Disclosure of the moon landing hoax.

page: 11
54
<< 8  9  10    12  13  14 >>

log in

join

posted on Mar, 16 2013 @ 07:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by mrwiffler
reply to post by turbonium1
 


Another annoying aspect of the "oh noes teh danjerus radeashun" argument is the complete lack of historical context. In the 1960's scientists were still in the trial and error stage of gathering data about the effects of radiation. For goodness' sake, they flew planes through mushroom clouds just to "see what would happen".

My father was an airforce technician. Him and his mates would sit in the cocpits of the planes that had flown through nuclear blasts at Maralinga(south Australia) just to "see what would happen". They really weren't aware of the dangers involved. Thought they might get super powers or something.

By todays standards the Apollo missions seem a little lax in the radiation shielding department, but this is a reflection of the state of our knowledge back then, as much as it is also a reflection of the state of health and safety regulations in industry in the past. People took more risks in every dangerous field of endeavour. Regardless, the only real risk to the moon missions in terms of radiation were solar flares. Sure, they took a gamble, but were there any dangerous flares? No. End of story.



edit on 12-3-2013 by mrwiffler because: cause
edit on 12-3-2013 by mrwiffler because: jjnln


The only risk Apollo had with radiation was how to fudge the actual data. And to get Van Allen on board.

This is how to sell the hoax. The first reports were considered accurate, and Van Allen never retracted his findings or data. The data was 'revised' to sell the Apollo story. Not so much revised as blatantly removed the incriminating data.

Apollo had no hope of using the real data. The same reason why we can't do it, over 40 years later, or even the next 20 years. Why do you think they've sent probes into the VA Belts? Any valid reason come to mind?,

A real spacecraft will need real shielding. Not thin aluminum sheets described in Apollo-land fantasy books




posted on Mar, 16 2013 @ 09:40 AM
link   
reply to post by turbonium1
 


So your rebutal is that the radiation data was fudged and VanAllen was persuaded to lie to support the hoax.

Implicit in this notion is the idea that every expert who has researched, first hand, extra-terrestrial radiation since the late 1960's has been lying. Doesn't make sense.

The data we have now shows quite clearly that the Apollo craft were sufficiently shielded.

OK, here's a question for you turbonium. What is the specific type of radiological phenomena that exists in the VanAllen belts? You don't know off had do you. That's Ok, google it and get back to us.









edit on 16-3-2013 by mrwiffler because: cause



posted on Mar, 16 2013 @ 10:44 AM
link   
Ok turbonium et al. You really need to understand the following.

Data about the VanAllen belts is available from the National Space Sciences Data Center at Goddard Spaceflight Center.

nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov...

It is important that their data is accurate as some satelites interact with the VanAllen belts.

Here are some statistics that give various energy levels of protons and electrons and the corresponding distance that the particles will penetrate into aluminium:

Range in Aluminum [cm] Energy
[MeV] electrons protons
1 0.15 ~ nil
3 0.56 ~ nil
10 1.85 0.06
30 no flux 0.37
100 no flux 3.7

There are few electrons(less than 1 electron per square centimeter) at any altitude that is over 7 MeV(mega electron volts).

The "DANGEROUS" radiation in the belts comes from the protons(hope you did your homework turbo.) There are peak(of short duration) fluxes of protons of up to 20,000 per square cm that are greater than 100Mev, at an altitude of 1.7 Earth radii. The Apollo missions were exposed to this area for approximately 5 minutes each time they traversed the belts.

Below is an analysis of this data in relation to the Apollo missions by this fellow: William A. Wheaton, Ph.D. in physics from UCSD in La Jolla in 1976. Post-doc at MIT and 15 years at Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) doing gamma-ray astronomy. Staff astronomer at the Spitzer Space Telescope Science Center at Caltech in Pasadena, CA.

www.wwheaton.com...

