Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 13

Thread: The Apollo Moon Missions Were Faked in a Studio

  1. #1

    The Apollo Moon Missions Were Faked in a Studio

    The evidence that the Apollo moon missions were faked in a studio is crushing. The US government can't censor the evidence that's on the internet but it can bury it with disinformation and obfuscation. If you enter "Apollo hoax" in Google, you'll find about fifteen pro-Apollo sites for every hoax site. I made a collection of some of the hoax evidence the government is trying to bury.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ymwE1sNm82Y
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gn6MTrin5eU
    (If these links don't work, do a YouTube search on "Apollo 15 flag waving")

    At the 2 minute 35 second mark of the video the flag is still. When the astronaut goes past it, it starts to move.

    There's an analysis of that here in this three part series.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zr76q...BF9062EF97A674

    http://www.youtube.com/results?searc...ad+horses&aq=f


    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I7yc2rVOs00

    The above video refutes this attempt by the government to mislead the public.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yhab86KoVjU

    -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    There's a noticeable difference in the body movements in these two clips.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wdMvQTNLaUE
    http://www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/a11/a11v.1101330.rm

    What I hypothesize is that a fifty percent slow-motion was used in Apollo 11 to simulate lunar gravity. Later, they improved their methods of simulating lunar gravity and started using a combination of slow-motion and support wires. The slow-motion in the later missions might not have been exactly half-speed. It might have been sixty five or seventy percent of natural speed. It looked better but it was inconsistent with Apollo 11 footage. The inconsistency is apparent.

    At around the 21 minute mark of this video the above footage from Apollo 11 can be seen played at double speed.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MIy8ZqqK5G8
    (If the above link doesn't work, do a YouTube search on "Conspiracy Theory : Did We Land on the Moon ?")

    It can also be seen in this video at around the 30 minute 40 second mark.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NHwzyqICYTM


    (The above video "A funny thing happened on the way to the moon" keeps going on and off-line. If the above link is dead, click here)
    http://www.google.es/search?q=a%20fu...&hl=es&tbm=vid

    It looks just like movement in earth gravity.
    --------------------------------
    When the footage from this clip is doubled, the movements look unnaturally fast.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wdMvQTNLaUE

    Here it is doubled.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G29WT2_y1-E

    When the Apollo 11 footage is doubled, the movements look natural. This makes it very clear that they used a simple fifty percent slow-motion to simulate lunar gravity in Apollo 11 and a faster slow-motion (around 67 percent according to Jarrah White's calculations) combined with wire supports in the later missions.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MW31fOWzY-E
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Watch how the corner of Collins' jacket moves in this clip.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6fqdB1b53jc
    (00:52 time mark)

    The corner of Collins' jacket swings back and forth the way it would in gravity.

    If the above link is dead, the footage can be seen here.
    http://www.veoh.com/watch/v17299829n...The+Little+Gem
    (17:40 time mark)

    It's necessary to download the "Veoh video player" to be able to see it. It's free.
    ----------

    Look at the corners of the jacket the woman astronaut is wearing in this clip.
    http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=TejsnPThmd4

    That is real zero-gravity and they behave quite differently.

    The movement of Collins' jacket corner is very different from that of the straps in this clip which is in zero-G.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1ofwzby1c7o
    (3:17 time mark)

    It looks the same as the movement of this guy's jacket corners in gravity.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DTNGNW5Evs4

    One possible explanation is that they were trying to fake zero-gravity in a diving plane and the plane wasn't diving fast enough at that point.
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    There is no blast crater under the lander.
    http://thoughtworld.files.wordpress....7/picture1.jpg

    That is discussed in this four part video series.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yEQNZQdJFtI

    -----------------------------------------------

    Look at the size of the reflection of the sun in the astronaut's visor at the beginning of this video.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wdMvQTNLaUE

    Now look at the reflection of the sun in the visor in the picture at the top of this page.
    http://www.sciencephotogallery.com/l...dia&xm=1694861

    It's pretty clear that the reflection in the Apollo astronaut's visor is that of a big light. Here's an article about that.
    http://www.aulis.com/sunsize.htm
    ---------------------

    At bottom of this page there's a picture of the astronaut's visor that has in it the reflection of what looks like some kind of studio light.
    http://www.aulis.com/jackstudies_9.html

    -----------------------------------------------
    Here's some evidence that they used wire supports to fake lunar gravity.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gjesg6ShxMU
    -----------------------------------------------

