Does anyone have a video of original interview with Marcus Allen? For some reason everyone who uploads it feels the need to add dramatic music and/or their smart-ass comments.
@Spoutnik1957 I honestly believe you may need to get your brain checked for cognitive dissonance....Radioactivity is the reason they could not go as well as photos being rendered virtually useless...
Don't stay ignorant of space. Learn about it and the Apollo Fairy Tale fades away with the truth of cislunar space!
I don't often respond to this garbage, but really. The Lunar Rover on Apollo 17 was driven (on all 3 EVA) on 1 occasion, to a maximum distance of 7.6 km from the Lunar Module. That would put the LM below the local horizon, never mind, hidden behind the mid field ridge. Who are you people. Can't you put your curiosity to some good science.
Does it really matter if anyone has been to the moon and back...I was a kid and very caught up in everything to do with space at the time I remember counting down the last seven seconds before the first Apollo mission was claimed to have succeeded in making it,the footage could be real or faked they may have gone or they never it served it's purpose...and I don't care anymore...
@realvworld2 Marcus Allen is a con and a liar, and not even a very good one. He's been on talk shows peddling his NASA "faked" photos showing "spotlights" that anybody who ever did any serious photography at all can see immediately are just lens flares.
NASA has always used photoshop (I say it is logical that if you want to retouch images that look attractive (that's so bad?)), that's nothing new, if the man on the moon or not is another matter, I personally think so.
those are lens flares! this was stopid! obiusly the astronaut is airbrushed so he has more light, that's an obious enhancement, buts it's an understandable enhancement, also the astronaut is wearing white while surface of the moon isn't white but gray, i guess the original exposure showed a darker astronaut equaling him to the background and they decided to enhance his shadows, whta is strange was the first fakery, maybe this way the printed photo is more squarish?
Moon Hoaxers--best argument for birth control. The "no stars" argument is so lame, ask any photographer...even the space station (ISS) photos rarely show stars because of something photographers call "exposure times"
Do you honestly believe that they just forgot to put the lunar lander in the photo and then reveal the photo to the public? You do know the astronauts travelled quite a distance during their EVA's. They don't just stay around the lunar lander the whole 2 days and look at the same things. That is why they brought the lunar rover. To explore more of the moons surface in a shorter amount of time...
those pics are not a montage book they are real photos of fake lunar landing we never land on the moon the first time its was a a lie just as many other goverment like jfk was an inside job cause the jfk knew to many things as was a liabillalty to be left alive so they off him.. there are some many people who are stupid enough to think it was really. back in the 60s most people where probably to high to notice also the lander cant be miles away from them cause they dont have enough o2.
So you expect us to believe that they not only faked the moon landing but were so incompetent that they released damning evidence of the fact that they did so?
What's the scenario here?
NASA GOON 1: OMG, we need pictures for this Full Moon book.
NASA GOON 2: Just give 'em that really bad one where we forgot to put the lander in and left those spotlights that idiot intern Jimmy forgot to remove.
NG1: Right-o, the public is completely stupid, they'll never figure out we've bilked them for years.
How come in every scene you see showing the horizon in the background that there are no stars - just black nothingness. At night I can look up in the sky and see the planets (earlier after dark) and then all the stars shortly after that.
@arobekie It is also common not to see stars in a cloudless night, when you're trying to observe stars in the middle of a city, even a mile or km out of an illuminated city one can barely see stars or not see them at all. That's why many astronomers today complain that urbanization is ruining the ability to observe stars in observatories near the cities. Why would they see stars on an illuminated surface of the moon?
@MoonLandingFarce : "Investigate"? No-one has "Investigated" anything; there are just some chancers who make lots of money out ofpreying on the gullibility of the foolish and scientifically illiterate.
Funny how being in a hole mans you should be able to see something behind the ridge. And rocks in a zero atmosphere usually react the same, unless under force?You are pathetic, and reaching too deep. LIght also in space is not like in an atmosphere idiot????It acts different. You either have light or none. As if thinking in the air which bends light everyday. Why is the sky blue? Big conspiracy???
Marcus Allen using a Time magazine centerfold for scientific analysis. Of course ot was cropped, for Time magazine centerfold. There's one red flag for stupidity.
These photos were for entertainment and nothing else.
And it's pronounced Taurus not Terris.
Allen has no idea where the LM is "supposed" to be in the 360° pic'
And don't get me started on the lens flare this idiot Allen thinks are spotlights.
Hahahaha Whata' an idiot this guy made himself to be...LMFao
I think if there is anything the government is hiding from us like the existence of Aliens they should tell us right away because you can live in a society that knows nothing of its own universe or.. the truth if you will
No-fly zones will come into effect on the moon for the very first time by the end of this month! Why, even buffer zones that spacecraft may have to avoid will come into existence. The reason: avoiding any spraying of rocket exhaust or dust onto certain historical sites and artIfacts on the moon. (w)(w)(w).thehindu.com/sci-tech/science/article2432999.ece
@OneTrueLloyd The lunar lander was miles away behind a ridge, so it was not visible. A real research would know it, and he would use the original photos, not some photo montages from a book.
@CHSarahBs and apart from that: if Nasa was crafty enough to keep their 'fakery' hidden from the world for over 40 years, how can people even consider that they just 'forgot' to put the lander in the picture... these people have no sense of logic :D
What does this prove? It definately proves NASA editted a few photos for whatever reason. Maybe just for ascetics. Also that there are light sources placed while they were taking pictures. Thats it... no proof that the landings were fake. Moon landing deniers really need to be more objective and maybe get out a bit and stop fantacising over conspiracy theories.
Clumsy joker Obama clearly implies the supposed authenticity of the moonlanding is an issue that doesn't matter..which is understandable since he knows it was a hoax. You may ask "Is this another B.Clinton like attempt of play down the significance of the Moon Hoax of 1969-1972 and try soften the impact ,the International embarrassment ,and the crimes associated with it?"
When the European Space Agency’s resupply ship Johannes Kepler, known also as Automated Transfer Vehicle 2 (ATV2) arrives at the space station later this month, it will bring the fuel needed to boost the station to its normal planned altitude of 248 miles, or 400 kilometers.
nasa. gov/mission_pages/station/expeditions/expedition26/iss_altitude. html
“As solar activity rises, the atmospheric density in our altitude range increases causing increased drag on the vehicle. This in turn causes us to have to raise the orbit more often.”
nasa. gov/mission_pages/station/expeditions/expedition26/iss_altitude. html
“The key reason for moving to the higher altitude is to save propellant over the long term as we protect against increased solar activity, said Bill Spetch, of the space station program’s Systems Engineering, Analysis and Integration Office.
Here is one for everyone to think about. Gamma ray bursts, galactic cosmic rays, solar flares and the solar wind. Ever take a good look at a gamma burst map? Ever take a good look at a galactic cosmic ray map? Then take into account that there are about 2 solar flares a week. Now factor in the solar winds. What you have is a suicide mission if you plan to goto the moon. You won't even make it half way before your cooked. Beef jerky would be more like it.
Is this where you guys ran off to? I have totally made you Krisdevall. Your busted. For everyone here who wants to know the truth. Monkeyboysdontknow is Krisdevall who is probably Roamingcroat, but roamingcroat talks like someone else. Either way, these guys are part of some team of shills. I still can't believe they think nobody's on to them. Traitors to humanity.
@Daddyo930 "but roamingcroat talks like someone else"
The leading theory is that we're actually everyone on YouTube except for you. The evidence for this theory is that we occasionally slip into our other personas through typographical errors.
In fact, further evidence is that many of us seem to have an inexplicable profile picture of a goose right now. If that's not a conspiracy, I don't know what is
"Traitors to humanity"
But our reptillian overlords are pleased with us, and that's what counts
@roamingcroat Yeah, I guess your a different idiot who knows nothing about astrophysics yet pretends he's the oracle when it comes to subjects dealing with space. Your still on the same team. I bet that Krisdevall and Monkeyboysdontknow are friends and subscribers. I know who you are. Someone who never studied astrophysics but pretends to know everything about the fake ass manned missions to the moon.
@Daddyo930 "I guess your a different idiot who knows nothing about astrophysics"
I know enough to say that the total energy output of a solar flare doesn't really say anything about the dose rate or total dose an astronaut would receive. I know enough to say that mass specific energy is not the same as energy. In short, I know enough to know that you're quite full of it, and that you're offering nothing but bluster.
@Monkeyboysdontknow Would you like me to post some of the conversations we had when I busted you the first time? Krisdevall, you are busted. Why don't you just use your normal profile? Why do you have to come at people with different accounts? I know who you are and what you are doing is disgusting. Just use your regular profile. I busted your shit long time ago and you know it. Don't try and act like I didn't bust you. We both know you have more than one youtube account. BUSTED!
'Would you like me to post some of the conversations we had when I busted you the first time?'
????? Go ahead. I have no idea what you are talking about. As usual, I told you the complete, unaltered truth, and you are imagining some wild alterate reality where there is, of course, none. I am me. That is MY face in the picture on my channel. I have never pretended, and have no plans on ever pretending, to be someone else. You REALLY need help.
@Monkeyboysdontknow Whatever Krisdevall. You don't have multiple accounts. Your not spending an inordinate amount of time online defending the lies of NASA. It was just my imagination? NOT! Your part of a team of shills devoted to defending the lies. I know who you are and so do you. Maybe everyone else hasn't been able to put it all together, but I have. YOUR BUSTED! You have multiple accounts and that is the truth. Monkeyboysdontknow is just another account. used by Krisdevall.
'I know who you are and so do you. Maybe everyone else hasn't been able to put it all together, but I have. YOUR BUSTED! You have multiple accounts and that is the truth.'
Still wrong. I know who I am, but you obviously don't. You are as knowledgable about any supposed multi-accounts I have, as you are on the MH - essentially nada.
Oh, and FYI, the 'proper' use and spelling of what you mean is "you're", not "your". No science, english or critical thinking skills - a pattern?
@Daddyo930 "Maybe everyone else hasn't been able to put it all together, but I have."
Amusing. You have a superiority complex even when it comes to other conspiracy theorists.
If you had paid even a modicum of attention, you'd know that your delusions about us being "paid shills" and having dozens of sockpuppet accounts is pretty much old hat. Virtually every hoaxer, when unable to defend his asinine claims, resorts to calling us NWO shills. Calling us that doesn't make you special.
@roamingcroat I thought I presented evidence provided by satellites designed to measure radiation, solar flares and galactic cosmic rays. Then I presented evidence of apollo 12 flying through solar flares. All I have gotten back is denials of the numbers and facts. These facts are from NASA, universities and the orbiting satellites. Then I presented evidence of the amount of radiation in space every day. Nothing. You guys are a bunch of frauds afraid to confront the numbers and raw data.
@Daddyo930 I believe I've asked you a number of times what the flux is of these multi-GeV particles you keep harping on. You never did. You've presented data that is irrelevant, incomplete, or misinterpreted by you. For instance, solar flares. You've said over and over again that solar flares release 6e25 joules. Which is lovely, but irrelevant.
You said I never studied astrophysics; that's true. Have you?
@roamingcroat Solar flares are classified as A, B, C, M or X according to the peak flux (in watts per square meter, W/m2) of 100 to 800 picometer X-rays near Earth, as measured on the GOES spacecraft. Each class has a peak flux ten times greater than the preceding one, with X class flares having a peak flux of order 10−4 W/m. Does that answer your question? If you think apollo 12 could have flown through X class solar flares, your dreaming. No one survives 800 picometer X-rays.
