Moon Landings Faked? (and all other space mission fakery)

[SpeedFreek]

When considering the ravings of a madman there is little to be gained taking every sentence he utters and dissecting it with logic - you will never convince him of his madness.

Why are we still talking about the radiation when Van Allen himself said it is a nonsense to think it would be fatal to the astronauts?

 

[Quantum11]

Great, so you too can post unrelated links. This is a common theme among some unscientific posters here... :roll: :lol:

Talk about "hand-waving"!!

The links were placed there for those who wish to begin to learn about the true nature of space, how we are protected from the deadly radiation in space by our planets ionosphere, magnetosphere, and radiation belts.

You, however, can continue being ignorant if you wish. Just go back to sleep and keep dreaming your Apollo Fairy Tale dreams.

 

[Quantum11]

When considering the ravings of a madman there is little to be gained taking every sentence he utters and dissecting it with logic - you will never convince him of his madness.

Why are we still talking about the radiation when Van Allen himself said it is a nonsense to think it would be fatal to the astronauts?

You would be much more impressive if you posted Van Allens original research findings about the Van Allen radiation belts which he called a sea of DEADLY RADIATION, rather than the statement he was forced to make after the FOX program educated the general public to the radiation belts.

Or you can join Wayne in his Apollo Fairy Tale dreams for the rest of your life.

I guess being popular is worth being ignorant eh?

 

[MeteorWayne]

If we took a poll here at SDC of who is ignorant, you certainly would come out in the top 5

 

[cosmored]

Are any pro-Apollo people going to address my last post?

Here's some stuff about Van Allen.
http://www.buzzcreek.com/grade-a/MOON/articles1.htm
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f2rotplZn0g

 

[ZenGalacticore]

Are any pro-Apollo people going to address my last post?

No. But I'll address you.

No one that I know of is "pro-Apollo" or "anti-Apollo". It was the program named such to send men to the Moon. It happened. Get over it. Accept it. It's not a political movement to be "pro" or "con" about. It's not, in hindsight, even that big of a deal today. The Moon is only 200,000 miles away. Whoopi!

And serious radiation hazards aren't likely to happen within 9 days of venturing beyond Earth's protective magnetosphere and Van Allen belts. Get that through your skull. In fact, during the entire Apollo program, IIRC, the Sun was at a low cycle in flare and coronal activity.

Please, just go away. Go to some site that believes that the world (Earth, ie) is going to end in 2012 because of "galactic alignment" because the Myans said so. Go to a site that believes that extra-terrestrial intelligences are landing in your grandmother's backyard every Friday night.


And take your BS links and all the inane youtube videos that others of your ilk keep posting here and go visit with those ETI's that you believe travel across lightyears even though the likes of you simultaneously believe that man can't travel across a few paltry, 200,000 miles to his very near natural satellite.

Instead of wasting time and space here, why don't you take a road trip down to the Space Coast, go visit all the NASA folks down there, and spout your bogus, paranoid delusions to the real people involved in the American space program.

You hoaxers would try to posit that the Renaissance, Protestant Reformation, American Revolution, Civil War, and Birth of Industrialism never happened either because you weren't alive when those awakenings and movements occurred.

 

[MeteorWayne]

No, the issues have been addressed dozens of times. And you've proven nothing, just posted other's links.

Here's some links for YOU to refute:

http://www.clavius.org/envradintro.html

http://www.clavius.org/envrad.html

See, I can post links too!

 

[Smersh]

... And take your BS links and all the inane youtube videos that others of your ilk keep posting here ...

 

[CommonMan]

Will I get banned if I say Forest Gump quote to all these stupid, people that are only trying to start sh_t. Stupid is, as stupid does. They need to grow up. Most all of them really know we went to the moon, and only trying to get attention.

 

[a_lost_packet_]

Are any pro-Apollo people going to address my last post?

Thanks!

Whew!

.. oh, wait a sec..

That wasn't your LAST post, was it? ... Dang.

