they flooded the compartmrnt with o2, than he. the son found a steel-bar shoved into the electronics, causeing the spark. remember, nazis were in full control of the area...
Oh, and this video is a lie. Grissom NEVER was "an outspoken critic of the space program." He was critical of the original design of the Apollo spacecraft.
Grissom was a career astronaut who wholeheartedly was part of the space program.
This video is a LIE. Fox TV should have been sued and had its license suspended pending an investigation by the FCC.
@MadHighway Really now? Well,you're "half-correct" about Grissom. He was a bad-ass who thought he could say what ever he wanted to. He wanted his cake and eat it too. He did critisize the whole space program but never too much because he enjoyed all the attention and celebrity status he was getting. That's what cost him his life. He never knew how serious his handlers were. His wife today knows he was killed by NASA/Nazis anyway no matter what naive people like you may think.
@MadHighway Your diagnosis of "state of paranoia" is funny. I'll see your definition of paranoia and charge you with a "state of denial". Your state of mind is as follows - - Denial (also called abnegation) is a defense mechanism postulated by Sigmund Freud, in which a person is faced with a fact that is too uncomfortable to accept and rejects it instead, insisting that it is not true despite what may be overwhelming evidence.
Yes, denial of your paranoia-based fabrications, misperceptions, and conjecture predicated on your ignorance of and lack of education in sciences, engineering, geopolitics, and history.
In other words, you're talking out of your hat, and you don't know what you're talking about. Any reputable scientist knows what you're promulgating is a crock of shit.
Here's the problem you'll never solve: you don't HAVE "overwhelming evidence." You fail right there. All of your 'evidence' comes from your own mind and the mental fabrications of others like you.
@MadHighway I looked into this matter and I and just about all my family and friends when they ive an honest look at all the evidence with an open mind,there is only one conclusion to come to. And btw,why have'nt we ever gone back to the moon since 1969? {I'm in the mood for a good laugh}
The last Apollo mission to the moon was Apollo 17 in Dec 1972. Congress cut funding to the program in Sept 1970 in favor of the Skylab space station (cheap because it used up surplus Apollo hardware) and the Space Shuttle (very, very expensive R&D).
NASA has never had anything CLOSE to the funding to carry out several projects at once like a space station, reuseable Shuttle, AND a moon-landing program.
There's your reason: lack of funding. Go tell your friends and family!
@MadHighway Look,if you are on the up and up and have an honest desire and interest to check out all the facts no matter if they are pleasant or unpleasant,I'm gonna send you a 1 and 1/2 hour video of a talk given by one Peter Levendar about the NASA Space Program that I think you will find very interesting. Things are not always as they seem and if you look into what this guy discusses,it may surprise you to say the least. Check your mailbox.
It took 25 min of claptrap about UFOs and Kennedy to get to the assertion that Wernher Von Braun was "head of NASA." Uh, no. Von Braun designed rockets. James Webb headed NASA in the 60s.
Plus, Levendra labors under the notion that Germans are 'Nazis'. Now he's talking about an office "at the NASA site." Canaveral? Houston?
This Levendra guy watched 'JFK' too much. Anyway, you use him to support your Apollo hoax--he mentions nothing of that. Now he's on about Manson. Hokay.
@MadHighway You must be really DENSE like most people these days who have 'zero' attention span. You're never gonna find everything out in one place. Would if life could be so simple. Lavander is not right on all things. He's way off on his comments on who wanted JFK dead. And if you're a lone gunman nut,then you're denial is full blown. You have to connect the dots with lots of research and cross-checking. Problem is not many people have the time these days which I'm sure is just fine the NWO
You suggested this weirdo Levendra in order to support your Apollo hoax case, and his own paranoid assertions don't even match yours. Now you're dragging the Kennedy assassination into this. Hokay.
Conclusion: you'll eat up any bit of conspiracy nuttiness you'll come across, because like all conspiracy believers, you're paranoid.
Way to go. You supported conjecture with yet more conjecture that doesn't even support yours!
@MadHighway It always amazes me how once empty headed debunkers like you manage to get the word 'paraniod' out and use it from then on and think you have the upper hand. Name calling will not get you the truth,nor will the oil-soaked news monopoly you watch every night on the tele.
Yes, we know you're amazed--the origin of which means to be in a mental state; bewildered, confused.
Paranoia is a state of mind, not a label. You put your mistrust of government ahead of facts, and facts you do employ you and others like you have twisted to support that mistrust.
Nothign of what you propose about an Apollo 'hoax' is reasonable and not a whit is supported. Your conjecture is not evidence.
800+ kg of hand-selected lunar rock and soil samples: THAT'S evidence.
@MadHighway Not sure what constitutes 'evidence' in your mind but any lawyer would tell you that absence of evidence does not mean evidence is absent.
@tjrxk7 .... anyone looking into this hoax for 10 hours with an open mind will realize just like all gov BS it was a charade to steal money and fool the sheep
@pt1gard "10 hours" researching the NAZI-CIA connection? If you start with Operation Paperclip and SS Major Von Braun from 2 years before the war was declared over you will see how the US and the USSR were fighting for who would get the most murderous NAZI scientists. If we were supposed to get the lions' share of them,why did the Russians get to space first?Get to put a dog up there first?First man up there,first woman up there first,THEN MIRACULOUSLY we get to the moon?Does that seem logical?
Anyway, sorry to hear you've dragged your family and friends into your fallacy, but paranoiacs do that.
You're in no way using an "honest and open" mind since it's readily apparent you've severely twisted and misperceived facts. I'm sure there are other facts you've messed up as well.
For instance, your take on Virgil Grissom is not supported by any biographical history at all--it's all YOUR supposition.
Grissom hated the public eye and was uncomfortable with "celebrity status" as you put it. In no way was he a "bad-ass". He was a career pilot, a test pilot, and not given to taking the risks a "bad-ass" would take.
That you accuse NASA of murder is particularly base. Go live on Nibiru, ha!
@MadHighway By 'bad-ass' I meant him speaking out on how underdeveloped and unprepared for the moon shot as NASA was. He loved the celebrity status as anyone would but he never for a minute thought his outspoken comments would get him killed cause like all the astronauts,they trusted who they were working for. Only problem was that they were working for NAZIs who did not take kind to what negative comments Grissom did make. His wife to this day says he was murdered. You are in denial dude.
What, then, a silly term to use: "bad-ass." Also, I just corrected you: your statements about Grissom are incorrect and not supported by biographical history. He was never in love with "celebrity status" and hated the public eye.
I'll type very slowly and in large letters so you can understand better: GRISSOM WAS UNHAPPY WITH THE APOLLO BLOCK I SPACECRAFT'S PROBLEMS IN DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION.
Got it? No? Read again, slowly. Repeat until you get it, dude.
Im not sure what they teach in school,considering Im 56 years old! lol! Sarcastic prick! lol! Plus,I couldnt care LESS about physics,so you're talking to the wrong person!
So pray tell then (in 1969 when technology was NOTHING like it is now),HOW did a tin can like the Lunar Module EVER "blast off" from the moon's surface?? If it took that much rocket power and people power on earth to get it lifted in the first place,then how could three astronauts do it from the moon? Of COURSE the whole thing was a HOAX! lol!
@toffeetigerkimba too bad you have no evidence. Go read a book, you will learn what the rest of us already know about the technology created that supported Mercury, Gemini & Apollo. the LM APS only had to lift about 10K lbs off the Lunar surface under 1/6th of Earths gravity to launch the LM Ascent stage back to the CSM. whats so hard about that ?
The moon's gravity is 6 times weaker than Earth's. And the LM was designed to be VERY LIGHT. AND the LM carried TWO men to the surface and back, not three. AND it left half of itself behind--the descent stage.
You need to read up on Apollo literature. All of it. 100%. This woudl be after you get an education in science.
@hunchbacked There's nothing to make me believe you have any expertise whatsoever in engineering, electronics, or basic analysis.
You've made so many mistakes over so many videos your credibility is completely shot to hell.
I see electronics experts run rings around you. I see you consistently reluctant to have any peers review your work. I see a superiority complex ruining any sort of objectivity you may have attempted to have.
I have made some mistakes I have acknowledged and corrected.
My opponents make far more mistakes than I do, but they never acknowledge them because they don't have the honesty I have.
Calling ApolloWasReal an expert in electronics is more than exaggerated for he has huge misconceptions.
And about beeing peer reviewed, I am perfectly willing to be, provided that it is by real experts and not by pseudo experts who have no real deep knowledge of electronics.
@hunchbacked See you here next year bro, where the only thing that will have changed is further lunar exploration, more confirmation for the Apollo lunar missions.
All accusations in this video are irrational conjecture. The fire was a tradgic accident, nothing more. Mr. Bardon was abandoned by his government supporters (yes, there WERE several Apollo opponents in Congress) when they realized he was mentally unstable. ALL the mountains of evidence that exists that verify our walking on the Moon have stood up to scientific scrutiny for over 40 years. MHB's have ZERO supporting scientific evidence. Those ARE the facts!
Baron was right, nasa didn't want that ruining their plans, the truth was out about the apollo program so they killed him, faked the moon landings to restore glory to the US, and perpetrated the biggest hoax of all time, and no manned spacecraft has ever gone past the van allen belt, people just have to open their eyes and use their logic and think for themselves
Never went to the moon because of the extreme levels of solar radiation. The report disappears and to this day has never been found? They accidentally erased the first moon tapes? Something does not add up here and it's right in front of your face. We never went to the moon in the apollo spacecraft. Physically impossible.
@Daddyo930 Physically impossible? What was impossible for the spacecraft to reach the Moon? Which dose of radiation causes health threats? Do you know the dose, the kind of radiation and the exposure time?
@CHSarahBs Gamma radiation specifically. Here is one question. If we actually went to the moon, how come we have not been back? How come NASA now admits that they have to do more research into the dangers of radiation in space? According to the IAEA "There is no such thing as a safe dose of radiation" That's from the International Atomic Energy Agency. Go argue with them about "safe" doses.
@Daddyo930 They have to do the research due to the mission profiles of future missions. They will last much longer then an Apollo short trip of a few days.
@CHSarahBs Without electromagnetic shielding, which we don't have, you will die in space in a very horrible fashion and in short order once you reach about 500 miles. the US Government tried to blast a hole in the belt 248 miles above Earth in 1962. Operation Starfish Prime a Megaton Nuclear Bomb was used to try and force an unnatural corridor through the Van Allen Belt. What they created was a third belt that was 100 times more intense than the natural belts. Is Operation Starfish real?
@Daddyo930 Harlan Spence from MIT (one of many many other experts) said, that a long term mission would be dangerous without proper shielding. For this a model with electromagnetic shielding was designed.
As usual you ignore (or forget?) one important indicator for radiation sickness: the exposure time.
@CHSarahBs Then you can end this debate right now and direct me to the link that shows anyone how much gamma is in space in real time. There is a good reason why they can't reveal how much gamma radiation there is in space. Because someone with a brain might figure out than in our current state of technology, we can't go to the moon now because of lethal levels of gamma radiation. Find me the real time readings of gamma radiation in space.
@Daddyo930 Take this article: science. nasa. gov/science-news/science-at-nasa/2005/08sep_radioactivemoon/
Keep in mind the exposure time. Keep in mind the dose. Can you give a concrete number how much radiation an astronaut has to be exposed to get harmed?