Yes it does. That proves you've read Wikipedia. It also proves you don't understand what you read.
"No one survives 800 picometer X-rays."
You must be joking. Everyone survives 800 picometer X-rays. If you were right, hospital patients would be dropping dead due to radiation poisoning by the truckload!
@roamingcroat Try flying through that with the added heat of a solar flare and the radioactivity for four hours. Everyone survives an X-ray. Try being exposed to that for four hours. What do you think will happen? There is a really good reason they only do a few seconds with an X-ray. Can you survive 12+ hours of that? I don't thinks so. That's why apollo 12 never happened. Solar flare on the 17,18 and 19 of November, 1969. Don't forget the radioactivity increase because of the solar flare.
@Daddyo930 "Try flying through that with the added heat..."
Added heat? And how much is that? The Wiki article you're quoting from gives a peak flux of ~1e-4 W/m^2. The Solar constant at Earth is ~1,300 W/m^2. Even if the peak flux is off by 4 orders of magnitude (to account for other wavelengths which is, of course, absurdly high), the "added heat" would be well within the design margins of any spacecraft.
@roamingcroat Damn..., still quoting Wikipedia? Use some common sense dude, the shit is too stupid to make sense to work.
The rockets are too small to go to and from the moon.
Too much radiation to survive.
NASA's top Astronaut, "How are we going to get to the moon when can't even communicate between two or three buildings?" Virgil Ivan Grissom <----(Explain that shit and while you are at it, explain his death that is no question a murder)
Too many anomalies that points to a fucking HOAX.
@GUARDIANtrooper "USE YOUR BRAIN AND STOP WORKING FOR GOVERNMENT, SELLOUT."
I'm mostly amused that you addressed that to yourself...
Jarrah White rambles and brings up many, many irrelevant and minor details. He lies or misrepresents facts (in his Apollo 1 ego-trip, he shows footage of an Apollo reentry without telling his viewers that it's that, then he tells them to decide for themselves if there's footage of the Apollo 1 fire. That's incredibly dishonest). Suffice it to say, he's dead wrong.
@roamingcroat If I addressed it to myself, then why did you read it and answered it? I guess you got the message... This is not about Jarrah, Jarrah proves himself in fine detail, unlike you people. That is why everyone attacks him, because his arguments are very strong indeed. You can't contest the truth with fictitious bullshit, because it never looks right, Jarrah brings the facts. If Jarrah is dead wrong about anything he does, then NASA is a complete lie and you love being a fucking fool.
Don't mistake verbosity for evidence. Jarrah talks a lot, but it's largely irrelevant, and it's entirely wrong.
"Jarrah brings the facts."
Do me a favor. Look at part 10 of his Apollo 1 travesty (watch?v=g0iCpIxU3xE). Look at 2:20. Note that he says the video "clearly shows the spacecraft window as it fills with flames." On page 2 of the comments, he denies saying the footage he subsequently shows is of the fire. Somewhere, he's lying.
@roamingcroat No..., somewhere you didn't understand. What is there to lied about or why better yet, why conjure up a statement to be that of a lie if you are not sure to state, "Somewhere, he's lying?" If you didn't understand it in its entirety, how could you even call him a liar? Justify that...
@GUARDIANtrooper "What is there to lied about or why better yet"
Great question. Why did Jarrah White lie? Only he knows.
Tell me, did you review his video? Did you see the part at 2:20 where he implies the Apollo reentry film is Apollo 1? That's a lie of omission. He (according to page 2) knew that wasn't film of Apollo 1, but he implied that it was. Hiding behind "I'll let my viewers decide" is crap. He isn't giving his viewers enough information to make an informed decision.
@GUARDIANtrooper In case you don't know, the footage he shows of "flames filling the window" is of an Apollo reentry through one of the forward facing windows. The only window that wasn't covered on Apollo 1 was the hatch window, which is circular. There is simply no way that footage, that Jarrah White says "clearly shows the spacecraft window fill with flames" is of Apollo 1.
Tell me, do you think that's dishonest? I do. He's relying on the ignorance of his viewers to not know the difference.
@GUARDIANtrooper "The rockets are too small to go to and from the moon."
Oh, I like that.
Tell me, if the Saturn V was too small to send the stack to the Moon, how much delta-V did it have?
You've made a quantitative statement (Saturn V and/or the CSM were too small to achieve the necessary delta-V), so you absolutely need to give a quantitative analysis. Handwaving qualitative statements don't do you any good.
Except there wasn't. I have yet to see anyone give a quantitative analysis of what dose would be expected for an Apollo astronaut. I've seen quantitative analysis from actual experts (not Wiki-"exeprts" like Daddy-O here) that says a 90 day mission to the Moon during Solar maximum would result in a risk of exposure-induced death of about 1% - and that includes long-term risk of cancer. This contradicts your claim about unsurvivable radiation.
He was frustrated with a test going badly. The Block I command module had a hell of a lot of problems, that's true. But that's flight testing for you.
Wilbur Wright told his brother in 1901 that man wouldn't fly for 50 years. Two years later, they succeeded with their flyer. Exasperation can lead one to say many things like that.
@roamingcroat I told you a thousand times, the ISS is 300 miles above the planet. That is within the protective magnetic shield. Sometimes they have to goto a special shielded area of the ISS because of solar flares. Were the ISS 700 miles or 1000 miles in space, they would be dead in minutes unless the ISS increased it's shielding dramatically. Yes, radioactivity is part of space. Being the third rock from the sun means your gonna get a lot of radiation thrown at the planet.
@Daddyo930 "That is within the protective magnetic shield."
And how, pray tell, would the Van Allen belts deflect X-rays? You do know the difference between electromagnetic and particle radiation, right? I mean, that's pretty much remedial astrophysics...
"Yes, radioactivity is part of space."
watch?v=G2y8Sx4B2Sk
The mere presence of radiation is not, in and of itself, deadly. What would you say the dose would be for an astronaut on a given Apollo mission? Show your work (or cite a source).
@roamingcroat I never said anything about the van allen belts deflecting anything. almost 90% of all the incoming cosmic rays are protons, about 9% are helium nuclei (alpha particles) and nearly 1% are electrons. The ratio of hydrogen to helium nuclei (28% helium by mass) is about the same as the primordial elemental abundance ratio of these elements (24% by mass He) in the universe. That's from Wikipedia. Solar proton events kill which are what galactic cosmic rays are uto themselves it seems.
@Daddyo930 Whoa, back up there, chief. Yesterday, it was, "No one survives 800 picometer X-rays," which would, of course, sound the death knell for all manned spaceflight. Now you're on particle radiation. Before we get to that, would you kindly retract yesterday's statement about X-rays being deadly?
"That's from Wikipedia."
Yep. And?
"Solar proton events kill"
That's not from Wikipedia, is it? That's your spin on Wikipedia, isn't it?
Remind me, where did you get your degree in astrophysics?
@roamingcroat You don't need a degree to have studied something. I build computers from scratch but never got my A+ certification. I still build computers. I write music but never went to school for that either. I have a digital recording studio but never went to school for it. Yes. X-ray for four hours will kill you. I meant it when I said that no one survives 800 picometer X-rays for four hours. Ask NASA what a solar proton event is. They are very specific when they said it's dangerous.
@Daddyo930 "You don't need a degree to have studied something."
You certainly don't. But getting a degree challenges you. If you're wrong, you'll quickly find out about it at University. If your entire education consists of reading Wikipedia, if you misunderstand the fundamentals, you will be wrong, and you may not realize it. Astrophysics isn't easy.
"I meant it when I said that no one survives 800 picometer X-rays for four hours."
So how is it the ISS astronauts survive just fine?
@roamingcroat For the twentieth time, because the ISS is in orbit 300 miles above the planet within the magnetic shield. That protects it from most solar flares. The ISS has a special shielded room in case of strong solar flares. Stop asking that stupid question. Numbers don't lie, people do all the time. History demonstrates it. The numbers like 10^27 ergs per second for a solar flare indicate that the energy would not dissipate to the point of being harmless when it reached earth.
@roamingcroat A solar wind is a stream of particles (mostly high energy protons) which are ejected from the upper atmosphere of a star. [6] Solar winds are energy that is released from solar flares. When the solar winds reach earth, some of the high energy particles are able to penetrate the earth's ionosphere. If solar flares in the M and X class are serious enough to cause blackouts here and radiation storms in space, what makes you think astronauts can fly through them?
@Daddyo930 Let's try the question again: "How does the "magnetic shield" affect X-rays?"
Not protons. X-rays. You've made a very specific claim about X-rays, and I'm afraid until you understand why you're dead wrong about that, I'd rather not move on.
@roamingcroat We're talking about space travel, not orbiting vehicles. X-rays will affect you in space past 350 miles. 300 miles is the limit for manned missions as every manned vessel in space is within 300 miles. That's the extent of the protection for harmful radiation. Now I am talking specifically about travel past 300 miles in space. Why do you want to keep the conversation on the planet? I am dealing with radiation in space, past the 300 mile limit. Stop looking for another strawman.
@roamingcroat What's the matter? You can't read english? I am talking only about space travel. The astronauts allegedly went to the moon. Lets deal with what they would be facing in space, not here on earth. You would be exposed to X-rays in space and other types of harmful radiation in space. Deal with that. I don't know why you carry one about X-rays here on earth. What do X-rays here on earth have to do with space travel. Try and stay on topic. Your making yourself dizzy.
@Daddyo930 "I don't know why you carry one about X-rays here on earth."
I'm not. I'm talking about X-rays in Earth orbit. You say a X-rays from a solar flare will kill anyone exposed to them. I'm asking you what stops the X-rays from reaching the ISS or other LEO manned spacecraft. Well?
@roamingcroatGettingAnAssKick I see Daddyo930 is kicking your ass all over Youtube and still you are not answering the questions correctly as usual. And I am not Daddyo, I only have two accounts, unlike you with your 50 Duck Clan accounts, LMAO!! Now stop it with the bullshit runarounds and stay focus, read the shit before you submit stupid bullshit comeback answers that has nothing to do with the questions or the debate... You'll try to change the subject and I am not going to let you, LMAO!
@GUARDIANtrooper "I see Daddyo930 is kicking your ass all over Youtube"
Is he, though? He seems to think the Van Allen belts stop electromagnetic radiation. Now that's just silly, and anyone with even a modicum of understanding of electromagnetism (let alone astrophysics, which he thinks he knows) would know that that's preposterous.
@roamingcroat You lied, he never stated anything about the belts, YOU DID in your own confusion.
LMAO, Goose, duck, swan, makes no difference it's you, WHY?
Anyway, your statement here doesn't correspond with what you guys are debating about, (AS USUAL) So in your studies, what do you think stops electromagnetic radiation? Or do we even have a need to stop it? Radiation is part of us, we are radiated, lol! The balance of earth and space is perfect, everything is for a reason...
@GUARDIANtrooper "You lied, he never stated anything about the belts"
I know, because he's not giving a mechanism for how electromagnetic radiation would be absorbed. I jumped ahead a few steps and assumed he was talking about the belts and/or the magnetosphere in general.
"Anyway, your statement here doesn't correspond with what you guys are debating about"
Really? He claims X-rays are deadly in space, but Earth orbital manned missions are possible. That's a non sequitor.
