Moon Landings
#31
Scooby Senior
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: North Wales
Posts: 5,826
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"Yes, there is deadly radiation in the Van Allen belts, but the nature of that radiation was known to the Apollo engineers and they were able to make suitable preparations. The principle danger of the Van Allen belts is high-energy protons, which are not that difficult to shield against. And the Apollo navigators plotted a course through the thinnest parts of the belts and arranged for the spacecraft to pass through them quickly, limiting the exposure.
The Van Allen belts span only about forty degrees of earth's latitude -- twenty degrees above and below the magnetic equator. The diagrams of Apollo's translunar trajectory printed in various press releases are not entirely accurate. They tend to show only a two-dimensional version of the actual trajectory. The actual trajectory was three-dimensional. The highly technical reports of Apollo, accessible to but not generally understood by the public, give the three-dimensional details of the translunar trajectory.
Each mission flew a slightly different trajectory in order to access its landing site, but the orbital inclination of the translunar coast trajectory was always in the neighborhood of 30°. Stated another way, the geometric plane containing the translunar trajectory was inclined to the earth's equator by about 30°. A spacecraft following that trajectory would bypass all but the edges of the Van Allen belts.
This is not to dispute that passage through the Van Allen belts would be dangerous. But NASA conducted a series of experiments designed to investigate the nature of the Van Allen belts, culminating in the repeated traversal of the Southern Atlantic Magnetic Anomaly (an intense, low-hanging patch of Van Allen belt) by the Gemini 10 astronauts. "
Geezer
[Edited by Geezer - 1/19/2004 3:09:21 PM]
The Van Allen belts span only about forty degrees of earth's latitude -- twenty degrees above and below the magnetic equator. The diagrams of Apollo's translunar trajectory printed in various press releases are not entirely accurate. They tend to show only a two-dimensional version of the actual trajectory. The actual trajectory was three-dimensional. The highly technical reports of Apollo, accessible to but not generally understood by the public, give the three-dimensional details of the translunar trajectory.
Each mission flew a slightly different trajectory in order to access its landing site, but the orbital inclination of the translunar coast trajectory was always in the neighborhood of 30°. Stated another way, the geometric plane containing the translunar trajectory was inclined to the earth's equator by about 30°. A spacecraft following that trajectory would bypass all but the edges of the Van Allen belts.
This is not to dispute that passage through the Van Allen belts would be dangerous. But NASA conducted a series of experiments designed to investigate the nature of the Van Allen belts, culminating in the repeated traversal of the Southern Atlantic Magnetic Anomaly (an intense, low-hanging patch of Van Allen belt) by the Gemini 10 astronauts. "
Geezer
[Edited by Geezer - 1/19/2004 3:09:21 PM]
#32
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: God's promised land
Posts: 80,907
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dan, that's the official retort, granted. But for ALL the astronauts to have taken the doses of radiation they did with ZERO long-term side effects? Well, it could be the case of course, but as i say, it's not a watertight argument to the sceptics.
#33
Why do people believe in Conspiracy Theories?? It makes them think they have "one over" on everyone else...
Reported by who? Where's your source?
Nothing I've read makes me believe there is anything "strange" about shows seen on the moon.
mmmmm. difficult one... could it be that the camera was pointing in the same direction???
Reflections of what? The lander? The other astronaught?
Where did you get this info from? Have you asked NASA?
[Edited by Nimbus - 1/19/2004 3:13:56 PM]
apart from the reportedly v.poor control of the lunar lander during testing,
the strange shadows of the astronauts,
exactly identical landscapes (in several shots),
reflections on the helmets etc....
IMHO the #1 reason that the Moon Landings never took place = the cotton suits and construction of Apollo would not have protected the astronauts in anyway from the lethal effects of the Van Allen Radiation Belt, hence they all would have died years ago (which they havent).
[Edited by Nimbus - 1/19/2004 3:13:56 PM]
#34
Tel: Sure, but most skeptics I come across are very closed minded and generally have opinions formed from a non-technical background I mean just look at the "Does God exist" thread
[Edited by Dan B - 1/19/2004 3:15:37 PM]
[Edited by Dan B - 1/19/2004 3:15:37 PM]
#35
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: God's promised land
Posts: 80,907
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
LOL, why, do you think that thread should be moved to General Technical?
On the Moon landings, i do remain ever so slightly sceptical, not for any esoteric reason, but because the justifications for them *not* going do seem to make a lot of sense. If it had happened at any other time other than in the middle of a fierce Cold War, i don't think i'd have given the sceptic's point of view more than a cursory brush-off.
