We Probably Never Made it to the Moon

a reply to: Ove38

If they claim they are fake then I would never hire them as photographers. There is a difference betwen being able to make a living composing an image and understanding what is in an image you didn't take. Appealing to authority doesn't work if the authority isn't up to the job.

There are many professional photographers who know otherwise: the photographs were taken on the moon. The details in them are confirmed by multiple sources. You can add professional astrononers, astronauts and geologists to the list.

a reply to: cooperton

There are multiple working at NASA that admit we cannot get past the Van Allen Belts:

NASA admits we can't get humans beyond low earth orbit

And yet. People broadcasted from the moon…

Larry Baysinger, a technician for WHAS radio in Louisville, Kentucky, independently detected and recorded transmissions between the Apollo 11 astronauts on the lunar surface and the Lunar Module.[22] Recordings made by Baysinger share certain characteristics with recordings made at Bochum Observatory by Kaminski, in that both Kaminski's and Baysinger's recordings do not include the Capsule Communicator (CAPCOM) in Houston, Texas, and the associated Quindar tones heard in NASA audio and seen on NASA Apollo 11 transcripts. Kaminski and Baysinger could only hear the transmissions from the Moon, and not transmissions to the Moon from the Earth.[17][23]
The Arcetri Observatory near Florence, Italy, also detected transmissions coming from the mission[24][25] using a 10 meters dish.[26]

en.m.wikipedia.org...

And radar was also used.

Ground Tracking of Apollo

web.mit.edu...


The MSFN will “track” the spacecraft during its entire lunar mission, except for those portions of flight where the Moon occults the spacecraft
(approximately for 1 hr during each 2-hr lunar parking orbit). As defined here the word “track” means more than it does in the usual sense; it means the cumbersome “link” between the space- craft and the Main Control Center at the Manned Spacecraft Center in Houston, Tex. This link con- sists of the many information, tracking, voice, telemetry, and data channels necessary to keep up with the events of the flight.

Third-party evidence for Apollo Moon landings

en.m.wikipedia.org...

The missions were tracked by radar from several countries on the way to the Moon and back.[9]

The issue has been addressed in detailing what strategies were used to minimize radiation exposure in this thread, and many others. You have ignored those explanations.


More here…

How NASA Worked Around Earth’s Radiation Belts to Land Apollo 11 on the Moon

science.thewire.in...

When NASA commenced its lunar spaceflight program, its scientists already knew about the belts and their spatial and energy distribution. Apropos the energies: electrons below about 1 MeV were unlikely to be dangerous, as were protons below 10 MeV. For example, a proton with an energy of 3 MeV could penetrate about 6 mm of aluminium (a typical spacecraft material) whereas one of 100 MeV could penetrate up to 40 mm. So engineers fashioned shielding that consisted of a spacecraft hull and all the instrumentation lining the walls.

Further, knowing the belts’ absence above the poles, the altitude of the lower edge of the inner belt being ~600 km (well above the LEO) and the location of the South Atlantic anomaly, where doses are at a high 40 mrads/day at an altitude of 210 km allowed NASA to design the Apollo translunar injection (TLI) orbit in a way that the spacecraft would avoid the belts’ most dangerous parts.

Apollo 11 bypassed the inner belt and only passed through the weaker part of the outer belt (Fig. 4). According to NASA’s ‘The Apollo Spacecraft: A Chronology’, the high-altitude nuclear tests would have had a significant impact on Apollo orbits but NASA scientists had accounted for this possibility in radiation-protection planning.

Fake?!

Come on,

It s not like it was a masonic rituel to establish a esoteric current or something.

The eagle definitly landed.

originally posted by: dunn00
a reply to: Soylent Green Is People

and u know this how? i was just quoting the OP first post here where he says :The Van Allen Belts are about 3,400 miles high above earth's surface. The Van Allen Belts range from temperatures of 2,000-20,000 degrees Celsius. That's as much as 4x hotter than the surface of the sun. so if this is true then how did we go to the moon ? when there's nothing that can withstand that temp around here ? if its not true then the sky's the limit right

I'll repeat a response to the OP I made several pages back near the beginning of this thread:

Even though the individual molecules of material in the Van Allen Belt (or in the thermosphere, as another example) is at a high temperature, there are actually very few molecules. So the actual effect on a spacecraft will be virtually nothing.