@CHSarahBs GLAST Burst Monitor. Ever heard of it? Go there and if you can figure it out, you will learn that there is lethal radiation in space at all times and from every direction. The directions are rather simple. Just type in a location in the sky and the day and time at which you wish to know how much radiation there was in space near their monitor. At no time has the radiation been anywhere near survivable without electromagnetic shielding. We didn't have it then therefore we didn't go.
Reanalysis of Relativistic Radiation Belt Electron
3 Fluxes using CRRES Satellite Data, a Radial
4 Diffusion Model and a Kalman Filter
Space is deadly and if you try to leave this planet without electromagnetic shielding, your are gonna fry like a re-fried twinkie. If you understand physics you should have no problem coming to the conclusion that radiation is constant, everywhere.
@Daddyo930 The biomedical results of Apollo, with data from personal radiation dosimeters work by every astronaut who went to the moon, has been published and available for 4 decades. No physicist, radiation expert or other spacefaring nation who has also sent probes and instruments to measure cislunar space or the lunar surface has ever disputed this data.
We are all aware of the radiation risks of space travel, but all data supports a survivable short trip such as the Apollo missions.
@CHSarahBs Did you even bother to visit the GLAST Burst Monitor website? Do I have to post some readings from there on my next post? You are being obtuse.
@Daddyo930 The same I think about you. Yes I have visited the website. Nothing there says, that Apollo was impossible, similar to the biomedical results of Apollo, in which you should take a look. As it has been told to you several times: There is no physicist, radiation expert or other spacefaring nation which has ever disputed this data. Not even the Chinese dispute them ;)
And again I want to bring it in your mind: exposure time.
@CHSarahBs Access to Fermi GBM data is provided by the Fermi Science Support Center through this portal. Bottom. Here is a reading from January 1, 2011 12:10:25.
The submitted query parameters for query ID=L110728233657E0D2F37E29 were:
Search Center (RA,Dec) = (83.8221,-5.39111)
Radius = 15 degrees
Start Time (MET) = 321451810 seconds (2011-03-10T12:10:10)
Stop Time (MET) = 333576607 seconds (2011-07-28T20:10:07)
@CHSarahBs As long as your in space your being exposed to:
Search Center (RA,Dec) = (83.8221,-5.39111)
Radius = 15 degrees
Start Time (MET) = 321451810 seconds (2011-03-10T12:10:10)
Stop Time (MET) = 333576607 seconds (2011-07-28T20:10:07)
Minimum Energy = 100 MeV
Maximum Energy = 1e+10 MeV
I does not really matter where you are in relation to the sun. Lethal radiation is constant in space and at no time does it dissipate to non-lethal levels.
@Daddyo930 So you ignore again the important indicator exposure time. Do you have any idea why the unit for dose rates is Sv/s or Sv/h? Do you know what this unit means?
@CHSarahBs biomedical results of Apollo, in which you should take a look.
I did...and the lie about Major Solar Particle events is clearly seen by looking at the NGDC, and it's CFI index for major solar flares. Link is on my main page. Waking up to NASA lies, means confronting your own cognitive dissonance, and gullibility! Good luck with that!
@krisdevalle ASTROPHYSICISTS and SOLARPHYSICISTS, as well as RADIATION SHIELDING EXPERTS like Eleanor Blakely, say RADIAITON IN SPACE IS DEADLY! And that ALUMINUM worsens the problem by creating an even greater number of solar particles of a slower atomic value (which can stick in the skin of astronauts) on the interior of the craft, due to fragmentation! So, you people who delude yourselves, are only deluding yourselves. The experts know full well, as do I, that you are full of crap!
Correction...lower, not slower atomic value...Anyone who is really interested in knowing the truth of the radiation in space is welcomed to listen to a few of the experts right here. watch?v=Bqv4q35QqUg
See, this is the blatant deception you fuckwits engage in.
If by deadly you mean increased risk of cancer, then no problem, but I really haven't heard of anyone getting cancer and dying in 4 days, as you appear to be suggesting what would have happened during Apollo.
Stop fucking about. Capslock does not avoid the fact that you fail, repeatedly, to qualify the claims of these experts.
@krisdevalle Deadly as in over 100 REMsper hour at a minimum. 500 REMs and your dead. The readings that NASA presents as accurate dosimeter readings for apollonots are fucking laughable. Radiation experts from radiologists to solar/astro physicists laugh at your stupidity. You are the head fuckwit of the fuckwit club their defail! Anyone with half a brain will ignore your ignorance and look up the shit themselves. My channel has the links to NGDC, to see major solar flares during Apollo!!!
@krisdevalle NO fucking experts comment on APOLLO DOSIMETER READINGS. At least not any who have any shred of self fucking respect! Try getting a comment from Eleanor Blakely about the accuracy of said numbers...Bet she is moot on it. She has self-respect!
As for your inablity to understand Solar Flare Data, that is your lack of understanding, and ignorance. Try educating yourself. Or go talk to some low-dose radiation treated patients about their neural function problems! Fucking nitwit
@un4g1v3n1 Actually, the data is used in the publication 'Managing Space Radiation Risk in the New Era of Space Exploration', where many notable experts acknowledge the reality of Apollo.
@krisdevalle We both know you are the lying fuckwit around here. Try EE Kovalev, VAN ALLEN's original research describing the radiation in the VAB's alone as a DEADLY SEA OF RADIATION. Or you can refer to the data yourself, once you abolish your ignorance! That will be a hell of a feat!!
Now, go troll some one who is a dumb shit, cause your ignorance tires me!
I looked at E. E. Kovalev's work. In no way does he state, allude to, imply, or suggest that the Apollo lunadr landings are anything but established fact.
You used a peer-reviewed source like Kovalev and twisted his work for your own use. That shows your argument is fallacious. Kovalev co-wrote "Estimated Radiation shielding for a manned flight to Mars"; he's never suggested as you do that space travel is impossible.
You didn't even READ his work; you quote other crackpots.
@MadHighway What part of 300 plus REM per hour through the VAB's alone are you incapable of understanding? And that was a MINIMUM! You see, you don't need to specifically mention the fact that APOLLO was impossible with numbers like that. It's a FUCKING GIVEN. Your ignorance is mystifuckifying!
For those who are paying attention, and give a fuck about being lied to by dipshits like dumbhighway, 500 REM and you are DEAD! The inner VAB starts at 1000 miles out, and the outer ends at 60,000.
@un4g1v3n1 1centimeter of lead OR 18g/cm² of water to attenuate gamma rad' by %50.
2.7g/cm² water =1.0g/cm² AL.
Apollo's 7-8g/cm² AL. density rating was equivalent to over 20g/cm² of water.
2g over halving thickness
The trajectory for Apollo11 flew thru' omnidirectional flux protons of 100MeV / 10³particles/cm²-sec. That was sufficiently attenuated by the hull of the CM of 8g/cm², anyone with any knowledge of radiation will not dispute that.
We like how you flagged the correct answer of 2 hours ago as spam.
Also, I'm still awaiting your list of peer-revierwed science papers written by reputable scientists that propose the Apollo landings were a hoax. I need the names of the authors and the titles of the works, and their publications.
"1 centimeter of lead OR 18g/cm² of water to attenuate gamma rad' by %50.
2.7g/cm² water =1.0g/cm² AL.
Apollo's 7-8g/cm² AL. density rating was equivalent to over 20g/cm² of water.
2g over halving thickness
The trajectory for Apollo11 flew thru' omnidirectional flux protons of 100MeV / 10³particles/cm²-sec. That was sufficiently attenuated by the hull of the CM of 8g/cm², anyone with any knowledge of radiation will not dispute that."
300+ rem per hour for an unshielded, NAKED OBJECT, you twit.
"The total radiation exposure to astronauts was estimated to be much less than the five (5) rem set by the U.S. Atomic Energy Commission." Flight paths were designed to minimize exposure. The risk was deemed acceptable and the missions proceeded.
You still will NOT address the fact that the Soviet Union tracked all Apollo missions to the moon and confirm the US landings.
This is where we get to eventually; I provide data and references that mention, support and accept Apollo, you reject it because you don't want to face it. Call it fiction, despite no evidence of such.
Maybe you could write deadly in all caps again, it appears to be your forte.
@krisdevalle You're still in here trying to debunk these videos? Damn you've been doing this for years now. Is this your full time job? Two things you have to do and they are 1) get a life and 2) get a REAL job. It's really getting stale.
Hmm, funny how the CM's two outer shells of solid aluminum (covering up another solid aluminum interior pressure shell) are so fragile to radiation, when one square inch of ground here on Earth is well protected against radiation by a mere 14.7 pounds of rarefied nitrogen and oxygen (air).
The Apollo spacecraft were tested unmanned deep within the Van Allen belts before Apollo 8. No radiation problems experienced. Don't misquote Blakely again.
@MadHighway You are full of crap! Period. Honey-combed aluminum. Next time you go to the dentist, bring along a couple of sheets of aluminum foil, and tell him you don't need his stinking lead vest moron!
Clearly you don't know what monocoque construction is. An outer layer of aluminum sheet, honeycomb bonded tom an inner layer, which housed an "inner aluminum face sheet with a steel honeycomb core."
The source for X- and gamma rays that you're tallking about was much more diffuse than a medical X-ray machine, and FAR more distant: 150,000,000 km. Plus the sun is a weak emitter of X/gamma radiation. The trip through the Van Allen belts was only a few hours.
PLUS, there were unmanned Apollo CSM craft tested in high Earth orbit--in the Van Allen belts--and no additional radiation was recorded in the crew cabin. Several layers of aluminum were quite enough to deal with the moderate radiation. Plus, the Soviets sent Zond spacecraft around the moon 1968-70 with animal specimens inside. None suffered radiation poisoning.
@MadHighway You are a full of shit troll. No one has gone into, or beyond the VAB's. Anyone who thinks so, is completely ridiculous, and ignorant of the true radiation environment in and beyond them. Astro and solar physicists laugh at Apollo Fairy Tale believers as if they are ignorant children. So do the radiologists, and other people familiar with the effects of radiation on human DNA and vital organs.
Keep dreaming, and trolling, or whatever it is you are trying to accomplish...
@MadHighway Another fool unaware of the radiation-laden space within the VAB's and beyond. Your own ignorance makes you the laughing stock of astro-solar physicists the world over. Oh, btw, those who use low-dose radiation to treat cancer patients think your an idiot as well!
Your ignorance is a drag on your ability to be taken seriously on this topic!
Show me the peer-reviewed papers in the scientific community that declare the moon landings faked, and show me the reputable science and engineering experts who are in consensus the landings were faked.
After you've shown me all the names and theior reputability, you can explain why the Soviet Union tracked all nine US manned missions to the moon, and the six landings themselves.
Go on, give me names of reputable, peer-reviewed scientists; explain the Soviet corroboration.
The only people not taken seriously are you paranoiac hoax crackpots. Regale me with the names of reputable scientists and their peer-reviewed work that hypothesizes Apollo was faked. Show me ten names of non-crackpots that have succeeded in initiating top-level governmental inquiries. DO IT.
Please don't name Bill Kaysing, Bart Sibrel (a cab driver), or Jarrah White (a schizoid).
