Disclosure of the moon landing hoax.

a reply to: SayonaraJupiter

1960s geopolitics places Apollo in a context. The best way to understand Apollo is to get an understanding of science and engineering.

Once again, please don't repeat the mistake of assuming that defending the truth of the Apollo missions amounts to support for NASA.

Oh, and your glass ceiling is fictitious nonsense.

oh crap - this thread is still going ? - lets use "hoax believer " logic " on thier posts :

a reply to: SayonaraJupiter

There is only a very small percentage of the population who could name you more than 2 or 3 astronauts who walked on the moon...

there you have it folks , a hoax " believer " ADMITS men walked on the moon

thread over ?

oh crap - this thread is still going ? - lets use "hoax believer " logic " on thier posts :

a reply to: SayonaraJupiter

There is only a very small percentage of the population who could name you more than 2 or 3 astronauts who walked on the moon...

there you have it folks , a hoax " believer " ADMITS men walked on the moon

thread over ?

originally posted by: ignorant_ape
thread over ?

"hoax believer"

Are you seriously using ad hominem? It's 2015 bro. You need a grow a better argument than that. Russian Glass Ceiling is at 475km. All the experts agree on this because it is a basic fact of the historical narrative. There is no interpretation needed to understand the limits of Russian space altitude exploration. And that limit is 475km.

originally posted by: SayonaraJupiter

"hoax believer"

Are you seriously using ad hominem? It's 2015 bro. You need a grow a better argument than that. Russian Altitude record is at 475km. All the experts agree on this because it is a basic fact of the historical narrative. There is no interpretation needed to understand the russian record of space altitude exploration. And that russian altitude record is 475km.

fixed for you.. it isnt a limit.. its merely an altitude that a russian person has yet to pass..

a reply to: SayonaraJupiter

The problem with some of the Apollo Cult Believers is that

check and mate

PS - my use of " hoax believer " is not a ad-hom. it is a statement of fact - you claim to believe that the apollo program was a hoax , ergo " hoax believer " QED

PPS - why did you vere of on a tangent with your ramblings about the manned russian altitude record ???????

the thrust of my post was your admitance that men walked on the moon :

There is only a very small percentage of the population who could name you more than 2 or 3 astronauts who walked on the moon...

a reply to: choos

it isnt a limit.. its merely an altitude that a russian person has yet to pass..

The operative phrase being "as yet." There are plans to send a Soyuz spacecraft on a lunar orbiting flight, exactly the mission it was originally designed for. When that happens, will you admit that the Apollo program was at least possible?

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: choos

it isnt a limit.. its merely an altitude that a russian person has yet to pass..

The operative phrase being "as yet." There are plans to send a Soyuz spacecraft on a lunar orbiting flight, exactly the mission it was originally designed for. When that happens, will you admit that the Apollo program was at least possible?

No DJW001, you should know by now that going through the FAB and beyond is not possible till now because there is not enough shielding against the radiance.

You will be killed.

nasa is trying to find out how they can go through the VAB and beyond....they don't know how they can, till now.

Because of this we can conclude that the moonlandings are faked.

a reply to: webstra

And yet the Gemini missions went up into the VAB and they didn't even have health problems.

originally posted by: webstra

No DJW001, you should know by now that going through the FAB and beyond is not possible till now because there is not enough shielding against the radiance.

Some sources, or evidence or some kind of proof of this would be just peachy, thanks.

You will be killed.

Some sources, or evidence or some kind of proof of this would be just peachy, thanks.

nasa is trying to find out how they can go through the VAB and beyond....they don't know how they can, till now.

In a different space craft going through different parts of the VAB. You do understand this right?

Because of this we can conclude that the moonlandings are faked.

No, we can conclude that you know nothing about radiation, space travel in general of the Apollo missions in particular.

originally posted by: webstra

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: choos

it isnt a limit.. its merely an altitude that a russian person has yet to pass..

The operative phrase being "as yet." There are plans to send a Soyuz spacecraft on a lunar orbiting flight, exactly the mission it was originally designed for. When that happens, will you admit that the Apollo program was at least possible?

No DJW001, you should know by now that going through the FAB and beyond is not possible till now because there is not enough shielding against the radiance.

You will be killed.

Wrong. You cannot send astronauts on an Apollo command module through the same region on the same trajectory as Orion EFT-1 without risking the astronauts developing mild symptoms of radiation poisoning.