@roamingcroat Your still trying not to get it. Gamma ray bursts happen all the time and come from every direction in space. Galactic cosmic rays happen all the time and come from every direction in space. Solar flares happen about twice a week. The apollo spacecraft was not shielded to protect against these three cosmic forces. They never went above 300 miles. Someone sent a dog into space. It came back dead. They say it died of a heart attack. Radioactive testing is still done on monkeys.
@krisdevalle I signed up for more physics forums like you requested. I started a thread on PhysForum. It's called Nasa faked the moon landing. My username there is the same one as here. Once again, discussion of radiation in space, galactic cosmic rays, gamma ray bursts, solar flares and the solar winds. Quotes by reputable scientist not allowed. Numbers only. The scientific method will apply in the thread. Have fun.
@Daddyo930 I can't find the thread, did you get booted off that one too?
Maybe you want to be a little more subtle and start with a less idiotic statement. As you have probably figured out, the moon landing hoax is not actually supported by anyone who knows a little about physics.
@Daddyo930 Never mind I found it. So far they are telling you that you lack foundation, which is what I maintained from the outset, and your conclusions, from the extremely limited understanding you have, are wrong.
Maybe you want to start asking questions instead of making statements.
I'd also ask you to review the term 'Dunning-Kruger Effect' to get an idea of why you feel you know Apollo was impossible.
@krisdevalle No. They're doing exactly what you do. Say I lack foundation with discussing the numbers. Why don't you wanna talk about the numbers? Do they scare you? Were I an astronaut back then and I had to study astrophysics, there's no way in hell I'm going up in the apollo craft. Guss Grisolm said "Somebody's gonna get killed". He was right. His opposition to the program ended when his pre-launch sim ended in a fire. Everyone else stepped into line after that. How convenient.
You've done the barest amount of research and made a conclusion unsupported by any academic or professional in the field.
You are clearly suffering from the Dunning-Kruger Effect and this colors your perception greatly. You think you know a lot but the gulf of understanding is immense.
@krisdevalle How can they be right when they are running away from the numbers? If the numbers were insignificant, I would expect to see people throwing them in my face all the time. I don't. I see people running away from the numbers like they were extremely radioactive. Would you care to discuss the numbers that Wikipedia has on gamma ray bursts?
@Daddyo930 They have dismissed you because the the kind of calculations required to figure out the skin dosage for a gamma ray burst through Apollo CM module shielding require the kind of education that takes years to complete. You seem to think a quick wikipedia check will put you in the forefront of space radiation science. It won't.
'The sources of most GRBs are billions of light years away from Earth, implying that the explosions are both extremely energetic and extremely rare.' from wiki.
@krisdevalle Wrong again. The science is there. Wikipedia has it. It's called Radiation Protection. Section 3. Radiation shielding. Luckily the geniuses at NASA figured all this out for us so we don't have to. There is a handy chart there regarding how much each type of shielding protects against radiation. No need for complex calculations. You could use the free online RADPRO calculator to determine shielding thickness. What's wrong with your brain? Can you google?
@Daddyo930 Nothing wrong, but the list of signficant gamma ray bursts since their discovery in the 60's is relatively few.
Scientists and radiation experts have reviewed the Biomedical results of Apollo, freely available on the net, and not found any discrepancies with the reported values. What expertise do you have that puts you ahead of all learned academics?
@krisdevalle I don't think I'm smarter than the experts. As a matter of fact, I know I still have much to learn. I just won't lie like the experts. The numbers speak the truth for me. I don't need anyone to validate the numbers because NASA and Wikipedia and Science Journal and many other respectable scientific organizations use them. Established numbers used and accepted by everyone don't need validation. E=mc2 does not need validation. It's accepted theory.
@Daddyo930 Your problem is you don't understand the numbers. Gigaelectron-volts sounds scary, but it requires context. In the past, you had great difficulty with units (arbitrarily dividing joules by grams and declaring the dose unsurvivable).
"I showed you that gamma bursts make their way into this solar system and are lethal?"
You haven't demonstrated that they're lethal. I mean, yes, they can be, but the ones you discussed weren't. What dose would an Apollo crew receive from a given burst?
@krisdevalle Thank you. I would draw your attention to the 2704 BATSE Gamma Ray Burst map. What do you see? This is a dimension representation of how many gamma rays are out there at one time. What do you see?
@krisdevalle That 2512/8 = 314 a year from one satellite. We don't have enough satellites to detect and measure all the gamma ray bursts that are out there. SWIFT captured 500 in 5 years. Take no comfort in those numbers. You do acknowledge that the entire map is basically covered in gamma ray burst right? I thought the number was 2704 anyway, that would be 2704/8 = 338 a year. More than one a day on that satellite. How many satellites are there that measure gamma ray bursts?
@Daddyo930 If I click the link on the same page to look at significant gamma ray bursts, there appear to be little more than a dozen or so, and very few and far between.
The rest are insignificant, but detected nonetheless.
Remember the first bursts were detected in the mid-60s. So they've been measuring for some time.
@krisdevalle a typical gamma ray burst releases as much energy in a few seconds as the Sun will in its entire 10-billion-year lifetime. What part of typical did you not understand? I told you before, we don't have enough satellites to detect and measure all the gamma ray bursts out in space. They are coming from every direction in space every second of every day. If the first bursts were detected in 1960, did they exist before 1960? Your just floundering like a fish out of water now.
@krisdevalle This is from Wikipedia: On March 5, 1979, a few months after the successful dropping of satellites into the atmosphere of Venus, the two Soviet spacecraft that were then drifting through the solar system were hit by a blast of gamma ray radiation at approximately 10:51 EST. This contact raised the radiation readings on both the probes from a normal 100 counts per second to over 200,000 counts a second, in only a fraction of a millisecond. Does that answer your question?
@krisdevalle Your just going to ignore the fact that I showed you that gamma bursts make their way into this solar system and are lethal? Have gamma ray bursts been out there before 1960 when we discovered them? Gamma-ray bursts were first observed in the late 1960s by the U.S. Vela satellites, which were built to detect gamma radiation pulses emitted by nuclear weapons tested in space. Damn son, you really are grasping at straws now.
@krisdevalle Have you checkout the PhysForum thread I started two days ago? 28 comments and 143 views. Most of the comments agree with me you idiot. Science and numbers are not for sale to the highest bidder. Numbers are not intellectual prostitutes. You should go there and sign up and try posting some of your garbage there and watch how quickly it get shot down with numbers and facts. Not by me, but others who know. I am waiting in PhysForum. Its NASA faked the moon landing. Have fun.
@Daddyo930 Maybe we are reading different threads because that one you pointed out, NOBODY agrees with you and keeps asking why you're ignoring the links where other people have investigated it and found there is no problem.
Are you delusional? Which of the commenters agrees with you?
@krisdevalle Notice how those who disagree won't even discuss the numbers associated with cosmic forces like gamma ray bursts? I got them running scared over there. Wait until I start the thread on HAARP.
@Daddyo930 That's because they have tried to explain how little you understand, as I have.
While the initial energies of the gamma ray bursts are immense, the intergalactic distances are equally immense. This is why there is only a very short list of significant GRBs, a list you repeatedly and willingly fail to acknowledge, despite me pointing it out.
Now you lied, earlier, stating that people on that forum agreed with you. Why did you do that?
rpenner, brucep, AlexG, RealityCheck, Sithdarth, Beer w/Straw.. these are the people responding to you or your claims. And no one of them agrees with you. As AlexG said in the last post: "I'd guess we're dealing with a home-schooled teenager. He can't help being stupid. He was raised that way. "
@CHSarahBs Whats up. You'll also notice that not one of them will discuss the numbers. Rpenner, who admins the site, tried some bogus calculations regarding magnetars. The rest of them will not discuss the numbers. Would you like to discuss the numbers with me? Lets start with gamma ray bursts. A typical burst releases as much energy in a few seconds as the Sun will in its entire 10-billion-year lifetime. Was apollo shielded to protect against gamma ray bursts?
@CHSarahBs You made your point. It is true that all of the comments posted on my thread have been ridicule. You should also point out that none of those that posted will discuss the numbers. In science, bold assertions are just that, assertions. Without numbers to quantify and validate assertions, you have nothing. The numbers associated with gamma ray bursts, galactic cosmic rays, magnetars, solar flares and the solar winds make it impossible in space without electromagnetic shielding. Research
@Daddyo930 I see you over here talking & complaining about how no of Apollo believers use numbers,as in flux & eV values, yet when ever you post your vague generalities you seem to never ever mention any numbers yourself.
.
Why will you not continue our "discussion" on the gamma ray burst.GCR's & flares.
Why do you evade my question,why isn't the gamma ray flux from GCR's&Sun,as high as the UV rays that penetrate atmosphere & hit Earth's surface,after all they're at the same end of the spectrum?
@Tweekerhead Because, krisdevall, you don't even know who you are. If all LDE flares are solar proton events then the apollo manned missions to the moon were faked. Are LDE flares proton events? Yes or no?
@Daddyo930 You're DeadJesus"correct?And you also"deadlyradiation"also correct?
You're also wengsky& NASAHOAX too yes?See that's how Y-Tube works.
.Accuse me of being all or anyone else, it doesn't matter. The fact still stands that you can not answer a simple question or come up with any eV values-flux rates when you propagate your amazing assumptions of space environment.
That evasion tactic is just that.......an evasion.
You can't hang with the discussion, you put the cart before the horse.
@Tweekerhead Are LDE flares solar proton events? Yes. Could apollo have been on the moon during a solar proton event lasting 3 hours? Fuck no. Did the apollo craft ever leave earth orbit? Hell no. I don't bother answering anything a sophomore says. I just give the facts.
@Daddyo930 You give facts? Ok then, what were the eV values & flux ratios of this endless sea of proton events that happens then & now constantly?
Are the of 10MeVor100MeV is the flux10³ or10x10³particles/cm²/sec.?
Can you give specifics?
You're saying you won't answer any more from a sophomore as the last ditch effort of endless evasion only after you've retreated from your original claim that a flare hit Earth on Nov.69' making Apollo12 impossible, that I totally busted? Is that what that is?
@Tweekerhead All the flux ratios are in the Catalogue of LDE flares 1968 to 1986. M3 and X5 solar proton events have flux ratios, they're in a chart in Wikipedia moron. Bye.
@Daddyo930 No,the"LDE Catalogue"has no flux ratios,that would mean particles per square centimeter per second.
Nothing in the catalogue' for that. Nada!
You really are an idiot or you're just a kid. if you're kid just say so, that way I can help you.
.
Employ all the evasion tactics you want, you post this nonsense on a public forum, it's up for grabs. I'll bust your assumptions and all your stupid shit wannabe' astrophysics reality shit until the chickens come back to roost & shit in your bed.
@Tweekerhead Solar flares are classified as A, B, C, M or X according to the peak flux (in watts per square meter, W/m2) of 100 to 800 picometer X-rays near Earth, as measured on the GOES spacecraft. Each class has a peak flux ten times greater than the preceding one, with X class flares having a peak flux of order 10−4 W/m2. Within a class there is a linear scale from 1 to 9, so an X2 flare is twice as powerful as an X1 flare, and is four times more powerful than an M5 flare. Stupid ass.
@Daddyo930 Stupid ass? Yeah, if I had a disenfranchised, post-adolescent mentality like yourself, I'd probably be trying to insult & discredit me also, esp. after I busted &refuted all your feeble baseless claims, making you look stupid with every post.