An example of fewer molecules meaning less effect would be this: Heat your oven to 212 F (100 C). Also, heat a pot of water to 212 F/100 C. You can put your hand in the 212 F oven and leave it there for a short while with little effect on your hand. However, I would strongly advise you NOT to stick your hand in 212 F water, even for just a second or two. Your hand would be scalded an you would suffer sever burns.

The oven air and the pot of water are the same temperature, but because the molecules in the pot are much more dense than in the oven, there is a huge difference in the effect on your hand.

a reply to: Grenade

Physical evidence that could not have been obtained any other way. It sticks a truth flag into the turkey.

Logic takes over.

Logic says that you must disprove that these rocks got here by being brought back by the Apollo missions.

No sense in going anywhere with the discussion, unless you can do this, except for entertainment purposes, of course.

This is the way science works. Once we accept things as facts, they get plugged into other unresolved theories and if they fit, well it becomes just another part of what we call reality. We have done pretty well with this method over time, Don't you think?

Let's put it another way.

Today, A scientist stands at a podium in the front of an audience of hundreds of people.
He holds up a 5 lb rock that he says is covered on one side with micro-meteorite impacts, just a few mm wide.
That is all the information he provides.
He then asks the audience where the rock came from.

There is only one correct answer.

originally posted by: Soylent Green Is People

originally posted by: dunn00
a reply to: Soylent Green Is People

and u know this how? i was just quoting the OP first post here where he says :The Van Allen Belts are about 3,400 miles high above earth's surface. The Van Allen Belts range from temperatures of 2,000-20,000 degrees Celsius. That's as much as 4x hotter than the surface of the sun. so if this is true then how did we go to the moon ? when there's nothing that can withstand that temp around here ? if its not true then the sky's the limit right

I'll repeat a response to the OP I made several pages back near the beginning of this thread:

Even though the individual molecules of material in the Van Allen Belt (or in the thermosphere, as another example) is at a high temperature, there are actually very few molecules. So the actual effect on a spacecraft will be virtually nothing.

An example of fewer molecules meaning less effect would be this: Heat your oven to 212 F (100 C). Also, heat a pot of water to 212 F/100 C. You can put your hand in the 212 F oven and leave it there for a short while with little effect on your hand. However, I would strongly advise you NOT to stick your hand in 212 F water, even for just a second or two. Your hand would be scalded an you would suffer sever burns.

The oven air and the pot of water are the same temperature, but because the molecules in the pot are much more dense than in the oven, there is a huge difference in the effect on your hand.

Very nice science lesson for those that did know what those temperatures really mean.
The temperature thing has been the reason why so many people not knowing science, bring up the Van Allen belts as the reason for so much hype. Sure the longer term radiation has to be shielded against, but our NASA knows exactly how to accomplish this. This is what they do.

a reply to: charlyv

Do we have access to these rocks and independent verification of their authenticity?

If so, can you point me in a direction of the studies so i can have a look?

Thanks

originally posted by: OneBigMonkeyToo
"There are multiple working at NASA that admit we cannot get past the Van Allen Belts:

NASA admits we can't get humans beyond low earth orbit

"Right now we can only fly in earth orbit, that's the furthest we can go"
-NASA Astronauts Col. Terry Virts aboard the ISS
16:20 in the link above"



They are 'admitting' nothing of the sort.

Not having a currently human rated craft able of gwtting beyond LEO is not the same as "we've never had one" or "it can't be done".

But that's preposterous, how would technology have devolved to the point where we have to refigure out how to send humans beyond low earth orbit? It strongly insists we have never been there, since we are still trying to figure out how to get humans there.

originally posted by: Soylent Green Is People

I'll repeat a response to the OP I made several pages back near the beginning of this thread:

Even though the individual molecules of material in the Van Allen Belt (or in the thermosphere, as another example) is at a high temperature, there are actually very few molecules. So the actual effect on a spacecraft will be virtually nothing.

