Godlike Productions - Discussion Forum
Users Online Now: 2,047 (Who's On?)Visitors Today: 476,207
Pageviews Today: 1,441,876Threads Today: 836Posts Today: 17,336
10:16 PM


Rate this Thread

Absolute BS Crap Reasonable Nice Amazing
 

OFFICIAL NASA VIDEO ADMITS To NEVER SENDING PEOPLE TO THE MOON

 
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 67744632
United States
02/05/2015 01:51 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: OFFICIAL NASA VIDEO ADMITS To NEVER SENDING PEOPLE TO THE MOON
If the hoaxers would bother to learn what the problems were in going to the Moon, and how they were solved, they would understand that Apollo indeed did go there.


 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 66774127


If the hoaxers would bother to learn what the problems were in going to the Moon, and how they couldn't possibly have been solved in 1969, they would understand that Apollo could not possibly have gone there on a manned mission.
74444

User ID: 74444
United States
02/05/2015 01:56 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: OFFICIAL NASA VIDEO ADMITS To NEVER SENDING PEOPLE TO THE MOON
In the US you have every kind of belief and conspiracy its all over the place. Did you know there are people who believe the internet doesn't exist and its all the result of psychological conditioning.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 66560219


I can believe that, utterly.
74444

User ID: 74444
United States
02/05/2015 02:00 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: OFFICIAL NASA VIDEO ADMITS To NEVER SENDING PEOPLE TO THE MOON
...


Speaking of writing...where's your 1300 page book?

And as the Apollo Landing sites are photographed by other countries in the near future, and the Apollo remnants are shown to be there, will you admit you are wrong, or merely move the goalposts that equipment was put up there just to 'stage' the landings?
 Quoting: 74444

I don't see the post you're quoting. Was it on another thread or something like that?
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 67744632


Looks like IDW has peeved off the mods something fierce.

 Quoting: 74444


I think we all know why people get banned here on GLP. I think what it actually means is that NASA and it's representatives are not up to the task of defending against a real challenge. I read the rest of your post and about the only thing I have to say about it is that you don't seem to have particularly impressive knowledg3 about the science required to understand the veracity of your claims. In fact you don't appear to have any knowledge at all.

What is apparent is that you appeal to mainly psychological aspects, claiming Apollo debunkers are somehow psychologically defective or motivated. I think most of us know what that means as well.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 67744632


Why, IDW, are you engaging in your supposed 'stealth' mode?

Shocked, I tell you.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 67744632
United States
02/05/2015 02:02 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: OFFICIAL NASA VIDEO ADMITS To NEVER SENDING PEOPLE TO THE MOON
In the US you have every kind of belief and conspiracy its all over the place. Did you know there are people who believe the internet doesn't exist and its all the result of psychological conditioning.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 66560219

There are people that believe all kinds of nutty things, some times these people are in the majority like for instance with religion....and the manned Apollo moon missions of the last century. It is a faith. That is the impression you get when discussing it with people who believe it, that you are questioning their religious beliefs.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 67744632
United States
02/05/2015 02:04 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: OFFICIAL NASA VIDEO ADMITS To NEVER SENDING PEOPLE TO THE MOON
Well, Pt Barnum had it right when he said there's a sucker born every minute.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 67744632

Many of them, apparently, are Apollo-Hoax believers.
 Quoting: 74444


No doubt about it. People like you
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 2380183
United States
02/05/2015 02:12 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: OFFICIAL NASA VIDEO ADMITS To NEVER SENDING PEOPLE TO THE MOON
TLDR the point is they hoaxed the moon landings before they knew the van allen radiation belt was there? This means they couldnt have gone to the moon or they'd be dead?
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 30148978


No, not exactly. It means they are unwilling to accept that we know much more than we did in 1969. In reality it is the lower proton belt that is the very worst. The energy level and density of particles is highly variable and changes not just day to day, but minute to minute. There are incredible densities of energetic particles that would kill anyone in an aluminum spacecraft in a matter of minutes that we did not know about in 1969. What we did know was a tiny fraction of what we do now, and scientists who study these things do not comment on Apollo.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 67744632


Non-starter.

If they didn't know, they wouldn't have not-gone.

Unless you are suggesting they did go, died, and that had to be covered up.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 66774127
United States
02/05/2015 02:15 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: OFFICIAL NASA VIDEO ADMITS To NEVER SENDING PEOPLE TO THE MOON
If the hoaxers would bother to learn what the problems were in going to the Moon, and how they were solved, they would understand that Apollo indeed did go there.