Using SPENVIS, here is the dose expected for an Apollo astronaut sitting inside an Apollo spacecraft with about 7-8 g/cm^2 areal density on the trajectory taken by Apollo to the moon:
h.dropcanvas.com...
That dose isn't dangerous at all.

The trajectory taken by Apollo avoided the most intense parts of the Van Allen belts.


Now here is the expected dose if you were to send Apollo astronauts in an Apollo command module on the same trajectory as Orion EFT-1's final orbit:
h.dropcanvas.com...
Nearly 30 rads = potential for mild radiation sickness symptoms. So in a very literal sense you cannot safely send astronauts through the region of space flown by Orion EFT-1 using older manned spacecraft capable of reaching that altitude, namely Apollo. You can, however, send it to the moon by avoiding the most intense part of the belts and not lingering in them. Orion EFT-1's trajectory, however, will potentially give you mild radiation poisoning. Trajectory matters, spacecraft density matters. Yes, Apollo could safely get to the moon. No Apollo could not safely travel along Orion EFT-1's trajectory through that particular region of space, not without risking mild radiation sickness. Future methods for getting astronauts beyond low earth orbit may involve low thrust methods like Hall effect thrusters, according to NASA. If that is the case they will necessarily need more shielding than Apollo because they will take longer to get through the belts, whether they avoid the most intense region or not. EFT-1 provided an opportunity to test how the spacecraft would tolerate a higher dose of radiation than Apollo received.

originally posted by: choos


The SAMA is part of the VAB, the is regularly traverses through it, this is a fact..

Also go back and read the entire paragraph you wrote of the quote. Cherry picking a sentence and putting it out of context is dishonest at best.

The man is talking about the challenge of shielding sensitive electronics which includes life support electronics properly, new electronics are now so much smaller that an electron from the VAB can and will change some of the states of the electronics memories etc, these challenges of shielding the electronics onboard Orion must be solved before they can successfully send a man THrOUGH the vab with Orion. That is what he is saying you cherry picking a quote and putting it out of context is dishonest.

I posted the entire passage, and linked the clip it was from, so don't accuse me of being dishonest, which only shows you are the one acting dishonestly here.

The problems he mentions are about shielding electronics, which need to be solved before sending humans through the VAB. Shielding humans is far more difficult than shielding electronics, and it is not close to being solved.

The fact remains we cannot send humans through the VAB yet.

originally posted by: choos
P.s. And what I've been trying to tell you is that the vab has varying levels of energetic particles, the less energetic areas can be protected against, and a trajectory can be planned within these areas, the higher energetic areas are harder to protect against and planning a trajectory around this is very much possible, if you want to claim that we can't send a man through the vab, you are claiming that the high energy areas is everywhere in the vab and completely unavoidable. Which includes the saa. Which is completely false

The problem is that we DON'T YET KNOW where, or when, or how, the VAB become highly charged with radiation. Look at all latest discoveries from the VAB probes, so you'll know what I mean here.


Now, in a March, 1973 report, NASA claimed...

In terms of hazard to crewmen in the heavy, well-shielded command module, even the largest solar-particle event on record (November 12, 1960) would not have caused any impairment of crewmember functions or ability of the crewmen to complete
their mission safely.

www.hq.nasa.gov...

That's quite a claim, indeed...

The claim has no evidence to back it up, that's the whole problem.

If true, all the problems we have today wouldn't exist, but that's not the case at all.

Do you agree with their claim, noted in that paper, or do you not?


If you do, what do you believe supports their claim?

originally posted by: turbonium1

I posted the entire passage, and linked the clip it was from, so don't accuse me of being dishonest, which only shows you are the one acting dishonestly here.

and yet you deliberately cherry picked one sentence and attempted to take it out of context??

The problems he mentions are about shielding electronics,

yes he is, he was not talking about the challenges of shielding humans, which is what you were trying to establish.

which need to be solved before sending humans through the VAB. Shielding humans is far more difficult than shielding electronics, and it is not close to being solved.

are you sure?? i suppose you have some evidence of this??

did you know one single electron or charged particle can affect electronics?? which can lead to minor damage to complete failure

are you suggesting that a single electron can kill a human??

The fact remains we cannot send humans through the VAB yet.

incorrect..
the fact remains that you cannot work out how to navigate around an obstacle.

The problem is that we DON'T YET KNOW where, or when, or how, the VAB become highly charged with radiation. Look at all latest discoveries from the VAB probes, so you'll know what I mean here.

so when they say that its associated with solar activity, it really means they dont know where, when or how the VAB becomes highly charged??