You display all the symptoms of Dunning-Kruger effect.
.
You LDE has NO flux ratios, you can't read this chart because you don't understand it.
It gives wave-length intervals, if you were as astute as you think, you would've seen this.
@Daddyo930 Funny to see you retreat from your original claim of the flare in Nov. 69',but it really wasn't your claim,the flare of Nov.69 has been debunked already.
.
If you like to convert eV values to Watts to display how much energy you're talking about, know that it takes the equivalent energy of about 620,000,000,000,000 mill. electron volts,MeV per/sec. to light up a 100-watt bulb.
Repeating ad nauseam doesn't make it true, those scarey numbers aren't so scarey in reality when translated.
@Daddyo930 "a typical gamma ray burst releases as much energy in a few seconds as the Sun will in its entire 10-billion-year lifetime"
Yep. Luckily, that energy is rarely released close enough to the Earth to cause any problems, either for us or for astronauts outside the magnetosphere. When it is close enough, and when it's directed directly at us, then watch out - It's not just astronauts who are in trouble. It's the whole bloody world.
@Daddyo930 You seem to think all radiation is created equal.
Here's the deal: you think gamma rays and X-rays are deadly. Lovely. But if they're deadly in cislunar space, their deadly in low Earth orbit. Gamma and X-rays are electromagnetic radiation. They cannot be stopped, trapped, or deflected by Earth's magnetic field. They are attenuated by Earth's atmosphere, but not before then (unless hitting a spacecraft's hull).
So if X-rays and gamma rays kill on Apollo, they kill on the ISS.
@roamingcroat You need to stop making distinctions without a difference. I told you that the ISS is protected by the ionosphere that extends to about 300 miles above the planet. Past that, things get complicated. Electromagnetic radiation bounces off other magnetic fields which is why there seem to be an endless stream of them from every direction in space. I am talking about space travel, not orbital activity.
@Daddyo930 How much does the ionosphere attenuate X-rays and gamma rays? Not much. If gamma rays and X-rays are deadly in cislunar space, they'll be deadly in typical low Earth orbits - because there's just nothing to absorb them.
@roamingcroat Do you know what NASA and Wikipedia and even Yahoo Answers say about where the ISS is? 220 miles. You would have to round up to get to 300. Why do think google, wikipedia and online dictionary's don't give correct information? You need to stop using that 300 number. No one would say that now. They had to lower the orbit because of radiation fears.
@Daddyo930 I was using 300 because that's the number you used. Obviously a mistake. The point still stands. Electromagnetic radiation affecting objects in cislunar space will affect objects orbiting the Earth at 300 miles, and it will affect objects orbiting at 200 miles. You'd have to get to bellow the Karman line to have appreciable absorption. If X-rays are deadly for Apollo, they're deadly for the ISS.
all those uneducated person being experts when it comes to the moon landings is just so funny to me - if there are photoshopped pics in this book why didnt the 'authors' also photoshop the 'spotslights' - see LOL at the Troll ! "How can flag flutter on moon,when there is no air there?" Well, in a vacuum chamber i.E. things like a flag pole once set it motion by hammering into the ground will wiggle and vibrate much longer than say here on earth, because there is no air resistance, okay?
@jonkam10 So answer me this one... How is it that we can pretty much fly, not hop, around the space station in our exosphere (with a powerful gravitational pull within our atmosphere that could actually pull down the space station), but deeper in space on the moon, in a fucking vacuum, (what a bunch of fools) the gravity is almost the same as earth with no fucking atmosphere? WTF?! You people believe everything NASA say without a question whatsoever, that is too ignorant to even think it...
And this guy pretends to be a researcher? A researcher would make his analysis with the original pictures, not with some montages from a book.
A researcher would know the background of the shots. In this case he would know that the photo location was several miles away from the landingsite and the LM was behind a range.
heh. funny. This video contradicts itself. It simultaneously claims that we faked the moon landing while asserting that we encountered UFOs at the moon.
@kevingabbert I don't believe we went to the moon, but you are absolutely right about the contradictory part of the one who uploaded this video, that was really stupid to put that crap at the end of the video, wow...
Just cause some idiot take and minipulate these pictures then somehow get them published cause of thir name more than likely, does not mean that the moon landing was a dud made by fantasy in some american goverment basement ,thats bull i could easly do all that in photoshop and make it look a hell of alot more real than that ,thirs just a retart out thir who genuinely taut he could make the moon landing out to be a fake by fucking up on photoshop :P, leave the conspiracys to the hippys (Y)
Consider this. We landed on the moon, without question. AND... some photos and videos were faked, for various reasons. See "Stanley Kubrick and Apollo 11."
@foxtrotmuppett It was swinging not waving. Only when an astronaut touches the flag or manipulated the pole it was swinging. Without airfriction to slow it down, the swinging lasted longer then on Earth with atmosphere. It is a question of inertia.
@CHSarahBs The only ace those hoaxers might have up their sleeve (for a moment) is that scene when an astronaut jumps past the flag and it starts swinging like a pendulum because of that - but that can easily be explained by static electricity, and if both the astronaut and the flag carry the same charge they will repel each other, resulting in a seemingly "puffed away" flag.
Bullshiters
tweaker205 1 week ago
Does anyone have a video of original interview with Marcus Allen? For some reason everyone who uploads it feels the need to add dramatic music and/or their smart-ass comments.
randyfletcher86 1 month ago
this really speaks volumes, it's time we wake up sheeple?
Thatboy1980 1 month ago
I think they really went to the Moon but couldnt take pictures because of radioactivity so they made some nice pictures for the crowd.
Spoutnik1957 1 month ago
@Spoutnik1957 I honestly believe you may need to get your brain checked for cognitive dissonance....Radioactivity is the reason they could not go as well as photos being rendered virtually useless...
Don't stay ignorant of space. Learn about it and the Apollo Fairy Tale fades away with the truth of cislunar space!
un4g1v3n1 1 month ago
I don't often respond to this garbage, but really. The Lunar Rover on Apollo 17 was driven (on all 3 EVA) on 1 occasion, to a maximum distance of 7.6 km from the Lunar Module. That would put the LM below the local horizon, never mind, hidden behind the mid field ridge. Who are you people. Can't you put your curiosity to some good science.
MrValiantAP6 1 month ago
If it's a day light you should have bright background not black.Fake as hell.I'm a photographer.
nano63a 1 month ago
Does it really matter if anyone has been to the moon and back...I was a kid and very caught up in everything to do with space at the time I remember counting down the last seven seconds before the first Apollo mission was claimed to have succeeded in making it,the footage could be real or faked they may have gone or they never it served it's purpose...and I don't care anymore...
badwolfno9 1 month ago
@realvworld2 Marcus Allen is a con and a liar, and not even a very good one. He's been on talk shows peddling his NASA "faked" photos showing "spotlights" that anybody who ever did any serious photography at all can see immediately are just lens flares.
occhamite 2 months ago
"you would expect these rocks to be slightly different but they're not".
LOL no. actually, i wouldnt. perhaps you haven't seen what the moon looks like?
l1nkie 2 months ago
Please buy my DVD!!! LOL
Dmac11a666 2 months ago
NASA has always used photoshop (I say it is logical that if you want to retouch images that look attractive (that's so bad?)), that's nothing new, if the man on the moon or not is another matter, I personally think so.
ErDaToCHeNz 3 months ago
those are lens flares! this was stopid! obiusly the astronaut is airbrushed so he has more light, that's an obious enhancement, buts it's an understandable enhancement, also the astronaut is wearing white while surface of the moon isn't white but gray, i guess the original exposure showed a darker astronaut equaling him to the background and they decided to enhance his shadows, whta is strange was the first fakery, maybe this way the printed photo is more squarish?
Biel7318 3 months ago
Comment removed
charliegoodboy 3 months ago
Comment removed
charliegoodboy 3 months ago
OOH British accent! he must know what he's talking about...fuckin limey
charliegoodboy 3 months ago
Moon Hoaxers--best argument for birth control. The "no stars" argument is so lame, ask any photographer...even the space station (ISS) photos rarely show stars because of something photographers call "exposure times"
charliegoodboy 3 months ago
Do you honestly believe that they just forgot to put the lunar lander in the photo and then reveal the photo to the public? You do know the astronauts travelled quite a distance during their EVA's. They don't just stay around the lunar lander the whole 2 days and look at the same things. That is why they brought the lunar rover. To explore more of the moons surface in a shorter amount of time...
Astromaster90 3 months ago
@ bowlerfreak, you're a real idiot in the sense of the term, and that can not simplify.
SaiyanRace5 3 months ago
those pics are not a montage book they are real photos of fake lunar landing we never land on the moon the first time its was a a lie just as many other goverment like jfk was an inside job cause the jfk knew to many things as was a liabillalty to be left alive so they off him.. there are some many people who are stupid enough to think it was really. back in the 60s most people where probably to high to notice also the lander cant be miles away from them cause they dont have enough o2.
brodflo1 3 months ago
So you expect us to believe that they not only faked the moon landing but were so incompetent that they released damning evidence of the fact that they did so?
What's the scenario here?
NASA GOON 1: OMG, we need pictures for this Full Moon book.
NASA GOON 2: Just give 'em that really bad one where we forgot to put the lander in and left those spotlights that idiot intern Jimmy forgot to remove.
NG1: Right-o, the public is completely stupid, they'll never figure out we've bilked them for years.
DocHoncho 3 months ago
Thanks for the video acceptance:)
andschannll 3 months ago
Comment removed
andschannll 3 months ago
Yes and no.
moya138 3 months ago
Arrest the
NASACrooks 3 months ago
How come in every scene you see showing the horizon in the background that there are no stars - just black nothingness. At night I can look up in the sky and see the planets (earlier after dark) and then all the stars shortly after that.
H1X2N4 3 months ago
@H1X2N4 : You try taking a photo in brilliant sunlight (as it was on the moon) and see just how many stars you can see in the picture!.
p.s. I don't want to alarm you, but the Internet is faked! It's a con by scientists you know!
Geothemusicman 3 months ago
@H1X2N4 Believe it or not,it was daytime when the astronauts were on the moon,you go outside during the day and see how many stars you can see.
arobekie 3 months ago
@arobekie It is also common not to see stars in a cloudless night, when you're trying to observe stars in the middle of a city, even a mile or km out of an illuminated city one can barely see stars or not see them at all. That's why many astronomers today complain that urbanization is ruining the ability to observe stars in observatories near the cities. Why would they see stars on an illuminated surface of the moon?
Lachausis 2 months ago
every single one of you posting these videos be trollin. OR you're just stupid. take your pick.
bowlerfreak 4 months ago
I will say this one more time, If you are an idiot you will believe this Big M.F./B.S.!
What if the man never landed? will you kill the president? Will you destroy every space craft?
This is just a waste of time, be intelligent and find something useful not ""evidence"" of conspiracy theories!
KiropteranKnight 4 months ago
Moon-landing-is-a-hoax.The-one-thing-that-says-this-is-the-fact-these-guys-weighing-thirty-pounds-on-the-moon-are-jumping-in-the-air-and-floating-like-they-weigh-one-gram.Does-1/6th-the-gravity-mean-you-float-like-a-feather?Plus-why-do-they-keep-jumping-around?Why-won't-they-walk-normal?They-keep-jumping-around-like-children.
tubeyou9878 4 months ago
What does everyone think? Real or Fake? I think most people who investigate the Apollo Moon Missions decide things seem fake.