 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 66774127


If the hoaxers would bother to learn what the problems were in going to the Moon, and how they couldn't possibly have been solved in 1969, they would understand that Apollo could not possibly have gone there on a manned mission.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 67744632


Which problems couldn't be solved...specifically?
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 2380183
United States
02/05/2015 02:21 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: OFFICIAL NASA VIDEO ADMITS To NEVER SENDING PEOPLE TO THE MOON
The fact that I can personally make fakes that are just as "undetectable" and look just as convincing means it isn't proof in my opinion. CGI is detectable when used on a large scale and close scrutiny of the faked images reveals pixels were like inserted into the images. In other words they took real images of the lunar surface and doctored them, but they didn't show anything high resolution. The fact is they haven't shown anything near the resolution that can be achieved on this planet with satellites. Theoretically, using the same type of camera they should be able to resolve the lunar surface to 3 inch per pixel resolution. They don't because it would be difficult to make convincing fakes and debunkers would be all over it.

You actually brought up one of the more convincing facts that seem to prove NASA is lying. 46 years after and still nothign coming close to proof.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 67744632


So, an arbitrary standard of scale. You would be convinced by, say, gigapixel images if they only avoided CGI artifacts you are personally capable of detecting.

Do you have similar methods for detecting large-scale model photography?


Hrm. Math time. 3 inches per pixel you say. Typical bit of lunar hardware would be the rover at 122 inches long. Assume a square frame for simplicity. That's 40 x 40; barely the size of a smiley.

At 40 x 40, NASA could HAND PAINT every pixel in the image. What's your method for detecting errors here, again? It can't be a relic of, say, the Phong shader's famous reluctance to smoothly interpolate between large n-gons. And as for physical models, at 40 x 40, the lunar rover model released by Tang (yes, them), would suffice.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 66774127
United States
02/05/2015 02:27 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: OFFICIAL NASA VIDEO ADMITS To NEVER SENDING PEOPLE TO THE MOON
The "Belts"...

HBs seem to believe that one needed to go through the belts to get to the Moon. A simple understanding of orbital inclination says that's bunk. The VAB are not a single mass, it has layers (2 main belts) which are stronger towards the center and weaker towards the edges.

A cleverly designed trans lunar profile (based on their orbital inclination) allowed them to traverse, more or less, the weaker edges of the belts. Between this and their 20,000mph+ transit speed, it wasn't such a problem.

Shielding? Aluminum, plastics, insulating materials...all helped in attenuating the particles they encountered.

Yeah, it's pretty basic rocket science, but you can learn it.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 65695781
United States
02/05/2015 03:10 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: OFFICIAL NASA VIDEO ADMITS To NEVER SENDING PEOPLE TO THE MOON
...


Looks like IDW has peeved off the mods something fierce.

 Quoting: 74444


I think we all know why people get banned here on GLP. I think what it actually means is that NASA and it's representatives are not up to the task of defending against a real challenge. I read the rest of your post and about the only thing I have to say about it is that you don't seem to have particularly impressive knowledg3 about the science required to understand the veracity of your claims. In fact you don't appear to have any knowledge at all.

What is apparent is that you appeal to mainly psychological aspects, claiming Apollo debunkers are somehow psychologically defective or motivated. I think most of us know what that means as well.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 67744632


Why, IDW, are you engaging in your supposed 'stealth' mode?

Shocked, I tell you.
 Quoting: 74444


Do you have any comments about the post you quoted?

I think the methods employed speak for themselves.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 67744632

IDW,
The only posts of yours I've seen removed are the ones likely reported for vulgarity, racism, and/or anti-semitism. If you could avoid that your posts would likely stay around.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 67748437
United States
02/05/2015 03:32 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: OFFICIAL NASA VIDEO ADMITS To NEVER SENDING PEOPLE TO THE MOON
The "Belts"...

HBs seem to believe that one needed to go through the belts to get to the Moon. A simple understanding of orbital inclination says that's bunk. The VAB are not a single mass, it has layers (2 main belts) which are stronger towards the center and weaker towards the edges.

A cleverly designed trans lunar profile (based on their orbital inclination) allowed them to traverse, more or less, the weaker edges of the belts. Between this and their 20,000mph+ transit speed, it wasn't such a problem.

Shielding? Aluminum, plastics, insulating materials...all helped in attenuating the particles they encountered.

Yeah, it's pretty basic rocket science, but you can learn it.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 66774127



The "Belts"...

HBs seem to believe that one needed to go through the belts to get to the Moon. A simple understanding of orbital inclination says that's bunk. The VAB are not a single mass, it has layers (2 main belts) which are stronger towards the center and weaker towards the edges.

A cleverly designed trans lunar profile (based on their orbital inclination) allowed them to traverse, more or less, the weaker edges of the belts. Between this and their 20,000mph+ transit speed, it wasn't such a problem.

Two points, the time required to get to the moon from the Earth was far more than the 12 hours you're claiming (237,000/20,[email protected] hrs), meaning the velocity was much lower than 20,000mph. Also, it is impossible for Apollo to have penetrated the VAB at any latitude other than the one it was launched at because it had to intersect the moon's orbit in essentially the same plane it orbits Earth to have the equatorial orbit of the moon it did and land at the Sea of tranquility. The best case scenario is 38 degrees latitude, in the thick of the VAB which BTW are extremely variable and vary from minute to minute. Radiation densities are given as averages.
Shielding? Aluminum, plastics, insulating materials...all helped in attenuating the particles they encountered.