Zond 5, a Soviet unmanned circumlunar flight: "On September 18, 1968, the spacecraft flew around the moon at an altitude of 1950 km. High quality photographs of the earth were taken at a distance of 90,000 km. A biological payload of turtles, wine flies, meal worms, plants, seeds, bacteria, and other living matter was included in the flight."
The biological specimens showed no radiation effects. Soviets then cleared manned flights to the moon.
I told you once: the Command Module comprises two layers of aluminum SHEET METAL with a steel honeycomb interior. STEEL: iron and carbon matrix. This shell covers an INNER metal vessel of more aluminum. Enough to shield against VAB flux.
And I still need the titles of those peer-reviewed scientific papers that show Apollo was faked. I also need you to address the fact that the USSR confirmed the US landings, AND the 800+ kg of lunar rock and soil samples hand-collected.
@MadHighway What you need is a brain, and the ability to think logically, with reason. Since you lack either, you'll continue to buy NASA's bullshit stories, and pay to be kept in the dark about the true nature of space.
I need the names of the scientists, papers, and publications that contain peer-reviewed works that call Apollo a hoax and NASA a lying organization. You muyst also address the issue that the Soviet Union INDEPENDENTLY confirmed its adversary's manned presence at the moon, as well as the landings. Also, the Soviets returned live biological specimes from circumlunar space with their Zond program 1968-70.
@un4g1v3n1 BTW..Moron, that's not the Sun in your video...LOL That's the light at the elbow of the robotic arm. You can look up the schematic of the arm and see, that would you'd have to look something up and do a little research. You know R E S E A R C H ..? Too Too funny
Hey, moron, Blakely's using Apollo lunar footage and experiences to underline her talk about space radiation.
Blakely quotes how astronauts saw light flashes in their eyes during their lunar missions. She's NOT a hoax proponent--she USES Apollo data! She talks to the astronauts!
@MadHighway watch?v=6aWUa5l_WNs I guess listening to an expert explain how ineffective, and even more deadly aluminum is for shielding space radiation is beyond you?
Does Eleanor Blakely say outright that Apollo was a hoax, and that NASA is lying, and that NASA is guilty of murdering its own employees? Or are you simply using her research incorrectly to promulgate your anti-American, amnti-intellectual, and anti-scientific paranoia?
ANSWER my other issues: USSR confirmation; USSR sends biologicals around moon in Zond program; 800+ kg of hand-selected soil/rock samples.
You FOOL. Blakely's talking about CATARACTS. She does not support you in any way, because she is not an insane, paranoid, ignorant, megalomaniac Apollo hoax proponent.
@MadHighway Again, you ignore the facts stated as Blakely did. Aluminum is a terrible shield as the fragmentation will cause an even more dangerous environment inside the craft than on the outside. I guess you prefer to hold onto your Apollo Fairy Tale, than to admit you were duped and deal with it!
Blakely is NOT an Apollo hoax proponent--she'd call YOU crazy. The longest trip to the moon with aluminum-steel monocoque design was about ten days. That's about as long as you want to go with that desuign, but it was doable. The astronauts took a radiation dose--but not enough to cause cancer (as yet). She's talking about CATARACTS.
She's funded by NASA, the organization who makes you paranoid. She's no hoax nut unlike you. Take your insane concerns to her.
And STILL you have not accounted for the 800+ kg of hand-selected rock/soil samples; USSR confirmationn of US landings; USSR ZOnd program which sent and returned live biological specimens to cislunar space.
You twist a reputable, NASA-funded scientist's work to suit your anti-NASA, anti-science needs. Wow.
You deliberately exaggerate and twist Blakely's work, and you also ignore the fact that she clearly used Apollo data and astronaut testimony in her research. Also, her work here is about CATARACTS, not radiation-induced sickness and death.
She never once said Apollo is 'faked', nor does she imply so. She said simply that aluminum is not the right shielding for long-duration space voyages. Apollo missions were less than two weeks--NOT long-duration.
@MadHighway She states that ALUMINUM makes the interior environment of the craft MORE DEADLY than outside the craft. At 300 REM per hour (minimum according to Kovelev) on the outside, and the inside being MORE DEADLY, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to understand that it doesn't take longer than a couple hours to be dead. 500 REM being a death dose. Now, go back to sleep and dream your Apollo Fairy Tales bub!
@un4g1v3n1 It's Bremsstrahlung, it's when an electron hits aluminum & causes soft X-ray emission.That's why Apollo used phenolic resin as a apart of the shielding.
And no one ever said"more deadly"in referring to such a case, you're lying.
REM is a unit of radiation dose equivalent, the outside of the Apollo hull is not subject to dosage,idiot.
You use this conversion1RAD=62.4x100³MeV/g.
Look at the trajectory for Apollo, it was child's play to fly around the VA belts.
Anyway, Salyut, Skylab, Mir, and the ISS are all made of aluminum. The radiation dosage from those who spent months in space, and even over a year, is FAR above a ten-day Apollo lunar mission.
Your science is bogus and you twisted Blakely's words to suit your own. Your case is shot down.
@MadHighway Wow, another excuse coming from ingorance and exclusion of facts. All the space stations you name are well below the inner layer of the Van Allen Radiation belts, safe under the protection of the Magnetosphere. Your deceptions are as obvious as your ignorance!
I'm quoting Blakely's work, not using my own opinion or committing fraud as you are.
Blakely states her research shows higher risk of radiation-induced cataracts with increased exposure time to a space environment. She states that Apollo lunar missions were of far lesser duration than later space station missions.
The magnetosphere does NOTHING to stop UV, gamma, and X-ray radiation. You deliberately twisted Blakely's work to suit your anti-NASA stance. She CONSULTS for NASA.
1centimeter of lead OR 18g/cm² of water to attenuate gamma rad' by %50.
2.7g/cm² water =1.0g/cm² AL.
Apollo's 7-8g/cm² AL. density rating was equivalent to over 20g/cm² of water.
2g over halving thickness
The trajectory for Apollo11 flew thru' omnidirectional flux protons of 100MeV / 10³particles/cm²-sec. That was sufficiently attenuated by the hull of the CM of 8g/cm².
.
Electrons in the belt are at 1-10MeV's and less lethal than protons.
You ignore all else Blakely says in her video and yet exhort us to watch the whole thing.
You tell us Apollo is a fraud, and yet the scientist you uphold uses Apollo data.
You tell us she says "aluminum shielding is deadly," when she uses no such words; Blakely was talking about risk of cataracts, not radiation deaths. Her presentation says nothing about deaths.
You also say now that she's a fraud herself, being paid off, AND a hoax believer.
What's psychotic is the fact that you call Blakely a fraud, and yet uphold her work, when her work verly clearly uses Apollo data and she mentions talking to Apollo astronauts and incorporating their experiences in her work. Clearly she knows Apollo was a real achievement, else as a reputable scientist she would not use the program's data.
Give it up. You're in a corner now and using weak defamations to weasel your way out.
This whole question of 'aluminum shielding' wasn't even part of Blakely's presentation. It was a question from an audience member about radiation dangers during spacewalks. She said EVAs involve radiation doses and that new shielding designs better than aluminum-based are needed for long-duration Mars missions. Nothing about a 'fake' Apollo. (She also stated "vegetarian" astronauts will be favored for a Mars voyage, but anyway.)
It's not often I see un4g1 out posting, but he won't answer or have any discussion with me.
He has quite an aversion to facts, and he seems to be getting more detached from reality.
He'll probably end his days held up in a McDonalds somewhere like in Iowa with a AK-47 screaming about how Apollo believers are unpatriotic and deserve to die.
"1 centimeter of lead OR 18g/cm² of water to attenuate gamma rad' by 50%.
2.7g/cm² water =1.0g/cm² AL.
Apollo's 7-8g/cm² AL. density rating was equivalent to over 20g/cm² of water.
2g over halving thickness
The trajectory for Apollo11 flew thru' omnidirectional flux protons of 100MeV / 10³particles/cm²-sec. That was sufficiently attenuated by the hull of the CM of 8g/cm².
Electrons in the belt are at 1-10MeV's and less lethal than protons."
Gotta' do better than that. And you gotta' do a better video, like why not show where the Zodiac is in your video where you claim the robotic arm's light at the elbow is the Sun. You know what the Zodiac is, it's the path the Sun follows across the sky through the constellations.
Ever stop to wonder why you can see the Aurora and the Sun at the same time?
38:55 onward: we see here Blakely using Apollo data as part of her presentation. 40:00 she shows how Apollo astronauts had lower doses because of their SHORTER DURATION TIMES IN SPACE.
The space station astronauts take the highest doses as they spend weeks and months in space. Apollo missions were 10 days or less.
Dr. Blakely is NOT a hoax-believing crackpot as you hoax nuts are. You've been using her research to supoort your insane paranoid delusions. She supports Apollo.
@Daddyo930 I went and found one. The new is not very good for you. MeV means millions of electron volts. You can now find out how much lethal gamma radiation there is on any given day by going to the GLAST Burst Monitor site. If you can figure it out, you will learn that at all times, 24/7, there is a constant barrage of lethal radiation in space and from every direction in space. The only thing that protects us is our magnetic shield.
@MadHighway Can you say ionosphere? It's a level of the atmosphere. You haven't paid attention in science class. I doubt by your last statement that you even graduated high school.
Man, you don't even have grasp on what solar radiation means. You think it means the Sun is radioactive. The earth's magnetic field traps some solar wind atoms, PARTICLES, MATTER, but it doesn't do shit to electromagnetic radiation (you know, radio, light, UV, X-rays, gamma rays).
You've confused the ionosphere with the magnetosphere, and you think that both act as some kind of 'shield'--YOUR word--that can deflect electromagnetic radiation. You're bonkers, dude.
@MadHighway Yes, Doodlyo thinks the ionosphere blocks gamma rays that come from the Sun, not only that, he thinks the Sun produces a high flux of gamma ray radiation.
You too have not addressed the fact that there are 800+ kg of hand-selected lunar rock and soil samples broguht back from the moon, and that the USSR confirmed the adverdary USA's manned presence at the moon and on its surface 1969-72.
I'm sure you simply ignore such facts in your anti-intellectual, anti-science crusade.
@MadHighway Lets deal with your understanding of the "atmosphere" first. Is the ionosphere an electromagnetic shield? I won't waste time talking with someone who doesn't understand the basics of physics first.
Let's talk about the term you fabricate--"magnetic shield"--and how you also mistake the solar wind for solar irradiance, AND mistake the word "irradiance" to mean "radioactive."
The ionosphere has a property that we use to extend radio transmissions long distances--dependent on the time of day. We use very low angle of incidence.
The ionosphere reflects no other type of radiation. Are you suggesting it "shields" IR, light, and UV?
@MadHighway No, the ionosphere stops gamma, high-frequency ultra violet and X-ray radiation. It's electromagnetic properties do that. Because of the makeup of the layers of the ionosphere, harmful radiation is absorbed. Now, what percentage of the solar constant is ionizing radiation?
You really do need to be beaten over the head with this. Have you never looked this up yourself?
Ok. 0.001% compared to visible, IR, UV? The Sun itself is weak a powerful emitter at gamma and X-ray wavelengths. Spacecraft design--layers of metal--protected the astronauts.