An example of fewer molecules meaning less effect would be this: Heat your oven to 212 F (100 C). Also, heat a pot of water to 212 F/100 C. You can put your hand in the 212 F oven and leave it there for a short while with little effect on your hand. However, I would strongly advise you NOT to stick your hand in 212 F water, even for just a second or two. Your hand would be scalded an you would suffer sever burns.

The oven air and the pot of water are the same temperature, but because the molecules in the pot are much more dense than in the oven, there is a huge difference in the effect on your hand.

It was a good argument, but It doesn't make sense that NASA engineers and scientists are expressing the inability to get humans past these layers of the atmosphere. I would think its because The Van Allen belt particles are moving at speeds near the speed of light, so this would compensate for lack of density. Here are the links, the video shortcuts to the time in the video where they mention our inability to get humans beyond low earth orbit:

NASA admits we can't get humans beyond low earth orbit
NASA admits we can't currently get humans past Van Allen Belts

a reply to: cooperton

Technology has not devolved, it has evolved and been put to different uses thanks to changing political priorities. Going to the moon with new technology means it needs to be checked.

Nasa is not admitting it can't get past the VAB. Continually and deliberately misinterpreting what they say isn't going to make your version true no matter how many times you repeat it. Humans are capable of traversing the VAB. They've done it already.

a reply to: Grenade

Anyone can submit research proposals for them.

I have about a dozen volumes of Lunar Science conference proceedings full of Apollo sample analyses by scientists all over the world. Not one of them disputes their origin.

This shows a sample exchange with the Soviets, who had their own material:

commons.m.wikimedia.org...:US_and_USSR_Exchange_Lunar_Samples_(18614896961).jpg

The samples were photographed and filmed during their collection, those images confirm where they were taken as clearly as the samples confirm their origin.

a reply to: OneBigMonkeyToo

Thank you. Ill have a look tomorrow when i get free time.

Just seen your link is a picture of the handover. Do you have a link to the scientific analysis please?

I'm not convinced by a picture of some diplomat with a rock nor do i have the tools to petition NASA and perform my own tests.

"Right now we can only fly in earth orbit, that's the furthest we can go"
-NASA Astronauts Col. Terry Virts aboard the ISS

a reply to: cooperton

Pathetic attempt at cherry picking and taking things out of context

The astronaut is referring that current boosters, following retiring the Saturn V boosters, are only able to lift manned payloads to Low Earth Orbits, mostly to the ISS at 250 miles (400 km) Later boosters in development will be aable to go beyond

The POLARIS DAWN private space mission scheduled for November 2022 will carry its crew of 4 to a high earth orbit
going into the lower reached of the Van Allen belts

polarisprogram.com...

This Dragon mission will take advantage of Falcon 9 and Dragon’s maximum performance, flying higher than any Dragon mission to date and endeavoring to reach the highest Earth orbit ever flown. Orbiting through portions of the Van Allen radiation belt, Polaris Dawn will conduct research with the aim of better understanding the effects of spaceflight and space radiation on human health.

The current altitude record in earth orbit is 739.2 nautical miles (1,369.0 km) set by Gemini 11 in 1966

originally posted by: Ove38
Toni Thorimbert, Aldo Fallai, Oliviero Toscani, Peter Lindbergh, Massimo Mazzucco are all professional photographers. If they say the Apollo missions photos are fake, then they are fake.

No, if they are professional photographers and say that then it's still their opinion. An opinion from an expert is still an opinion.

originally posted by: cooperton
"radiation like this can harm the guidance system..shielding will be put to the test as the vehicle goes through the radiation.. sensors aboard will detect radiation from this region for scientists to study.. we must solve this problem before we send people through this region of space" (starts at 3:00 in the video below)

As I said before, the problem is that today's electronics (not only the guidance system) is much more sensitive to radiation than the old electronics, a side effect of the reduction in size and power consumption.
A charged particle that was millions of times smaller than a transistor and had a charge that was only a small fraction of the working levels of that transistor now is only thousands of times small and has a charge that is not that small, resulting in a higher probability of malfunction.

originally posted by: cooperton

originally posted by: Gothmog

Learn real science , not from YouTube .