Yeah, it's pretty basic rocket science, but you can learn it.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 66774127

Plastic and insulation can stop SOME particle radiation. They have little effect on electromagnetic radiation or high energy particles. The aluminum hull woudl make the problem worst,because particle radiation produces deadly x radiation when it impact aluminum. It also produces secondary particle radiation from the nuclei of aluminum atoms. While in the VAB the Apollo spacecraft would be bathed in electromagnetic radiation many times more powerful than an x ray machine or microwave oven is, which penetrates a body easily. It also important to understand x ray exposure in medicine is limited to a fraction of second because x radiation is in fact extremely harmful to living things. This is why I am reluctant to be x rayed, because I believe a person could easily be killed by a malfunction..
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 2380183
United States
02/05/2015 04:35 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: OFFICIAL NASA VIDEO ADMITS To NEVER SENDING PEOPLE TO THE MOON
Two points, the time required to get to the moon from the Earth was far more than the 12 hours you're claiming (237,000/20,[email protected] hrs), meaning the velocity was much lower than 20,000mph.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 67748437


It's a transfer orbit, not a trip down the highway. You can't do simple division to figure out velocity specific to any of the bodies in question.

Also, it is impossible for Apollo to have penetrated the VAB at any latitude other than the one it was launched at because it had to intersect the moon's orbit in essentially the same plane it orbits Earth to have the equatorial orbit of the moon it did and land at the Sea of tranquility.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 67748437


More complex than that. The Moon's orbit is neither aligned with Earth's equator, nor the ecliptic. Nor is the Cape on the equator; launches from there are not equatorial either (much less aligned with the solar ecliptic).

The best case scenario is 38 degrees latitude, in the thick of the VAB which BTW are extremely variable and vary from minute to minute. Radiation densities are given as averages.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 67748437


Yes; as weighted averages. Which means the excursions are known numerically and statistically. When you say freeway speeds average 70 MPH, that doesn't imply cars frequently travel at 200 MPH. And it certainly does not allow that every now and then, a car passes at relativistic velocity.

Plastic and insulation can stop SOME particle radiation. They have little effect on electromagnetic radiation or high energy particles.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 67748437


Everything has a half-thickness. Even dead skin, or nomex coveralls. This is why qualitative statements are misleading.

The aluminum hull woudl make the problem worst,because particle radiation produces deadly x radiation when it impact aluminum. It also produces secondary particle radiation from the nuclei of aluminum atoms.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 67748437


Which is desired behavior. The secondary emissions are of lower energies and are largely stopped in the remainder of the material (or the following layers). For an education in how this works, look at the Therac-25 incidents. And remember these were therapeutic machines specifically designed to utilize bremmstrahlung to maximum effectiveness. Yet, the patients who died, died from the original electron beam, NOT from the generated x-rays.

While in the VAB the Apollo spacecraft would be bathed in electromagnetic radiation many times more powerful than an x ray machine or microwave oven is, which penetrates a body easily. It also important to understand x ray exposure in medicine is limited to a fraction of second because x radiation is in fact extremely harmful to living things. This is why I am reluctant to be x rayed, because I believe a person could easily be killed by a malfunction..
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 67748437


See Therac-25, above.

Numbers, that's what's important. You wave your hands and simply claim that because so and so source exist, the Apollo capsule "Must" have been exposed to a searing hell.

I am within miles of research reactors, tens of miles of power reactors. The local rock formations include natural uranium, and the so-called "radon daughters" (a collection of active radionuclides from the various decay chains) are known to collect in basements. There is detectable nuclear fallout in the soil, in fact, in the metals I work and in my very bones. There are cosmic ray showers. I have worked around multiple sources of hard x-rays with not always adequate shielding, and recently, too. The very sun is a source of x-rays. I can generate x-rays -- x-rays with sufficient penetrating power to expose photographic film! -- simply by unrolling a strip of tape.

This is why numbers are important. ALL of the above are non-zero hazards. In fact, several of them are known -- have been shown in large-scale studies -- to reduce my life expectancy by a measurable amount, and to mutate any progeny I might have.

But this does not make my continued existence a hoax.

Until you can quantify the actual hazards, show the energy distribution and flux and apply the half-thicknesses correctly, you are making nothing but empty claims.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 2380183
United States
02/05/2015 04:41 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: OFFICIAL NASA VIDEO ADMITS To NEVER SENDING PEOPLE TO THE MOON
Short of proving Apollo to the six percent of people who disbelieve it (and, given they would likely move the goalposts again) what's the point?

 Quoting: 74444


Bandwagon fallacy and misrepresenting the numbers. Large percentages of people believe ridiculous things

 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 67748437


Sure, but multiple studies have shown they are the people least likely to benefit from any money spent to try to reach them.

