Did NASA just admit they never put Man on The Moon? [Video]

a reply to: OccamsRazor04

A poem explains it best at this heated point in the thread:

-"To know if it day or night we must first dare to open our eyes."

Embrace all possibilities, walk all paths, leave no stone unturned.

So, it's not about ignorance or fact. You see, true ignorance is not daring to ask unpopular questions.

-MM

originally posted by: MerkabaMeditation
a reply to: choos

You might deduct that from the context of the video; but they are actually saying that the challenge is sending "people" through the Vann Allan Belt. Still, computers or people - the point is how come this is a challenge 45 years after we supposedly went there for the first time. NASA had the same challenges back then as they do now, it is not like the Vann Allen Belt has changed since then or anything.

-MM

but the deduction you are making is a seperate issue.. he is talking about protecting the delicate electronics onboard from the VAB and all of a sudden talks about not being able to protect people on board??? but those are two seperate issues it doesnt make sense for him to talk about protecting electronics and all of a sudden about protecting people..

and like i said before its a new craft, one that is alot more high tech alot more computer power and fits more people.. it will come with its own issues..
they cannot use the same numbers and materials to build the sydney harbour bridge as they did to build the brooklyn bridge..

a reply to: choos

If the NASA Engineer was just talking about sending computers trough the Vann Allen Belts, then why did he literally say that there are challenges sending "people" through the Belts and not sending "Computers".

Another place that your claims crashes is the fact that there has been dozens of unmanned Moon missions up until today, all of these had onboard computers. The first Moon misson was the Able I orbiter that was launched the 17 August 1958, the last Moon mission was the 4M flyby the 23 October 2014. I highly doubt that the Orion Missions computer is so much more advanced than the 4M's launced this year (or any of the other six Moon missions launched in the last four years) that it is a "challenge" to shield it from radiation - what could possibly be so magical about the Orion Mission spacecrafts computer that no other unmanned Moon Mission in the last 55 years did not solve - please explain that to me.

-MM

originally posted by: MerkabaMeditation
a reply to: choos

If the NASA Engineer was just talking about sending computers trough the Vann Allen Belts, then why did he literally say that there are challenges sending "people" through the Belts and not sending "Computers". Another place that your claims crashes is the fact that there has been dozens of unmanned Moon missions up until today, all of these had onboard computers. The first Moon misson was the Able I orbiter that was launched the 17 August 1958, the last Moon mission was the 4M flyby the 23 October 2014. I highly doubt that the Orion Missions computer is more advanced than the 4M's launced this year.

-MM

because he didnt..

he says they must overcome the challenge of protecting the delicate electronics BEFORE they can send people to the region..

are you sure you want to claim that orions computer is NOT more advanced than the 4M? the 4M which is already built and launched, whereas the Orion is still waiting to be launched??? its similar to claiming that a car that just got released yesterday is more advanced than a car that will be released next year...

and did you not understand what i was saying about the bridges??

NO engineer would EVER use the same data, numbers and materials to build the sydney harbour bridge as they did to build the brooklyn.. they are DIFFERENT bridges although they are still bridges THEY ARE DIFFERENT..

Orion is a NEW CRAFT.. new crafts have their own issues to overcome before they are certified for use.

a reply to: choos

I highly doubt that the Orion Missions computer is so much more advanced than the 4M's launced this year (or any of the other six Moon missions launched in the last four years) that it is a "challenge" to shield it from radiation - what could possibly be so magical about the Orion Mission spacecrafts computer that was not solved by any other of the dozens of unmanned Moon Mission in the last 55 - please explain that to me.

-MM

originally posted by: MerkabaMeditation
a reply to: choos

I highly doubt that the Orion Missions computer is so much more advanced than the 4M's launced this year (or any of the other six Moon missions launched in the last four years) that it is a "challenge" to shield it from radiation - what could possibly be so magical about the Orion Mission spacecrafts computer that no other unmanned Moon Mission in the last 55 years did not solve - please explain that to me.

-MM

for one, orion will carry passengers..

which means extra weight, location of the electronics cannot severely interfere with cabin space, and windows..

originally posted by: choos

originally posted by: MerkabaMeditation
a reply to: choos

I highly doubt that the Orion Missions computer is so much more advanced than the 4M's launced this year (or any of the other six Moon missions launched in the last four years) that it is a "challenge" to shield it from radiation - what could possibly be so magical about the Orion Mission spacecrafts computer that no other unmanned Moon Mission in the last 55 years did not solve - please explain that to me.

-MM

for one, orion will carry passengers..

which means extra weight, location of the electronics cannot severely interfere with cabin space, and windows..

Heaviest? The heaviest payload to the Moon in the Apollo Missions was 45,000 kg (99,208 lb), that is 5x the weight of the Orion Mission payload.

-MM

a reply to: MerkabaMeditation

whats the worst case scenario if the guidance computer fails on an unmanned craft??

whats the worst case scenario if the guidance computer fails on a manned craft with people on board??

which scenario would have cause for more concern?

originally posted by: MerkabaMeditation
a reply to: OccamsRazor04

A poem explains it best at this heated point in the thread:

-"To know if it day or night we must first dare to open our eyes."