That's quite a claim, indeed...

The claim has no evidence to back it up, that's the whole problem.

if thats a problem why dont you see a problem in your inability to back up your claims that GCR's would be deadly in as little as 6 days??

also, have you noticed how you cherry picked quotes yet again??

if the claim has no evidence to back it up, how do you think they were able to estimate the dosage received by the astronauts if they dont have any data to back it up?? the very next sentence gives you references:

In terms of hazard to crewmen in the heavy, well-shielded command module,
even the largest solar-particle event on record (November 12, 1960) would not have
caused any impairment of crewmember functions or ability of the crewmen to complete
their mission safely. It is estimated that within the command module during this event
the crewmen would have received a dose of 60 to 100 rads to their skin and 10 to 30 rads
to their blood-forming organs (bone and spleen) (refs. 4 and 5).

4. Jones, Robert K. ; Adams, Duane E. ; and Russell, Irving J. : The Radiobiological
Consequences of Dose Distributions Produced by Solar-Flare-Type Spectra. In
Second Symposium on Protection Against Radiations in Space, NASA SP-71, 1965,
pp. 85-95.

5. Langham, Wright H., ed. : Radiobiological Factors in Manned Space Flight.
National Acad. Sci., National Res. Council Pub. 1487 (Washington, D. C. ), 1967.
www.hq.nasa.gov...

If true, all the problems we have today wouldn't exist, but that's not the case at all.

Do you agree with their claim, noted in that paper, or do you not?

If you do, what do you believe supports their claim?

protection against solar activity has always been an issue.. Apollo astronauts would have survived, but their mission would have been drastically cut short..

the problem here is that Apollo didnt encounter any solar storms that would warrant them to cut the mission short. there was one, but that was inbetween missions..

also, you keep trying to say they dont have evidence for this or evidence for that.. have you noticed that ALL of your claims have no evidence?? where as the claims that they make has raw data to back up their claims (apparently you say its not evidence)

you have NO raw data that is capable of backing up your claims, you have mere speculation and conjecture at the very best.

if you believe they are making these claims without any evidence.. and you want to use their claims as your evidence, what does that make your claims?

originally posted by: onebigmonkey

In a different space craft going through different parts of the VAB. You do understand this right?

No, that goes for ANY spacecraft, and for ANY trajectory that will allow humans to safely through the VAB.

Main reason why NASA sent the two probes into the VAB - to know how, or even if, we can send humans safely through the VAB, beyond.

The probes serve many other purposes, sure. Unmanned craft will benefit from the studies, and much more. In fact, we've already gained more knowledge of the VAB from the probes than all the decades before it did. Which means, we knew diddly-squat about the VAB environment, back in the Apollo-era....to put it mildly.

The Apollo-era 'experts' believed that the VAB environment was a very slow, waxing/waning region of space.

Today, we know those 'experts' were...not experts, at all. We assumed these people knew (almost) everything about the subject. Such 'experts' believed they could blow a hole right through the VAB, by blasting it to smithereens with nukes!

To you, they had other reasons for nuking the VAB, but my point remains - the people we consider 'experts' of our day, often reveal themselves later as complete fools.... perhaps in just a few years time, perhaps in a few decades, or only when many centuries have since passed.

The truth is often revealed only after years of progress, as in these two cases (noted above)...


Apollo will also be revealed, it is inevitable. Don't say you weren't told about it, if you (and I) are still around to see that woeful day.

originally posted by: turbonium1

Main reason why NASA sent the two probes into the VAB - to know how, or even if, we can send humans safely through the VAB, beyond.

The probes serve many other purposes, sure. Unmanned craft will benefit from the studies, and much more. In fact, we've already gained more knowledge of the VAB from the probes than all the decades before it did. Which means, we knew diddly-squat about the VAB environment, back in the Apollo-era....to put it mildly.

so even though NASA has given the main purpose of the Van allen probes as:

º Discover which processes -- singly or in combination -- accelerate and
transport the particles in the radiation belt, and under what conditions.

º Understand and quantify the loss of electrons from the radiation belts.

º Determine the balance between the processes that cause electron
acceleration and those that cause losses.