Also, which is the bandwagon fallacy? Claiming that most people have moved on from thinking the manned landings were hoaxed, or claiming that most people think they are hoaxed? Either way, its call to science by popularity contest.

Unless you go into detail. The detail being; the vast majority of people don't have strong opinions on the subject and haven't given it much thought. Those who have given it thought fall largely into two groups; those to whom it came up due to professional experience in related fields, and those who are attracted to conspiracy theories.

And it is hardly a popularity contest if you point out the majority of those who have the technical qualifications to understand the material do not find significant problems with the Apollo Project record.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 67764349
United States
02/06/2015 01:19 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: OFFICIAL NASA VIDEO ADMITS To NEVER SENDING PEOPLE TO THE MOON
Short of proving Apollo to the six percent of people who disbelieve it (and, given they would likely move the goalposts again) what's the point?

 Quoting: 74444


Bandwagon fallacy and misrepresenting the numbers. Large percentages of people believe ridiculous things

 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 67748437


Sure, but multiple studies have shown they are the people least likely to benefit from any money spent to try to reach them.

Also, which is the bandwagon fallacy? Claiming that most people have moved on from thinking the manned landings were hoaxed, or claiming that most people think they are hoaxed? Either way, its call to science by popularity contest.

Unless you go into detail. The detail being; the vast majority of people don't have strong opinions on the subject and haven't given it much thought. Those who have given it thought fall largely into two groups; those to whom it came up due to professional experience in related fields, and those who are attracted to conspiracy theories.

And it is hardly a popularity contest if you point out the majority of those who have the technical qualifications to understand the material do not find significant problems with the Apollo Project record.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 2380183


Total nonsense. Qualified people with valid disqualifications are attacked,libeled, banned , stalked and threatened.That's not because they're calling hoax on something that really happened.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 67764349
United States
02/06/2015 01:44 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: OFFICIAL NASA VIDEO ADMITS To NEVER SENDING PEOPLE TO THE MOON
Two points, the time required to get to the moon from the Earth was far more than the 12 hours you're claiming (237,000/20,[email protected] hrs), meaning the velocity was much lower than 20,000mph.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 67748437

It's a transfer orbit, not a trip down the highway. You can't do simple division to figure out velocity specific to any of the bodies in question.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 2380183


No, you can't, that's MY point. You said they went through the van allen radiation belts at 20,000mph and I happen to know their actual path would have had to have been spiral,in fact simply modifying an Earth orbit until it intersected with the moons orbit, meaning the time they spent in the affected zones was much longer than your 20,000mph figure is intended to indicate. Their actual velocity would have had to have been much slower, at that velocity they would have one tiny window of error and it woudl have required a tremendous deceleration to effect capture by the moons gravity.. To calculate the actual time spent in any zone you cannot cherry pick data and say they moved vertically through the zones at 20,000mph, the actual vertical velocity would have been much much lower. You also cannot use average flux values to prove anything. Particle density in the lower proton belt varies radically from minute to minute.

Also, it is impossible for Apollo to have penetrated the VAB at any latitude other than the one it was launched at because it had to intersect the moon's orbit in essentially the same plane it orbits Earth to have the equatorial orbit of the moon it did and land at the Sea of tranquility.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 67748437

More complex than that. The Moon's orbit is neither aligned with Earth's equator, nor the ecliptic. Nor is the Cape on the equator; launches from there are not equatorial either (much less aligned with the solar ecliptic).
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 2380183

Let's be specific. the moons orbit in inclined at 5 degrees to the ecliptic. The Earths rotational axis is 22 degrees inclined to the Ecliptic The moons orbit varies from 0 degrees off of the equator of the earth to maximum of @27 degrees. Apollo was launched from cape Canaveral with a latitude of when the moon was in the moist advantageous position, and Apollo would have had to penetrate the VAB at no more than 27 degrees N latitude at it's lowest latitude, and no more than 33 or 24 at it's highest latitude. The latitude would be changing during the translunar injection SPIRAL trajectory. The illustrations by NASA which show the TLI are false.

.
The best case scenario is 38 degrees latitude, in the thick of the VAB which BTW are extremely variable and vary from minute to minute. Radiation densities are given as averages.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 67748437

Yes; as weighted averages. Which means the excursions are known numerically and statistically. When you say freeway speeds average 70 MPH, that doesn't imply cars frequently travel at 200 MPH. And it certainly does not allow that every now and then, a car passes at relativistic velocity.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 2380183

Quack quack, sounds smart , breaks down to total nothing. You said nothign intelligent whatsover here that means anything.

Plastic and insulation can stop SOME particle radiation. They have little effect on electromagnetic radiation or high energy particles.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 67748437

Everything has a half-thickness. Even dead skin, or nomex coveralls. This is why qualitative statements are misleading.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 2380183
Nonsense. The particles in the lower proton belt woudl go through Apollo like water though a sieve and the electrons in the outer belt would result in deadly levels of X radiation, which is not attenuate by any of the materials in the Apollo shielding.The spacecraft woudl have been worst than a microwave oven.

