8, December 21, 1968. NASA hasn't done the science. As of July 16, 1969 it's launch day for A11, NASA hasn't done the science. All they had were dreams of winning the space race to the moon.

Fast forward to 2009, "Our knowledge of the whole moon is actually quite poor," said Craig Tooley, LRO project manager. "We have much better maps of Mars than we do of our own moon." Source ibid.

In my view, NASA hasn't done the science.
If you read this post closely you will notice that I did not require any ad homs. I have simply outlined my reasoning and my support for JW's radiation argument.



posted on Dec, 9 2010 @ 12:58 AM
link   
reply to post by SayonaraJupiter
 



First you will come back to say, Apollo astronauts were only in outer space for a few days and radiation was not a serious, life threatening issue.


That about sums up the radiation argument in one sentence!!!

And you found the answer in your own post, excellent.

The only issue was solar flares and there was ample time to abort the mission no matter what phase it was to escape the effects and be on the way home once the flare was in proximity of the spacecraft. They'd have about three days till the flare reached them.

As for the rest of your post, I suggest you read up on formatting your posts so that one can tell quotes from sources, your input and the rest of your thoughts. As I really can't differentiate what is what.

BTW JW radiation argument isn't valid, it has been torn to shreds in this thread, over and over and over and over and over and over and over........

Rinse and repeat for everything he has presented.



posted on Dec, 9 2010 @ 01:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by theability
reply to post by SayonaraJupiter
 



First you will come back to say, Apollo astronauts were only in outer space for a few days and radiation was not a serious, life threatening issue.


That about sums up the radiation argument in one sentence!!!

And you found the answer in your own post, excellent.

The only issue was solar flares and there was ample time to abort the mission no matter what phase it was to escape the effects and be on the way home once the flare was in proximity of the spacecraft. They'd have about three days till the flare reached them.

As for the rest of your post, I suggest you read up on formatting your posts so that one can tell quotes from sources, your input and the rest of your thoughts. As I really can't differentiate what is what.

BTW JW radiation argument isn't valid, it has been torn to shreds in this thread, over and over and over and over and over and over and over........

Rinse and repeat for everything he has presented.



Sorry for the formatting faux pas


theability, could you please point out to me any successful science missions (US or USSR) doing human tissue or live animal testing which exceeded beyond LEO and beyond the VAB's prior to A8, launch date December 21, 1968? Same question for weed and Tomblvd. It is a yes or no question.

If, yes, please cite your sources.



posted on Dec, 9 2010 @ 01:49 AM
link   
reply to post by SayonaraJupiter
 


Irrelevant. That's like asking for all the sailors who circumnavigated the globe before Magellan.



posted on Dec, 9 2010 @ 02:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by DJW001
reply to post by SayonaraJupiter
 


Irrelevant. That's like asking for all the sailors who circumnavigated the globe before Magellan.


Magellan is the wrong answer. The Magellan spacecraft was a space probe sent to the planet Venus.

DJW001, could you please point out to me any successful science missions (US or USSR) doing human tissue or live animal testing which exceeded beyond LEO and beyond the VAB's prior to A8, launch date December 21, 1968? Same question for weed and Tomblvd. It is a yes or no question.

If, yes, please cite your sources.



posted on Dec, 9 2010 @ 05:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by SayonaraJupiter


Magellan is the wrong answer. The Magellan spacecraft was a space probe sent to the planet Venus.


Oh God.

The Magellan spacecraft, like many spacecraft, was named after an actual person, Ferdinand Magellan.

Shouldn't you already know that?


DJW001, could you please point out to me any successful science missions (US or USSR) doing human tissue or live animal testing which exceeded beyond LEO and beyond the VAB's prior to A8, launch date December 21, 1968? Same question for weed and Tomblvd. It is a yes or no question.

If, yes, please cite your sources.


Here

"The first tortoise in space was launched September 14, 1968 by the Soviet Union. The Horsfield's tortoise was sent on a circumlunar voyage along with wine flies, meal worms and other biological specimens. These were the first animals in deep space. The capsule was recovered at sea on September 21".



posted on Dec, 9 2010 @ 10:05 AM
link   
reply to post by SayonaraJupiter
 


I will assume you were joking about Magellan. Sending live animals into the cis-lunar environment was unnecessary; the data received from electronic probes allowed scientists to reproduce deep space radiation conditions in controlled laboratory experiments. This allowed for more direct observations. The example you cited earlier is an excellent example of the limitations on performing experiments that are monitored remotely by telemetry.

