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: 266
377
<< 263  264  265    267  268  269 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 15 2010 @ 11:35 PM
link   
reply to post by nataylor
 



Man, you are being more obtuse and circular than normal.


I believe it safe to say that this is proof of no desire to care about the reality of things, only the desire to paint a dark image so that he may and JW may profit upon the fear and hate generated by this campaign.

As others has said you could launch him to the moon and Foosm would still call you a liar that man has set foot there.

There is no level of proof large enough for those who could care less about the truth.

:shk:


edit on 15-12-2010 by theability because: spelling




posted on Dec, 16 2010 @ 12:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by theability
reply to post by nataylor
 



Man, you are being more obtuse and circular than normal.


I believe it safe to say that this is proof of no desire to care about the reality of things, only the desire to paint a dark image so that he may and JW may profit upon the fear and hate generated by this campaign.

As others has said you could launch him to the moon and Foosm would still call you a liar that man has set foot there.

There is no level of proof large enough for those who could care less about the truth.

:shk:


edit on 15-12-2010 by theability because: spelling


theability -
Does a NASA link to a webpage prove anything about cosmic space radiation? Does a religious scripture prove anything about God? Can you show some NASA funded space turtles or space dogs? Prior to 1968? If not, it seems to be a leap of faith to me.



posted on Dec, 16 2010 @ 03:56 AM
link   
reply to post by FoosM
 



So how do you explain the stars in the following photo:


What exactly is there to explain? Be specific.



posted on Dec, 16 2010 @ 04:19 AM
link   
reply to post by SayonaraJupiter
 


On the other hand, let's look at Mariner 2:


The scientific experiments were mounted on the instrument mast and base. A magnetometer was attached to the top of the mast below the omnidirectional antenna. Particle detectors were mounted halfway up the mast, along with the cosmic ray detector. A cosmic dust detector and solar plasma spectrometer detector were attached to the top edges of the spacecraft base. A microwave radiometer and an infrared radiometer and the radiometer reference horns were rigidly mounted to a 48 cm diameter parabolic radiometer antenna mounted near the bottom of the mast. All instruments were operated throughout the cruise and encounter modes except the radiometers, which were only used in the immediate vicinity of Venus.

Scientific discoveries made by Mariner 2 included a slow retrograde rotation rate for Venus, hot surface temperatures and high surface pressures, a predominantly carbon dioxide atmosphere, continuous cloud cover with a top altitude of about 60 km, and no detectable magnetic field. It was also shown that in interplanetary space the solar wind streamed continuously and the cosmic dust density was much lower than the near-Earth region. Improved estimates of Venus' mass and the value of the astronomical unit were made.

Astronautix.com

Then there's Explorer 35:


Explorer 35 - . Payload: AIMP E. Mass: 104 kg (229 lb). Nation: USA. Agency: NASA Greenbelt. Program: Explorer. Class: Earth. Type: Magnetosphere satellite. Spacecraft: IMP. USAF Sat Cat: 2884 . COSPAR: 1967-070A. Apogee: 675 km (419 mi). Perigee: 484 km (300 mi). Inclination: 32.4000 deg. Period: 96.26 min. Earth magnetic tail measurements. Lunar Orbit (Selenocentric). The Westinghouse Aerospace Division, under contract to National Aeronautics and Space Administration's Goddard Space Flight Center, engaged in the system design, integration, assembly and launch support for Anchored Interplanetary Monitoring Platform Satellite, officially designated Explorer 35 by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration. It was launched on July 19, 1967, with the primary objectives of investigation of interplanetary plasma and the interplanetary magnetic field out to and at the lunar distance, in either a captured lunar orbit or a geocentric orbit of the earth. In the geocentric orbit, the apogee was near or beyond the lunar distance. In a lunar orbit, additional objectives included obtaining data on dust distribution, lunar gravitational field, ionosphere, magnetic field, and radiation environment around the moon. AIMP-E also studied spatial and temporal relationships of geophysical and interplanetary phenomena simultaneously being studied by several other National Aeronautics and Space Administration satellites. The investigation in the vicinity of the moon provided for measurements of the characteristics of the interplanetary dust distribution, solar and galactic cosmic rays, as well as a study of the magnetohydrodynamic wake of the earth in the interplanetary medium at the lunar distances.

Astronautix.com

I could fill the page with cut and paste "research" to refute your quote mined cut and paste "research."



posted on Dec, 16 2010 @ 04:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by SayonaraJupiter
Children's cancer research has nothing at all to do with space radiation studies beyond the VAB.


Radio waves, visble light, X-rays, are all forms of electromagnetic radiation. (imagine.gsfc.nasa.gov...) So I imagine all studies into radiation would be somewhat useful, but there's plenty of pre 1960s studies into radiation, cosmic, and gamma rays.