This is the real barrier to interplanetary space travel, why it cannot be done until the probelm is solved

The aluminum hull woudl make the problem worst,because particle radiation produces deadly x radiation when it impact aluminum. It also produces secondary particle radiation from the nuclei of aluminum atoms.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 67748437

Which is desired behavior. The secondary emissions are of lower energies and are largely stopped in the remainder of the material (or the following layers). For an education in how this works, look at the Therac-25 incidents. And remember these were therapeutic machines specifically designed to utilize bremmstrahlung to maximum effectiveness. Yet, the patients who died, died from the original electron beam, NOT from the generated x-rays.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 2380183

Nonsense. X radiation at the levels that would be produced are deadly for short periods of time. In medical x rays the exposure is not dangerous only because the total exposure time is a fraction of a second. We're talking at least several hours, at a much higher flux.
While in the VAB the Apollo spacecraft would be bathed in electromagnetic radiation many times more powerful than an x ray machine or microwave oven is, which penetrates a body easily. It also important to understand x ray exposure in medicine is limited to a fraction of second because x radiation is in fact extremely harmful to living things. This is why I am reluctant to be x rayed, because I believe a person could easily be killed by a malfunction..
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 67748437

See Therac-25, above.

Numbers, that's what's important. You wave your hands and simply claim that because so and so source exist, the Apollo capsule "Must" have been exposed to a searing hell.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 2380183
It is not me doing the handwaving and it is not me having your material censored.
I am within miles of research reactors, tens of miles of power reactors. The local rock formations include natural uranium, and the so-called "radon daughters" (a collection of active radionuclides from the various decay chains) are known to collect in basements. There is detectable nuclear fallout in the soil, in fact, in the metals I work and in my very bones. There are cosmic ray showers. I have worked around multiple sources of hard x-rays with not always adequate shielding, and recently, too. The very sun is a source of x-rays. I can generate x-rays -- x-rays with sufficient penetrating power to expose photographic film! -- simply by unrolling a strip of tape.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 2380183

Which proves the Apollo film record is fabricated. Thank you.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 2380183
United States
02/06/2015 02:39 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: OFFICIAL NASA VIDEO ADMITS To NEVER SENDING PEOPLE TO THE MOON
No, you can't, that's MY point. You said they went through the van allen radiation belts at 20,000mph and I happen to know their actual path would have had to have been spiral,
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 67764349


No, it is essentially an ellipse (technically a "patched conic" between two ellipses).

in fact simply modifying an Earth orbit until it intersected with the moons orbit,
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 67764349


More or less. A very eccentric Earth orbit that the is a close match to lunar orbit at the apogee.

meaning the time they spent in the affected zones was much longer than your 20,000mph figure is intended to indicate. Their actual velocity would have had to have been much slower, at that velocity they would have one tiny window of error
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 67764349


It isn't a solely ballistic process. There are designed-in mid-course corrections.

and it woudl have required a tremendous deceleration to effect capture by the moons gravity..
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 67764349


In a sense it is already captured; it continues an ellipse that has the Moon at one of the foci. As they pass behind the Moon they are at perigee relative to the Moon and the apogee is now the Earth. The expenditure of fuel is to circularize that orbit; reduce velocity until the apogee is as close to the Moon as the perigee (or should that be perilune?)


To calculate the actual time spent in any zone you cannot cherry pick data and say they moved vertically through the zones at 20,000mph, the actual vertical velocity would have been much much lower. You also cannot use average flux values to prove anything. Particle density in the lower proton belt varies radically from minute to minute.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 67764349


That's right; first you have to understand the actual flight path. Then you can work out how much of it was spent where. Numbers matter. Orbital elements matter. 20,000 MPH relative to what? The Earth? The Moon? The Sun?
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 2380183
United States
02/06/2015 02:48 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: OFFICIAL NASA VIDEO ADMITS To NEVER SENDING PEOPLE TO THE MOON
And, you know, the rest is a rambling mess of a Gish Gallop. Too many ideas, too few of them developed, no point in trying to discuss all of them.

You've started to do the work. Maybe in another ten years you will be able to debate properly.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 67255434
New Zealand
02/06/2015 03:13 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: OFFICIAL NASA VIDEO ADMITS To NEVER SENDING PEOPLE TO THE MOON
Besides the van Allen belt issue he says that coming back to earth the capsule will be hotter than molten lava and the shields will have to protect against that.

They used several parachutes for Orion in that video to slow it down and they said it would have to be as big as a football field.

............

Didnt the capsule that was used in the first moon landings have a window?
Parachutes as big as a football field ? Hmm don't remember any such thing
Did we have materials back then that could withstand molten lava temperatures?