But, if you must have it addressed:

You would be much more impressive if you posted Van Allens original research findings about the Van Allen radiation belts which he called a sea of DEADLY RADIATION, rather than the statement he was forced to make after the FOX program educated the general public to the radiation belts.

If he made such a claim, he was wrong. It's that simple. The man is not God, ya know.

Or you can join Wayne in his Apollo Fairy Tale dreams for the rest of your life.

Thanks! But, I don't need your permission.

I guess being popular is worth being ignorant eh?

Spoken almost like a true authority on ignorance.

In the Apollo Believers Club, we have quarterly parties, an annual cotillion, two informal luncheons and get 10% discounts at Denny's along with two free Superbowl tickets each year. Oh, and each year we get an honorary writeup in our periodical of choice along with an awards ceremony hosted by NASA, the CIA and the most Noble Mystical Brotherhood of Brother Bubba. (The guy who invented malt beer.) Don't worry about any of that, though. You won't be invited.

 

[SpeedFreek]

I equate moon landing deniers with holocaust deniers.

 

[cosmored]

No, the issues have been addressed dozens of times. And you've proven nothing, just posted other's links.

Here's some links for YOU to refute:

http://www.clavius.org/envradintro.html

http://www.clavius.org/envrad.html

See, I can post links too!

Jay Windley and the rest of those pro-Apollo posters at Clavius just assume the official data on space radiation provided by NASA is the real data. If NASA is going to fake moon missions, it's going to publish data that are consistent with what they did. Therefore, we have to assume that the data they make public may be bogus and can't just assume it's real.

I know that Van Allen said it was safe to go throught the belts in his later days. The theory is that he started working for NASA and had to modify his opinion.
http://www.buzzcreek.com/grade-a/MOON/articles1.htm
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f2rotplZn0g

This also doesn't make the anomalies in the video and still pictures go away.

Are any pro-Apollo people going to address my last post?
---------------------
No. But I'll address you.

What I asked was a perfectly legitimate question. Here it is again.

The official NASA position on the Chinese spacewalk is that it was real.

Look at the way the flag waves at the thirty second mark in this video.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MvpPknmHGAM

That's what happens when flags are in moving gas or liquid.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q0hu2fgoa6g&feature=fvw

If you think that flag was moving that way in a vacuum, tell us what the force was that made it wave the way it would in a medium.

NASA says the Chinese spacewalk was real and the evidence shows it wasn't. If you pro-Apollo people aren't sophists, but truth-seekers, you'll address this issue.

Just so it doesn't get buried, there's a partial summary of hoax evidence on page 16. It's the 13th post from the top.
(see the stuff about space radiation)

 

[Mee_n_Mac]

Great, so you too can post unrelated links. This is a common theme among some unscientific posters here... :roll: :lol:

Talk about "hand-waving"!!

The links were placed there for those who wish to begin to learn about the true nature of space, how we are protected from the deadly radiation in space by our planets ionosphere, magnetosphere, and radiation belts.

You, however, can continue being ignorant if you wish. Just go back to sleep and keep dreaming your Apollo Fairy Tale dreams.

We are indeed protected. Alas the only ignorance here is being demonstrated by you. You've yet to list how much deadly radiation was present during the Apollo missions. What were the measured levels of ionizing radiation ? Were there energetic particles emitted and what was their "strength" and density ?

Here's a question for you, I had an X-ray some years ago. That's radiation. Why am I not dead ? Aren't x-rays deadly ? This answer directly pertains to why the astronauts aren't dead as well.

ps - still waiting for the promised trouncing ...

 

[Moses3]

Moon landings fake?? I guess the moon is fake also. Conspiracy theories have been around since, well TV. Guess the moon rocks are fake also.

 

[Mee_n_Mac]

NASA says the Chinese spacewalk was real and the evidence shows it wasn't. If you pro-Apollo people aren't sophists, but truth-seekers, you'll address this issue.