MoonLandingFarce 4 months ago
@MoonLandingFarce : "Investigate"? No-one has "Investigated" anything; there are just some chancers who make lots of money out ofpreying on the gullibility of the foolish and scientifically illiterate.
Geothemusicman 3 months ago
Russians made this video they are to jealous
nugnug118 4 months ago
Funny how being in a hole mans you should be able to see something behind the ridge. And rocks in a zero atmosphere usually react the same, unless under force?You are pathetic, and reaching too deep. LIght also in space is not like in an atmosphere idiot????It acts different. You either have light or none. As if thinking in the air which bends light everyday. Why is the sky blue? Big conspiracy???
ltcurry 4 months ago
4:29 3 UFO
mars521chen 4 months ago
Marcus Allen using a Time magazine centerfold for scientific analysis. Of course ot was cropped, for Time magazine centerfold. There's one red flag for stupidity.
These photos were for entertainment and nothing else.
And it's pronounced Taurus not Terris.
Allen has no idea where the LM is "supposed" to be in the 360° pic'
And don't get me started on the lens flare this idiot Allen thinks are spotlights.
Hahahaha Whata' an idiot this guy made himself to be...LMFao
Tweekerhead 4 months ago
I think if there is anything the government is hiding from us like the existence of Aliens they should tell us right away because you can live in a society that knows nothing of its own universe or.. the truth if you will
DrDevil32 4 months ago
so are you saying that NASA spending money to have sex with your mom?!
TheSuperComments 4 months ago
what fakin retarded video
fak her momy who made it
indian japanese satelites phptgraphed all apollo landind sites
and cofirmed evidence of l;andings
google it fakin morons
MrAbsoluteknowledge 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
I have a video of a glass dome as well as an alien structure. Feel free to take a look. Thanks and Peace
bigbrotherwatcha 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Moon to have no-fly zones by month end
No-fly zones will come into effect on the moon for the very first time by the end of this month! Why, even buffer zones that spacecraft may have to avoid will come into existence. The reason: avoiding any spraying of rocket exhaust or dust onto certain historical sites and artIfacts on the moon. (w)(w)(w).thehindu.com/sci-tech/science/article2432999.ece
mw5353 4 months ago
Not very convincing.
LouigiVerona 4 months ago
Damn Europeans, always lying.
Oweboy1960 4 months ago
perhaps the 360 degree photo was taken around the luner lander so as not to ruin the panoramic of the moons surface, did you consider that?
OneTrueLloyd 4 months ago 18
@OneTrueLloyd The lunar lander was miles away behind a ridge, so it was not visible. A real research would know it, and he would use the original photos, not some photo montages from a book.
CHSarahBs 4 months ago 9
@CHSarahBs and apart from that: if Nasa was crafty enough to keep their 'fakery' hidden from the world for over 40 years, how can people even consider that they just 'forgot' to put the lander in the picture... these people have no sense of logic :D
ozzert 1 month ago
What does this prove? It definately proves NASA editted a few photos for whatever reason. Maybe just for ascetics. Also that there are light sources placed while they were taking pictures. Thats it... no proof that the landings were fake. Moon landing deniers really need to be more objective and maybe get out a bit and stop fantacising over conspiracy theories.
Spindry96 4 months ago
watch?v=CsNe4pTs-eo
Clumsy joker Obama clearly implies the supposed authenticity of the moonlanding is an issue that doesn't matter..which is understandable since he knows it was a hoax. You may ask "Is this another B.Clinton like attempt of play down the significance of the Moon Hoax of 1969-1972 and try soften the impact ,the International embarrassment ,and the crimes associated with it?"
The answer is yes!
potrodsas 4 months ago
@potrodsas The answer is: You do not understand Clintons and Obamas statements ;) Or is it better to say, you do not want to understand it?
CHSarahBs 4 months ago
"They had to lower the orbit because of radiation fears."
A little contradiction I smell ;)
CHSarahBs 5 months ago
When the European Space Agency’s resupply ship Johannes Kepler, known also as Automated Transfer Vehicle 2 (ATV2) arrives at the space station later this month, it will bring the fuel needed to boost the station to its normal planned altitude of 248 miles, or 400 kilometers.
nasa. gov/mission_pages/station/expeditions/expedition26/iss_altitude. html
(February 14th, 2011)
CHSarahBs 5 months ago
“As solar activity rises, the atmospheric density in our altitude range increases causing increased drag on the vehicle. This in turn causes us to have to raise the orbit more often.”
nasa. gov/mission_pages/station/expeditions/expedition26/iss_altitude. html
CHSarahBs 5 months ago
“The key reason for moving to the higher altitude is to save propellant over the long term as we protect against increased solar activity, said Bill Spetch, of the space station program’s Systems Engineering, Analysis and Integration Office.
(cont.)
CHSarahBs 5 months ago
Here is one for everyone to think about. Gamma ray bursts, galactic cosmic rays, solar flares and the solar wind. Ever take a good look at a gamma burst map? Ever take a good look at a galactic cosmic ray map? Then take into account that there are about 2 solar flares a week. Now factor in the solar winds. What you have is a suicide mission if you plan to goto the moon. You won't even make it half way before your cooked. Beef jerky would be more like it.
Daddyo930 5 months ago
Is this where you guys ran off to? I have totally made you Krisdevall. Your busted. For everyone here who wants to know the truth. Monkeyboysdontknow is Krisdevall who is probably Roamingcroat, but roamingcroat talks like someone else. Either way, these guys are part of some team of shills. I still can't believe they think nobody's on to them. Traitors to humanity.
Daddyo930 5 months ago
@Daddyo930 "but roamingcroat talks like someone else"
The leading theory is that we're actually everyone on YouTube except for you. The evidence for this theory is that we occasionally slip into our other personas through typographical errors.
In fact, further evidence is that many of us seem to have an inexplicable profile picture of a goose right now. If that's not a conspiracy, I don't know what is
"Traitors to humanity"
But our reptillian overlords are pleased with us, and that's what counts
roamingcroat 5 months ago
@roamingcroat Yeah, I guess your a different idiot who knows nothing about astrophysics yet pretends he's the oracle when it comes to subjects dealing with space. Your still on the same team. I bet that Krisdevall and Monkeyboysdontknow are friends and subscribers. I know who you are. Someone who never studied astrophysics but pretends to know everything about the fake ass manned missions to the moon.
Daddyo930 5 months ago
@Daddyo930 "I guess your a different idiot who knows nothing about astrophysics"
I know enough to say that the total energy output of a solar flare doesn't really say anything about the dose rate or total dose an astronaut would receive. I know enough to say that mass specific energy is not the same as energy. In short, I know enough to know that you're quite full of it, and that you're offering nothing but bluster.
"Someone who never studied astrophysics"
True. I studied aerospace engineering.
roamingcroat 5 months ago
@Daddyo930
' Monkeyboysdontknow is Krisdevall'
You are wrong, as ususal. Nothing new there. This is my first and only YT account. Deal with it!
Also, I would only be a traitor to humanity, if I endorsed the hateful and evil postings you proliferate. Sorry, THAT will NEVER happen!
Monkeyboysdontknow 5 months ago
@Monkeyboysdontknow Would you like me to post some of the conversations we had when I busted you the first time? Krisdevall, you are busted. Why don't you just use your normal profile? Why do you have to come at people with different accounts? I know who you are and what you are doing is disgusting. Just use your regular profile. I busted your shit long time ago and you know it. Don't try and act like I didn't bust you. We both know you have more than one youtube account. BUSTED!
Daddyo930 5 months ago
@Daddyo930
'Would you like me to post some of the conversations we had when I busted you the first time?'
????? Go ahead. I have no idea what you are talking about. As usual, I told you the complete, unaltered truth, and you are imagining some wild alterate reality where there is, of course, none. I am me. That is MY face in the picture on my channel. I have never pretended, and have no plans on ever pretending, to be someone else. You REALLY need help.
Monkeyboysdontknow 5 months ago
@Monkeyboysdontknow Whatever Krisdevall. You don't have multiple accounts. Your not spending an inordinate amount of time online defending the lies of NASA. It was just my imagination? NOT! Your part of a team of shills devoted to defending the lies. I know who you are and so do you. Maybe everyone else hasn't been able to put it all together, but I have. YOUR BUSTED! You have multiple accounts and that is the truth. Monkeyboysdontknow is just another account. used by Krisdevall.
Daddyo930 5 months ago
@Daddyo930
'I know who you are and so do you. Maybe everyone else hasn't been able to put it all together, but I have. YOUR BUSTED! You have multiple accounts and that is the truth.'
Still wrong. I know who I am, but you obviously don't. You are as knowledgable about any supposed multi-accounts I have, as you are on the MH - essentially nada.
Oh, and FYI, the 'proper' use and spelling of what you mean is "you're", not "your". No science, english or critical thinking skills - a pattern?
Monkeyboysdontknow 5 months ago
@Daddyo930 "Maybe everyone else hasn't been able to put it all together, but I have."
Amusing. You have a superiority complex even when it comes to other conspiracy theorists.
If you had paid even a modicum of attention, you'd know that your delusions about us being "paid shills" and having dozens of sockpuppet accounts is pretty much old hat. Virtually every hoaxer, when unable to defend his asinine claims, resorts to calling us NWO shills. Calling us that doesn't make you special.
roamingcroat 5 months ago
@roamingcroat I thought I presented evidence provided by satellites designed to measure radiation, solar flares and galactic cosmic rays. Then I presented evidence of apollo 12 flying through solar flares. All I have gotten back is denials of the numbers and facts. These facts are from NASA, universities and the orbiting satellites. Then I presented evidence of the amount of radiation in space every day. Nothing. You guys are a bunch of frauds afraid to confront the numbers and raw data.
Daddyo930 5 months ago
@Daddyo930 I believe I've asked you a number of times what the flux is of these multi-GeV particles you keep harping on. You never did. You've presented data that is irrelevant, incomplete, or misinterpreted by you. For instance, solar flares. You've said over and over again that solar flares release 6e25 joules. Which is lovely, but irrelevant.
You said I never studied astrophysics; that's true. Have you?
roamingcroat 5 months ago
@roamingcroat Solar flares are classified as A, B, C, M or X according to the peak flux (in watts per square meter, W/m2) of 100 to 800 picometer X-rays near Earth, as measured on the GOES spacecraft. Each class has a peak flux ten times greater than the preceding one, with X class flares having a peak flux of order 10−4 W/m. Does that answer your question? If you think apollo 12 could have flown through X class solar flares, your dreaming. No one survives 800 picometer X-rays.
Daddyo930 5 months ago
@Daddyo930 "Does that answer your question?"
Yes it does. That proves you've read Wikipedia. It also proves you don't understand what you read.
"No one survives 800 picometer X-rays."
You must be joking. Everyone survives 800 picometer X-rays. If you were right, hospital patients would be dropping dead due to radiation poisoning by the truckload!
roamingcroat 5 months ago
@roamingcroat Try flying through that with the added heat of a solar flare and the radioactivity for four hours. Everyone survives an X-ray. Try being exposed to that for four hours. What do you think will happen? There is a really good reason they only do a few seconds with an X-ray. Can you survive 12+ hours of that? I don't thinks so. That's why apollo 12 never happened. Solar flare on the 17,18 and 19 of November, 1969. Don't forget the radioactivity increase because of the solar flare.