Some solar flares can be powerful emitters of gamma rays; those are not part of the Sun's usual output. But you say ONLY the ionosphere--obviously made of lead--can protect people from deadly empty space.
You operate from the prejudice that the Sun is a powerful emitter of gamma and X-ray radiation. It's actually a very weak emitter in those parts of the ER spectrum. Well over 99% of its radiation is light, heat, and UV.
That's it, buddy. The US landed, collected 800+ kg of samples, and there is independent confirmation. Your thesis uses prejudice and conjecture to overturn reality. Your 'gut' is leading you on a paranoid wild goose chase.
@MadHighway I told him the to look up the solar wind, I think when he got there he saw it was made of particles that have energies of the 1.0-1.5keV range. He's a little upset over those numbers.
He's got all the "facts" where he wants em', don't be messin' it up for him with real sciencey' stuff.
Well, your answer to the misinformation these two are spouting had been flagged by either these two or some anonymous party.
The solar-radiation guy seems to think that the Sun is powerful at gamma and X-ray parts of the spectrum. I can't find anything anywhere in the literature that says the Sun is such. It emits strongest in visible light--green. White dwarf stars and OB stars are high X-ray/gamma ray emitters.
@MadHighway So what your saying is that 1 percent of the solar constant is ionizing radiation? Is that what your saying? You don't sound like you know anything in particular about astrophysics.
No, what I and many others and the textbooks are saying is that you're patently wrong and misusing facts and distoriting others, and that NO, the amount of GAMMA AND X-RAY RADIATION is far less than 1%. Far, far less.
Again: the Sun's EM output is mostly light, IR, and some UV. Gamma and X-ray radiation are extremely minor constituents of nominal solar radiative output. Were the Sun an A-type star, the gamma ray flux would be much higher. Keep reading up--just with less prejudice
Hey, you know you forgot that we have space stations that orbit above any effective atmosphere. What's protecting them from all this gamma and X-ray radiation you say the Sun pours forth?
Don't say it's the "ionosphere", because they're at the TOP of the ionosphere.
Space stations 400km high can only be protected from solar gamma/X-rays by their metal shells! And solar output must be LOW because the Russians had guys up there for a year straight.
@MadHighway He doesn't seem to want to talk about the GOES satellites in the geosynchronous orbit at almost 36,000 km out.
This guy Doodlyo is a real character, keep watching you'll see the typical personification of the Dunning -Kruger Effect!! (look it up for a big laugh)
@MadHighway Your getting stupider as this goes on it seems. The space station is 220 miles in orbit. 220 miles = 354 kilometers. NASA lowered the orbit of the space station because of the deterioration of the thermosphere. I'm really wasting my time with you because whereas you know something about NASA, you don't know jack about astrophysics. Later.
The ISS orbit is >>376x398 km<<. A search for 'thermosphere deterioration' showed no results. The ionosphere is basically vacuum, and thus you're saying that vacuum 400 km high deflects gamma, X-ray, and UV radiation. Hokay.
Your 'knowledge' is utter fabrication. The metal body of spacecraft stops the incoming (weak) solar hard irradiation.
Please consult university-level, peer-reviewed literature and SHOW US A QUOTE that says there's a sea of deadly radiation out there.
@MadHighway No need for "quoting". The solar constant is 1.36 kw/m2. 1.361 kW/m², is equivalent to 1.95 calories per minute per square centimeter, or 1.95 langleys (Ly) per minute. What percentage of the solar constant is ionizing radiation? You really are out of your league here. A sophomore really. You can't even answer the question I bet.
You're like one of those idiots that get out of a limousine and try to act real cool..Like hey I'm gettin' out of a limo' everybody look at me, and the whole time I'm thinkin'....Wow you have $80.
Anyone can look up this stuff up now remember, this is the internet.
.
<0.1%= 1/10 of a percent. btw....
Whatever number of RADS you decide to come up with remember your only dealing with particles of 1.0-1.5keV values, there are certain facts you can't change.
@Daddyo930 According to the last article I read, NASA was recording around 5 to 10 Gamma Ray Bursts PER DAY. A ten second gamma ray burst releases the same amount of energy as our SUN will in it's entire LIFETIME. NASA also admitted that the amount of Gamma-Ray bursts may be up to as many as 100 times the amount they are recording. It seems that finding the origin, and getting an accurate account on how many bursts happen per day is really difficult with all the GCR out there!!!
they flooded the compartmrnt with o2, than he. the son found a steel-bar shoved into the electronics, causeing the spark. remember, nazis were in full control of the area...
onceANexile 2 weeks ago
Comment removed
tjrxk7 2 months ago
This reminds me of Capricorn One.
Kooshmeister3 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Incorrectly flagged as spam: "Very true...Ed White was actually the "Man" at NASA, he was the jewel.
He probably would've been the first to walk on the lunar surface had he had lived.
That Fox TV show was for the gullible masses, funny how the main stream media manipulated so many American fools."
(Actually the Fox show was for the gullible minority of hoax believers--but they exude a massive amount of hot air.)
MadHighway 2 months ago
Oh, and this video is a lie. Grissom NEVER was "an outspoken critic of the space program." He was critical of the original design of the Apollo spacecraft.
Grissom was a career astronaut who wholeheartedly was part of the space program.
This video is a LIE. Fox TV should have been sued and had its license suspended pending an investigation by the FCC.
MadHighway 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@MadHighway Very true...Ed White was actually the "Man" at NASA, he was the jewel.
He probably would've been the first to walk on the lunar surface had he had lived.
That Fox TV show was for the gullible masses, funny how the main stream media manipulated so many American fools.
Tweekerhead 3 months ago
@MadHighway Really now? Well,you're "half-correct" about Grissom. He was a bad-ass who thought he could say what ever he wanted to. He wanted his cake and eat it too. He did critisize the whole space program but never too much because he enjoyed all the attention and celebrity status he was getting. That's what cost him his life. He never knew how serious his handlers were. His wife today knows he was killed by NASA/Nazis anyway no matter what naive people like you may think.
tjrxk7 2 months ago
@tjrxk7
And you're TOTALLY INCORRECT about Grissom, NASA, and the Apollo program. Nuff said.
MadHighway 2 months ago
@MadHighway Well,I guess you told me!- - - LMAO
tjrxk7 2 months ago
@tjrxk7
I, and many others. You hoax nuts get something wrong every time.
MadHighway 2 months ago
@MadHighway Then if the majority believes a certain way,it must be true? You're reasoning leaves much to be desired.
tjrxk7 2 months ago
@tjrxk7
"Then if the majority believes a certain way,it must be true?"
No ... it's that a minority (like you) has a delusional view of reality and history that's utterly false and proven so.
You employ no reasoning at all; only conjecture borne by paranoia.
MadHighway 2 months ago
@MadHighway Your diagnosis of "state of paranoia" is funny. I'll see your definition of paranoia and charge you with a "state of denial". Your state of mind is as follows - - Denial (also called abnegation) is a defense mechanism postulated by Sigmund Freud, in which a person is faced with a fact that is too uncomfortable to accept and rejects it instead, insisting that it is not true despite what may be overwhelming evidence.
tjrxk7 2 months ago
@tjrxk7
Yes, denial of your paranoia-based fabrications, misperceptions, and conjecture predicated on your ignorance of and lack of education in sciences, engineering, geopolitics, and history.
In other words, you're talking out of your hat, and you don't know what you're talking about. Any reputable scientist knows what you're promulgating is a crock of shit.
MadHighway 2 months ago
@tjrxk7
Here's the problem you'll never solve: you don't HAVE "overwhelming evidence." You fail right there. All of your 'evidence' comes from your own mind and the mental fabrications of others like you.
MadHighway 2 months ago
@MadHighway cont....The subject may use:
simple denial: deny the reality of the unpleasant fact altogether
minimisation: admit the fact but deny its seriousness (a combination of denial and rationalization)
tjrxk7 2 months ago
@tjrxk7
The problem is that whatever facts you do employ you've either misperceived or twisted to suit your needs. That's what a paranoiac does.
You're paranoid and as such you are not able to see past your own faulty mental constructs--like this hoax business.
MadHighway 2 months ago
@MadHighway I looked into this matter and I and just about all my family and friends when they ive an honest look at all the evidence with an open mind,there is only one conclusion to come to. And btw,why have'nt we ever gone back to the moon since 1969? {I'm in the mood for a good laugh}
tjrxk7 2 months ago
@tjrxk7
The last Apollo mission to the moon was Apollo 17 in Dec 1972. Congress cut funding to the program in Sept 1970 in favor of the Skylab space station (cheap because it used up surplus Apollo hardware) and the Space Shuttle (very, very expensive R&D).
NASA has never had anything CLOSE to the funding to carry out several projects at once like a space station, reuseable Shuttle, AND a moon-landing program.
There's your reason: lack of funding. Go tell your friends and family!
MadHighway 2 months ago
@MadHighway Look,if you are on the up and up and have an honest desire and interest to check out all the facts no matter if they are pleasant or unpleasant,I'm gonna send you a 1 and 1/2 hour video of a talk given by one Peter Levendar about the NASA Space Program that I think you will find very interesting. Things are not always as they seem and if you look into what this guy discusses,it may surprise you to say the least. Check your mailbox.
tjrxk7 2 months ago
@tjrxk7
Ok, now you're invoking an author whose favorite subject is the 'occult'.
MadHighway 2 months ago
@tjrxk7
It took 25 min of claptrap about UFOs and Kennedy to get to the assertion that Wernher Von Braun was "head of NASA." Uh, no. Von Braun designed rockets. James Webb headed NASA in the 60s.
Plus, Levendra labors under the notion that Germans are 'Nazis'. Now he's talking about an office "at the NASA site." Canaveral? Houston?
This Levendra guy watched 'JFK' too much. Anyway, you use him to support your Apollo hoax--he mentions nothing of that. Now he's on about Manson. Hokay.
MadHighway 2 months ago
@MadHighway You must be really DENSE like most people these days who have 'zero' attention span. You're never gonna find everything out in one place. Would if life could be so simple. Lavander is not right on all things. He's way off on his comments on who wanted JFK dead. And if you're a lone gunman nut,then you're denial is full blown. You have to connect the dots with lots of research and cross-checking. Problem is not many people have the time these days which I'm sure is just fine the NWO
tjrxk7 2 months ago
@tjrxk7
You suggested this weirdo Levendra in order to support your Apollo hoax case, and his own paranoid assertions don't even match yours. Now you're dragging the Kennedy assassination into this. Hokay.
Conclusion: you'll eat up any bit of conspiracy nuttiness you'll come across, because like all conspiracy believers, you're paranoid.
Way to go. You supported conjecture with yet more conjecture that doesn't even support yours!
MadHighway 2 months ago
@MadHighway It always amazes me how once empty headed debunkers like you manage to get the word 'paraniod' out and use it from then on and think you have the upper hand. Name calling will not get you the truth,nor will the oil-soaked news monopoly you watch every night on the tele.
tjrxk7 2 months ago
@tjrxk7
Yes, we know you're amazed--the origin of which means to be in a mental state; bewildered, confused.
Paranoia is a state of mind, not a label. You put your mistrust of government ahead of facts, and facts you do employ you and others like you have twisted to support that mistrust.
Nothign of what you propose about an Apollo 'hoax' is reasonable and not a whit is supported. Your conjecture is not evidence.