Note: 1 rem = 10 mSv(milli Sievert)


These numbers seem generally consistent with the ~2 rem doses I recall. If every gram of a person's body absorbed 600,000 protons with energy 100 MeV, completely stopping them, the dose would be about 50 mSv. Assuming a typical thickness of 10 cm for a human and no shielding by the spacecraft gives a dose of something like 50 mSv in 300 sec due to protons in the most intense part of the belt.

For comparison, the US recommended limit of exposure for radiation workers is 50 mSv per year, based on the danger of causing cancer. The corresponding recommended limits in Britain and Cern are 15 mSv. For acute doses, the whole-body exposure lethal within 30 days to 50% of untreated cases is about 2.5-3.0 Gy (Gray) or 250-300 rad; in such circumstances, 1 rad is equivalent to 1 rem.

So the effect of such a dose, in the end, would not be enough to make the astronauts even noticeably ill. The low-level exposure could possibly cause cancer in the long term. I do not know exactly what the odds on that would be, I believe on the order of 1 in 1000 per astronaut exposed, probably some years after the trip. Of course, with nine trips, and a total of 3 X 9 = 27 astronauts (except for a few, like Jim Lovell, who went more than once) you would expect probably 5 or 10 cancers eventually in any case, even without any exposure, so it is not possible to know which if any might have been caused by the trips.

Much of this material can be found in the 1999 "Review of Particle Properties", (see below) in the sections on "Atomic and nuclear properties of materials", on "Radioactivity and radiation protection", and on "Passage of particles through matter".


This analysis is based on current data. Turbonium, if you say that this is irrelevant because the guy worked for JPL then you really are being foolish and are missing an opportunity to become more informed about this subject.
edit on 16-3-2013 by mrwiffler because: speld a werd rong



posted on Mar, 16 2013 @ 12:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by turbonium1
The only risk Apollo had with radiation was how to fudge the actual data. And to get Van Allen on board.


And right here is where your entire argument falls to pieces (well, it falls to pieces in many places but I'm choosing this one) You seem to be under the impression that only Apollo missions went into the VAB's which isn't remotely true. Satellites in geosynchronous orbit are in the belts and due to their sensitive electronics need to be shielded from the radiation. If the known levels are, as you say, under-reported why then don't we have massive amounts of satellite failures due to radiation damage? If what you're saying (without any shred of evidence, mind you) were true, our GPS and telecommunications systems would be crippled.



posted on Mar, 16 2013 @ 03:59 PM
link   
Carol Rosin/Werner von Braun disclosure timeline. I added some dates here.. and the lies that go along with them.

1. commies (1949-1990)
LIE: American capitalist system defeats the Russian communist system. The American system indoctrinated and brainwashed 2 generations of Americans into believing that the Reds were going to nuke us at any minute of any day. That's enough to justify a clandestine space weapons program from 1960 onward.

The Cold War was not a victory at all unless one also counts the trillions of dollars of government debt racked up by the U.S. since 1950. And then it doesn't seem like so much of a victory to cheer about. During this time is the media exploitation of 'American exceptionalism' where America is characterized as the only remaining superpower in the world. en.wikipedia.org...

#2 and #3 go together because they are both integral to each other, terrorist groups and rogue nations.

2. terrorists/terrorism (1980-now).
LIE: America doesn't fund terrorists or rogue nations.
3. Nations of Concern/rogue nations (1980-now)
LIE: Rogue states are a threat to freedom. The American propaganda victory over Soviet Communism was immediately replace by two new threats, former Soviet satellite states and rogue states that were now in turmoil due to the collapse of the main enemies, the dirty Red Commies.

Of particular interest are the long string of costly foreign interventions from the mid-1980 up until today. Central America, Middle East and the long standing military occupations of European (NATO) countries. Last but not least the unending American support for both Israel AND Saudi Arabia, the birthplace of international terrorism.

This 50 years+ unilateral program of violence and duplicity with other nations proves that America is not what it says it is. Rogue States are created when America uses violence and duplicity on lower ranking nations. These 50 years of international troubles are the distractions while clandestine programs have been weaponizing space.