Eric Christian confirms some of this information here: imagine.gsfc.nasa.gov...

Dangerous radiation penetrates our bodies. The not so dangerous stuff generally doesn't.

History:



(Collated from various wikipedia sources in this general area: en.wikipedia.org...)

1896 Henri Becquerel discovers radioactivity
1900 Paul Villard discovers gamma radiation whilst studying radium
1903 Ernest Rutherford names Villard's radiation 'gamma rays' and has seperated alpha and beta
1911 Domenico Pacini observes that there is a decrease of radioactivity underwater and therefore a part of ionization must be due to sources other than Earth
1912 Victor Hess experiments and concludes: "The results of my observation are best explained by the assumption that a radiation of very great penetrating power enters our atmosphere from above."
1913-1914 Werner Kolhörster confirms Hess' result by discovering increased ionization at an altitude of 9 km
1927 Hermann Joseph Muller (Nobel prize winner) publishes research showing genetic effects of radiation
1927 - 1937 The term "cosmic rays" was coined by Robert Millikan who proves they are extraterrestrial in origin and not produced in the atmosphere
1935 Sergey Vernov performs cosmic ray readings at high altitude (13.6km using geiger counters)
1937 Homi J. Bhabha describes how cosmic rays from space interact with the upper atmosphere
1948 Van Allen and co perform experiments using balloons near the top of the atmosphere observing that primary cosmic particles are mostly protons with some helium


Even if X-rays and cosmic rays had nothing in common ... we still researched both. Both are similar enough that you can't dismiss the amount of research in radiation that occurred over 60 years. That's half a century of 'prep' time for Apollo.

Brookhaven National Laboratory which does a lot of research into radiation has actually been leaning towards proving that the radiation thread isn't as dangerous as first thought. Some articles quote half as dangerous (en.wikipedia.org...)

Zubrin Robert certainly believes it isn't as dangerous as people have been making out. You can read about some of that here (www.spacedaily.com...). In that article there is an interesting fact that a Russian Cosmonaut spent 18 months in space on board Mir. 18 months. Okay, so it's not the moon but if he can spend 18 months in space a few days on the moon doesn't seem that bad.

You can also read Robert Zubrin's book posted below for some collated sources and arguments regarding radiation. I have only just begun reading it.

Zubrin, Robert (1996). The Case for Mars: The Plan to Settle the Red Planet and Why We Must. Touchstone. ISBN 0-684-83550-9.

Enjoy.
edit on 16-12-2010 by Pinke because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 16 2010 @ 05:54 AM
link   
reply to post by SayonaraJupiter
 



Does a NASA link to a webpage prove anything about cosmic space radiation? Does a religious scripture prove anything about God? Can you show some NASA funded space turtles or space dogs? Prior to 1968? If not, it seems to be a leap of faith to me.


If you were shown a NASA space turtle, you'd claim it was a leap of faith to believe it anyway. Your argument is totally irrational. You choose to place your faith in Jarrah White. As a skeptic, you should examine his claims more closely or admit you are simply a believing disciple.

As a skeptic, what do you make of Jarrah's claim that the Apollo missions remained in Earth orbit? Every night, hundreds of astronomers photograph the night sky, yet not one accidentally captured them in an astrophotograph. Is that possible? Or were they all bought off, including the amateurs? How much would that cost? And not one single astronomer turned whistle blower? What does your skepticism make of that claim?


Amateur photo of satellite trail.

edit on 16-12-2010 by DJW001 because: Edit to add photo.



posted on Dec, 16 2010 @ 08:45 AM
link   
More proof that we landed on the moon:



You can't refute my brilliant arguments, FoosM.
I am whipping the 'Genius' butt in this debate.



posted on Dec, 16 2010 @ 08:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by nataylor

Originally posted by FoosM
Man thats silly.
Why dont you show me what is right about it.
Why did you choose those documents?
Only because they were published prior to Apollo 8?
LOL.

Man, you are being more obtuse and circular than normal. You wanted data from before Apollo 8, so of course I picked stuff published before it. And I chose those documents because they contain actual data about radiation in the space environment and that's the data you asked for.


And what does that data actually say?



posted on Dec, 16 2010 @ 09:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by FoosM
And what does that data actually say?


It says they had a pretty good idea of the radiation they'd encounter and how to protect the crews from it.



posted on Dec, 16 2010 @ 09:46 AM
link   
reply to post by SayonaraJupiter
 



theability -
Does a NASA link to a webpage prove anything about cosmic space radiation? Does a religious scripture prove anything about God? Can you show some NASA funded space turtles or space dogs? Prior to 1968? If not, it seems to be a leap of faith to me.


Well... hmmm

Try this, find a tall building and jump, then you'll believe in Newtonian mechanics, the same fundamentals that took man to the moon.

[please note sarcasm]

Just because you can't see it, does not mean its fake or impossible.

