The final verdict on NASA´s Apollo Missions: No. Here is why not and how they pulled it off

Dr. Van Allen predicted the presence of the van allen belts and therefor they are named for him, he is by far not the leading expert on them, nor is his word final.
It has been stated repeatedly that the course Apollo took through the Van Allen belts minimized exposure by going through a narrow outer part of them 28 degrees off equatorial. Most people would be satisfied with this explaination, but the fact is the trajectory to the moon was spiral and not direct at all, you can think of it as an ever increasing spiraling outwards. The ship NEVER left earth orbit, even if it did go to the moon , and the journey throught the Van allen belts lasted approximately 1/3 the total time in transit. For what it's worth I have already proved that the astronauts were exposed to 100 times more radiation than NASA's published dosimetere readings before they ever left the lower proton band of the Van allen radiation belts.-IDW

LMAO.

They were only in the inner radiation belt (high-radiation zone) for less than two hours.

The outer radiation belt (low radiation zone) for only a day and a half.

Net exposure never met or exceeded lethal levels.

but the fact is the trajectory to the moon was spiral and not direct at all -IDW

No, they did not Spiral to the Moon. They orbited the Earth a couple times for readiness checks, then went straight to where the Moon would be at by rendezvous time.

The ship NEVER left earth orbit, even if it did go to the moon -IDW

So what? Everyone knows the Moon is orbiting Earth, thus technically when orbiting the Moon you are still orbiting Earth. This is also entirely irrelevant and more ridiculous word games from the Apollo-deniers.

Last Edited by Byteman on 09/20/2009 10:31 PM

Three questions, baitman:
1) what type of radiation does the inner band consist of and how would you charcterize it's Q factor?
2) How did they go 'straight to the moon' when the gravity of the earth was pulling the spacecraft towards the earths center?
3) What schooling if any do you have.

Please provide references to scholarly papers in which Van Allen specifically asserts the radiation risk to a human Moon mission to be acceptably low.

You must be laughing due to realizing how ridiculous your previous idea was.

There are serious problems with the notion that the Apollo spacecraft never left Earth orbit, for starters:

- It would have been one of the brightest objects in the night sky, except nobody seems to have noticed it.

- Independent parties (outside of NASA) tracked it to the Moon

- For that matter, tracking and maintaining communications with a spacecraft in Earth orbit is a completely different problem from doing so with a spacecraft on its way to the Moon. It's simply impossible to maintain continuous contact with a spacecraft in Earth orbit with the technology at the time, not to mention that dozens of engineers at each tracking station around the world would have known where the spacecraft actually was, as well as all the flight controllers in Houston.

Why would those exist in that form? James Van Allen was in the business of characterizing a potential hazard; his papers would be about the known energy and flux of the belts, and their potential dangers, not about some hypothesized margin of safety for some hypothetical mission.

This would be typical of his work:

[link to www.agu.org]

1) Firstly, since this is 2009 instead of the mid-20th century, I would call it a "radiation weighting factor" instead. If you were up on the subject, you would have used that term instead of your purposely vague "Q factor" BS.

Secondly, 2.0 to 3.0...roughly.

2) The Apollo flight paths are well documented. They were tracked by third parties.

Also, I'm perfectly aware that space is curved. I used the term "straight" to make sure you education lacking Apollo deniers could understand.

3)Obviously more than you.

Frankly, I saw you coming a mile away IDW.

I've already seen the list of your past accomplishments. You like to make spectacular claims about proof and evidence, but you never deliver.

You regularly use outdated knowledge like your Q factor BS, and yet you act like your currently up on subjects.

To be quite honest IDW, I don't take anything you say all that seriously. Your a typical word-game playing Apollo denier, just like all the rest.

Not neccesarily. The spacecrat=ft was covered in a white shroud when it wa launched, what wa sunder it is open for debate. It could have been flat black for all you know.

They tracked something to the moon. I believe it was the third stage /LM. I also believe NASA attempted or accomplished an unmanned landing with the LM and collected samples. What I do not believe is that any man has ever left Earth orbit to venture into interplanetary space.

Have you ever heard of a tape recorder? Did you ever wonder why sometimes the astronauts began answering MC befor MC was through speaking?

Well, you should take me seriously because I am serious as hell is to a sinner on his deathbed.
And you are deluding yourself if you think you have a better education than I do.Mine is real.

Thanks for proving my point.

Now try to debunk the other 2 talking points you outlined, and I effectively retorted.

Wow, that is even better than ditching the LEM in the Pacific.

Excellent. That would explain the "tracking".



I do not think that was neccessary because there is an abundance of Moon rock to be found on Antarctica.

Coincidentally, Werner Von Braun did head an expedition there shortly before Apollo. Were they collecting landing evidence?



Hear, hear.

+1

IDW (AC775814) has nothing to back up their claims. Hey Eden, you two have something in common.

HAHAHA

Seriously though... yes, we went to the Moon.

Clearly, he could not write an article publicly and clearly exposing NASA's hoax. Such an article would never reach print, and any other dissemination of it would trigger an elite-induced trashing of his memory and possibly a threat on the lives of his many children and grandchildren. Even aside from all that, such an article would only invite vehement denials from NASA's "experts" who would claim that Van Allen had succumbed to Alzheimer's.

