Faked Moon Landing - Amazing Documentary

Originally posted by intergalactic fire
reply to post by Phage

 

So they were lucky, 9 missions, almost 3 months in space during solar maximum.
Good timing i guess

Hey, if you don't want to accept the facts from other people, you can always hear it from the horse's mouth!

"The recent Fox TV show, which I saw, is an ingenious and entertaining assemblage of nonsense. The claim that radiation exposure during the Apollo missions would have been fatal to the astronauts is only one example of such nonsense."

- Dr. James Van Allen

Arghright, the hammer and the feather experiment.. It would be incredibly hard to fake it in pre -jurassic HD Apollo film which had a quality of if -I had-a- penny-for- each-pixel-I -would-still-have-a-penny.Wanna bet for a million that I can fake it for 10 bucks? Of course, making of a lead( for suspense, let`s imagine osmium) falcon feather and a plastic hammer was out of equation.Funny, how internal pressure of astronaut`s space suit din`t hint even a notch of resistance to his fingers in gloves, which allowed him to mess around with the feather and roll it between his fingers. Here we go falcon feather. And here`s falcon punch from me to Apollo.

Originally posted by DoctorMobius
reply to post by Komodo

 

Ok the soviets are also in on it, but Communism's a red herring right? Not everything is a conspiracy. You can believe a narrator, I'll believe the KGB.

What did they tell to you?

reply to post by paradox


Chill out man, everyone has there opinions right.
And i wasn't talking about the radiation from the VAB, but solar radiation.
If a major solar flare headed for the moon while they were up there, things could have gone quite interesting.

As I read later on, yes they had some precautions and safety instructions if that would happen, but again, who knows the effect of dense solar particles hitting your body and equipement when you are on the moon.
It would be the first time such a thing would happen.

Originally posted by daddio

NASA was created to rob the American public of more "tax dollars", it is all about control, and how would you implement an "Alien invasion" in later years if you did not get everyone to "believe" that man can travel through deep space with no ill health effects? There is more to it than just a spacecraft landing a man on the moon. I could go into the physical numbers but others can do that for themselves and see that it was virtually impossible back then. just look at the Mars missions and how many of them went wrong and how many craft were lost. And that was with modern technology and better and more powerful computers. Shoot a man to the moon and miss? What would the ramifications be, and the odds were very good that they would miss, especially in 1969. Does anyone remember the lost Tetris satelite that was suposed to map the trajectory to the moon? That info has been hidden from public view as it would show that it was not possible to get the numbers right for the flight path. Too many variables at that distance in 1969 with the limited computer technology. Slide rule anyone?

Regardless of my position regarding the reality of the Apollo moon landings, I'm getting *really* tired of the taken-as-Gospel assertion that "We couldn't possibly have gone to the Moon because all the engineers had to work with were slide rules, not sophisticated computers!"

Let me introduce three "character witnesses" to testify on behalf of the much-maligned slide rule.

The XB-70 Valkyrie


The SR-71 Blackbird


and the North American X-15


Never mistake primitive tools for primitive engineering, people...a slide rule is a perfectly valid (albeit comparatively slow) computer, and in the hands of a good engineer, it can facilitate miracles.

Originally posted by intergalactic fire
reply to post by paradox

 

Chill out man, everyone has there opinions right.
And i wasn't talking about the radiation from the VAB, but solar radiation.

Woah I was chill. I was just saying. And he wasn't only referring to the van allen belts, he was referring to all radiation.

If a major solar flare headed for the moon while they were up there, things could have gone quite interesting.

As I read later on, yes they had some precautions and safety instructions if that would happen, but again, who knows the effect of dense solar particles hitting your body and equipement when you are on the moon.
It would be the first time such a thing would happen.

They knew what they were getting into. It takes a lot of planning to send people to the moon. But don't think they got off freely. The radiation does have an effect. A lot of astronauts end up getting cataracts or other ailments in the future. The radiation just isn't enough to kill them, though.

Yep , In more recent years NASA has reported cases of eye cataracts developing in the majority of astronauts after returning to earth, some within 4 to 5 years of returning, other cases taking 10 or more years to become apparent. Scientists have long known that there is a causal relationship between radiation exposure and cataracts.