    The moon rocks are often presented as proof the missions were real. There are plausible explanations that would explain them.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kSIlgQhUi9A
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4AQQHTjeMkA

    http://www.geschichteinchronologie.c...arth-ENGL.html


    http://www.youtube.com/results?searc...Revisited&aq=f


    ------------------------------------------------------------------------

    People say the Soviets would have snitched. There are explanations for that too:
    http://www.youtube.com/results?searc...+cold+war&aq=f

    http://www.nardwuar.com/vs/bill_kaysing/index.html
    (excerpt)
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Well, why did they keep faking the Apollo flights, I still don't understand. Did the Soviet Union know it was faked? Why did they keep shut up if they knew it was faked? 'Cause a lot of people would think they kept the moon race going to prove the U.S. was better than the Soviet Union. If the Soviet Union knew, why did they let the U.S. get away with this?
    Well, I'll tell you - at the highest levels there is a coalition between governments. In other words, the Soviets said, if you won't tell on us - and they faked most of their space exploration flights - we won't tell on you. It's as simple as that. See, what Apollo is, is the beginning of the end of the ability of the government to hoodwink and bamboozle and manipulate the people. More and more people are becoming aware in the U.S. that the government is totally and completely public enemy number one.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    http://www.apfn.org/apfn/moon.htm
    (excerpt)
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The Soviets, with their own competing moon program and an intense economic and political and military rivalry with the USA, could be expected to have cried foul if the USA tried to fake a Moon landing. Theorist Ralph Rene responds that shortly after the alleged Moon landings, the USA silently started shipping hundreds of thousands of tons of grain as humanitarian aid to the allegedly starving USSR. He views this as evidence of a cover-up, the grain being the price of silence. (The Soviet Union in fact had its own Moon program).
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Everyone should read Chomsky's analysis of the cold war.
    http://www3.niu.edu/~td0raf1/history468/apr2304.htm
    (excerpt)
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    On the domestic front, the Cold War helped the Soviet Union entrench its military-bureaucratic ruling class in power, and it gave the US a way to compel its population to subsidise high-tech industry. It isn't easy to sell all that to the domestic populations. The technique used was the old stand-by-fear of a great enemy.
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    continued...

  2. #2
    ...continued

    It someone were to make a deathbed statement saying the moon missions were faked, the press would never report it as the press is controlled.
    http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Me...dia_watch.html
    http://www.youtube.com/results?searc...sky+media&aq=f
    http://www.youtube.com//watch?v=bbnxsPgcsH0

    Also, it would be downright dangerous for someone to come forward. Look what happened to these guys.
    http://es.youtube.com/watch?v=ZfYBJFPuiwE
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ipKyUVuQ2Uk

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bvay28lZiHU

    Science journals are controlled too.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7bAE7FGdNmA
    (added 8/24/13)

    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Here are some videos.
    http://www.youtube.com/results?searc...=f&gl=ES&hl=es
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A6MvcIs4OcQ
    http://es.youtube.com/watch?v=EQj-Mh__fRc
    http://www.thule.org/brains/moon.rm
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g2rfsy3Sd0c
    (8 parts)

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UmIWhzTzLn0

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wjzKb...15E9FD150981FC

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mRE7grId3sI
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OKj5fckUX-c
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qc2kijG8YdY
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kx3YcQhdDps
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ij9BHiaC4t0
    http://www.youtube.com/user/un4g1v3n1?feature=watch
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LouHGOEMmK0

    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    What Happened on the Moon" (documentary)
    http://www.google.es/search?q=what%2...ce=hp&tbm=vid#

    http://www.youtube.com/results?searc....0.dLZem8w-o0Q
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Here are some articles.
    http://www.nardwuar.com/vs/bill_kaysing/
    http://www.apfn.org/apfn/moon.htm
    http://www.aulis.com/skeleton.html
    http://erichufschmid.net/Interview-w...rt-Sibrel.html
    http://www.geocities.com/apollotruth/
    http://www.aulis.com/investigation.htm
    http://northerntruthseeker.blogspot....inking_24.html
    http://www.ufos-aliens.co.uk/cosmicapollo.html
    http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Moon_Hoax
    http://theconspiracyzone.podcastpeople.com/posts/28159
    http://www.erichufschmid.net/Apollo_NASA.html
    http://www.davesweb.cnchost.com/index.html
    (Wagging the Moondoggie)

    http://en.metapedia.org/wiki/Moon_Hoax

    Bill Kaysing's book-
    http://www.cluesforum.info/viewtopic.php?f=23&t=1477


    The astronauts look pretty nervous at the press conference.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-RcKLAo62Ro

    Here's a link to the entire conference.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zSk3xqMFKMw&feature=gv

    This keeps going on and offline so if this link is dead, try googling "Apollo 11 press conference".