Just so it doesn't get buried, there's a partial summary of hoax evidence on page 16. It's the 13th post from the top.
(see the stuff about space radiation)

I looked at your vid of the flag waving. It didn't (to me) look like anything in air or water. I can't say it was definitely in a low G vacuum. To me the flag seemed to made of a rubber-like sheet that flexed and unflexed unlike a normal cloth flag. I might well expect something like this for a spacewalk. I also saw a vid of the so called bubbles. One of the bubbles was clearly a piece of paper. I also looked carefully at the movement of the hooks at the end of the tethers. They most certainly did not behave as I would have expected from something in a water tank. So where's your proof ?

Do you think the Space Shuttle didn't go into space ? Is the ISS not up there ? Other than trying to play a game of gotcha what does the Chinese effort say about Apollo ? Do you believe spaceflight, by anyone, is impossible ?

BTW 2: I had but a quickie look at the vid about radiation. To me it's sophistry to cherry pick the passages indicating that the VAB have places where the radiation levels are high and imply that that's where the Apollo flight path went. We know where the Apollo missions went (even if it's only where NASA claims). Why don't you and your fellow hoaxsters derive a dosage based upon that flight path (and time) ?

 

[cosmored]

I looked at your vid of the flag waving. It didn't (to me) look like anything in air or water.

You didn't address the issue of the rippling. Compare the movement of the two flags.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MvpPknmHGAM
(30 second time mark)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q0hu2fgoa6g&feature=fvw

I also saw a vid of the so called bubbles. One of the bubbles was clearly a piece of paper.

Tell us the exact time mark of the video so we can see what you're saying.
http://es.youtube.com/watch?v=NVbBFwdmldA
http://es.youtube.com/watch?v=kG4Z_r38ZDE

In the second video there is a piece of paper. I want to make sure you're not referring to that.

I also looked carefully at the movement of the hooks at the end of the tethers. They most certainly did not behave as I would have expected from something in a water tank.

The evidence is the buoyant safety cables. The hooks were never presented as evidence.

So where's your proof ?

The proof is the bubbles, the buoyant safety cables, and the rippling flag–so far you haven't actually addressed any of this. You've just tap danced around it.

Do you think the Space Shuttle didn't go into space ? Is the ISS not up there ?

I never said that. I've seen footage of zero-G that was too long to have been faked in a diving plane so it must have been taken in low earth orbit.

Other than trying to play a game of gotcha what does the Chinese effort say about Apollo ?

The official NASA position on the Chinese spacewalk is that it was real. This is about NASA's credibility.

BTW 2: I had but a quickie look at the vid about radiation. To me it's sophistry to cherry pick the passages indicating that the VAB have places where the radiation levels are high and imply that that's where the Apollo flight path went. We know where the Apollo missions went (even if it's only where NASA claims). Why don't you and your fellow hoaxsters derive a dosage based upon that flight path (and time) ?

What I did was post all the alternative info on space radiation that I've found over time. I'm not putting that forth as proof in and of itself of faked moon missions. I'm putting it forth to show there is a scenario which made faking the missions necessary. The only people who can say for sure they know the real data on space radiation are people with high security clearances. I have no idea what the real data are.

In this series some people with good credentials are quoted saying that space radiation is worse than NASA says it is. I don't remember the details or the time marks. Sorry.
http://www.youtube.com/results?search_q ... omaly&aq=f

 

[Mee_n_Mac]

The proof is the bubbles, the buoyant safety cables, and the rippling flag–so far you haven't actually addressed any of this. You've just tap danced around it.

The official NASA position on the Chinese spacewalk is that it was real. This is about NASA's credibility.

What I did was post all the alternative info on space radiation that I've found over time. I'm not putting that forth as proof in and of itself of faked moon missions. I'm putting it forth to show there is a scenario which made faking the missions necessary. The only people who can say for sure they know the real data on space radiation are people with high security clearances. I have no idea what the real data are.