º Understand how the radiation belts change in the context of geomagnetic
storms.

which is studying how solar activity affects the VAB..

however, the real main purpose of the van allen probes is "to know how, or even if, we can send humans safely through the VAB, beyond." all because you say so and everyone must listen to you.

a reply to: ignorant_ape

It's really too bad that Putin won't send up a circumlunar orbital missions that would break the Russian Glass Ceiling and end all speculation about the deadly earth radiation belts. Even if he didn't land on the moon it would be a huge propaganda victory. He's got the rockets and the capsules. Who would want to stop Putin from getting to the moon?

originally posted by: choos
yes he is, he was not talking about the challenges of shielding humans, which is what you were trying to establish.

He said we have to resolve those problems before we can send people through the VAB, which is what I wanted to establish. And what I didestablish.

originally posted by: choos
are you sure?? i suppose you have some evidence of this??

did you know one single electron or charged particle can affect electronics?? which can lead to minor damage to complete failure

are you suggesting that a single electron can kill a human??

Shielding humans from deep space radiation, or any other hazard/problem within the deep space environment, is FAR, FAR more difficult to resolve than shielding electronics...without a doubt.

Radiation has both short-term effects, and long-term (lifetime) effects, for humans, Both effects must be fully understood before knowing how to shield humans. Radiation has a short-term effect on electronics, but (by and large) it has NO long-term effects.

Humans have far more value than electronics, there is no comparison between protecting a human life and protecting a non-living computer
If a human dies in space, we cannot replicate him. If an electronic component is fried in space, we CAN replace it with a duplicate component. Obviously, humans are much more precious to shield from harm than computer chips are. (If you are a normal human, that is, not an evil, war-mongering, money-lending banker scumbag!)

Another point - I've shown you they keep revising the shielding requirements for humans in GCR radiation studies, greater and greater shielding is required over and over the years. That shows they do NOT know what is actually needed to shield humans in deep space. It is MUCH more complex to figure out what adequate shielding is for humans in deep space than it is for electronics.

Last point - we have many unmanned craft in deep space, and with electronics on board, which (in general) have been able to function in this environment, for years! We have no humans in deep space, obviously.


How do you not understand any of this?

originally posted by: choos

if thats a problem why dont you see a problem in your inability to back up your claims that GCR's would be deadly in as little as 6 days??

Because I didn't make such a claim, you made it up.

originally posted by: choos

if the claim has no evidence to back it up, how do you think they were able to estimate the dosage received by the astronauts if they dont have any data to back it up?? the very next sentence gives you references:

In terms of hazard to crewmen in the heavy, well-shielded command module,
even the largest solar-particle event on record (November 12, 1960) would not have
caused any impairment of crewmember functions or ability of the crewmen to complete
their mission safely. It is estimated that within the command module during this event
the crewmen would have received a dose of 60 to 100 rads to their skin and 10 to 30 rads
to their blood-forming organs (bone and spleen) (refs. 4 and 5).

A "well-shielded command module", now that's a good one!!

Why don't you tell me exactly what materials they used in the command module to make it so "well-shielded"? I can't wait to hear all about it!.....

Oh, right, - iirc, at that time, they also believed that aluminum was an adequate shielding material for a manned spacecraft against any deep space radiation, including GCR's.

They also believed the VAB were slow-moving, waxing and waning, at the time, not the unpredictable, instantly changing environment it ACTUALLY is, that becomes highly energized with radiation in seconds.


But go ahead, please...

originally posted by: choos
protection against solar activity has always been an issue.. Apollo astronauts would have survived, but their mission would have been drastically cut short..

They said it would not impair their safely completing the mission, though. It seems you disagree with NASA's claim that their mission would be completed, and not impaired, under such a scenario...so why do you dispute NASA's claim?

originally posted by: choos
also, you keep trying to say they dont have evidence for this or evidence for that.. have you noticed that ALL of your claims have no evidence?? where as the claims that they make has raw data to back up their claims (apparently you say its not evidence)

you have NO raw data that is capable of backing up your claims, you have mere speculation and conjecture at the very best.

The claim about aluminum intensifying GCR radiation is THEIR OWN CLAIM. I've told you that over and over, but you don't grasp this FACT, so I'm telling you yet again. IT IS THEIR CLAIM, NOT MINE.

They do not have raw data on this, because the only way to get raw data for it would be to put humans into deep space, in an aluminum spacecraft, measure the GCR radiation before the aluminum, outside the craft, and measure the GCR radiation inside the craft, after it has fragmented into smaller particles, which have become more intense, more hazardous to humans, than the original particles were, outside of the craft.

That's the easy part. Next, they have to assess the effects of GCR fragmentation on the crew, upon their return to Earth. Both for short-term effects, and for long-term effects, which means the astronauts must be monitored for the effects over the rest of their lives, perhaps 50 years or so.