I was on the fence before, this convinced me it was most definitely faked. Thanks op.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 67255434
New Zealand
02/06/2015 06:24 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: OFFICIAL NASA VIDEO ADMITS To NEVER SENDING PEOPLE TO THE MOON
I used solid empirical science to disprove any possibility of a manned lunar landing mission in the last century, abiding strictly in the accepted scientific method. It wasn't a single disqualification, it was over a dozen, all which can be proved beyond a shadow of a doubt to a moral certainty.
There is no supposed evidence NASA can produce which cannot completely and thoroughly debunked, and there are literally thousands of pieces of evidence of fraud.
I proved NASA Lied and continues to lie about nearly every aspect of the Apollo saga. In the process I learned a tremendous amount of information about not only NASA, but our government in general.The truth is no piece of information originating from any government source can ever be trusted, in any instance, and anyone who learns the truth is considered a dangerous enemy.
 Quoting: Interdimensional Warrior 64937206


Where? Link? Did you write a book?
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 67769107
Croatia
02/06/2015 06:32 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: OFFICIAL NASA VIDEO ADMITS To NEVER SENDING PEOPLE TO THE MOON
Of course their footage of moon landing is hoax.
It was just too risky to take that trip for first time and do the livestream (livestream Lol)
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 67255434
New Zealand
02/06/2015 06:49 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: OFFICIAL NASA VIDEO ADMITS To NEVER SENDING PEOPLE TO THE MOON
Talking about the intense radiation of the Van Allen Belts, he says, "We must solve these problems before sending people through this region of space."

I thought we HAD solved it with Apollo 8-17?!?!

He is indeed saying that a human being has never passed through the Van Allen Belts.

Very interesting. I wonder what NASA would say in its defense.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 64611386


They would say what was already said in this thread. Apollo went around the belts. They skirted the edges. But trajectories like that are not available all the time due to the angle of the magnetic field and the inclination of the Moon so the available launch windows are greatly decreased. In order to have a craft that can go more often then you need to have a craft capable of going through the center of the belts if necessary.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 47938245


THe problem here is they only discovered the intensity of the radiation of a new belt within the van allens in 2012, so to say that they did this or that in the 50's and 60's with Gemini and Apollo to avoid the radiation they know now exists and are trying to avoid with the Orion is simply lies and fodder for the general public's consumption.


2012 Van Allen Belt discovery:
[link to www.space.com]

Previous thread were people just don't get it ...yet:
Thread: NASA's Orion Mission
 Quoting: BG-Fan

It can be [and has been!] proved to a 100% certainty that a spacecraft launched from Cape Canaveral on a lunar orbital injection trajectory would have had to go through nearly the densest parts of both the lower proton belt and the much "deeper" outer electron belt.

Given the position of the claimed landing sites and the location of the Earth launch [both of which are not open for debate], the trajectory [and thus latitude] of the passage through the Van Allen radiation belts can be determined with precise accuracy.

Using vetted data, we know that Apollo's astronauts would have been exposed to particle radiation at a density of between 4,000,000 and 7,000,000 particles per cubic centimeter for at least two hours, particles with extremely high energy levels dangerous in of themselves, but also producing deadly levels of both x and gamma radiation on contact with the aluminum skin of the spacecraft.

What didn't penetrate the skin would be converted to electromagnetic radiation, and what did would be bathing the astronauts in deadly particle radiation... And that is only a segment of the radiation exposure that would be inevitable and unavoidable on a lunar mission, and yet NASA's official bio reports show total exposure rates of lunar astronauts that show exposure rates essentially identical to low Earth orbital missions in an identical spacecraft.

The conclusion is no Apollo astronaut ever left low Earth orbit.
 Quoting: Interdimensional Warrior 64937206


Hmmm
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 67255434
New Zealand
02/06/2015 06:58 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: OFFICIAL NASA VIDEO ADMITS To NEVER SENDING PEOPLE TO THE MOON



Aww, say it ain't so!


But the video looks SO DAMNED REAL!


lulzors
 Quoting: Citadel Moon


Why cant we see the bright stars? When at night, we can see them so clearly through our thick atmosphere on earth. Shouldn't they shine like sparks?
 Quoting: Apollo Far-Darter


Maybe, but isn't night time in that picture. Don't really know how it would work.
 Quoting: Genghis_Khan


Well camera exposure settings for daylight would have made it impossible to photograph the stars and the daylight bathed surface in the same shot, even worse with the cathode ray tube based video systems they used.

However, the human eye could easily cope, as any human can attest. The human eye takes about 15 minutes to saturate with visual purple enough to maximize night vision capable of picking out another aircraft against a sky full of stars, from 50+ km away. Without the light scattered by the atmosphere, all they would have to do to see a lifetime of stars would be to glance up or mask the horizon with their hand and the universe would come alive to the naked eye instantly.

What did the crew say about the breathtaking view?