Now look we have unmanned aerial drones to worry about. It will be a matter of time before some terrorists get their hands on a fleet of unmanned drones --> another disaster set in place by the International Gangsters



posted on Mar, 16 2013 @ 06:22 PM
link   
reply to post by SayonaraJupiter
 



Carol Rosin/Werner von Braun disclosure timeline. I added some dates here.. and the lies that go along with them.

1. commies (1949-1990)
LIE: American capitalist system defeats the Russian communist system. The American system indoctrinated and brainwashed 2 generations of Americans into believing that the Reds were going to nuke us at any minute of any day. That's enough to justify a clandestine space weapons program from 1960 onward.


It was also enough to justify an overt arms race, in which the use of space for military purposes was not only boasted of, but exaggerated.


The Cold War was not a victory at all unless one also counts the trillions of dollars of government debt racked up by the U.S. since 1950. And then it doesn't seem like so much of a victory to cheer about. During this time is the media exploitation of 'American exceptionalism' where America is characterized as the only remaining superpower in the world. en.wikipedia.org...


The Soviet Union has ceased to exist while the United States rolls merrily along. Sure looks like a victory to me.


#2 and #3 go together because they are both integral to each other, terrorist groups and rogue nations.

2. terrorists/terrorism (1980-now).
LIE: America doesn't fund terrorists or rogue nations.


Whoever said that? Certainly no-one here. The United States has long supported groups that use paramilitary means to defeat regimes it considers undesirable. These regimes consider these insurgents to be "terrorists." If you mean that the United States funds terrorist organizations dedicated to damaging American assets, I'm afraid you are going to have to explain yourself. Finally, the United States certainly does not support "rogue states" because the very definition of a rogue state is one that will not acknowledge the United States and the international system it has imposed!


3. Nations of Concern/rogue nations (1980-now)
LIE: Rogue states are a threat to freedom. The American propaganda victory over Soviet Communism was immediately replace by two new threats, former Soviet satellite states and rogue states that were now in turmoil due to the collapse of the main enemies, the dirty Red Commies.


Where do you get this stuff? No-one portrays rogue states as a threat to freedom, only as a threat to the stability of the international economic and political order. North Korea poses no real military threat to anyone, but aggressive actions on its part could disrupt Asia's economic network. That's not a threat to freedom. What is your obsession with Communism? After the fall of the Soviet Union, all of the former republics and satellites, with the notable exception of Beloruss, went hyper capitalistic!


Of particular interest are the long string of costly foreign interventions from the mid-1980 up until today. Central America, Middle East and the long standing military occupations of European (NATO) countries. Last but not least the unending American support for both Israel AND Saudi Arabia, the birthplace of international terrorism.


Isn't this thread supposed to be about the Moon Landings?


This 50 years+ unilateral program of violence and duplicity with other nations proves that America is not what it says it is. Rogue States are created when America uses violence and duplicity on lower ranking nations. These 50 years of international troubles are the distractions while clandestine programs have been weaponizing space.


There was nothing clandestine about it. In fact, you can follow it on an up to the moment basis here:

www.spacewar.com...


4. asteroids (2012-??)
Russia just announced that it was considering to build a space based asteroid shield. Carol Rosin's version of what Werner von Braun told her between 1974-1977 seems to be holding up quite well. This is a planned effort to introduce a new type of enemy threat ~ the Asteroids.


Asteroids have always been a threat. Just ask the dinosaurs.


If we can imagine what Carol Rosin has said so far is true then we can take for granted that the new asteroid threat will be a false flag of some sort -- the asteroid will be bumped from one place to another by covert space weaponry and enters a fatal trajectory that would surely be viewed as an existential threat to humanity. Add to this the American retreat from LEO and the fact that Hollywood has already prepared us for this type of disaster scenario.


If they can move asteroids like that, why do they need a false flag?