But his article you cite goes as far as a NASA skeptic could reasonably hope. How much clearer could he be?

[link to www.issues.org]
---
The visions of the 1970s and 1980s look more like delusions in today's reality.
...
For the rest of us, the adventure is vicarious and akin to that of watching a science fiction movie.
---

So your point is that Van Allen has no direct knowledge of Apollo at all, and is not qualified to comment either way on its safety.

Not quite.

James Van Allen had a great deal of theoretical and practical understanding of radiation. He KNEW what the make-up of the belts is; not some bogey-man of radiation, but a quantifiable and understood hazard that was within the bounds of amelioration with existing technology.

My point was he saw no purpose in writing a paper defending the reality of Apollo. On the subject of the hazards of the belts, he found the reality clearly understood by most educated people. He had -- as have most scientists -- very little interest in trying to reach people who had made themselves unreachable through cultivation of a studied ignorance.

Instead he wrote -- paper after paper -- exploring what was, and was was interesting and important. Not in trying to "prove" the sky was blue. Those with eyes see it already. Those without will never learn.

In a way this common attitude among scientists is unfortunate. Not for the sake of the committed idiot, but for the sake of the casual browser who is more likely to run into the rantings of the likes of you, than an article by the likes of James Van Allen.

Chuckle. That is exactly what Van Allen must have thought as he contemplated 40 years of wasted effort on (alleged) manned space exploration, conducted by blind idiots who were unwilling to admit that they were much more interested in siphoning $billions from the public till than actually contributing to science.

Of course not. He had no real knowledge of the program, strenuously disapproved of it, and in all likelihood strongly suspected its fraud. What does it tell you when a renowned scientist likens the "moon landings" to a science fiction movie?

Then how do you explain the amateurs around the world who tracked the radio transmissions of the mission to the moon as the craft moved exactly as planned? The amateurs who VISUALLY tracked the missions to the moon with telescopes? Or the fact that no one spotted the CM in orbit around the Earth when it wasn't supposed to be?




Everything was pre-recorded? 24/7 for eight days? And all the guys at mission control were working off scripts? And none of the outside observers who were there noticed? Care to expand on exactly how that worked and was kept secret for forty years?

Excellent views. Quite sure mind control was used, how they did the communications seems unsure at this time because of the tracking and continuous communications between mission control and the craft...

Maybe they were actually communicating with the astronauts, but they were not where they were supposed to be? Would the command module be nothing more than another satellite looking up through a telescope from earth?

I do not know, but I do not think they actually set foot on the Moon itself, they are too many discrepancies in the footage, and the calculated radiation on the Moon is simply too high for the light shielding they had in their suits.

Futhermore NASA did not tell the whole truth about solar flares during the missions. Apollo-11 received two during the third day, look it up. NASA: no notable solar activity.

Maybe they just faked the landing, who knows.

And another thing, expose a camera to as little as 5 rem and you will have severe over exposure. Why are all the pictures made with the Hasselblad cameras so perfect?

That is hard to believe. What was the shielding on the Hasselblad camera? Not too much appearantly. Certainly not enough to keep the rads < 5 rem.

Film travelling to ISS with the Space Shuttle is protected by a special thick lead line box for just that reason: radiation even at low level orbit messes with the celluloid.

At that is not even PASSED the VAB's.

Chuckle. No fooling, Sherlock. And the point is that Dr. Van Allen is more courageous than most scientists.

Let's face it, most scientists are cowards at best, and murderous traitors at worst. Look at recent history--World War II (both sides), the Tuskegee genocide, and 9/11--and you will almost always find vile, murderous scientists who are more than happy to help tyrants achieve their genocidal ends.

In comparison to those, Dr. Van Allen is relatively a paragon of virtue.

Not everything TRUE can be proven, and likewise not everything FALSE can be proven. Read up on Gödel's incompleteness theorems.

Heard Buzz Aldrin on agent provocateur' show say something strange; he falsely described the lunar tidal lock phenomenom, alluding to the moon having rotation.

Often people try the 'Oh, but we have laser reflective distancing equipment on the moon proves they went there'.
WEll no, my answer to this is 'we have sent and crashed spacecraft on the moon with the necessary equipment, it doesn't mean people had to be there'.

glp's censorship filter replaced 'AJs show' with agent provocateur' show. Not a useful censorship mods!

Well spoken. The Russians placed a reflector on the surface using an unmanned craft without any problems.

Look what NASA did on mars with the rover.

It is plausible they have been to the Moon many times with unmanned missions.

How would they recognize Moon rocks when they found them without anything to compare them against? The official story is that the first lunar meteorites were collected in 1982 and were recognized as such because they were similar to the Apollo and Soviet samples.

The command module was. The service module - an essential component for keeping the astronauts alive - wasn't.





Are you saying that NASA sent astronauts into Earth orbit and then completely ignored them until it was time to bring them home? It's either that, or many flight controllers and many people at tracking stations around the world were in on the hoax.