"Plasma called “solar wind" flows continually from the Sun at a very high speed of 500km/sec."

From the Japanese Institute of Space and Astronautical Science link. 500km/sec is 111,000mph. I did all my own research regarding the plasma winds, and I got all the data from credible space institutions. Solar winds can reach up to 1,000,000 degrees Celsius source. There's no atmosphere or magnetic field to protect the moon from being constantly bombarded by these super hot, super fast plasma winds.

You must try to understand it is a very, very, very small amount of super hot wind.

If an item the size of a penny got hit by all the wind that will hit the space ship for an hour, it might raise its temperature by 1 degree.

Transfer of heat is relative to heat, multiplied by mass, to another mass. So because the mass is so miniscule, the heat barely matters.

originally posted by: stelth2
a reply to: cooperton

If we can't get through the belt, how did we send satellites and rovers to Mars? I understand humans are fragile, but still, circuit boards made it through. If I remember right, the way that the astronauts made it through before was because there is a hole through the belt that they have to take at a certain angle.

That's why I showed that the Mars Rover was actually caught being on Devon Island on earth, it is at the end of the OP. If they're still faking stuff, there's no reason to believe anything they do really... Here's from the OP:

Many will argue we already have rovers on mars, which is further than the moon. But they actually got ratted out by a lemming located on Devon Island in Northern Canada:

The top photo is supposedly a picture from the Mars rover, but if you zoom in you can see there is clearly a rodent in the picture. These specific types of rodents are native to Devon Island in Northern Canada. But surely this must be a mistake? Nope... NASA is actually stationed in Devon Island:

"In addition to communications, equipment testing, and vehicular and extra-vehicular operations, Devon Island is the site of the Exploration program, which aims to develop new technologies, strategies, and operational protocols to support the future exploration of the moon, Mars, and other planets." -NASA

originally posted by: noonebutme

You have ZERO knowledge of science and technology.

How can you be so ignorant of tech and yet have the audacity to think we never landed on the moon when there is visual and PHYSICAL evidence that we have.

I would get an education on the basics of science and tech and THEN try to debunk them.

I don't need a degree in computer engineering to know that our scientific capabilities have increased exponentially since 1969, which was my point for even referencing the computer specs. If you know how to get us back to the moon, talk to Don Pettit at NASA they need your help

The problem of damaging electronics is a problem for modern electronics, because the wires are so small in a modern CPU that just the static electricity you might have in your body can over charge it and fry it.

The processors they were using in the early 70's had comparatively thick wires. They couldn't process as much data, but they were quite a bit more resistant to being over charged and frying.

a reply to: Grenade

To hand? No, but you have the same access to Google as I do. Soviet era scientific research in general isn't readily available, that's just how they did business. Not online snd not existing are not the same thing .

The complete lunar science conference proceedings are also difficult to find online, though individual papers are. Some good starting points:

www.drewexmachina.com...

ntrs.nasa.gov...

And searching 'Apollo 11 lunar science conference proceedings' and looking at any decent book on lunar geology.

Not one scientist from any country has disputed the samples. Again, their collection was recorded, and the details of that collection can be confirmed by other detauis in the photos and live RV broadcasts.

originally posted by: Ove38

originally posted by: OneBigMonkeyToo
a reply to: Ove38

7. Alleged professional photographer who already thinks they're fake says they're fake. I can find you any number of professional photographers who are more than happy the photos are genuine, along with astronomers, scientists, adn teh people who took the photographs.

There isn't one single thing in that video that doesn't have a much more accurate and truthful explanation: they went to the moon.

Toni Thorimbert, Aldo Fallai, Oliviero Toscani, Peter Lindbergh, Massimo Mazzucco are all professional photographers. If they say the Apollo missions photos are fake, then they are fake. Sorry, that's just the way it is. There's nothing we can do about that.

Some of the photographer's findings regarding the images the moon hoax proponents showed them were incorrect. For example, they talked about non-parallel shadows, but it is not uncommon for shadows to not be parallel in photographs due to perspective:


One of the non-parallel shadow examples was from an image that was a composite of more than one image, so it showed a wider angle, thus had a an even more pronounced perspective effect.