Armstrong : "..I dont recall"

Collins : "I dont remember seeing any"

They never expected THAT question, look at the body language.


 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 64946306


Hmmmm
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 67255434
New Zealand
02/06/2015 07:13 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: OFFICIAL NASA VIDEO ADMITS To NEVER SENDING PEOPLE TO THE MOON
...


OK you two dumbasses, explain the mirror that is on the moon the astronauts took there and it is used to this day to make exact laser measurements of the distance from the Earth to the Moon! A close personal friend of mine designed the fucking thing.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 64925658


Hahaha oh boy, here we go with the retro-reflector bullshit. A "close personal friend", huh? You sure it wasn't your uncle? Whoever you want us to think you know, you don't need a fucking mirror to bounce a laser beam off the moon and back to Earth. It was done long before the supposed moon landings. But I guess your uncle already told you all about that, right?
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 57963083


The mirror is a reflector like found on a mailbox.It's presence on the moon in no way suggests men placed it, and it could be as much as 85 degrees off and still reflect a laser
 Quoting: Interdimensional Warrior 64950464


The "mirror" coordinates are only used by mc Donald observatory, the russians just am "at" the moon and still conduct the measurement. The moon is highly reflective, as any trucker with an illegal radio will tell you, the fine silicate regolith is particularly good at reflecting almost any wave energy.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 64946306

Hmmmm
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 67255434
New Zealand
02/06/2015 07:32 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: OFFICIAL NASA VIDEO ADMITS To NEVER SENDING PEOPLE TO THE MOON
...


Actually, what would really clinch it for me would be for a US astronaut return to the moon and bring back just one of the flags. Cover the entire mission in vivid HDTV and take along observers from China and Iran... A Chinese high resolution image would work quite well if you cant get back on your own.

Seriously, if you cant make it back for reasons unknown, just pay India and Russia to send a one way robot impactor to snap a few shots before it becomes a lawn dart and I would eat my hat.

But to date, no such images have been taken. Japan took some images so poor that it could be anything, India could not see it and China will not release the pictures.

Hire a hostile 3rd party to take new pictures, or go back and get the flag.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 62580810


Very well. At least it is *some* kind of rational goalpost.

So, when China (most likely) gets a *more* high resolution shot than we've already seen from the LRO, you will change your opinion. That's a very high bar, but at least it is a bar.

The flags are probably dust. The UV has likely demolished them over 40+ years.

Thank you for the response.
 Quoting: 74444


Your welcome, and dont get me wrong, nothing would make me happier for it to be true. I would cheer on if America used a hostile third party, got the confirmation, called a press conference and said "there it is fellas, now pucker up and kiss my ass"

However the evidence to the contrary (as I see it) and the scope of the lies and conspiracy involving your nation that have been revealed in the past 10 years, indicates hostile independent eyes. Scientists are scientists, Chinese, Russian, Indian, Korean makes no difference between peers. If the scientific community of one of your adversaries found evidence, they would confirm it.. The Russian scientists confirmed space achievements in the west as you did for them... But in many areas now, the russians stand complicit in some of the very same lies. I would be certain that scientists from China, India, Brazil or Iran would not carry any water for America and if it was bullshit they would jump at the opportunity to prove it, likewise, if they found it, it would be on your dime, so they would not be able to withhold the results for political gain.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 62580810


I'm aware of what radioactive bombardment would do given the exposure and time, its more of a metaphoric example, any part of the vehicle would do, as would a independent photography of the site I'm sure would have the same effect.

It is my position that lunar transit has been achieved, just not using the apollo spacecraft as advertised. I have lived in America for a few years and have seen enough to know there is more than what one can find in a Janes catalog operating with approval in your airspace. Even in positive control, class B and military operating areas. When you are given vectors around something interesting by TRACON, it means that they can see it and probably know on some level what it is.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 62580810


Hmmmmm interesting
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 66319610
Moldova, Republic of
02/06/2015 07:40 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: OFFICIAL NASA VIDEO ADMITS To NEVER SENDING PEOPLE TO THE MOON
More "never been to the Moontards" Fucking idiots

bsflag bsflag bsflag bsflag
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 7790600
United Kingdom
02/06/2015 07:48 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: OFFICIAL NASA VIDEO ADMITS To NEVER SENDING PEOPLE TO THE MOON
Just to pick upon one point here :-
The illustrations by NASA which show the TLI are false.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 67764349

And do you have alternative data? Or is it just more supposition?

The Apollo missions were big news at the time, and were watched closely by people all over the world, including the USA's major political enemies - the USSR and China.

And it wasn't just governments who were watching. Millions of people followed the missions very closely, and many of them used telescopes to track the progress of the vehicles out from earth orbit to the moon and back.

And yet not one person, or government, has come forward in all that time to say that the observed trajectory doesn't match that published by NASA.

Furthermore, the dangers of the radiation belts were well known, and of course the sensible thing to do would be to design a trajectory which minimised the risks. Which is exactly what they did.