800+ kg of hand-selected lunar rock and soil samples: THAT'S evidence.
MadHighway 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@MadHighway Not sure what constitutes 'evidence' in your mind but any lawyer would tell you that absence of evidence does not mean evidence is absent.
tjrxk7 2 months ago
@tjrxk7 .... anyone looking into this hoax for 10 hours with an open mind will realize just like all gov BS it was a charade to steal money and fool the sheep
pt1gard 2 months ago
@pt1gard "10 hours" researching the NAZI-CIA connection? If you start with Operation Paperclip and SS Major Von Braun from 2 years before the war was declared over you will see how the US and the USSR were fighting for who would get the most murderous NAZI scientists. If we were supposed to get the lions' share of them,why did the Russians get to space first?Get to put a dog up there first?First man up there,first woman up there first,THEN MIRACULOUSLY we get to the moon?Does that seem logical?
tjrxk7 2 months ago
@tjrxk7
Anyway, sorry to hear you've dragged your family and friends into your fallacy, but paranoiacs do that.
You're in no way using an "honest and open" mind since it's readily apparent you've severely twisted and misperceived facts. I'm sure there are other facts you've messed up as well.
MadHighway 2 months ago
@tjrxk7
For instance, your take on Virgil Grissom is not supported by any biographical history at all--it's all YOUR supposition.
Grissom hated the public eye and was uncomfortable with "celebrity status" as you put it. In no way was he a "bad-ass". He was a career pilot, a test pilot, and not given to taking the risks a "bad-ass" would take.
That you accuse NASA of murder is particularly base. Go live on Nibiru, ha!
MadHighway 2 months ago
@MadHighway By 'bad-ass' I meant him speaking out on how underdeveloped and unprepared for the moon shot as NASA was. He loved the celebrity status as anyone would but he never for a minute thought his outspoken comments would get him killed cause like all the astronauts,they trusted who they were working for. Only problem was that they were working for NAZIs who did not take kind to what negative comments Grissom did make. His wife to this day says he was murdered. You are in denial dude.
tjrxk7 2 months ago
@tjrxk7
What, then, a silly term to use: "bad-ass." Also, I just corrected you: your statements about Grissom are incorrect and not supported by biographical history. He was never in love with "celebrity status" and hated the public eye.
I'll type very slowly and in large letters so you can understand better: GRISSOM WAS UNHAPPY WITH THE APOLLO BLOCK I SPACECRAFT'S PROBLEMS IN DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION.
Got it? No? Read again, slowly. Repeat until you get it, dude.
MadHighway 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Re-post that was incorrectly flagged as spam:
"Replying to Jarrah and his claims about the Apollo 1 fire:
"Guys like this idiot Jarrah White are a dime-a-dozen and no matter what we say, they are not going to change their mind."
Mr Stephen Clemmons
Apollo 1 Pad Technician (North American Aviation),
Present on Level 7 during AS-204 fire, 27 JAN 67"
MadHighway 3 months ago
Anyone who wants to make up "facts" about the environment of space beyond LEO should do a little research first so they don't get busted.
The percentage of the solar constant that's ionizing, or "radioactive" as some hoax-believers say, is very low, less than<0.1%.
Particles in the solar wind are around 1.0 -1.5keV so don't try and bluff there.
Hoaxers don't own the facts or the science,nor can they dictate who qualifies.
Never met one credentialed scientist who thought Apollo was fake.
Not one.
Tweekerhead 3 months ago
How can Fox TV accuse NASA of murder and not face an inquiry by the FCC?
MadHighway 3 months ago
Im not sure what they teach in school,considering Im 56 years old! lol! Sarcastic prick! lol! Plus,I couldnt care LESS about physics,so you're talking to the wrong person!
toffeetigerkimba 4 months ago
So pray tell then (in 1969 when technology was NOTHING like it is now),HOW did a tin can like the Lunar Module EVER "blast off" from the moon's surface?? If it took that much rocket power and people power on earth to get it lifted in the first place,then how could three astronauts do it from the moon? Of COURSE the whole thing was a HOAX! lol!
toffeetigerkimba 4 months ago
@toffeetigerkimba too bad you have no evidence. Go read a book, you will learn what the rest of us already know about the technology created that supported Mercury, Gemini & Apollo. the LM APS only had to lift about 10K lbs off the Lunar surface under 1/6th of Earths gravity to launch the LM Ascent stage back to the CSM. whats so hard about that ?
1MtnBoy 4 months ago
@toffeetigerkimba
The moon's gravity is 6 times weaker than Earth's. And the LM was designed to be VERY LIGHT. AND the LM carried TWO men to the surface and back, not three. AND it left half of itself behind--the descent stage.
You need to read up on Apollo literature. All of it. 100%. This woudl be after you get an education in science.
MadHighway 3 months ago
There is abosolutely nothing to make me believe in Apollo, nothing at all.
hunchbacked 4 months ago
@hunchbacked There's nothing to make me believe you have any expertise whatsoever in engineering, electronics, or basic analysis.
You've made so many mistakes over so many videos your credibility is completely shot to hell.
I see electronics experts run rings around you. I see you consistently reluctant to have any peers review your work. I see a superiority complex ruining any sort of objectivity you may have attempted to have.
krisdevalle 4 months ago
@krisdevalle
So many mistakes?
I have made some mistakes I have acknowledged and corrected.
My opponents make far more mistakes than I do, but they never acknowledge them because they don't have the honesty I have.
Calling ApolloWasReal an expert in electronics is more than exaggerated for he has huge misconceptions.
And about beeing peer reviewed, I am perfectly willing to be, provided that it is by real experts and not by pseudo experts who have no real deep knowledge of electronics.
hunchbacked 4 months ago
@hunchbacked Well you better hurry up and find some.
Because my opinion of you and your findings, unsupported by any of your 'peers', or apparently, by anyone else, is rather low.
You're not convincing, because you do not have anyone agreeing with you.
krisdevalle 4 months ago
@krisdevalle
It's just a matter of time before it happens.
Time is playing for me.
hunchbacked 4 months ago
@hunchbacked Ha ha I fucking LOVE IT when you clowns pull out the 'time' card.
Soon soon! SOOOOOON it will all come to light! SOOOOON NASA's house of cards will come tumbling down!
Been waiting 4 decades! Maybe next year huh champ? I wouldn't hold my breath.
krisdevalle 4 months ago
@krisdevalle
he who laughs last laughs best
hunchbacked 4 months ago
@hunchbacked See you here next year bro, where the only thing that will have changed is further lunar exploration, more confirmation for the Apollo lunar missions.
krisdevalle 4 months ago
@krisdevalle
More confirmation?
I would be curious to see that!
hunchbacked 4 months ago
All accusations in this video are irrational conjecture. The fire was a tradgic accident, nothing more. Mr. Bardon was abandoned by his government supporters (yes, there WERE several Apollo opponents in Congress) when they realized he was mentally unstable. ALL the mountains of evidence that exists that verify our walking on the Moon have stood up to scientific scrutiny for over 40 years. MHB's have ZERO supporting scientific evidence. Those ARE the facts!
Monkeyboysdontknow 4 months ago
Baron was right, nasa didn't want that ruining their plans, the truth was out about the apollo program so they killed him, faked the moon landings to restore glory to the US, and perpetrated the biggest hoax of all time, and no manned spacecraft has ever gone past the van allen belt, people just have to open their eyes and use their logic and think for themselves
ItzTheDean 4 months ago
@ItzTheDean
You're another uneducated and miseducated dolt.
MadHighway 3 months ago
APOLLO 1 MURDER
DeadJesus100 5 months ago
Here is an example of how stupid, inconsistent, and full of lies PAN's such as defail are! watch?v=J6DhY1NvmIc
The example shows just how deceptive these troll pans are!
un4g1v3n1 6 months ago
Never went to the moon because of the extreme levels of solar radiation. The report disappears and to this day has never been found? They accidentally erased the first moon tapes? Something does not add up here and it's right in front of your face. We never went to the moon in the apollo spacecraft. Physically impossible.
Daddyo930 7 months ago
@Daddyo930 Physically impossible? What was impossible for the spacecraft to reach the Moon? Which dose of radiation causes health threats? Do you know the dose, the kind of radiation and the exposure time?
CHSarahBs 7 months ago
@CHSarahBs Gamma radiation specifically. Here is one question. If we actually went to the moon, how come we have not been back? How come NASA now admits that they have to do more research into the dangers of radiation in space? According to the IAEA "There is no such thing as a safe dose of radiation" That's from the International Atomic Energy Agency. Go argue with them about "safe" doses.
Daddyo930 7 months ago
@Daddyo930 They have to do the research due to the mission profiles of future missions. They will last much longer then an Apollo short trip of a few days.
CHSarahBs 7 months ago
@CHSarahBs Without electromagnetic shielding, which we don't have, you will die in space in a very horrible fashion and in short order once you reach about 500 miles. the US Government tried to blast a hole in the belt 248 miles above Earth in 1962. Operation Starfish Prime a Megaton Nuclear Bomb was used to try and force an unnatural corridor through the Van Allen Belt. What they created was a third belt that was 100 times more intense than the natural belts. Is Operation Starfish real?
Daddyo930 7 months ago
@Daddyo930 Harlan Spence from MIT (one of many many other experts) said, that a long term mission would be dangerous without proper shielding. For this a model with electromagnetic shielding was designed.
As usual you ignore (or forget?) one important indicator for radiation sickness: the exposure time.
CHSarahBs 7 months ago
@CHSarahBs Then you can end this debate right now and direct me to the link that shows anyone how much gamma is in space in real time. There is a good reason why they can't reveal how much gamma radiation there is in space. Because someone with a brain might figure out than in our current state of technology, we can't go to the moon now because of lethal levels of gamma radiation. Find me the real time readings of gamma radiation in space.
Daddyo930 7 months ago
@Daddyo930 Take this article: science. nasa. gov/science-news/science-at-nasa/2005/08sep_radioactivemoon/
Keep in mind the exposure time. Keep in mind the dose. Can you give a concrete number how much radiation an astronaut has to be exposed to get harmed?
CHSarahBs 7 months ago
@CHSarahBs GLAST Burst Monitor. Ever heard of it? Go there and if you can figure it out, you will learn that there is lethal radiation in space at all times and from every direction. The directions are rather simple. Just type in a location in the sky and the day and time at which you wish to know how much radiation there was in space near their monitor. At no time has the radiation been anywhere near survivable without electromagnetic shielding. We didn't have it then therefore we didn't go.
Daddyo930 7 months ago
@Daddyo930 And again you ignore the indicator exposure time.
CHSarahBs 7 months ago
@CHSarahBs citeseerxdotistdotpsudotedu/viewdoc/download?doi=10dot1dot1dot145dot8033&rep=rep1&type=pdf
Reanalysis of Relativistic Radiation Belt Electron
3 Fluxes using CRRES Satellite Data, a Radial
4 Diffusion Model and a Kalman Filter
Space is deadly and if you try to leave this planet without electromagnetic shielding, your are gonna fry like a re-fried twinkie. If you understand physics you should have no problem coming to the conclusion that radiation is constant, everywhere.