Let me take the 3 points above in order :

1) I did address the flag ripples ... I didn't see any in the Chinese flag that looked like the wind driven US flag. What I did see was motion that was consistent with what I'd expect from a flag of some sort waved in a low G vacuum. Might this also look the same as a flag filmed under water and speeded up ? Perhaps, but it just doesn't have the same damping I've seen with sailcloth under water so I remain unconvinced. The "bouyant" cables don't look bouyant to me. If they truely were bouyant you'd see them headed for the surface constantly. They don'tdo that. Look at bbhenbb's vid at about the 3:01 mark. The tether has an angle at the joint to the clip and that angle isn't in the same direction as the astronaut, who must also be bouyant. That angle also changes as the astronaut moves. A bouyant tether would always be going up. As for the bubbles ... one clearly isn't, the others I can't say either way. Would paper act the way we see it if it were under water ? To have bubbles in a tank you have to answer this question yes. The only question raised in the vid that has any validity to me is why debris is still exitting the hatch so long after decompression.

2) As to NASA's credibility ... no it really doesn't address that, at least wrt Apollo. NASA today could be as duped as I could be. It's not like they have a team of people funded to pick apart China's spacewalk. That would fall into the NSA's lap. Moreover let's say NASA and everyone else is lying about the Chinese success. Does that mean NASA 40+ years ago under a different administration was lying then ? It's a whole new set of people.

3) Why would anyone need a security clearance to access VAB map data ? Just Google it yourself. When people mention security clearances it only tells me that they have no idea how Govt security and clearances work in real life. Moreover if you have no idea what the "real" data looks like, why are you even bringing it up ? It's like saying IF there are Mars men on the Moon AND they don't want us there ... then that's a (potential) reason we didn't go. To have any credible argument you'd need to 1'st establish that there were Mars men on the Moon and that they said don't land here. Only then does the reasoning "fly".

I don't have the time nor inclination to waste it watching more of JW's nonsense. His ability to cherry pick passages and misinterpret them (deliberately IMO) is well established. NASA was well aware that radation was an obstacle to overcome. They choose the flight path they did to minimize exposure during VAB transit. Lot of people understand that longer duration missions outside of LEO is going to require more than was done during Apollo. But that doesn't mean Apollo wasn't possible. IOW I can have an x-ray of my leg but what the docs won't do is take x-ray after x-ray of the same place in a short period of time. The total exposure, with no healing time inbetween, would be bad.

 

[tom_hobbes]

BRAAAAAAAIIINNNNSSSSS

Bravo Mac!

cosmored:

There is no 'issue.'

I too fail to understand this silly Chinese flag business.

The motion of the flag is entirely consistant with zero G and the lighting of the scene. The flag at all times follows the motion of the stick it is attached to including when it comes to rest in several different positions visibly inconsistant with gravity acting upon it from any one direction.

If you would take the time to observe your own clip you may notice only one wave propagates through the Chinese flag at any one moment in direct relation to the motion of the stick, until the direction of motion is altered by the stick to which it is attached, because there is no other medium including water acting upon it.

In contrast, the rippling of the US flag has multiple waves propagating through it in multiple directions, because it is being acted upon by movements of air. If you had developed the ability to observe you could appreciate this for yourself.

Frankly it's embarrassing to have to break it down like this for you. You should have the ability to distinguish these different kinds of motion intuitively from a very early age.

This clip is possible to fake but you'd have to put the actors in zero G, light them consistant with orbit or your proposed scene, and then composite all the elements together. No simple task. But that is not the argument you present and it is clearly not the case here. The motion of the flag is entirely consistant with zero G.

 

[BurgerB75]

Seriously. It would seem to be easier to actually go there than create this elaborate hoax. :lol:

Oh well, as long as the people that are important to me know what we accomplished I'm a happy man. Had my oldest daughter watch The Right Stuff and Apollo 13 a few months ago with me. She loved them and has been on a science kick lately! Score!!