5. aliens, extraterrestrials (in the near future?)
Disclosure could mean only 1% or 50% or 99% disclosure. Let's look at the past to see how close we are to the alien disclosure.


Let's return to this line of reasoning when "disclosure" happens.
edit on 16-3-2013 by DJW001 because: (no reason given)
edit on 16-3-2013 by DJW001 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 16 2013 @ 07:13 PM
link   
reply to post by ppk55
 


I think it was real.

But the real video footage was censored and replaced with a sheeple friendly video.



posted on Mar, 17 2013 @ 12:23 AM
link   
reply to post by DJW001
 



Let's return to this line of reasoning when "disclosure" happens.


According to the Rosin/von Braun theory. First, the asteroids have to be ramped up. The disclosure of the moon landing hoax should take place after the e.t. disclosure. When the asteroids have played out... the terrorists and rogue states should be on the decline or almost gone... controlled by one world government system against an advancing, increasing alien e.t. threat... That's not my theory, it's theirs. I added some thoughts to it so I did.

The moon landing hoax disclosure probably won't be 100% successful. We have already seen how NASA "lost" all Apollo telemetry tapes. Today NASA partner in crime Arizona State University is busy erasing the reseau patterns from the Apollo images. Yippee. NASA also sent out teams of investigators to recapture all the Nixon gift rocks... because they knew they are all fakes. Ed Mitchell's camera lawsuit would also be considered part of this recapture team efforts to "clean up" the Apollo situation. It brings new meaning to the Charles Bolden quote about turning science fiction into science fact. Obviously he's in the disclosure plan as NASA administrator - you know the guy who is running the Keep Out Zones over Apollo landing sites.



posted on Mar, 17 2013 @ 04:19 AM
link   
reply to post by SayonaraJupiter
 



According to the Rosin/von Braun theory. First, the asteroids have to be ramped up. The disclosure of the moon landing hoax should take place after the e.t. disclosure. When the asteroids have played out... the terrorists and rogue states should be on the decline or almost gone... controlled by one world government system against an advancing, increasing alien e.t. threat... That's not my theory, it's theirs. I added some thoughts to it so I did.


Leave von Braun out of this. It is Rosin's theory. She has taken advantage of her passing acquaintance with von Braun to lend credibility to her own paranoid rantings. No-one pays attention to her outside of the "exopolitics" movement. Why would von Braun make this death bed confession without mentioning that the Apollo program was a sham?


The moon landing hoax disclosure probably won't be 100% successful.


Because the people who believe Rosin want the Moon Landings to be real, just assisted by alien and/or Tesla technology.


We have already seen how NASA "lost" all Apollo telemetry tapes.


Except that all the important data was preserved.


Today NASA partner in crime Arizona State University is busy erasing the reseau patterns from the Apollo images. Yippee.


Yes, all of that important reseau information. Oh, but wait: the originals are still available, so you have absolutely no point.

NASA also sent out teams of investigators to recapture all the Nixon gift rocks... because they knew they are all fakes.


Please cite a single source to support this statement. NASA has sent out investigators to seek out people attempting to sell rocks. Rocks that they were not authorized to have.


Ed Mitchell's camera lawsuit would also be considered part of this recapture team efforts to "clean up" the Apollo situation.


Or it could be part of the same effort to quash the black market in stolen space memorabilia. Incidentally, how would the camera pose a threat to the historical record?


It brings new meaning to the Charles Bolden quote about turning science fiction into science fact.


Unlike you, who consistently fail in your attempt to turn scientific and historical fact into science fiction.


Obviously he's in the disclosure plan as NASA administrator - you know the guy who is running the Keep Out Zones over Apollo landing sites.


You mean the one who proposed that some, not all, of the landing sites be preserved as heritage sites? Tell me: most of the Roman Coliseum is closed to the public. Does that mean that it is a hoax? The Roman Empire never existed?



posted on Mar, 17 2013 @ 04:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by DJW001

Tell me: most of the Roman Coliseum is closed to the public. Does that mean that it is a hoax? The Roman Empire never existed?