The dangers to the craft are in the form of radiation which can interfere with, disrupt and damage sensitive electrical equipment. In some space flights electrical equipment has been turned off whilst passing through the belts in order to prevent damage. Of course, space craft also have built-in screening to minimise radiation risks.
To protect astronauts from radiation dangers, spacecraft are fitted with various types of shielding, such as aluminum shielding, and the astronauts also wear protective clothing during this part of their journey. Also the courses/paths were plotted so that the craft would travel through the parts of space where the Van Allen belts are at their thinnest. Despite these precautions, there were and are still serious radiation considerations.

reply to post by intergalactic fire
Well it was a chance they took comes with the territory
solar flares arent all that bad as they help reduce radiation levels


During the storms the solar storms, something strange happened onboard the International Space Station (ISS): radiation levels dropped.

"The crew of the ISS absorbed about 30% fewer cosmic rays than usual," says Frank Cucinotta, NASA's chief radiation health officer at the Johnson Space Center. "The storms actually improved the radiation environment inside the station." see it is not all doom and gloom .

Originally posted by jazzguy
i love this documentary. its one of the ones that started my passionate hate affair with nasa lol.

That is really an amazing statement. Hating the source of all things that you can hate.
Is it possible that what you really hate is your lack of understanding in science?
I think that people who hate, will target anything they they do not understand, to justify the most useless of all emotions.

reply to post by charlyv


Yep people fear what they do not understand , and jump on the hate wagon when confronted with the truth that is presented to them ..

reply to post by denver22

That's interesting but it doesn't have a lot to do with the radiation environment for the Apollo astronauts. Because of the relatively short duration of the missions cosmic rays were not a large concern. The "protection" offered by CMEs only applies to galactic cosmic rays, which only become a serious problem with extended exposure.

The major concern during Apollo was the chance of a major solar proton event (SPE). Because SPEs are directional (like CMEs), the odds of a dangerous one occurring on any particular mission were quite low. A calculated risk. Risk was, and is, part of the job description for astronauts.

reply to post by Phage


what a marvelous acievement for man, well done buzz and co for your feats.
You got passed that nasty radiation belt and took some giant leaps for us respect.
P.S phage i think you get my drift brother we got there there were risks involved but it was done.

R.I.P for the brave astronauts who lost there lives living the dream of many young children when a time when most wanted to become astronauts ..

reply to post by denver22

In full agreement. I just like to keep the facts in order.

I find it interesting that it seems to be a lot of the same people who claim that our ancestors could not have done the things they did also claim that the Moon landings were impossible. Seems to be common thread; denial of the use of human abilities, skills, and ingenuity (not to mention courage) to accomplish a chosen task. They don't seem to think much of themselves (us).

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by denver22

 

That's interesting but it doesn't have a lot to do with the radiation environment for the Apollo astronauts. Because of the relatively short duration of the missions cosmic rays were not a large concern. The "protection" offered by CMEs only applies to galactic cosmic rays, which only become a serious problem with extended exposure.

The major concern during Apollo was the chance of a major solar proton event (SPE). Because SPEs are directional (like CMEs), the odds of a dangerous one occurring on any particular mission were quite low. A calculated risk. Risk was, and is, part of the job description for astronauts.

I do not know why you would wan't to correct me as i am basically saying it is all a risk and all you go on to say is what i missed out so my bad thanx for adding the (SPE) look i know about extended exposure .

I am talking about risks and i have mentioned about risks phage my boy the radiation has everything to add to about "risks" whether it was major or not.......

Originally posted by Brother Stormhammer
Let me introduce three "character witnesses" to testify on behalf of the much-maligned slide rule.

The XB-70 Valkyrie


The SR-71 Blackbird


and the North American X-15


Never mistake primitive tools for primitive engineering, people...a slide rule is a perfectly valid (albeit comparatively slow) computer, and in the hands of a good engineer, it can facilitate miracles.

Also the Concorde, first flown in 1969 - and yet here we are 43 years later and we currently have no supersonic airliner, nor one even being built!

So that must mean Concorde was a myth?

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by denver22

 

In full agreement. I just like to keep the facts in order.

I got some for you, radiation is dangerous long exposure as well as short exposure they both carry risks
although one can be far greater than the other, are we in full agreement now?
P.S i just like to keep the facts in order
,

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by denver22

 

They don't seem to think much of themselves (us).

edit on 5/18/2012 by Phage because: (no reason given)

Well, who to blame,.
If you take a good look around this world and see humans killing their own species just for the fun of it.
Who and what to believe becomes a great challenge these days.

reply to post by intergalactic fire

No doubt.
We do a lot of bad stuff. But that doesn't mean we can't, haven't, or won't do some amazing things.

reply to post by digitalf


Oh trust me I watched it and a few others. I'm just saying I know former KGB and Spetz. who tell me it's legit. I'm not saying anyone is wrong, I just trust my friends.