In addition, one of the photos the commented on as being fake was in fact a fake -- but it wasn't even a true Apollo photo. It was a composite photo made by someone else (not NASA) decades after the moon landings, but the moon conspiracy theorists told the photographers it was a NASA picture.

They also seemed to lack the knowledge about the amount and nature of the radiation on the Moon. They likened the radiation to an x-ray machine and said it should have ruined the film. But the radiation on the Moon is not like an x-ray machine. And the Apollo film was low-ISO, which would make it even less susceptible to exposure from radiation.

They lacked an understanding of what "cold and hot" means in space as well. The film, inside its case, would be more protected from temperatures in the vacuum of space than it would on Earth. That's because there is no atmosphere to help transfer heat away from or to an object in space. Granted, there was a direct connection between the film and the parts of the film magazine it was touching, but the magazines were designed to minimize the thermal transfer. But they didn't need to worry about thermal transfer through air like a photographer in the cold on Earth, because there was no air.

They also made the claim that shadows should be completely dark due to lack of atmosphere to diffuse the sunlight. While these photographers may understand the effects of light, shadows, and reflections in photography, they seem to have little understanding of the physics of the light itself. Light does not need atmosphere for the light to be reflected from a lit surface to fall upon an surface in a shadow. The light will reflect normally onto shadowed areas whether or not there is atmosphere. I mean, how would Earthshine work if these photographers claims were right?

originally posted by: bloodymarvelous

You must try to understand it is a very, very, very small amount of super hot wind.

If an item the size of a penny got hit by all the wind that will hit the space ship for an hour, it might raise its temperature by 1 degree.

Then why are NASA engineers and astronauts struggling to figure out how to get new technology through this region?

Imagine 50 years after Columbus, and the European boat-builders all of a sudden can't make a vessel that can bring humans to America. It's an absurd thought, but that's what's happening with getting humans past low earth orbit

originally posted by: Soylent Green Is People

originally posted by: Ove38

originally posted by: OneBigMonkeyToo
a reply to: Ove38

7. Alleged professional photographer who already thinks they're fake says they're fake. I can find you any number of professional photographers who are more than happy the photos are genuine, along with astronomers, scientists, adn teh people who took the photographs.

There isn't one single thing in that video that doesn't have a much more accurate and truthful explanation: they went to the moon.

Toni Thorimbert, Aldo Fallai, Oliviero Toscani, Peter Lindbergh, Massimo Mazzucco are all professional photographers. If they say the Apollo missions photos are fake, then they are fake. Sorry, that's just the way it is. There's nothing we can do about that.

Some of the photographer's findings regarding the images the moon hoax proponents showed them were incorrect. For example, they talked about non-parallel shadows, but it is not uncommon for shadows to not be parallel in photographs due to perspective:

One of the non-parallel shadow examples was from an image that was a composite of more than one image, so it showed a wider angle, thus had a an even more pronounced perspective effect.

In addition, one of the photos the commented on as being fake was in fact a fake -- but it wasn't even a true Apollo photo. It was a composite photo made by someone else (not NASA) decades after the moon landings, but the moon conspiracy theorists told the photographers it was a NASA picture.

No, this is what the say about parallel and non-parallel shadows. They understand it perfectly.

At 2:49:27 youtu.be...

And image AS14-68-9486 is not a composite of more than one image

a reply to: cooperton

You

Then why are NASA engineers and astronauts struggling to figure out how to get new technology through this region?

Because the computers were very simpler, custom made, and very labor intensive.

That Time When Computer Memory Was Handwoven by Women

www.amusingplanet.com...

You

Imagine 50 years after Columbus, and the European boat-builders all of a sudden can't make a vessel that can bring humans to America.

More like a electromagnetic pulse takes out all the modern ships with computers. And very few people proficient to run sailing ships and navigate by celestial navigation without computers. And try to maintain the same volume of shipping enjoyed today.

How many wooden sailing ships would it take to match the cargo shipped by one cargo ship reliant on computers and vulnerable to and EMP? But they would still work while modern ships with burnt up computers sat idle.