On the Moon landings, i do remain ever so slightly sceptical, not for any esoteric reason, but because the justifications for them *not* going do seem to make a lot of sense. If it had happened at any other time other than in the middle of a fierce Cold War, i don't think i'd have given the sceptic's point of view more than a cursory brush-off.
#37
IMHO the #1 reason that the Moon Landings never took place = the cotton suits and construction of Apollo would not have protected the astronauts in anyway from the lethal effects of the Van Allen Radiation Belt, hence they all would have died years ago (which they havent).
They have died and they have all been replaced by higly developed japanese robots and its true because steve down the pub told me.
#38
Former Sponsor
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: www.scoobyworld.co.uk
Posts: 1,987
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Nimbus -
"Why do people believe in Conspiracy Theories?? It makes them think they have "one over" on everyone else..."
mmm thats a bit rough - I think the moon landings are one of the only theories I subscribe too, and certainly not to "get one over on everyone else" - I'm far more down to earth than that
Maybe they did happen, but to my mind there seems to be lot of evidence available to suggest otherwise.
There was a good documentary on BBC2 (I think) middle of last year regarding the Moon Landings, giving evidence for and against the various theories.
Part of the documentary showed videod testing of the lunar lander and people involved at the time reported that it was almost impossible to control. It also showed various pictures of the landings, supposedly taken from many different locations but which had identical landscapes in the background (identical being identical).
I'm sure it will pop up again on Discovery on something similar.
Neil
"Why do people believe in Conspiracy Theories?? It makes them think they have "one over" on everyone else..."
mmm thats a bit rough - I think the moon landings are one of the only theories I subscribe too, and certainly not to "get one over on everyone else" - I'm far more down to earth than that
Maybe they did happen, but to my mind there seems to be lot of evidence available to suggest otherwise.
There was a good documentary on BBC2 (I think) middle of last year regarding the Moon Landings, giving evidence for and against the various theories.
Part of the documentary showed videod testing of the lunar lander and people involved at the time reported that it was almost impossible to control. It also showed various pictures of the landings, supposedly taken from many different locations but which had identical landscapes in the background (identical being identical).
I'm sure it will pop up again on Discovery on something similar.
Neil
#39
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Lurkin Somewhere
Posts: 7,951
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Like previously states the US currently doesnt have the rocket power to get to the moon. It will be a rocket id expect not the like the shuttle. They need to redesign all the gear etc
Si
Si
#40
It also showed various pictures of the landings, supposedly taken from many different locations but which had identical landscapes in the background (identical being identical).
#41
Scooby Senior
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: North Wales
Posts: 5,826
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Matt, "feeble-minded" it might have seemed, but *nobody*, repeat *nobody*, repeat again *nobody* can adequately explain how Apollo was sufficiently shielded against the solar radiation for the duration of the Apollo trips - the single biggest concern of NASA today for a manned Moon base
Geezer
#42
Neil,
Sorry mate. It was a bit harsh. Should have been "many" not "all"
To my mind, I have not seen any "evidence" that this was anything other than the real thing. That people still question this after all of the theories have been debunked gets to me a bit. Still, they (and you) have the right to question this and anything else you want, of course. Some people though, will continue to argue a point even when it's been lost. They just don't want to let go of the feeling that they are the only ones who know the Truth..
I'm not sure if I saw the program you mentioned. But the answer I can give is that if this was during testing, then maybe it was still a proto-type and they (obviuosly) needed to make improvments.
Sorry mate. It was a bit harsh. Should have been "many" not "all"
To my mind, I have not seen any "evidence" that this was anything other than the real thing. That people still question this after all of the theories have been debunked gets to me a bit. Still, they (and you) have the right to question this and anything else you want, of course. Some people though, will continue to argue a point even when it's been lost. They just don't want to let go of the feeling that they are the only ones who know the Truth..
I'm not sure if I saw the program you mentioned. But the answer I can give is that if this was during testing, then maybe it was still a proto-type and they (obviuosly) needed to make improvments.
#43
We had this subject in a debating contest last year and I successfully won the contest with the motion that the landings were fake.
However, I believe that only a fool could seriously believe this to be faked when there are clear scientific explanations for all the conspiracy theories.
Now on the other hand, I have yet to read any adequate answers to all the inconsistencies about hte death of Diana. Now that looks like a more likely conspiracy to me.
However, I believe that only a fool could seriously believe this to be faked when there are clear scientific explanations for all the conspiracy theories.
Now on the other hand, I have yet to read any adequate answers to all the inconsistencies about hte death of Diana. Now that looks like a more likely conspiracy to me.