Daddyo930 7 months ago
@Daddyo930 The biomedical results of Apollo, with data from personal radiation dosimeters work by every astronaut who went to the moon, has been published and available for 4 decades. No physicist, radiation expert or other spacefaring nation who has also sent probes and instruments to measure cislunar space or the lunar surface has ever disputed this data.
We are all aware of the radiation risks of space travel, but all data supports a survivable short trip such as the Apollo missions.
CHSarahBs 7 months ago
@CHSarahBs Did you even bother to visit the GLAST Burst Monitor website? Do I have to post some readings from there on my next post? You are being obtuse.
Daddyo930 7 months ago
@Daddyo930 The same I think about you. Yes I have visited the website. Nothing there says, that Apollo was impossible, similar to the biomedical results of Apollo, in which you should take a look. As it has been told to you several times: There is no physicist, radiation expert or other spacefaring nation which has ever disputed this data. Not even the Chinese dispute them ;)
And again I want to bring it in your mind: exposure time.
CHSarahBs 7 months ago
@CHSarahBs Access to Fermi GBM data is provided by the Fermi Science Support Center through this portal. Bottom. Here is a reading from January 1, 2011 12:10:25.
The submitted query parameters for query ID=L110728233657E0D2F37E29 were:
Search Center (RA,Dec) = (83.8221,-5.39111)
Radius = 15 degrees
Start Time (MET) = 321451810 seconds (2011-03-10T12:10:10)
Stop Time (MET) = 333576607 seconds (2011-07-28T20:10:07)
Minimum Energy = 100 MeV
Maximum Energy = 1e+10 MeV
What's a MeV?
Daddyo930 7 months ago
@Daddyo930 Mega electron Volt. And? Have you ever heard about exposure time?
CHSarahBs 7 months ago
@CHSarahBs As long as your in space your being exposed to:
Search Center (RA,Dec) = (83.8221,-5.39111)
Radius = 15 degrees
Start Time (MET) = 321451810 seconds (2011-03-10T12:10:10)
Stop Time (MET) = 333576607 seconds (2011-07-28T20:10:07)
Minimum Energy = 100 MeV
Maximum Energy = 1e+10 MeV
I does not really matter where you are in relation to the sun. Lethal radiation is constant in space and at no time does it dissipate to non-lethal levels.
Daddyo930 7 months ago
@Daddyo930 So you ignore again the important indicator exposure time. Do you have any idea why the unit for dose rates is Sv/s or Sv/h? Do you know what this unit means?
CHSarahBs 7 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@CHSarahBs 1E+10 = 10,000,000,000
Start Time (MET) = 321451810 seconds (2011-03-10T12:10:10)
Stop Time (MET) = 333576607 seconds (2011-07-28T20:10:07)
Minimum Energy = 100 MeV
Maximum Energy = 1e+10 MeV
Now what part of that equation is causing you problems?
Maximum Energy = 1e+10 MeV (1E+10 = 10,000,000,000 MeV)
Tell me how someone can survive that for 3 minutes?
Daddyo930 7 months ago
@CHSarahBs biomedical results of Apollo, in which you should take a look.
I did...and the lie about Major Solar Particle events is clearly seen by looking at the NGDC, and it's CFI index for major solar flares. Link is on my main page. Waking up to NASA lies, means confronting your own cognitive dissonance, and gullibility! Good luck with that!
un4g1v3n1 7 months ago
@un4g1v3n1 Point to table. Say it dangerous. Have no proof.
Well done!
You got anyone who actually knows what they are talking about to support your claims?
krisdevalle 6 months ago
@krisdevalle ASTROPHYSICISTS and SOLARPHYSICISTS, as well as RADIATION SHIELDING EXPERTS like Eleanor Blakely, say RADIAITON IN SPACE IS DEADLY! And that ALUMINUM worsens the problem by creating an even greater number of solar particles of a slower atomic value (which can stick in the skin of astronauts) on the interior of the craft, due to fragmentation! So, you people who delude yourselves, are only deluding yourselves. The experts know full well, as do I, that you are full of crap!
un4g1v3n1 6 months ago
Correction...lower, not slower atomic value...Anyone who is really interested in knowing the truth of the radiation in space is welcomed to listen to a few of the experts right here. watch?v=Bqv4q35QqUg
Enjoy!
un4g1v3n1 6 months ago
@un4g1v3n1 Deadly how?
See, this is the blatant deception you fuckwits engage in.
If by deadly you mean increased risk of cancer, then no problem, but I really haven't heard of anyone getting cancer and dying in 4 days, as you appear to be suggesting what would have happened during Apollo.
Stop fucking about. Capslock does not avoid the fact that you fail, repeatedly, to qualify the claims of these experts.
krisdevalle 6 months ago
@krisdevalle Deadly as in over 100 REMsper hour at a minimum. 500 REMs and your dead. The readings that NASA presents as accurate dosimeter readings for apollonots are fucking laughable. Radiation experts from radiologists to solar/astro physicists laugh at your stupidity. You are the head fuckwit of the fuckwit club their defail! Anyone with half a brain will ignore your ignorance and look up the shit themselves. My channel has the links to NGDC, to see major solar flares during Apollo!!!
un4g1v3n1 6 months ago
@un4g1v3n1 Funny how none of your experts have a problem with the Apollo dosimeter readings.
I saw your links to the solar flare data. It's a bunch of numbers that you seem unable to explain.
krisdevalle 6 months ago
@krisdevalle NO fucking experts comment on APOLLO DOSIMETER READINGS. At least not any who have any shred of self fucking respect! Try getting a comment from Eleanor Blakely about the accuracy of said numbers...Bet she is moot on it. She has self-respect!
As for your inablity to understand Solar Flare Data, that is your lack of understanding, and ignorance. Try educating yourself. Or go talk to some low-dose radiation treated patients about their neural function problems! Fucking nitwit
un4g1v3n1 6 months ago
@un4g1v3n1 Actually, the data is used in the publication 'Managing Space Radiation Risk in the New Era of Space Exploration', where many notable experts acknowledge the reality of Apollo.
So, please stop lying.
krisdevalle 6 months ago
@krisdevalle We both know you are the lying fuckwit around here. Try EE Kovalev, VAN ALLEN's original research describing the radiation in the VAB's alone as a DEADLY SEA OF RADIATION. Or you can refer to the data yourself, once you abolish your ignorance! That will be a hell of a feat!!
Now, go troll some one who is a dumb shit, cause your ignorance tires me!
un4g1v3n1 6 months ago
@un4g1v3n1 Deadly how, champ?
Risk of cancer?
DO GO ON!
krisdevalle 6 months ago
@un4g1v3n1
I looked at E. E. Kovalev's work. In no way does he state, allude to, imply, or suggest that the Apollo lunadr landings are anything but established fact.
You used a peer-reviewed source like Kovalev and twisted his work for your own use. That shows your argument is fallacious. Kovalev co-wrote "Estimated Radiation shielding for a manned flight to Mars"; he's never suggested as you do that space travel is impossible.
You didn't even READ his work; you quote other crackpots.
MadHighway 3 months ago
@MadHighway What part of 300 plus REM per hour through the VAB's alone are you incapable of understanding? And that was a MINIMUM! You see, you don't need to specifically mention the fact that APOLLO was impossible with numbers like that. It's a FUCKING GIVEN. Your ignorance is mystifuckifying!
For those who are paying attention, and give a fuck about being lied to by dipshits like dumbhighway, 500 REM and you are DEAD! The inner VAB starts at 1000 miles out, and the outer ends at 60,000.
un4g1v3n1 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@un4g1v3n1 1centimeter of lead OR 18g/cm² of water to attenuate gamma rad' by %50.
2.7g/cm² water =1.0g/cm² AL.
Apollo's 7-8g/cm² AL. density rating was equivalent to over 20g/cm² of water.
2g over halving thickness
The trajectory for Apollo11 flew thru' omnidirectional flux protons of 100MeV / 10³particles/cm²-sec. That was sufficiently attenuated by the hull of the CM of 8g/cm², anyone with any knowledge of radiation will not dispute that.
Of course you will cuz' you slept thru' class.
Tweekerhead 3 months ago
@un4g1v3n1
We like how you flagged the correct answer of 2 hours ago as spam.
Also, I'm still awaiting your list of peer-revierwed science papers written by reputable scientists that propose the Apollo landings were a hoax. I need the names of the authors and the titles of the works, and their publications.
MadHighway 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@un4g1v3n1
The reply you flagged in order to hide it:
"1 centimeter of lead OR 18g/cm² of water to attenuate gamma rad' by %50.
2.7g/cm² water =1.0g/cm² AL.
Apollo's 7-8g/cm² AL. density rating was equivalent to over 20g/cm² of water.
2g over halving thickness
The trajectory for Apollo11 flew thru' omnidirectional flux protons of 100MeV / 10³particles/cm²-sec. That was sufficiently attenuated by the hull of the CM of 8g/cm², anyone with any knowledge of radiation will not dispute that."
MadHighway 3 months ago
@un4g1v3n1
300+ rem per hour for an unshielded, NAKED OBJECT, you twit.
"The total radiation exposure to astronauts was estimated to be much less than the five (5) rem set by the U.S. Atomic Energy Commission." Flight paths were designed to minimize exposure. The risk was deemed acceptable and the missions proceeded.
You still will NOT address the fact that the Soviet Union tracked all Apollo missions to the moon and confirm the US landings.
MadHighway 3 months ago
@un4g1v3n1 And wow, what do you know, more information regarding the dosimeters:
ww w. hps. org/publicinformation/ate/faqs/spaceradiation. html
Page last updated July 2011. And you can contact the author! Maybe you should, and hear what a load of shit you're talking from an expert.
krisdevalle 6 months ago
@krisdevalle If I want to read fiction, I'll stick to the Bible...Thanks!
un4g1v3n1 6 months ago
@un4g1v3n1 Prove it's not.
This is where we get to eventually; I provide data and references that mention, support and accept Apollo, you reject it because you don't want to face it. Call it fiction, despite no evidence of such.
Maybe you could write deadly in all caps again, it appears to be your forte.
krisdevalle 6 months ago
@krisdevalle You're still in here trying to debunk these videos? Damn you've been doing this for years now. Is this your full time job? Two things you have to do and they are 1) get a life and 2) get a REAL job. It's really getting stale.
cleandiaper 6 months ago
@un4g1v3n1
Hmm, funny how the CM's two outer shells of solid aluminum (covering up another solid aluminum interior pressure shell) are so fragile to radiation, when one square inch of ground here on Earth is well protected against radiation by a mere 14.7 pounds of rarefied nitrogen and oxygen (air).
The Apollo spacecraft were tested unmanned deep within the Van Allen belts before Apollo 8. No radiation problems experienced. Don't misquote Blakely again.
MadHighway 3 months ago
@MadHighway You are full of crap! Period. Honey-combed aluminum. Next time you go to the dentist, bring along a couple of sheets of aluminum foil, and tell him you don't need his stinking lead vest moron!
un4g1v3n1 3 months ago
@un4g1v3n1
Clearly you don't know what monocoque construction is. An outer layer of aluminum sheet, honeycomb bonded tom an inner layer, which housed an "inner aluminum face sheet with a steel honeycomb core."
The source for X- and gamma rays that you're tallking about was much more diffuse than a medical X-ray machine, and FAR more distant: 150,000,000 km. Plus the sun is a weak emitter of X/gamma radiation. The trip through the Van Allen belts was only a few hours.