Now, whether or not you believe the spacecraft were manned, the fact is that several vehicles were launched to the moon, and were observed to follow the published trajectories.

If you can find data that contradicts that, then please present it...
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 67255434
New Zealand
02/06/2015 07:57 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: OFFICIAL NASA VIDEO ADMITS To NEVER SENDING PEOPLE TO THE MOON
Invisible plasma shield which protects earth from radiation discovered 7,200 miles above earth

[link to www.ibtimes.com]
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 65653469


Interesting thanks
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 7790600
United Kingdom
02/06/2015 07:57 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: OFFICIAL NASA VIDEO ADMITS To NEVER SENDING PEOPLE TO THE MOON
Oooh, another good one :-

It can be [and has been!] proved to a 100% certainty that a spacecraft launched from Cape Canaveral on a lunar orbital injection trajectory would have had to go through nearly the densest parts of both the lower proton belt and the much "deeper" outer electron belt.

Given the position of the claimed landing sites and the location of the Earth launch [both of which are not open for debate], the trajectory [and thus latitude] of the passage through the Van Allen radiation belts can be determined with precise accuracy.
 Quoting: Interdimensional Warrior 64937206


OK Sparky, show us the maths to prove this one. And I mean real calculations, not hand-waving, oh the latitude is so-and-so and the orbital inclination is such-and-such.

I'd like to see all your calculations, with details showing why a higher inclination trajectory would be impossible...
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 67255434
New Zealand
02/06/2015 08:11 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: OFFICIAL NASA VIDEO ADMITS To NEVER SENDING PEOPLE TO THE MOON
...


They would say what was already said in this thread. Apollo went around the belts. They skirted the edges. But trajectories like that are not available all the time due to the angle of the magnetic field and the inclination of the Moon so the available launch windows are greatly decreased. In order to have a craft that can go more often then you need to have a craft capable of going through the center of the belts if necessary.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 47938245


THe problem here is they only discovered the intensity of the radiation of a new belt within the van allens in 2012, so to say that they did this or that in the 50's and 60's with Gemini and Apollo to avoid the radiation they know now exists and are trying to avoid with the Orion is simply lies and fodder for the general public's consumption.


2012 Van Allen Belt discovery:
[link to www.space.com]

Previous thread were people just don't get it ...yet:
Thread: NASA's Orion Mission
 Quoting: BG-Fan

It can be [and has been!] proved to a 100% certainty that a spacecraft launched from Cape Canaveral on a lunar orbital injection trajectory would have had to go through nearly the densest parts of both the lower proton belt and the much "deeper" outer electron belt.

Given the position of the claimed landing sites and the location of the Earth launch [both of which are not open for debate], the trajectory [and thus latitude] of the passage through the Van Allen radiation belts can be determined with precise accuracy.

Using vetted data, we know that Apollo's astronauts would have been exposed to particle radiation at a density of between 4,000,000 and 7,000,000 particles per cubic centimeter for at least two hours, particles with extremely high energy levels dangerous in of themselves, but also producing deadly levels of both x and gamma radiation on contact with the aluminum skin of the spacecraft.

What didn't penetrate the skin would be converted to electromagnetic radiation, and what did would be bathing the astronauts in deadly particle radiation... And that is only a segment of the radiation exposure that would be inevitable and unavoidable on a lunar mission, and yet NASA's official bio reports show total exposure rates of lunar astronauts that show exposure rates essentially identical to low Earth orbital missions in an identical spacecraft.

The conclusion is no Apollo astronaut ever left low Earth orbit.
 Quoting: Interdimensional Warrior 64937206


Hmmm
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 67255434


Can anyone address what this guy is saying?
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 67255434
New Zealand
02/06/2015 08:18 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: OFFICIAL NASA VIDEO ADMITS To NEVER SENDING PEOPLE TO THE MOON
...


Why cant we see the bright stars? When at night, we can see them so clearly through our thick atmosphere on earth. Shouldn't they shine like sparks?
 Quoting: Apollo Far-Darter


Maybe, but isn't night time in that picture. Don't really know how it would work.
 Quoting: Genghis_Khan


Well camera exposure settings for daylight would have made it impossible to photograph the stars and the daylight bathed surface in the same shot, even worse with the cathode ray tube based video systems they used.

However, the human eye could easily cope, as any human can attest. The human eye takes about 15 minutes to saturate with visual purple enough to maximize night vision capable of picking out another aircraft against a sky full of stars, from 50+ km away. Without the light scattered by the atmosphere, all they would have to do to see a lifetime of stars would be to glance up or mask the horizon with their hand and the universe would come alive to the naked eye instantly.

What did the crew say about the breathtaking view?

Armstrong : "..I dont recall"

Collins : "I dont remember seeing any"

They never expected THAT question, look at the body language.


 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 64946306


Hmmmm
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 67255434

Why can't they remember seeing stars?





GLP