Any other questions?




edit on 16-12-2010 by theability because: spelling



posted on Dec, 16 2010 @ 10:50 AM
link   


Last year when Jarrah came to visit, I interviewed him. The first section of the interview is kind of rough because we did it rather late at night after a busy day/evening running out to Area 51.








added the missing the videos 2 & 3
edit on Thu Dec 16 2010 by DontTreadOnMe because: abovetopsecret.com...

Mod Note (This Appears On Every New Thread/Post Reply Page):
Please make sure every post matters.
Refrain from 1-line or very-minimal responses.
Edit-down your quoted posts to the important part.
Provide meaningful comments for links, pictures, and videos.

edit on Thu Dec 16 2010 by DontTreadOnMe because: Mod Note: One Line and Short Posts – Please Review This Link.



posted on Dec, 16 2010 @ 11:19 AM
link   
reply to post by FoosM
 


Really, FoosM! Have you paid no attention at all to all the T&C violation warning from the Mods? Not only are you quoting a previous post in its entirety, you're adding yet more video spam without a statement or summary of your own.



posted on Dec, 16 2010 @ 11:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by nataylor

Originally posted by FoosM
And what does that data actually say?


It says they had a pretty good idea of the radiation they'd encounter and how to protect the crews from it.


Did it, where does it say that and...
were they right?


edit on 16-12-2010 by FoosM because: spelling



posted on Dec, 16 2010 @ 11:26 AM
link   
reply to post by FoosM
 



Did it. Where does it say that and...
where they right?


Yes and yes. For one thing, the basic data they collected about the effects of radioactivity on living tissue is used to set radiation exposure standards in everyday life, You had better hope they were right next time you go to the dentist. As the defender of truth, it is your job to review the data and prove that it is wrong.

edit on 16-12-2010 by DJW001 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 16 2010 @ 11:33 AM
link   
reply to post by DJW001
 



Really, FoosM! Have you paid no attention at all to all the T&C violation warning from the Mods? Not only are you quoting a previous post in its entirety, you're adding yet more video spam without a statement or summary of your own.


More proof that this is all a joke to people like Foosm that cannot follow the simplest of rules.

Never About Apollo, always about youtube traffic, that is all.

Sad that the Mods allow this behavior that defies ATS T@C to continue. :shk:



posted on Dec, 16 2010 @ 11:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by FoosMDid it, where does it say that and...
were they right?


It says that when you look at the totality of the evidence and data they had collected. And yes, they were right, as you can see from the measured radiation exposure of the Apollo crews that were well within acceptable limits.



posted on Dec, 16 2010 @ 02:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by DJW001
reply to post by FoosM
 



Did it. Where does it say that and...
where they right?


Yes and yes. For one thing, the basic data they collected about the effects of radioactivity on living tissue is used to set radiation exposure standards in everyday life, You had better hope they were right next time you go to the dentist. As the defender of truth, it is your job to review the data and prove that it is wrong.

edit on 16-12-2010 by DJW001 because: (no reason given)


So the data they got from their space missions was used to set radiation exposure standards here on Earth.
Is that what you are saying. I had no idea we had to go to space for such information.




posted on Dec, 16 2010 @ 03:28 PM
link   
Animal experiments were conducted but I guess all of these are fake.
Hey, have I convinced you yet?








This is what Animal Astronauts did when they retired.


Don't be shy, FoosM. Tell me how much you appreciate being treated with the same respect you have graciously shown all of us. It is with the deepest feelings of reciprocity that I bring to you these most heartfelt offerings. Someday everyone will hold JW up as an example....



posted on Dec, 16 2010 @ 03:36 PM
link   
reply to post by Smack
 


I'm not certain whether this is a direct descendant of "Space Chimp Ham", but surely enCAPSULates (get it??) the collective feelings of many of us, and his friends, after seeing the antics of a few particular posts, of late:




What did I read earlier...the Soviets launched turtles early on, into cislunar space and return, in order to study effects of the space flight, back on Earth?

Interesting. I suppose, most people have little feeling for them, since they are reptiles, not nearly as cuddly, fun and playful as a dog, cat or even a chimp...still, they DO have their fans out there:





edit on 16 December 2010 by weedwhacker because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 16 2010 @ 05:49 PM
link   
reply to post by weedwhacker
 


Grave site of the World's First Astrochimp Ham




The legacy of Ham lives on



Wonderful music by James Horner for the Excellent film Apollo 13
Made with the free Orbiter flight simulator software
orbit.medphys.ucl.ac.uk...



There are no words for the magnificent legacy the space program has left to Humanity.
Our destiny is out there, and they took the first steps for us all.
I'm sorry, but JW and his ilk have no soul.



new topics

top topics



 
377
<< 263  264  265    267  268  269 >>

log in

join