According to his thinking yes, it is a hoax. The same as the Concorde was just a hoax, the same as he thinks battleships were just hoaxes as well! As atmospheric nuclear testing no longer occurs, all those previous tests were also hoaxes.
edit on 17-3-2013 by hellobruce because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 19 2013 @ 10:53 PM
link   
reply to post by DJW001
 



Leave von Braun out of this.


DJW! Are you really going to put on a defense for Werner von Braun in this thread? He's not worth it, I say.

Once a Nazi always a Nazi. You would like to leave von Braun out of this because he is your achilles heal - yet, he always remains the Nazi soul to NASA's Apollo program.

Let me re-phrase that "von Braun is your Achilles' heal... the blackened Nazi soul to NASA's Apollo program.


Here WvB showing color movies to the Führer. It's in wikipedia so it's common knowledge that...


On December 22, 1942, Adolf Hitler signed the order approving the production of the A-4 as a "vengeance weapon" and the group developed it to target London. Following von Braun's July 7, 1943 presentation of a color movie showing an A-4 taking off, Hitler was so enthusiastic that he personally made von Braun a professor shortly thereafter.[24] In Germany at this time, this was an exceptional promotion for an engineer who was only 31 years old.


Basically, Werner von Braun was a state-sponsored terrorist who devised and manufactured weapons of mass destruction in the 1942-1943 time frame.




Once a Nazi always a Nazi. Werner have played movies for Hitler in 1943, 20 years later he was selling rockets to the young JFK as seen here in this undeniable document of Nazi influence on American politics.



posted on Mar, 20 2013 @ 12:04 AM
link   
reply to post by SayonaraJupiter
 


I think you're in the wrong thread. Von Braun being a Nazi has nothing to do with the subject at hand. And as to your vilification of Von Braun, you must take into account that people on both sides of that war invented and manufactured terrible weapons.

Carol Rosin has even less to do with the moon hoax theory.

Why don't you get back on topic and challenge the information on radiation that has been presented? Are the currently available statistics on the levels of proton flux in the Van Alen belts a fabrication?



posted on Mar, 20 2013 @ 11:28 PM
link   
reply to post by mrwiffler
 



I think you're in the wrong thread. Von Braun being a Nazi has nothing to do with the subject at hand.


First you said I am wrong, that is your opinion, I am not wrong with the facts. The problem is that you disagree with me. Okay. Fine. I am not trying to convert you to my way of thinking. I am writing for the audience of the thread.

The problem with some of the Apollo Cult Believers is that sometimes that they are too aggressive and interject comments where they are not necessary. For example, I replied to DJW and you have interjected. That's all fine.

However you need to have this realization :

von Braun is a 100% Nazi. When you try to deny this fact you look totally foolish because this is common knowledge.

The purpose of the thread is "Disclosure of the moon landing hoax." and I must interject, like you have done in this thread, the new narrative, Werner von Braun is so essential to the Apollo that if one were to remove Werner von Braun from the Apollo Equation.... July 20, 1969, 20:17:40 UTC .... that date would have no significance at all.


So, Finally, when you, and DJW, have tried to remove WvB from the Apollo equations, what is your final strategy?

You can't expect to take Werner von Braun out of the Apollo equation and get away with it.
Deny Ignorance. Deny it.



posted on Mar, 21 2013 @ 12:35 AM
link   
reply to post by SayonaraJupiter
 


i dont get it how whether von braun being a nazi or not has anything to do with a moon landing hoax disclosure.

by your method of reasoning:
von braun, who designed rockets, regardless of its purpose will disclose the moon landing hoax because nazi.

p.s. in case you dont get it, von braun being a nazi is off topic.
edit on 21-3-2013 by choos because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 21 2013 @ 05:37 AM
link   
reply to post by SayonaraJupiter
 



So, Finally, when you, and DJW, have tried to remove WvB from the Apollo equations, what is your final strategy?