Have you broke the news to your daughter about the innocent little Santa lie? You know they guy that defies gravity with help from his antler buddies, high on magic dust? Well, wait until she figures out why NASA used a mythical gods name, for it's mythical missions....

You really are a bitter shell of a human aren't you? If I were you I'd put down the crack pipe, step outside and get some fresh air.

 

[frodo1008]

The Apollo project went to the moon!

There are now pictures of the sites, every scientist that has ever handled the moon rocks fully believes them to be from the moon.

Even the Myth busters have proven to their satisfaction that it could not have been faked in any way.

There is a site totally devoted to debunking the "moon Hoax" types, go there. it is called Bad Astronomy.com.

On top of it all these "fake moon types" are calling some of the finest men this country has ever produced out and out liars.

Instead of course they are believing such a paragon of truthful virtue as FOX NEWS instead (which of course, we all know would never lie or even stretch the truth if it could mean better ratings and higher charges for advertising). It would be really, really funny if it was not so sad!

The reflectors that are used by astronomers to bounce off lasers to get very precise readings of the distance from the Earth to the Moon could not have been placed on the moon by any other agency that human beings, in other words the Apollo Astronauts. And that is something that the "Moon Hoax" do not even try to find out about, let alone effectively refute.

These are people that have for the most part never flown anything more complicated than paper airplanes, calling some of the greatest pilots in history liars and cheats!

I am far too disgusted to continue. :x :x :x

 

[Yuri_Armstrong]

Besides, you can't judge NASA's credibility based on a Chinese spacewalk. Even if they really did fake it what makes you think NASA would take the time and effort to investigate it and prove that it was real? To satisfy your accusations?

NASA is a credible source used by all international science conventions and organizations. If somebody wants to know something about Astronomy, aeronautics, physics, cosmology, astronautics, almost any science/engineering field they are the ones to go to.

 

[kk434]

I think that todays state of NASA's human spaceflight is fueling the hoax accusations. Back in the 60's they went from no human flight to lunar landing in 8 (eight)! ! ! ! ! years. Today it takes 8 years just to set up a plan, another 8 to build the prototype and finally in 25 years they can land on the moon. The idea that it was done back then is mindboggling for young people and they have a hard time beliveing it was at all possible.

 

[BurgerB75]

The biggest differences though is that the amount of public interest back then was also much higher than there is today and the government was a bit looser with the purse stings. Giving someone 100 million at one go to design, develop and fly a spacecraft is quite a bit different than giving them 100 million spread out over 5 years (the amount is just a number by the way).

 

[Yuri_Armstrong]

No, the issues have been addressed dozens of times. And you've proven nothing, just posted other's links.

Here's some links for YOU to refute:

http://www.clavius.org/envradintro.html

http://www.clavius.org/envrad.html

See, I can post links too!

Jay Windley and the rest of those pro-Apollo posters at Clavius just assume the official data on space radiation provided by NASA is the real data. If NASA is going to fake moon missions, it's going to publish data that are consistent with what they did. Therefore, we have to assume that the data they make public may be bogus and can't just assume it's real.

I know that Van Allen said it was safe to go throught the belts in his later days. The theory is that he started working for NASA and had to modify his opinion.

I'm sorry but this is just ridiculous. NASA has been cited by third party and international organizations for decades. Most of my science textbooks have cited something from NASA. NASA TV is the best channel for science information unlike Discovery and History which peddle the pseudoscientific nonsense that you seem to believe in.

There is no evidence that NASA was lying and hushed all of these people up.

There's one thing you have to adress: HOW did they leave all of that equipment on the moon that is still visible today? And the laser reflector which could ONLY have been placed by astronauts on an Apollo mission?

You also keep ignoring the fact that the astronauts did show some symptoms of radiation when they returned home. This should make it obvious they were exposed to space radiation, it just wasn't as fatal as you keep making it out to be.

 

[keeper96]

I saw an episode of mythbusters that busted most the hoaxers theories. CASE CLOSED NUTTERS!!!!!!!! :lol: mythbusters says we went to the moon.