Daddyo930 5 months ago
@Daddyo930 "Try flying through that with the added heat..."
Added heat? And how much is that? The Wiki article you're quoting from gives a peak flux of ~1e-4 W/m^2. The Solar constant at Earth is ~1,300 W/m^2. Even if the peak flux is off by 4 orders of magnitude (to account for other wavelengths which is, of course, absurdly high), the "added heat" would be well within the design margins of any spacecraft.
"...and the radioactivity"
And what does that amount to?
roamingcroat 5 months ago
@roamingcroat Damn..., still quoting Wikipedia? Use some common sense dude, the shit is too stupid to make sense to work.
The rockets are too small to go to and from the moon.
Too much radiation to survive.
NASA's top Astronaut, "How are we going to get to the moon when can't even communicate between two or three buildings?" Virgil Ivan Grissom <----(Explain that shit and while you are at it, explain his death that is no question a murder)
Too many anomalies that points to a fucking HOAX.
GUARDIANtrooper 5 months ago
@GUARDIANtrooper
watch?v=_oZ-clvq7ZY&feature=related
USE YOUR BRAIN AND STOP WORKING FOR GOVERNMENT, SELLOUT...
GUARDIANtrooper 5 months ago
@GUARDIANtrooper "USE YOUR BRAIN AND STOP WORKING FOR GOVERNMENT, SELLOUT."
I'm mostly amused that you addressed that to yourself...
Jarrah White rambles and brings up many, many irrelevant and minor details. He lies or misrepresents facts (in his Apollo 1 ego-trip, he shows footage of an Apollo reentry without telling his viewers that it's that, then he tells them to decide for themselves if there's footage of the Apollo 1 fire. That's incredibly dishonest). Suffice it to say, he's dead wrong.
roamingcroat 5 months ago
@roamingcroat If I addressed it to myself, then why did you read it and answered it? I guess you got the message... This is not about Jarrah, Jarrah proves himself in fine detail, unlike you people. That is why everyone attacks him, because his arguments are very strong indeed. You can't contest the truth with fictitious bullshit, because it never looks right, Jarrah brings the facts. If Jarrah is dead wrong about anything he does, then NASA is a complete lie and you love being a fucking fool.
GUARDIANtrooper 5 months ago
@GUARDIANtrooper "Jarrah proves himself in fine detail"
Don't mistake verbosity for evidence. Jarrah talks a lot, but it's largely irrelevant, and it's entirely wrong.
"Jarrah brings the facts."
Do me a favor. Look at part 10 of his Apollo 1 travesty (watch?v=g0iCpIxU3xE). Look at 2:20. Note that he says the video "clearly shows the spacecraft window as it fills with flames." On page 2 of the comments, he denies saying the footage he subsequently shows is of the fire. Somewhere, he's lying.
roamingcroat 5 months ago
@roamingcroat No..., somewhere you didn't understand. What is there to lied about or why better yet, why conjure up a statement to be that of a lie if you are not sure to state, "Somewhere, he's lying?" If you didn't understand it in its entirety, how could you even call him a liar? Justify that...
GUARDIANtrooper 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@GUARDIANtrooper "What is there to lied about or why better yet"
Great question. Why did Jarrah White lie? Only he knows.
Tell me, did you review his video? Did you see the part at 2:20 where he implies the Apollo reentry film is Apollo 1? That's a lie of omission. He (according to page 2) knew that wasn't film of Apollo 1, but he implied that it was. Hiding behind "I'll let my viewers decide" is crap. He isn't giving his viewers enough information to make an informed decision.
roamingcroat 5 months ago
@GUARDIANtrooper In case you don't know, the footage he shows of "flames filling the window" is of an Apollo reentry through one of the forward facing windows. The only window that wasn't covered on Apollo 1 was the hatch window, which is circular. There is simply no way that footage, that Jarrah White says "clearly shows the spacecraft window fill with flames" is of Apollo 1.
Tell me, do you think that's dishonest? I do. He's relying on the ignorance of his viewers to not know the difference.
roamingcroat 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@GUARDIANtrooper "The rockets are too small to go to and from the moon."
Oh, I like that.
Tell me, if the Saturn V was too small to send the stack to the Moon, how much delta-V did it have?
You've made a quantitative statement (Saturn V and/or the CSM were too small to achieve the necessary delta-V), so you absolutely need to give a quantitative analysis. Handwaving qualitative statements don't do you any good.
What do you base this claim off of?
roamingcroat 5 months ago
@GUARDIANtrooper "Too much radiation to survive."
Except there wasn't. I have yet to see anyone give a quantitative analysis of what dose would be expected for an Apollo astronaut. I've seen quantitative analysis from actual experts (not Wiki-"exeprts" like Daddy-O here) that says a 90 day mission to the Moon during Solar maximum would result in a risk of exposure-induced death of about 1% - and that includes long-term risk of cancer. This contradicts your claim about unsurvivable radiation.
roamingcroat 5 months ago
@GUARDIANtrooper "Explain that shit"
He was frustrated with a test going badly. The Block I command module had a hell of a lot of problems, that's true. But that's flight testing for you.
Wilbur Wright told his brother in 1901 that man wouldn't fly for 50 years. Two years later, they succeeded with their flyer. Exasperation can lead one to say many things like that.
"explain his death"
Read the AS-204 review board report.
roamingcroat 5 months ago
@Daddyo930 "Can you survive 12+ hours of that? I don't thinks so."
Can you survive 12 hours of that while sitting in in the CM? I very much think so. Radiologists aren't dropping dead every second either.
More importantly, do you think the ISS is fake? If not, what do you suppose is protecting astronauts from those (apparently) deadly X-rays?
"Don't forget the radioactivity increase because of the solar flare."
You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means...
roamingcroat 5 months ago
@roamingcroat I told you a thousand times, the ISS is 300 miles above the planet. That is within the protective magnetic shield. Sometimes they have to goto a special shielded area of the ISS because of solar flares. Were the ISS 700 miles or 1000 miles in space, they would be dead in minutes unless the ISS increased it's shielding dramatically. Yes, radioactivity is part of space. Being the third rock from the sun means your gonna get a lot of radiation thrown at the planet.
Daddyo930 5 months ago
@Daddyo930 "That is within the protective magnetic shield."
And how, pray tell, would the Van Allen belts deflect X-rays? You do know the difference between electromagnetic and particle radiation, right? I mean, that's pretty much remedial astrophysics...
"Yes, radioactivity is part of space."
watch?v=G2y8Sx4B2Sk
The mere presence of radiation is not, in and of itself, deadly. What would you say the dose would be for an astronaut on a given Apollo mission? Show your work (or cite a source).
roamingcroat 5 months ago
@roamingcroat I never said anything about the van allen belts deflecting anything. almost 90% of all the incoming cosmic rays are protons, about 9% are helium nuclei (alpha particles) and nearly 1% are electrons. The ratio of hydrogen to helium nuclei (28% helium by mass) is about the same as the primordial elemental abundance ratio of these elements (24% by mass He) in the universe. That's from Wikipedia. Solar proton events kill which are what galactic cosmic rays are uto themselves it seems.
Daddyo930 5 months ago
@Daddyo930 Whoa, back up there, chief. Yesterday, it was, "No one survives 800 picometer X-rays," which would, of course, sound the death knell for all manned spaceflight. Now you're on particle radiation. Before we get to that, would you kindly retract yesterday's statement about X-rays being deadly?
"That's from Wikipedia."
Yep. And?
"Solar proton events kill"
That's not from Wikipedia, is it? That's your spin on Wikipedia, isn't it?
Remind me, where did you get your degree in astrophysics?
roamingcroat 5 months ago
@roamingcroat You don't need a degree to have studied something. I build computers from scratch but never got my A+ certification. I still build computers. I write music but never went to school for that either. I have a digital recording studio but never went to school for it. Yes. X-ray for four hours will kill you. I meant it when I said that no one survives 800 picometer X-rays for four hours. Ask NASA what a solar proton event is. They are very specific when they said it's dangerous.
Daddyo930 5 months ago
@Daddyo930 "You don't need a degree to have studied something."
You certainly don't. But getting a degree challenges you. If you're wrong, you'll quickly find out about it at University. If your entire education consists of reading Wikipedia, if you misunderstand the fundamentals, you will be wrong, and you may not realize it. Astrophysics isn't easy.
"I meant it when I said that no one survives 800 picometer X-rays for four hours."
So how is it the ISS astronauts survive just fine?
roamingcroat 5 months ago
@roamingcroat For the twentieth time, because the ISS is in orbit 300 miles above the planet within the magnetic shield. That protects it from most solar flares. The ISS has a special shielded room in case of strong solar flares. Stop asking that stupid question. Numbers don't lie, people do all the time. History demonstrates it. The numbers like 10^27 ergs per second for a solar flare indicate that the energy would not dissipate to the point of being harmless when it reached earth.
Daddyo930 5 months ago
@Daddyo930 "For the twentieth time, because the ISS is in orbit 300 miles above the planet within the magnetic shield."
And this goes to show your superficial understanding of radiation.
How does the "magnetic shield" affect X-rays?
"...would not dissipate to the point of being harmless when it reached earth."
Really? The sun puts out 10^33 ergs/s, but that's harmless at the distance to Earth
That number alone is useless. What is the particle flux at Earth? Energy flux? Energy distribution? Etc.
roamingcroat 5 months ago
@roamingcroat A solar wind is a stream of particles (mostly high energy protons) which are ejected from the upper atmosphere of a star. [6] Solar winds are energy that is released from solar flares. When the solar winds reach earth, some of the high energy particles are able to penetrate the earth's ionosphere. If solar flares in the M and X class are serious enough to cause blackouts here and radiation storms in space, what makes you think astronauts can fly through them?
Daddyo930 5 months ago
@Daddyo930 Let's try the question again: "How does the "magnetic shield" affect X-rays?"
Not protons. X-rays. You've made a very specific claim about X-rays, and I'm afraid until you understand why you're dead wrong about that, I'd rather not move on.
roamingcroat 5 months ago
@roamingcroat We're talking about space travel, not orbiting vehicles. X-rays will affect you in space past 350 miles. 300 miles is the limit for manned missions as every manned vessel in space is within 300 miles. That's the extent of the protection for harmful radiation. Now I am talking specifically about travel past 300 miles in space. Why do you want to keep the conversation on the planet? I am dealing with radiation in space, past the 300 mile limit. Stop looking for another strawman.
Daddyo930 5 months ago
@Daddyo930 "X-rays will affect you in space past 350 miles."
What stops X-rays (i.e., electromagnetic radiation) from passing the 350 mi mark?
roamingcroat 5 months ago
@roamingcroat What's the matter? You can't read english? I am talking only about space travel. The astronauts allegedly went to the moon. Lets deal with what they would be facing in space, not here on earth. You would be exposed to X-rays in space and other types of harmful radiation in space. Deal with that. I don't know why you carry one about X-rays here on earth. What do X-rays here on earth have to do with space travel. Try and stay on topic. Your making yourself dizzy.
Daddyo930 5 months ago
@Daddyo930 "I don't know why you carry one about X-rays here on earth."