They probably wouldn't get any volunteers, if they ever wanted to try it, first of all.

They'd have to vary the missions in duration, from a few days, to a year, or longer, in order to get the entire spectrum of data
and variables measured properly. Then repeat the missions, to confirm their original measurements. If the second set of data is not similar, they' have to run more missions, and see if it still conflicts. If it does, they'd need more missions, until the conflict is resolved. Monitor every astronaut from day one, every week, over a year, then twice a year, or annually, for the next 50 years. After they all have died, they can compile all their data together, to compare and contrast each and every one of the various factors.

No such data exists, as you should now realize, because they can't actually GET this data.

But they have studied what aluminum does when GCR radiation contacts it - the radiation goes through the aluminum, and fragments into many more smaller particles, which are more hazardous to humans than before going through the aluminum.

They DON'T KNOW how much more hazardous it is to humans after the fragmentation, because to measure the effects, to know exactly how much more hazardous it is with aluminum, requires a crew in an aluminum craft, going into deep space, and back to Earth, and then the effects of the GCR radiation can be measured, both in short-term, and in long-term, to get this data.

But no humans have done this, so no data can be obtained.

edit on 21-3-2015 by turbonium1 because: (no reason given)

originally posted by: SayonaraJupiter
Even if he didn't land on the moon it would be a huge propaganda victory.

Sure it would....

"Today Russia did for the first time what the Americans did 47 years ago, this is a huge victory for Russia we are catching up fast with the Americans, once again we have shown socialism is superior to capitalism"!

originally posted by: turbonium1

He said we have to resolve those problems before we can send people through the VAB, which is what I wanted to establish. And what I didestablish.

send people through the VAB using Orion!!!

he is saying that they need to make sure that Orion's electronics can withstand the high radiation environment of the VAB so that humans can use Orion without it failing..

you are trying to establish that they are using Orion to find a shielding that is good at protecting humans within the VAB.

Shielding humans from deep space radiation, or any other hazard/problem within the deep space environment, is FAR, FAR more difficult to resolve than shielding electronics...without a doubt.

for long term missions yes.. one concept you have to this date completely failed to understand is EXPOSURE TIME and how it is important.

Radiation has both short-term effects, and long-term (lifetime) effects, for humans, Both effects must be fully understood before knowing how to shield humans. Radiation has a short-term effect on electronics, but (by and large) it has NO long-term effects.

radiation has no long-term effects?? radiation can and will make electronic components completely useless.. now, say you are a month away from earth and GCR's just so happens to cause the malfunction of all your life support systems.. how are you going to replace them before the occupants die within a day?

Humans have far more value than electronics, there is no comparison between protecting a human life and protecting a non-living computer
If a human dies in space, we cannot replicate him. If an electronic component is fried in space, we CAN replace it with a duplicate component. Obviously, humans are much more precious to shield from harm than computer chips are. (If you are a normal human, that is, not an evil, war-mongering, money-lending banker scumbag!)

what is keeping the humans alive in space?? oh thats right the electronics..

Another point - I've shown you they keep revising the shielding requirements for humans in GCR radiation studies, greater and greater shielding is required over and over the years. That shows they do NOT know what is actually needed to shield humans in deep space. It is MUCH more complex to figure out what adequate shielding is for humans in deep space than it is for electronics.

GCR levels are very very low why do you continue to ignore this basic fact? it is no where close to killing astronauts within 14 days let alone 6 days as you want to believe.

Last point - we have many unmanned craft in deep space, and with electronics on board, which (in general) have been able to function in this environment, for years! We have no humans in deep space, obviously.

How do you not understand any of this?

because electronics that are NOT required to support human life can be TURNED OFF.. electronics that is required to support human life is required to be on AT ALL TIMES and is required to be have complete confidence on its reliability, you are putting your life on the reliability of the electronics..
or do you think that maybe we could just turn a human being off and back on like electronic equipment??

Because I didn't make such a claim, you made it up.

not your claim??
you are of the belief that GCR's would make ALL Apollo lunar missions impossible am i correct?? perhaps you want to change your mind??

note: the shortest Apollo lunar mission was a touch over 6 days..

A "well-shielded command module", now that's a good one!!

Why don't you tell me exactly what materials they used in the command module to make it so "well-shielded"? I can't wait to hear all about it!.....

Oh, right, - iirc, at that time, they also believed that aluminum was an adequate shielding material for a manned spacecraft against any deep space radiation, including GCR's.