#44
Scooby Senior
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Radiator Springs
Posts: 14,810
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Who moved the camera when the thingy left the moon? And, if I struggle to track a rally car at <100 mph, how do you track a thingy going like **** And, all the stills are perfectly framed and in focus even though the cameras are held at waist height and the blokes got a chuff off helmet on...and big gloves, how did he press the shutter button?
Conclusive proof, as if it were needed that it's all a hoax
I don't think it's real, that's my opinion and I'm sticking to it Besides which, I don't actually care
Conclusive proof, as if it were needed that it's all a hoax
I don't think it's real, that's my opinion and I'm sticking to it Besides which, I don't actually care
#46
Scooby Senior
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Radiator Springs
Posts: 14,810
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
OK so given that the camera starts off close to the thingy...the thingy gets faster...the perspective changes, nah sorry, I don't buy it...can't explain what I mean either!
How did it know when to set off because that's perfectly shot / timed aswell.
How did it know when to set off because that's perfectly shot / timed aswell.
#48
Guest
Posts: n/a
Oh yeah, and NASA wrote/produced a big conclusive book addressing and explaining/countering with hard scientific fact all the conspiracy theories about the moon landing. They never released it though becuase the top NASA bods and the govt thought that to do so would just add credance to the conspiracy theories and cause people to say "well if NASA takes them seriously enough to make a book countering them then they must be credible" kinda thing.
#50
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Zed Ess Won Hay Tee
Posts: 21,611
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ive seen the shadow pics, saw them a while back, very strange imo, i belive that NASA seriosly bends and alters things that it reports, ive seen pics pics released from nasa that show mars has a red sky, when its now reported that it has in fact got a blue sky, why would you do that?
#56
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: London
Posts: 4,797
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
couldn't it be that they really did send a couple of septics to the moon, and when they got back the pictures were sh*te, so NASA decided to mock up the scenes in a studio to give them some better press material?
sorry if this has been aired already - only read the last page of the thread
sorry if this has been aired already - only read the last page of the thread
#57
Former Sponsor
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: www.scoobyworld.co.uk
Posts: 1,987
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Nimbus - cheers & no worries
As I have already said, I think there is enough evidence to doubt that the Apollo moon mission ever suceeded (look out for that documentary - its all in there in non-glorified form)
However, on the flip side of the coin......2 points, that nobody has mentioned yet, that would provide a good argument for the moon landings taking place, namely Jodrell Bank's telescope - the largest of its kind in the world (AFAIK) at the time, tracked the rocket - so wouldnt it have also have tracked the complete mission and hence provide some solid proof?
Also, keeping a cover up of this nature quiet, would require the silencing of all of the mission crew - inc mission ctrl, remote tracking sites, engineering resouces etc - I imagine the staff count on this must run into hundreds, yet few of them have ever spoken up about it...?
Neil
Now on to the Rendlesham UFO hoax....
As I have already said, I think there is enough evidence to doubt that the Apollo moon mission ever suceeded (look out for that documentary - its all in there in non-glorified form)
However, on the flip side of the coin......2 points, that nobody has mentioned yet, that would provide a good argument for the moon landings taking place, namely Jodrell Bank's telescope - the largest of its kind in the world (AFAIK) at the time, tracked the rocket - so wouldnt it have also have tracked the complete mission and hence provide some solid proof?
Also, keeping a cover up of this nature quiet, would require the silencing of all of the mission crew - inc mission ctrl, remote tracking sites, engineering resouces etc - I imagine the staff count on this must run into hundreds, yet few of them have ever spoken up about it...?
Neil
Now on to the Rendlesham UFO hoax....
#58
Scooby Senior
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: North Wales
Posts: 5,826
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The photos that are usually seen are the best of the crop. NASA did release all of the photos, and there are loads of under or over exposed ones, or badly framed/blurred.
NASA weren't going to showcase bad photos for their shining acheivment
Geezer
NASA weren't going to showcase bad photos for their shining acheivment
Geezer
#59
if people actually follow one of the links earlier - it debunks the whole "photo conspiracy" thing.
Its possible to recreate and explain every single "unexplainable anomaly" with a few models and a desk lamp. There is nothing unexplainable in the slightest
Deano
Its possible to recreate and explain every single "unexplainable anomaly" with a few models and a desk lamp. There is nothing unexplainable in the slightest
Deano
#60
Scooby Senior
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: North Wales
Posts: 5,826
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As I have already said, I think there is enough evidence to doubt that the Apollo moon mission ever suceeded
Geezer