I'm not. I'm talking about X-rays in Earth orbit. You say a X-rays from a solar flare will kill anyone exposed to them. I'm asking you what stops the X-rays from reaching the ISS or other LEO manned spacecraft. Well?
roamingcroat 5 months ago
@roamingcroatGettingAnAssKick I see Daddyo930 is kicking your ass all over Youtube and still you are not answering the questions correctly as usual. And I am not Daddyo, I only have two accounts, unlike you with your 50 Duck Clan accounts, LMAO!! Now stop it with the bullshit runarounds and stay focus, read the shit before you submit stupid bullshit comeback answers that has nothing to do with the questions or the debate... You'll try to change the subject and I am not going to let you, LMAO!
GUARDIANtrooper 5 months ago
@GUARDIANtrooper "I see Daddyo930 is kicking your ass all over Youtube"
Is he, though? He seems to think the Van Allen belts stop electromagnetic radiation. Now that's just silly, and anyone with even a modicum of understanding of electromagnetism (let alone astrophysics, which he thinks he knows) would know that that's preposterous.
"And I am not Daddyo"
OK. I'm not Halle Berry, Joe Biden or the Donald.
Why are we listing all the people we're not?
"50 Duck Clan accounts"
Funny. It's a goose.
roamingcroat 5 months ago
@roamingcroat You lied, he never stated anything about the belts, YOU DID in your own confusion.
LMAO, Goose, duck, swan, makes no difference it's you, WHY?
Anyway, your statement here doesn't correspond with what you guys are debating about, (AS USUAL) So in your studies, what do you think stops electromagnetic radiation? Or do we even have a need to stop it? Radiation is part of us, we are radiated, lol! The balance of earth and space is perfect, everything is for a reason...
GUARDIANtrooper 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@GUARDIANtrooper "You lied, he never stated anything about the belts"
I know, because he's not giving a mechanism for how electromagnetic radiation would be absorbed. I jumped ahead a few steps and assumed he was talking about the belts and/or the magnetosphere in general.
"Anyway, your statement here doesn't correspond with what you guys are debating about"
Really? He claims X-rays are deadly in space, but Earth orbital manned missions are possible. That's a non sequitor.
roamingcroat 5 months ago
@roamingcroat Your still trying not to get it. Gamma ray bursts happen all the time and come from every direction in space. Galactic cosmic rays happen all the time and come from every direction in space. Solar flares happen about twice a week. The apollo spacecraft was not shielded to protect against these three cosmic forces. They never went above 300 miles. Someone sent a dog into space. It came back dead. They say it died of a heart attack. Radioactive testing is still done on monkeys.
Daddyo930 5 months ago
@Daddyo930 They sent plenty of dogs into space, most of them came back alive.
The Soviets returned a number of biological samples safely from lunar orbit, too. Look it up.
krisdevalle 5 months ago
@krisdevalle I signed up for more physics forums like you requested. I started a thread on PhysForum. It's called Nasa faked the moon landing. My username there is the same one as here. Once again, discussion of radiation in space, galactic cosmic rays, gamma ray bursts, solar flares and the solar winds. Quotes by reputable scientist not allowed. Numbers only. The scientific method will apply in the thread. Have fun.
Daddyo930 5 months ago
@Daddyo930 I can't find the thread, did you get booted off that one too?
Maybe you want to be a little more subtle and start with a less idiotic statement. As you have probably figured out, the moon landing hoax is not actually supported by anyone who knows a little about physics.
krisdevalle 5 months ago
@Daddyo930 Never mind I found it. So far they are telling you that you lack foundation, which is what I maintained from the outset, and your conclusions, from the extremely limited understanding you have, are wrong.
Maybe you want to start asking questions instead of making statements.
I'd also ask you to review the term 'Dunning-Kruger Effect' to get an idea of why you feel you know Apollo was impossible.
krisdevalle 5 months ago
@krisdevalle No. They're doing exactly what you do. Say I lack foundation with discussing the numbers. Why don't you wanna talk about the numbers? Do they scare you? Were I an astronaut back then and I had to study astrophysics, there's no way in hell I'm going up in the apollo craft. Guss Grisolm said "Somebody's gonna get killed". He was right. His opposition to the program ended when his pre-launch sim ended in a fire. Everyone else stepped into line after that. How convenient.
Daddyo930 5 months ago
@Daddyo930 Well, they are right.
You've done the barest amount of research and made a conclusion unsupported by any academic or professional in the field.
You are clearly suffering from the Dunning-Kruger Effect and this colors your perception greatly. You think you know a lot but the gulf of understanding is immense.
krisdevalle 5 months ago
@krisdevalle How can they be right when they are running away from the numbers? If the numbers were insignificant, I would expect to see people throwing them in my face all the time. I don't. I see people running away from the numbers like they were extremely radioactive. Would you care to discuss the numbers that Wikipedia has on gamma ray bursts?
Daddyo930 5 months ago
@Daddyo930 They have dismissed you because the the kind of calculations required to figure out the skin dosage for a gamma ray burst through Apollo CM module shielding require the kind of education that takes years to complete. You seem to think a quick wikipedia check will put you in the forefront of space radiation science. It won't.
'The sources of most GRBs are billions of light years away from Earth, implying that the explosions are both extremely energetic and extremely rare.' from wiki.
krisdevalle 5 months ago
@krisdevalle Wrong again. The science is there. Wikipedia has it. It's called Radiation Protection. Section 3. Radiation shielding. Luckily the geniuses at NASA figured all this out for us so we don't have to. There is a handy chart there regarding how much each type of shielding protects against radiation. No need for complex calculations. You could use the free online RADPRO calculator to determine shielding thickness. What's wrong with your brain? Can you google?
Daddyo930 5 months ago
@Daddyo930 Nothing wrong, but the list of signficant gamma ray bursts since their discovery in the 60's is relatively few.
Scientists and radiation experts have reviewed the Biomedical results of Apollo, freely available on the net, and not found any discrepancies with the reported values. What expertise do you have that puts you ahead of all learned academics?
Do you think you are smarter than all of them?
krisdevalle 5 months ago
@krisdevalle I don't think I'm smarter than the experts. As a matter of fact, I know I still have much to learn. I just won't lie like the experts. The numbers speak the truth for me. I don't need anyone to validate the numbers because NASA and Wikipedia and Science Journal and many other respectable scientific organizations use them. Established numbers used and accepted by everyone don't need validation. E=mc2 does not need validation. It's accepted theory.
Daddyo930 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Daddyo930 Your problem is you don't understand the numbers. Gigaelectron-volts sounds scary, but it requires context. In the past, you had great difficulty with units (arbitrarily dividing joules by grams and declaring the dose unsurvivable).
"I showed you that gamma bursts make their way into this solar system and are lethal?"
You haven't demonstrated that they're lethal. I mean, yes, they can be, but the ones you discussed weren't. What dose would an Apollo crew receive from a given burst?
roamingcroat 5 months ago
@Daddyo930 I would care to discuss the list here on wikipedia:
List of gamma-ray bursts
Because there does not seem to be too many significant gamma ray bursts. Is wikipedia right here?
krisdevalle 5 months ago
@krisdevalle Thank you. I would draw your attention to the 2704 BATSE Gamma Ray Burst map. What do you see? This is a dimension representation of how many gamma rays are out there at one time. What do you see?
Daddyo930 5 months ago
@Daddyo930 By the way, the description on the BATSE gamma ray map:
The above figure illustrates the locations of 2512 gamma-ray bursts detected by the BATSE instrument after more than eight years of observation.
Eight years. Well done genius. If you're so unobservant as to miss this, what makes you qualified to begin discussing the issue?
krisdevalle 5 months ago
@krisdevalle That 2512/8 = 314 a year from one satellite. We don't have enough satellites to detect and measure all the gamma ray bursts that are out there. SWIFT captured 500 in 5 years. Take no comfort in those numbers. You do acknowledge that the entire map is basically covered in gamma ray burst right? I thought the number was 2704 anyway, that would be 2704/8 = 338 a year. More than one a day on that satellite. How many satellites are there that measure gamma ray bursts?
Daddyo930 5 months ago
@Daddyo930 If I click the link on the same page to look at significant gamma ray bursts, there appear to be little more than a dozen or so, and very few and far between.
The rest are insignificant, but detected nonetheless.
Remember the first bursts were detected in the mid-60s. So they've been measuring for some time.
krisdevalle 5 months ago
@krisdevalle a typical gamma ray burst releases as much energy in a few seconds as the Sun will in its entire 10-billion-year lifetime. What part of typical did you not understand? I told you before, we don't have enough satellites to detect and measure all the gamma ray bursts out in space. They are coming from every direction in space every second of every day. If the first bursts were detected in 1960, did they exist before 1960? Your just floundering like a fish out of water now.
Daddyo930 5 months ago
@Daddyo930 What was their strength when they reached our solar system?
From the list of significant flares on the resource you are using, wikipedia, there are only a dozen or so.
krisdevalle 5 months ago
@krisdevalle This is from Wikipedia: On March 5, 1979, a few months after the successful dropping of satellites into the atmosphere of Venus, the two Soviet spacecraft that were then drifting through the solar system were hit by a blast of gamma ray radiation at approximately 10:51 EST. This contact raised the radiation readings on both the probes from a normal 100 counts per second to over 200,000 counts a second, in only a fraction of a millisecond. Does that answer your question?
Daddyo930 5 months ago
@Daddyo930 Nope. Last moon landing was in 1972. Any big ones then?
krisdevalle 5 months ago
@krisdevalle Your just going to ignore the fact that I showed you that gamma bursts make their way into this solar system and are lethal? Have gamma ray bursts been out there before 1960 when we discovered them? Gamma-ray bursts were first observed in the late 1960s by the U.S. Vela satellites, which were built to detect gamma radiation pulses emitted by nuclear weapons tested in space. Damn son, you really are grasping at straws now.
Daddyo930 5 months ago
@krisdevalle Have you checkout the PhysForum thread I started two days ago? 28 comments and 143 views. Most of the comments agree with me you idiot. Science and numbers are not for sale to the highest bidder. Numbers are not intellectual prostitutes. You should go there and sign up and try posting some of your garbage there and watch how quickly it get shot down with numbers and facts. Not by me, but others who know. I am waiting in PhysForum. Its NASA faked the moon landing. Have fun.
Daddyo930 5 months ago
@Daddyo930 Maybe we are reading different threads because that one you pointed out, NOBODY agrees with you and keeps asking why you're ignoring the links where other people have investigated it and found there is no problem.
Are you delusional? Which of the commenters agrees with you?
krisdevalle 5 months ago
@Daddyo930 Having trouble finding a single comment that agrees with you, champ.
That's some pretty impressive peer review! A panel of physicists has decreed you must either be a moron, or home-schooled!
krisdevalle 5 months ago
@krisdevalle Notice how those who disagree won't even discuss the numbers associated with cosmic forces like gamma ray bursts? I got them running scared over there. Wait until I start the thread on HAARP.
Daddyo930 5 months ago
@Daddyo930 That's because they have tried to explain how little you understand, as I have.
While the initial energies of the gamma ray bursts are immense, the intergalactic distances are equally immense. This is why there is only a very short list of significant GRBs, a list you repeatedly and willingly fail to acknowledge, despite me pointing it out.