MadHighway 3 months ago
@un4g1v3n1
PLUS, there were unmanned Apollo CSM craft tested in high Earth orbit--in the Van Allen belts--and no additional radiation was recorded in the crew cabin. Several layers of aluminum were quite enough to deal with the moderate radiation. Plus, the Soviets sent Zond spacecraft around the moon 1968-70 with animal specimens inside. None suffered radiation poisoning.
The radiation argument doesn't hold up.
MadHighway 3 months ago
@MadHighway You are a full of shit troll. No one has gone into, or beyond the VAB's. Anyone who thinks so, is completely ridiculous, and ignorant of the true radiation environment in and beyond them. Astro and solar physicists laugh at Apollo Fairy Tale believers as if they are ignorant children. So do the radiologists, and other people familiar with the effects of radiation on human DNA and vital organs.
Keep dreaming, and trolling, or whatever it is you are trying to accomplish...
un4g1v3n1 3 months ago
@un4g1v3n1
Oct 31, 2011: "Kennedy Space Center's VAB tours start Tuesday." The KSC conducts public TOURS, asshole.
No, there are no reputable scientists "who laugh at Apollo"--only the crackpot Internet-based paranoiacs you and your kind fall prey to.
The only "trolls" around here are you and your uneducated kind who basically are a drag on society, education, science, and the quest for knowledge.
MadHighway 3 months ago
@MadHighway Another fool unaware of the radiation-laden space within the VAB's and beyond. Your own ignorance makes you the laughing stock of astro-solar physicists the world over. Oh, btw, those who use low-dose radiation to treat cancer patients think your an idiot as well!
Your ignorance is a drag on your ability to be taken seriously on this topic!
un4g1v3n1 3 months ago
@un4g1v3n1
Show me the peer-reviewed papers in the scientific community that declare the moon landings faked, and show me the reputable science and engineering experts who are in consensus the landings were faked.
After you've shown me all the names and theior reputability, you can explain why the Soviet Union tracked all nine US manned missions to the moon, and the six landings themselves.
Go on, give me names of reputable, peer-reviewed scientists; explain the Soviet corroboration.
MadHighway 3 months ago
@un4g1v3n1
The only people not taken seriously are you paranoiac hoax crackpots. Regale me with the names of reputable scientists and their peer-reviewed work that hypothesizes Apollo was faked. Show me ten names of non-crackpots that have succeeded in initiating top-level governmental inquiries. DO IT.
Please don't name Bill Kaysing, Bart Sibrel (a cab driver), or Jarrah White (a schizoid).
MadHighway 3 months ago
@un4g1v3n1
Zond 5, a Soviet unmanned circumlunar flight: "On September 18, 1968, the spacecraft flew around the moon at an altitude of 1950 km. High quality photographs of the earth were taken at a distance of 90,000 km. A biological payload of turtles, wine flies, meal worms, plants, seeds, bacteria, and other living matter was included in the flight."
The biological specimens showed no radiation effects. Soviets then cleared manned flights to the moon.
MadHighway 3 months ago
@un4g1v3n1
I told you once: the Command Module comprises two layers of aluminum SHEET METAL with a steel honeycomb interior. STEEL: iron and carbon matrix. This shell covers an INNER metal vessel of more aluminum. Enough to shield against VAB flux.
And I still need the titles of those peer-reviewed scientific papers that show Apollo was faked. I also need you to address the fact that the USSR confirmed the US landings, AND the 800+ kg of lunar rock and soil samples hand-collected.
MadHighway 3 months ago
@MadHighway What you need is a brain, and the ability to think logically, with reason. Since you lack either, you'll continue to buy NASA's bullshit stories, and pay to be kept in the dark about the true nature of space.
How does it feel to be a moron?
un4g1v3n1 3 months ago
@un4g1v3n1
Answer the questions I ask of you; nothing else.
I need the names of the scientists, papers, and publications that contain peer-reviewed works that call Apollo a hoax and NASA a lying organization. You muyst also address the issue that the Soviet Union INDEPENDENTLY confirmed its adversary's manned presence at the moon, as well as the landings. Also, the Soviets returned live biological specimes from circumlunar space with their Zond program 1968-70.
Address all of this-do it.
MadHighway 3 months ago
@un4g1v3n1 BTW..Moron, that's not the Sun in your video...LOL That's the light at the elbow of the robotic arm. You can look up the schematic of the arm and see, that would you'd have to look something up and do a little research. You know R E S E A R C H ..? Too Too funny
Tweekerhead 3 months ago
@un4g1v3n1
Hey, moron, Blakely's using Apollo lunar footage and experiences to underline her talk about space radiation.
Blakely quotes how astronauts saw light flashes in their eyes during their lunar missions. She's NOT a hoax proponent--she USES Apollo data! She talks to the astronauts!
MadHighway 3 months ago
@MadHighway watch?v=6aWUa5l_WNs I guess listening to an expert explain how ineffective, and even more deadly aluminum is for shielding space radiation is beyond you?
Argue with Eleanor Blakely dumbass!
un4g1v3n1 3 months ago
@un4g1v3n1 That's all you have?? "What you need is a brain, and the ability to think logically, with reason."
.
That's it??
Apply your own ointment of advice to your open infected gaping wound you call a brain.
Tweekerhead 3 months ago
@un4g1v3n1
Does Eleanor Blakely say outright that Apollo was a hoax, and that NASA is lying, and that NASA is guilty of murdering its own employees? Or are you simply using her research incorrectly to promulgate your anti-American, amnti-intellectual, and anti-scientific paranoia?
ANSWER my other issues: USSR confirmation; USSR sends biologicals around moon in Zond program; 800+ kg of hand-selected soil/rock samples.
MadHighway 3 months ago
@un4g1v3n1
You FOOL. Blakely's talking about CATARACTS. She does not support you in any way, because she is not an insane, paranoid, ignorant, megalomaniac Apollo hoax proponent.
She's FUNDED BY NASA, you insane clown!
MadHighway 3 months ago
@MadHighway Again, you ignore the facts stated as Blakely did. Aluminum is a terrible shield as the fragmentation will cause an even more dangerous environment inside the craft than on the outside. I guess you prefer to hold onto your Apollo Fairy Tale, than to admit you were duped and deal with it!
un4g1v3n1 3 months ago
@un4g1v3n1
Blakely is NOT an Apollo hoax proponent--she'd call YOU crazy. The longest trip to the moon with aluminum-steel monocoque design was about ten days. That's about as long as you want to go with that desuign, but it was doable. The astronauts took a radiation dose--but not enough to cause cancer (as yet). She's talking about CATARACTS.
She's funded by NASA, the organization who makes you paranoid. She's no hoax nut unlike you. Take your insane concerns to her.
MadHighway 3 months ago
@un4g1v3n1
And STILL you have not accounted for the 800+ kg of hand-selected rock/soil samples; USSR confirmationn of US landings; USSR ZOnd program which sent and returned live biological specimens to cislunar space.
You twist a reputable, NASA-funded scientist's work to suit your anti-NASA, anti-science needs. Wow.
MadHighway 3 months ago
@un4g1v3n1
You deliberately exaggerate and twist Blakely's work, and you also ignore the fact that she clearly used Apollo data and astronaut testimony in her research. Also, her work here is about CATARACTS, not radiation-induced sickness and death.
She never once said Apollo is 'faked', nor does she imply so. She said simply that aluminum is not the right shielding for long-duration space voyages. Apollo missions were less than two weeks--NOT long-duration.
MadHighway 3 months ago
@MadHighway She states that ALUMINUM makes the interior environment of the craft MORE DEADLY than outside the craft. At 300 REM per hour (minimum according to Kovelev) on the outside, and the inside being MORE DEADLY, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to understand that it doesn't take longer than a couple hours to be dead. 500 REM being a death dose. Now, go back to sleep and dream your Apollo Fairy Tales bub!
You fail, and your excuses fall flat yet again!
un4g1v3n1 3 months ago
@un4g1v3n1
Nowhere does Blakely use the phrase "more deadly." Nowhere does she state "300 rem." She says aluminum is not a good shield for a Mars mission.
Her presentation was about cataracts and radiation exposure on long-duration space flight. She incorporates Apollo data into her work. End of story.
You've been outed. We can all tell that you've been deliberately misquoting Dr. Blakely's work--and she works for NASA. You're a FRAUD.
MadHighway 3 months ago
@un4g1v3n1 It's Bremsstrahlung, it's when an electron hits aluminum & causes soft X-ray emission.That's why Apollo used phenolic resin as a apart of the shielding.
And no one ever said"more deadly"in referring to such a case, you're lying.
REM is a unit of radiation dose equivalent, the outside of the Apollo hull is not subject to dosage,idiot.
You use this conversion1RAD=62.4x100³MeV/g.
Look at the trajectory for Apollo, it was child's play to fly around the VA belts.
Scientifically illiterate?
Tweekerhead 3 months ago
@un4g1v3n1
Anyway, Salyut, Skylab, Mir, and the ISS are all made of aluminum. The radiation dosage from those who spent months in space, and even over a year, is FAR above a ten-day Apollo lunar mission.
Your science is bogus and you twisted Blakely's words to suit your own. Your case is shot down.
MadHighway 3 months ago
@MadHighway Wow, another excuse coming from ingorance and exclusion of facts. All the space stations you name are well below the inner layer of the Van Allen Radiation belts, safe under the protection of the Magnetosphere. Your deceptions are as obvious as your ignorance!
un4g1v3n1 3 months ago
@un4g1v3n1
I'm quoting Blakely's work, not using my own opinion or committing fraud as you are.
Blakely states her research shows higher risk of radiation-induced cataracts with increased exposure time to a space environment. She states that Apollo lunar missions were of far lesser duration than later space station missions.
The magnetosphere does NOTHING to stop UV, gamma, and X-ray radiation. You deliberately twisted Blakely's work to suit your anti-NASA stance. She CONSULTS for NASA.
MadHighway 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@un4g1v3n1 You didn't like this post?
1centimeter of lead OR 18g/cm² of water to attenuate gamma rad' by %50.
2.7g/cm² water =1.0g/cm² AL.
Apollo's 7-8g/cm² AL. density rating was equivalent to over 20g/cm² of water.
2g over halving thickness
The trajectory for Apollo11 flew thru' omnidirectional flux protons of 100MeV / 10³particles/cm²-sec. That was sufficiently attenuated by the hull of the CM of 8g/cm².
.
Electrons in the belt are at 1-10MeV's and less lethal than protons.
Go study.
Tweekerhead 3 months ago
@un4g1v3n1
You ignore all else Blakely says in her video and yet exhort us to watch the whole thing.
You tell us Apollo is a fraud, and yet the scientist you uphold uses Apollo data.
You tell us she says "aluminum shielding is deadly," when she uses no such words; Blakely was talking about risk of cataracts, not radiation deaths. Her presentation says nothing about deaths.
You also say now that she's a fraud herself, being paid off, AND a hoax believer.
How deep does your delusion go?
MadHighway 3 months ago
@MadHighway you are a psycho aren't you? Were you abused as a child? I can't seem to grasp what makes a troll as insane as you are? seriously...
un4g1v3n1 3 months ago
@un4g1v3n1
What's psychotic is the fact that you call Blakely a fraud, and yet uphold her work, when her work verly clearly uses Apollo data and she mentions talking to Apollo astronauts and incorporating their experiences in her work. Clearly she knows Apollo was a real achievement, else as a reputable scientist she would not use the program's data.