Embrace all possibilities, walk all paths, leave no stone unturned.

So, it's not about ignorance or fact. You see, true ignorance is not daring to ask unpopular questions.

-MM

The problem is not asking questions, the problem is opening your eyes, seeing the sunlight, and saying it's still night time.

Enjoy ignorance, hopefully one day you will ask questions and actually want the truth, and not only be interested in proving it's night despite the sun overhead.

a reply to: OccamsRazor04

It is time for another poem to wrap-up this discussion between us, OR04:

-"A blind will claim it is night after opening his eyes at midday, and all the other blind will chant with him."

-MM

a reply to: MerkabaMeditation

Nice poem, is that why you used a made up quote falsely attributed to Dr Van Allen?

originally posted by: Chadwickus
a reply to: MerkabaMeditation

Nice poem, is that why you used a made up quote falsely attributed to Dr Van Allen and verifiable by their sources?

Are you talking about these Dr. James Van Allen quotes? I can assure you they are 100% authentic and verifiable by their sources:

But, though mechanical and electronic equipment can operate within the high radiation areas, a living organism cannot survive this level of radiation damage. Hence, all manned space flight attempts must steer clear of these two belts of radiation until adequate means of safeguarding the astronauts has been developed.

-Dr. James Van Allen, Space World, December 1961.

So farr, the most interesting and least expected result of man's exploration of the immediate vicinity of the earth is the discovery that our planet is ringed by a region–to be exact, two regions–of high-energy radiation extending many thousands of miles into space. This discovery is of course troubling to astronauts; somehow the human body will have to be shielded from this radiation, even on a rapid transit through the region.

-Dr. James Van Allen, Scientific American, March 1959.

-MM

a reply to: MerkabaMeditation

Nope, this one:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

a reply to: MerkabaMeditation

are you assuming that NO progress occured during 61 to 69?? nor the understanding of the VAB??

"The recent Fox TV show, which I saw, is an ingenious and entertaining assemblage of nonsense. The claim that radiation exposure during the Apollo missions would have been fatal to the astronauts is only one example of such nonsense." -- Dr. James Van Allen

signed by dr van allen himself.. if you have issues take it up with someone who is an expert.

originally posted by: Chadwickus
a reply to: MerkabaMeditation

Nope, this one:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

The verifiable sources says the same, if we need 1 meter (3 feet) of lead of shielding is not important here - the core of the verifiable quotes are the same "Humans must be shielded from extreme radiation in Vann Allen Belts".

-MM

originally posted by: choos
a reply to: MerkabaMeditation

are you assuming that NO progress occured during 61 to 69?? nor the understanding of the VAB??

"The recent Fox TV show, which I saw, is an ingenious and entertaining assemblage of nonsense. The claim that radiation exposure during the Apollo missions would have been fatal to the astronauts is only one example of such nonsense." -- Dr. James Van Allen

signed by dr van allen himself.. if you have issues take it up with someone who is an expert.

Do you have any proof that the letter is not just a hoax? I could write down and print something similar in a couple of minutes myself with my PC, just saying.

I'm also awaiting a reply from you on what is so magical about the Orion Mission spacecraft's computer that there would be "challenges" sending the spacecraft through the Vann Allen Belts.

-MM

a reply to: MerkabaMeditation

ask jay windley..

do you doubt him?? it was signed by dr james van allen.. are you able to fake his signature never having seen it before?

p.s. i already told you.. it is to carry passengers..

how many times must i tell you that the orion craft is a NEW CRAFT??? it isnt your ordinary unmanned craft, it is NEW. it carries its own issues, you cannot and must not use the same numbers you used to build an unmanned craft for a manned craft it is irresponsible and will endanger lives.. safety factors will not be the same.

a reply to: MerkabaMeditation

Do you have proof that the Dr Van Allen quote is not a fake?

You must believe it enough to have used it, yet when given evidence that it's false, you're all of a sudden skeptical?

You can't have you cake and eat it too.

originally posted by: Chadwickus
a reply to: MerkabaMeditation

Dr Van Allen never said that.

He did say this though:

"The recent Fox TV show, which I saw, is an ingenious and entertaining assemblage of nonsense. The claim that radiation exposure during the Apollo missions would have been fatal to the astronauts is only one example of such nonsense."

s149.photobucket.com...
www.clavius.org...

I can't find that Fox News clip you mention anywhere online, can you prove that it is real? If it was real then I'm pretty sure that someone would have posted it online somewhere, like on YouTube. I'm concluding that the clip never existed for that reasons, same thing goes for the lack of proof that the Dr. Vann Allen letter was real - please show me the proof.

-MM

originally posted by: choos
a reply to: MerkabaMeditation

ask jay windley..

I don't have to ask anyone; you put the claim out there and you have to prove that it is not false - those are the rules of engagement my friend.

originally posted by: choos
a reply to: MerkabaMeditation
do you doubt him?? it was signed by dr james van allen.. are you able to fake his signature never having seen it before?

Then how do we know that the signature was written by Dr. James Vann Allen if we have nothing to compare it with. The letter could have been signed by any toddler for all we know.

-MM