Now you lied, earlier, stating that people on that forum agreed with you. Why did you do that?
krisdevalle 5 months ago
@Daddyo930 "Most of the comments agree with me"
rpenner, brucep, AlexG, RealityCheck, Sithdarth, Beer w/Straw.. these are the people responding to you or your claims. And no one of them agrees with you. As AlexG said in the last post: "I'd guess we're dealing with a home-schooled teenager. He can't help being stupid. He was raised that way. "
CHSarahBs 5 months ago
@CHSarahBs Whats up. You'll also notice that not one of them will discuss the numbers. Rpenner, who admins the site, tried some bogus calculations regarding magnetars. The rest of them will not discuss the numbers. Would you like to discuss the numbers with me? Lets start with gamma ray bursts. A typical burst releases as much energy in a few seconds as the Sun will in its entire 10-billion-year lifetime. Was apollo shielded to protect against gamma ray bursts?
Daddyo930 5 months ago
@Daddyo930 No, I do not want to discuss it. For this I have to research this special field. In the thread there are some interesting links.
All I wanted was to point out, that you have been caught in a lie by saying, most of the comments agree with me.
CHSarahBs 5 months ago
@CHSarahBs You made your point. It is true that all of the comments posted on my thread have been ridicule. You should also point out that none of those that posted will discuss the numbers. In science, bold assertions are just that, assertions. Without numbers to quantify and validate assertions, you have nothing. The numbers associated with gamma ray bursts, galactic cosmic rays, magnetars, solar flares and the solar winds make it impossible in space without electromagnetic shielding. Research
Daddyo930 5 months ago
@Daddyo930 I see you over here talking & complaining about how no of Apollo believers use numbers,as in flux & eV values, yet when ever you post your vague generalities you seem to never ever mention any numbers yourself.
.
Why will you not continue our "discussion" on the gamma ray burst.GCR's & flares.
Why do you evade my question,why isn't the gamma ray flux from GCR's&Sun,as high as the UV rays that penetrate atmosphere & hit Earth's surface,after all they're at the same end of the spectrum?
Tweekerhead 4 months ago
@Tweekerhead Because, krisdevall, you don't even know who you are. If all LDE flares are solar proton events then the apollo manned missions to the moon were faked. Are LDE flares proton events? Yes or no?
Daddyo930 4 months ago
@Daddyo930 You sound like an old man who tells the same thing to everybody in town & forgets who he told.
I've already answered that some time ago, YES of course, everybody knows this.
Do you know what it takes to attenuate protons of 10MeV values at 10³particles/cm²/sec.?
Oooops there's those pesty' numbers no Apollo believers use.
Still no numbers from you I see to give any inclination you actually know what your talking about?
.
Why the gamma flux is not as great as the UV flux on Earth?
Tweekerhead 4 months ago
@Daddyo930 You're DeadJesus"correct?And you also"deadlyradiation"also correct?
You're also wengsky& NASAHOAX too yes?See that's how Y-Tube works.
.Accuse me of being all or anyone else, it doesn't matter. The fact still stands that you can not answer a simple question or come up with any eV values-flux rates when you propagate your amazing assumptions of space environment.
That evasion tactic is just that.......an evasion.
You can't hang with the discussion, you put the cart before the horse.
Tweekerhead 4 months ago
@Tweekerhead Are LDE flares solar proton events? Yes. Could apollo have been on the moon during a solar proton event lasting 3 hours? Fuck no. Did the apollo craft ever leave earth orbit? Hell no. I don't bother answering anything a sophomore says. I just give the facts.
Daddyo930 4 months ago
@Daddyo930 You give facts? Ok then, what were the eV values & flux ratios of this endless sea of proton events that happens then & now constantly?
Are the of 10MeVor100MeV is the flux10³ or10x10³particles/cm²/sec.?
Can you give specifics?
You're saying you won't answer any more from a sophomore as the last ditch effort of endless evasion only after you've retreated from your original claim that a flare hit Earth on Nov.69' making Apollo12 impossible, that I totally busted? Is that what that is?
Tweekerhead 4 months ago
@Tweekerhead All the flux ratios are in the Catalogue of LDE flares 1968 to 1986. M3 and X5 solar proton events have flux ratios, they're in a chart in Wikipedia moron. Bye.
Daddyo930 4 months ago
@Daddyo930 No,the"LDE Catalogue"has no flux ratios,that would mean particles per square centimeter per second.
Nothing in the catalogue' for that. Nada!
You really are an idiot or you're just a kid. if you're kid just say so, that way I can help you.
.
Employ all the evasion tactics you want, you post this nonsense on a public forum, it's up for grabs. I'll bust your assumptions and all your stupid shit wannabe' astrophysics reality shit until the chickens come back to roost & shit in your bed.
Tweekerhead 4 months ago
@Tweekerhead Solar flares are classified as A, B, C, M or X according to the peak flux (in watts per square meter, W/m2) of 100 to 800 picometer X-rays near Earth, as measured on the GOES spacecraft. Each class has a peak flux ten times greater than the preceding one, with X class flares having a peak flux of order 10−4 W/m2. Within a class there is a linear scale from 1 to 9, so an X2 flare is twice as powerful as an X1 flare, and is four times more powerful than an M5 flare. Stupid ass.
Daddyo930 4 months ago
@Daddyo930 Stupid ass? Yeah, if I had a disenfranchised, post-adolescent mentality like yourself, I'd probably be trying to insult & discredit me also, esp. after I busted &refuted all your feeble baseless claims, making you look stupid with every post.
You display all the symptoms of Dunning-Kruger effect.
.
You LDE has NO flux ratios, you can't read this chart because you don't understand it.
It gives wave-length intervals, if you were as astute as you think, you would've seen this.
Tweekerhead 4 months ago
@Daddyo930 Funny to see you retreat from your original claim of the flare in Nov. 69',but it really wasn't your claim,the flare of Nov.69 has been debunked already.
.
If you like to convert eV values to Watts to display how much energy you're talking about, know that it takes the equivalent energy of about 620,000,000,000,000 mill. electron volts,MeV per/sec. to light up a 100-watt bulb.
Repeating ad nauseam doesn't make it true, those scarey numbers aren't so scarey in reality when translated.
Tweekerhead 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Daddyo930 "a typical gamma ray burst releases as much energy in a few seconds as the Sun will in its entire 10-billion-year lifetime"
Yep. Luckily, that energy is rarely released close enough to the Earth to cause any problems, either for us or for astronauts outside the magnetosphere. When it is close enough, and when it's directed directly at us, then watch out - It's not just astronauts who are in trouble. It's the whole bloody world.
roamingcroat 5 months ago
@Daddyo930 You seem to think all radiation is created equal.
Here's the deal: you think gamma rays and X-rays are deadly. Lovely. But if they're deadly in cislunar space, their deadly in low Earth orbit. Gamma and X-rays are electromagnetic radiation. They cannot be stopped, trapped, or deflected by Earth's magnetic field. They are attenuated by Earth's atmosphere, but not before then (unless hitting a spacecraft's hull).
So if X-rays and gamma rays kill on Apollo, they kill on the ISS.
roamingcroat 5 months ago
@roamingcroat You need to stop making distinctions without a difference. I told you that the ISS is protected by the ionosphere that extends to about 300 miles above the planet. Past that, things get complicated. Electromagnetic radiation bounces off other magnetic fields which is why there seem to be an endless stream of them from every direction in space. I am talking about space travel, not orbital activity.
Daddyo930 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Daddyo930 How much does the ionosphere attenuate X-rays and gamma rays? Not much. If gamma rays and X-rays are deadly in cislunar space, they'll be deadly in typical low Earth orbits - because there's just nothing to absorb them.
roamingcroat 5 months ago
@roamingcroat Do you know what NASA and Wikipedia and even Yahoo Answers say about where the ISS is? 220 miles. You would have to round up to get to 300. Why do think google, wikipedia and online dictionary's don't give correct information? You need to stop using that 300 number. No one would say that now. They had to lower the orbit because of radiation fears.
Daddyo930 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Daddyo930 I was using 300 because that's the number you used. Obviously a mistake. The point still stands. Electromagnetic radiation affecting objects in cislunar space will affect objects orbiting the Earth at 300 miles, and it will affect objects orbiting at 200 miles. You'd have to get to bellow the Karman line to have appreciable absorption. If X-rays are deadly for Apollo, they're deadly for the ISS.
(And they're quite simply not deadly for either).
roamingcroat 5 months ago
all those uneducated person being experts when it comes to the moon landings is just so funny to me - if there are photoshopped pics in this book why didnt the 'authors' also photoshop the 'spotslights' - see LOL at the Troll ! "How can flag flutter on moon,when there is no air there?" Well, in a vacuum chamber i.E. things like a flag pole once set it motion by hammering into the ground will wiggle and vibrate much longer than say here on earth, because there is no air resistance, okay?
jonkam10 5 months ago
@jonkam10 So answer me this one... How is it that we can pretty much fly, not hop, around the space station in our exosphere (with a powerful gravitational pull within our atmosphere that could actually pull down the space station), but deeper in space on the moon, in a fucking vacuum, (what a bunch of fools) the gravity is almost the same as earth with no fucking atmosphere? WTF?! You people believe everything NASA say without a question whatsoever, that is too ignorant to even think it...
GUARDIANtrooper 5 months ago
The best sequence of the whole clip: 3:55
"I can't find it' (the LM)
And this guy pretends to be a researcher? A researcher would make his analysis with the original pictures, not with some montages from a book.
A researcher would know the background of the shots. In this case he would know that the photo location was several miles away from the landingsite and the LM was behind a range.
CHSarahBs 6 months ago
heh. funny. This video contradicts itself. It simultaneously claims that we faked the moon landing while asserting that we encountered UFOs at the moon.
kevingabbert 6 months ago 4
@kevingabbert I don't believe we went to the moon, but you are absolutely right about the contradictory part of the one who uploaded this video, that was really stupid to put that crap at the end of the video, wow...
GUARDIANtrooper 6 months ago
This individual is a buffoon of the highest order.
eggbertsmith 6 months ago
@usernameVEVO cocky
Insane0industry 6 months ago
Investing in the cheater weasel system..Defenders of weasels
LottsaLasagna 6 months ago
Just cause some idiot take and minipulate these pictures then somehow get them published cause of thir name more than likely, does not mean that the moon landing was a dud made by fantasy in some american goverment basement ,thats bull i could easly do all that in photoshop and make it look a hell of alot more real than that ,thirs just a retart out thir who genuinely taut he could make the moon landing out to be a fake by fucking up on photoshop :P, leave the conspiracys to the hippys (Y)
Helden6621 6 months ago
the reason why the flag moves is not because air it moves when you hold it and move around the moon landing was real fuck sake
lewis20349 6 months ago
Consider this. We landed on the moon, without question. AND... some photos and videos were faked, for various reasons. See "Stanley Kubrick and Apollo 11."
Rumpl4skn 7 months ago
the flag was waveing theres no aiiir on the moon fuck!!!!!!!!
foxtrotmuppett 7 months ago
@foxtrotmuppett It was swinging not waving. Only when an astronaut touches the flag or manipulated the pole it was swinging. Without airfriction to slow it down, the swinging lasted longer then on Earth with atmosphere. It is a question of inertia.
CHSarahBs 7 months ago
@CHSarahBs The only ace those hoaxers might have up their sleeve (for a moment) is that scene when an astronaut jumps past the flag and it starts swinging like a pendulum because of that - but that can easily be explained by static electricity, and if both the astronaut and the flag carry the same charge they will repel each other, resulting in a seemingly "puffed away" flag.
Laurelindo 6 months ago