But go ahead, please...

are you aware of what they would do during a solar storm that was directed at them?? they would orient the Command module to point the heatshield at the sun..

perhaps you arent aware that the command module has an entire service module attached to it on the side with the heatshield??
do you have any idea what the service module contained???
all the liquid oxygen and hydrogen??
all the propellants??
all of the meterial from the service module??
the several inches of material from the heatshield?
all the insulation from the command module??
all the equipment inside the command module?
the air within the command module?
the clothing the astronauts are wearing?

oh no but you know better.. you know that all the particles from a major solar storm will completely ignore everything and ONLY interact with aluminium and the astronauts

They said it would not impair their safely completing the mission, though. It seems you disagree with NASA's claim that their mission would be completed, and not impaired, under such a scenario...so why do you dispute NASA's claim?

you think im disputing their claim??? if that is true then you obviously believe there is only one level of severity for a solar storm..

NASA said according to the solar event on Nov 12 1960, it would not have caused impairment to the crewman and their ability to complete their mission safely.. 10-30 rads they might have shown mild radiation sickness.. NOT IMMEDIATE DEATH..

im saying in the event that a solar storm is severe enough (not this particular event) to warrant shortening the mission in order to have the astronauts treated back on earth.. understand yet?? not all solar storms are the same..

The claim about aluminum intensifying GCR radiation is THEIR OWN CLAIM. I've told you that over and over, but you don't grasp this FACT, so I'm telling you yet again. IT IS THEIR CLAIM, NOT MINE.

i grasp the fact.. i also grasp the fact that even though aluminium makes GCR's worse, the dose is still very very low.. something that you continue to fail to grasp or deliberately ignore.

They do not have raw data on this

they have raw data of the level of dose it was also collected from the mars curiosity mission as well as the chandrayaan lunar mission.. and it was shown the dose from GCR's is very very very low.. aluminium intensifying very very very low to very very low..

that is what they are able to show.. you cant even show that aluminium will intensify GCR's from very very very low to high..
and if they dont have data on what GCR's can do to humans why do you believe that very very very low levels of GCR's can and will kill humans??

No such data exists, as you should now realize, because they can't actually GET this data.

and yet somehow you KNOW for a fact that it is deadly when exposed to it for about 6 days?

originally posted by: choos

originally posted by: turbonium1

Main reason why NASA sent the two probes into the VAB - to know how, or even if, we can send humans safely through the VAB, beyond.

The probes serve many other purposes, sure. Unmanned craft will benefit from the studies, and much more. In fact, we've already gained more knowledge of the VAB from the probes than all the decades before it did. Which means, we knew diddly-squat about the VAB environment, back in the Apollo-era....to put it mildly.

so even though NASA has given the main purpose of the Van allen probes as:

º Discover which processes -- singly or in combination -- accelerate and
transport the particles in the radiation belt, and under what conditions.

º Understand and quantify the loss of electrons from the radiation belts.

º Determine the balance between the processes that cause electron
acceleration and those that cause losses.

º Understand how the radiation belts change in the context of geomagnetic
storms.

which is studying how solar activity affects the VAB..

however, the real main purpose of the van allen probes is "to know how, or even if, we can send humans safely through the VAB, beyond." all because you say so and everyone must listen to you.

Do you even realize that if NASA said the actual, main reason for sending probes into the VAB, was to understand how, and if, humans might one day be able to safely fly through the belts, NASA would essentially be saying that Apollo couldn't have gone through the VAB, and didn't go through the VAB, which they'd have to in order to fly to the moon, so the moon landings were a hoax? Not a chance.

Simply consider the timeline -

In 2001, they announced a plan to 'return' man to the moon, by 2018, later by 2020.

The probes were launched after they announced this plan, in 2012, and the project was to end 2 years later, which is a few years BEFORE they planned to go to the moon, in 2018/2020.

So the timeline fits perfectly within their plans to go to the moon.

That's quite a remarkable coincidence, is it not? Not.

Add the fact we didn't even know how the VAB even behaved until the probes, as well.

Add the fact a NASA engineer said there are problems the probes will need to help them to resolve, before they can attempt to send people through the region. The main purpose of the probes is to understand the problems involved with a manned flight traversing the region. NASA lists those points which must be understood, before taking the next step, to go to the moon.

THAT is the actual 'main purpose' of the probes, without a doubt.

The list is the path towards understanding the VAB, required in reaching for their TRUE goal, main purpose