On the contrary, it is you who have tried to deflect away from the importance of Rosin's testimony. According to her, von Braun "confessed" that there would be a series of false revelations in order to militarize space. If that is true, why did he not confess to faking the Moon landings? You can't have your cake and eat it too.



posted on Mar, 21 2013 @ 06:26 AM
link   
reply to post by SayonaraJupiter
 


The discussion was, for quite a few posts, about the Van Allen belts. Instead of addressing the subject, you went off on a tangent.

So as soon as hard evidence surfaces you're going to change the subject? And when someone points out that you are off topic, you acuse them of "interjecting". Are you serious?





edit on 21-3-2013 by mrwiffler because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 21 2013 @ 08:46 PM
link   
reply to post by davjan4
 


you got it right! NASA faked it all



posted on Mar, 21 2013 @ 10:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by DJW001
reply to post by SayonaraJupiter
 



So, Finally, when you, and DJW, have tried to remove WvB from the Apollo equations, what is your final strategy?


On the contrary, it is you who have tried to deflect away from the importance of Rosin's testimony. According to her, von Braun "confessed" that there would be a series of false revelations in order to militarize space. If that is true, why did he not confess to faking the Moon landings? You can't have your cake and eat it too.


Well DJW please tell us what you really think about DOCTOR Carol Rosin's videotape at the disclosure conference. Was she acting? Is she fabricating? Can we trust her credibility simply by examining her credentials?

Here is Dr. Carol Rosin's video, from the time she takes the podium until she leaves it. There are no cuts. Have you watched it from end to end? I think she's credible. She says not once, but twice, she says that she would testify under oath in front of Congress. I think she's credible. Based on what she has said in the video that Werner von Braun told her between 1974-1977, your Nazi hero von Braun could have been feeding her a load of rubbish and she believed all of it.

Dr. Carol Rosin is a credible witness and Werner von Braun is a credible Nazi. Fair and square.

edit on 3/21/2013 by SayonaraJupiter because: change is to and



posted on Mar, 22 2013 @ 03:26 AM
link   
reply to post by SayonaraJupiter
 



Well DJW please tell us what you really think about DOCTOR Carol Rosin's videotape at the disclosure conference. Was she acting? Is she fabricating? Can we trust her credibility simply by examining her credentials?


Her only credentials appear to be that she knew Werner von Braun, and is using that to enhance her reputation. She seems to have no web presence outside of "exopolitics" circles. Do you believe that the United States is secretly allied with space aliens?


Here is Dr. Carol Rosin's video, from the time she takes the podium until she leaves it. There are no cuts. Have you watched it from end to end? I think she's credible. She says not once, but twice, she says that she would testify under oath in front of Congress. I think she's credible. Based on what she has said in the video that Werner von Braun told her between 1974-1977, your Nazi hero von Braun could have been feeding her a load of rubbish and she believed all of it.


I do not have your remarkable gift for knowing exactly how someone is supposed to behave under every possible circumstance. You say that the Apollo astronauts were clearly lying and that Carol Rosin is telling the truth. All I know is that millions of people can confirm most of the astronauts'stories, but only Rosin knows what von Braun allegedly told her in private.


Dr. Carol Rosin is a credible witness and Werner von Braun is a credible Nazi. Fair and square.


Please explain to me, in detail, why von Braun's background is relevant to his abilities as an engineer. Besides, what was so bad about the Nazis? Do you really believe all the stories that the evil American government tell about them? After all, if they lied about Apollo, maybe they lied about the Holocaust, right? Well?



posted on Mar, 22 2013 @ 07:37 AM
link   
reply to post by mrwiffler
 


Were all the above known to the scientists of the Apollo era? it seems that every research paper on radiation has a recent date.





new topics
top topics
 
54
<< 8  9  10    12  13  14 >>

log in

join