Give it up. You're in a corner now and using weak defamations to weasel your way out.
You've been caught in a lie. Give up.
MadHighway 3 months ago
@MadHighway Leave it to a hoaxtard to use NASA's data to prove that NASA is lying.
Heard of the "liar's paradox"?
Tweekerhead 3 months ago
@Tweekerhead
This whole question of 'aluminum shielding' wasn't even part of Blakely's presentation. It was a question from an audience member about radiation dangers during spacewalks. She said EVAs involve radiation doses and that new shielding designs better than aluminum-based are needed for long-duration Mars missions. Nothing about a 'fake' Apollo. (She also stated "vegetarian" astronauts will be favored for a Mars voyage, but anyway.)
MadHighway 3 months ago
@MadHighway Thanks, I'm gonna' look that one up.
It's not often I see un4g1 out posting, but he won't answer or have any discussion with me.
He has quite an aversion to facts, and he seems to be getting more detached from reality.
He'll probably end his days held up in a McDonalds somewhere like in Iowa with a AK-47 screaming about how Apollo believers are unpatriotic and deserve to die.
Tweekerhead 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Tweekerhead
Re-posting--they keep flagging:
"1 centimeter of lead OR 18g/cm² of water to attenuate gamma rad' by 50%.
2.7g/cm² water =1.0g/cm² AL.
Apollo's 7-8g/cm² AL. density rating was equivalent to over 20g/cm² of water.
2g over halving thickness
The trajectory for Apollo11 flew thru' omnidirectional flux protons of 100MeV / 10³particles/cm²-sec. That was sufficiently attenuated by the hull of the CM of 8g/cm².
Electrons in the belt are at 1-10MeV's and less lethal than protons."
MadHighway 3 months ago
@un4g1v3n1 And that proves Apollo was faked?
Gotta' do better than that. And you gotta' do a better video, like why not show where the Zodiac is in your video where you claim the robotic arm's light at the elbow is the Sun. You know what the Zodiac is, it's the path the Sun follows across the sky through the constellations.
Ever stop to wonder why you can see the Aurora and the Sun at the same time?
You can't.
You're real genius.
Tweekerhead 3 months ago
@un4g1v3n1
38:55 onward: we see here Blakely using Apollo data as part of her presentation. 40:00 she shows how Apollo astronauts had lower doses because of their SHORTER DURATION TIMES IN SPACE.
The space station astronauts take the highest doses as they spend weeks and months in space. Apollo missions were 10 days or less.
Dr. Blakely is NOT a hoax-believing crackpot as you hoax nuts are. You've been using her research to supoort your insane paranoid delusions. She supports Apollo.
MadHighway 3 months ago
@CHSarahBs
Of course these results show low levels of radiations since the astronauts didn't go to the moon.
This is called circular reasoning.
hunchbacked 4 months ago
@Daddyo930 I went and found one. The new is not very good for you. MeV means millions of electron volts. You can now find out how much lethal gamma radiation there is on any given day by going to the GLAST Burst Monitor site. If you can figure it out, you will learn that at all times, 24/7, there is a constant barrage of lethal radiation in space and from every direction in space. The only thing that protects us is our magnetic shield.
Daddyo930 7 months ago
@Daddyo930
Magnetic FIELD. Niot "shield". You've watched 'The Core' too many times. It's fiction.
MadHighway 3 months ago
@MadHighway Can you say ionosphere? It's a level of the atmosphere. You haven't paid attention in science class. I doubt by your last statement that you even graduated high school.
Daddyo930 3 months ago
@Daddyo930
Man, you don't even have grasp on what solar radiation means. You think it means the Sun is radioactive. The earth's magnetic field traps some solar wind atoms, PARTICLES, MATTER, but it doesn't do shit to electromagnetic radiation (you know, radio, light, UV, X-rays, gamma rays).
You've confused the ionosphere with the magnetosphere, and you think that both act as some kind of 'shield'--YOUR word--that can deflect electromagnetic radiation. You're bonkers, dude.
MadHighway 3 months ago
@MadHighway Yes, Doodlyo thinks the ionosphere blocks gamma rays that come from the Sun, not only that, he thinks the Sun produces a high flux of gamma ray radiation.
He's funny..
Tweekerhead 3 months ago
@Daddyo930
You too have not addressed the fact that there are 800+ kg of hand-selected lunar rock and soil samples broguht back from the moon, and that the USSR confirmed the adverdary USA's manned presence at the moon and on its surface 1969-72.
I'm sure you simply ignore such facts in your anti-intellectual, anti-science crusade.
MadHighway 3 months ago
@MadHighway Lets deal with your understanding of the "atmosphere" first. Is the ionosphere an electromagnetic shield? I won't waste time talking with someone who doesn't understand the basics of physics first.
Daddyo930 3 months ago
@Daddyo930
Let's talk about the term you fabricate--"magnetic shield"--and how you also mistake the solar wind for solar irradiance, AND mistake the word "irradiance" to mean "radioactive."
The ionosphere has a property that we use to extend radio transmissions long distances--dependent on the time of day. We use very low angle of incidence.
The ionosphere reflects no other type of radiation. Are you suggesting it "shields" IR, light, and UV?
MadHighway 3 months ago
@MadHighway No, the ionosphere stops gamma, high-frequency ultra violet and X-ray radiation. It's electromagnetic properties do that. Because of the makeup of the layers of the ionosphere, harmful radiation is absorbed. Now, what percentage of the solar constant is ionizing radiation?
Daddyo930 3 months ago
@Daddyo930
You really do need to be beaten over the head with this. Have you never looked this up yourself?
Ok. 0.001% compared to visible, IR, UV? The Sun itself is weak a powerful emitter at gamma and X-ray wavelengths. Spacecraft design--layers of metal--protected the astronauts.
Some solar flares can be powerful emitters of gamma rays; those are not part of the Sun's usual output. But you say ONLY the ionosphere--obviously made of lead--can protect people from deadly empty space.
MadHighway 3 months ago
@Daddyo930
You operate from the prejudice that the Sun is a powerful emitter of gamma and X-ray radiation. It's actually a very weak emitter in those parts of the ER spectrum. Well over 99% of its radiation is light, heat, and UV.
That's it, buddy. The US landed, collected 800+ kg of samples, and there is independent confirmation. Your thesis uses prejudice and conjecture to overturn reality. Your 'gut' is leading you on a paranoid wild goose chase.
MadHighway 3 months ago
@MadHighway I told him the to look up the solar wind, I think when he got there he saw it was made of particles that have energies of the 1.0-1.5keV range. He's a little upset over those numbers.
He's got all the "facts" where he wants em', don't be messin' it up for him with real sciencey' stuff.
Tweekerhead 3 months ago
@Tweekerhead
Well, your answer to the misinformation these two are spouting had been flagged by either these two or some anonymous party.
The solar-radiation guy seems to think that the Sun is powerful at gamma and X-ray parts of the spectrum. I can't find anything anywhere in the literature that says the Sun is such. It emits strongest in visible light--green. White dwarf stars and OB stars are high X-ray/gamma ray emitters.
MadHighway 3 months ago
@MadHighway So what your saying is that 1 percent of the solar constant is ionizing radiation? Is that what your saying? You don't sound like you know anything in particular about astrophysics.
Daddyo930 3 months ago
@Daddyo930
No, what I and many others and the textbooks are saying is that you're patently wrong and misusing facts and distoriting others, and that NO, the amount of GAMMA AND X-RAY RADIATION is far less than 1%. Far, far less.
Again: the Sun's EM output is mostly light, IR, and some UV. Gamma and X-ray radiation are extremely minor constituents of nominal solar radiative output. Were the Sun an A-type star, the gamma ray flux would be much higher. Keep reading up--just with less prejudice
MadHighway 3 months ago
@Daddyo930 Anyone can look it up Dil, the solar wind has only 1.0-1.5keV αlpha & ßeta radiation.
You've been told numerous times by many people the constant is less than 0.1% that's <0.001.
And that's a generous estimate since the constant is subjective.
Tweekerhead 3 months ago
@Daddyo930
Hey, you know you forgot that we have space stations that orbit above any effective atmosphere. What's protecting them from all this gamma and X-ray radiation you say the Sun pours forth?
Don't say it's the "ionosphere", because they're at the TOP of the ionosphere.
Space stations 400km high can only be protected from solar gamma/X-rays by their metal shells! And solar output must be LOW because the Russians had guys up there for a year straight.
MadHighway 3 months ago
@MadHighway He doesn't seem to want to talk about the GOES satellites in the geosynchronous orbit at almost 36,000 km out.
This guy Doodlyo is a real character, keep watching you'll see the typical personification of the Dunning -Kruger Effect!! (look it up for a big laugh)
:-))
Tweekerhead 3 months ago
@MadHighway Your getting stupider as this goes on it seems. The space station is 220 miles in orbit. 220 miles = 354 kilometers. NASA lowered the orbit of the space station because of the deterioration of the thermosphere. I'm really wasting my time with you because whereas you know something about NASA, you don't know jack about astrophysics. Later.
Daddyo930 3 months ago
@Daddyo930
The ISS orbit is >>376x398 km<<. A search for 'thermosphere deterioration' showed no results. The ionosphere is basically vacuum, and thus you're saying that vacuum 400 km high deflects gamma, X-ray, and UV radiation. Hokay.
Your 'knowledge' is utter fabrication. The metal body of spacecraft stops the incoming (weak) solar hard irradiation.
Please consult university-level, peer-reviewed literature and SHOW US A QUOTE that says there's a sea of deadly radiation out there.
MadHighway 3 months ago
@MadHighway No need for "quoting". The solar constant is 1.36 kw/m2. 1.361 kW/m², is equivalent to 1.95 calories per minute per square centimeter, or 1.95 langleys (Ly) per minute. What percentage of the solar constant is ionizing radiation? You really are out of your league here. A sophomore really. You can't even answer the question I bet.
Daddyo930 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Daddyo930 Wow..You know how to Wiki.
You're like one of those idiots that get out of a limousine and try to act real cool..Like hey I'm gettin' out of a limo' everybody look at me, and the whole time I'm thinkin'....Wow you have $80.
Anyone can look up this stuff up now remember, this is the internet.
.
<0.1%= 1/10 of a percent. btw....
Whatever number of RADS you decide to come up with remember your only dealing with particles of 1.0-1.5keV values, there are certain facts you can't change.
Tweekerhead 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Daddyo930 ..."Your getting stupider as this goes on it seems"
It seems to you ans you only...Hahaha
Come on man...You better than this.
Put up or shut up!!
Tweekerhead 3 months ago
@Daddyo930 According to the last article I read, NASA was recording around 5 to 10 Gamma Ray Bursts PER DAY. A ten second gamma ray burst releases the same amount of energy as our SUN will in it's entire LIFETIME. NASA also admitted that the amount of Gamma-Ray bursts may be up to as many as 100 times the amount they are recording. It seems that finding the origin, and getting an accurate account on how many bursts happen per day is really difficult with all the GCR out there!!!
DEADLY!!!
un4g1v3n1 6 months ago