To explain by analogy, sending remote probes containing animals to the Moon would be like early European navigators putting mice in bottles and floating them out to sea. They would not learn much of value.

The radiation argument hinges upon one factor: fear of radiation. This fear comes largely from a lack of understanding. Jarrah White and others exploit this fear. Between the Second World War and the lunar landings, the effects of different types of radiation on the human body were intensively studied by scientists. This was largely a matter of national security, although it did provide some useful medical techniques as well. This research allowed NASA scientists to calculate the risks that the astronauts were exposed to.Society has changed enormously in the past half century. We have become a "nanny society," which demands levels of risk approaching zero in all its aspects. The scientists and test pilots of the time had more liberal definitions of "As Low As Possible."



posted on Dec, 9 2010 @ 11:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by SayonaraJupiter
So the OV1 (all in LEO) series with full of fail,


There were 12 launches in the OV1 series, carrying 27 spacecraft. Of those spacecraft, only five failed to reach orbit.

Of the 27 spacecraft, there were 11 that dealt with radiation. Of those 11, five went above low-earth orbit:

OV1-2: Radiation data, apogee: 1,699 miles.
OV1-9: Radiation bio-hazard experiments, apogee: 2,847 miles.
OV1-13: Radiation, engineering experiments, apogee: 5,725 miles.
OV1-14: Radiation data, apogee: 6,125 miles.
OV1-19S: Radiation experiments, apogee: 5,551 miles.

Source: www.astronautix.com...

edit on 9-12-2010 by nataylor because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 9 2010 @ 02:20 PM
link   
reply to post by SayonaraJupiter
 



theability, could you please point out to me any successful science missions (US or USSR) doing human tissue or live animal testing which exceeded beyond LEO and beyond the VAB's prior to A8, launch date December 21, 1968? Same question for weed and Tomblvd. It is a yes or no question.

If, yes, please cite your sources.


Apollo 17 Carried Mice as an experiment to study the effects of radiation in deep space.

PROGRAMS, MISSIONS, AND PAYLOADS

Amazingly enough no ill effects were noted on return of the mice to earth.



posted on Dec, 9 2010 @ 06:03 PM
link   
reply to post by nataylor
 


Thanks nataylor. I'm currently reviewing your link www.astronautix.com... and this link www.designation-systems.net... and this link oai.dtic.mil...

It will take some time for me to correlate all this mission information. I look forward to absorbing more radiation data!
(horrible radiation joke)
But I will stand by my "full of fail" remark since 5 failures in 12 launches (speaking of OV1) equates to a 41 percent fail rate.

Let's all keep in mind that "mission summaries" are not scientific data. Scientific data is published and peer reviewed. I noticed how easy (for any of us) to just point a link to a "mission summary" to support our arguments. (I am also guilty of this and I hope to avoid this bad habit in the future).

I'm going to respond to DJW001 and Tomblvd in this same post. I hope it conforms with formatting ettiquette. My goal is that my line of inquiry remains neutral and my reasoning crystal clear. Thanks you guys for taking the time.
-----
DJW001, you are presuming that my questions are coming from a "fear of radiation". This is simply not the case at all. DJW001, you also failed to answer the question (twice) while nataylor responded with some substance. DJW001, you said "Sending live animals into the cis-lunar environment was unnecessary;" and you said "the data received from electronic probes allowed scientists to reproduce deep space radiation conditions in controlled laboratory experiments." DJW001, now I am going to ask you for the citation which shows that, prior to Apollo 8 launch date, NASA scientists reproduced deep space conditions in controlled laboratory experiments and conducted studies of human tissue or live animals in that 'reproduced' environment.
-----
Tomblvd, on to the follow up question - When the Russians launched a turtle to the moon on September 14, 1968, did it directly enhance NASA's scientific understanding of cosmic space radiation on human tissue, prior to the Apollo 8 launch on December 21, 1968?



new topics

top topics



 
377
<< 255  256  257    259  260  261 >>

log in

join