    Their behavior look pretty suspicious here too.
    http://vimeo.com/24508433

    The main reason they had to fake it was probably space radiation. Here are some articles and videos I've found on the subject.

    http://www.geocities.com/apollotruth/
    (excerpt)
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    There is an old saying that "A liar needs a good memory". Nowhere is this more true than in the Apollo program. NASA tell lies to cover up previous lies, and other discrepancies uncovered by people investigating the Moon landings. Altering previous data, removing photographs, and retracting statements made, only re-enforces the evidence that NASA are on the run, and being forced into a corner to which they cannot escape. The actions of those under investigation makes the investigator more aware they are bluffing. The longer that person, or persons, who make the extravagant claims continue, the more lies they have to tell in order to counteract it, until it reaches the point where it becomes ridiculous. That point was passed in July 1999, when NASA officials were questioned about the Moon landings on television. They dodged the all important questions like a drifter dodges the heat.
    Many Apollo astronauts have long since died, as to have many of the original NASA officials involved in the scam, consequently current officials, who know that Apollo was a fake, have not quite got it right when talking openly in public. Perhaps the biggest slip of the tongue was made by NASA Chief Dan Goldin when interviewed by UK TV journalist Sheena McDonald in 1994. He said that mankind cannot venture beyond Earth orbit, 250 miles into space, until they can find a way to overcome the dangers of cosmic radiation. He must have forgot that they supposedly sent 27 astronauts 250,000 miles outside Earth orbit 36 years earlier.
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    two sets of radiation data
    http://hey_223.tripod.com/bulldogleb...oooo/id82.html
    (excerpt)
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    To prove his thesis, Rene tries to get certain solar data from NATIONAL
    OCEANIC & ATMOSPHERIC ADMINISTRATION, (NOAA) using clever techniques
    to
    disguise his true intentions, [i.e. to get true data on solar flares.] NOAA,
    unfortunately, proved to be as cagey as Rene in dodging the giving out of any
    really good DETAILS on this matter, [you know, where the devil resides.]
    Rene, seeing games being played, deduced that there must be two sets of data,
    one which is sent to scientists on the preferred list, and one sent to the
    likes of Rene as casual strangers. (p.125)
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    http://ocii.com/~dpwozney/apollo5.htm
    http://www.erichufschmid.net/MoreInf...Challenge.html
    http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/in...9659&hl=apollo

    These two are important
    ---------------------------
    http://www.buzzcreek.com/grade-a/MOON/articles1.htm
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f2rotplZn0g
    ---------------------------

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OKB5u_VTt6M
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pcytzf7PkRA
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J6DhY1NvmIc
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T1ltWMbHdDU
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mnckudD9oa8
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LiTzo3G_hvo
    ---------------------------
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dFiIR7hA1rM
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=toI1Xw9paW4
    ---------------------------
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9xlKooAbKpM
    (23 parts)
    ----------------------------------------------------------------
    http://theconspiracyzone.podcastpeople.com/posts/28159
    (excerpts)
    ---------------------------------------------

    continued...

  3. #3
    ...continued

    http://theconspiracyzone.podcastpeople.com/posts/28159
    (excerpts)
    ---------------------------------------------

    Q: Why do prominent astronomers like Sir Bernard Lovell and Patrick Moore support the Moon landings if they were faked?

    A: Scientists and astronomers around the globe know full well that the Moon missions were faked, but rely on NASA to gain access to the vital data beamed back to Earth from the Hubble space telescope. They cannot slag off NASA otherwise NASA would deprive them of this essential information, which they so much require.
    ---------------------------------------------
    Q: What about the vast number of people involved in Apollo, wouldnít someone have spoken out.

    A: Panís claim there were half a million people involved in the Apollo program, but that includes all the humble engineers working on machine parts in many companies around the globe. So if someone is making a part in some engineering factory in Seattle, and his boss tells him itís for the Apollo spacecraft, is that engineer proof the landings took place? No of course it is not proof, and even if that engineer knew they never made it to the Moon, he would still brag to his friends that he made a part that went to the Moon just to make him feel proud in some way or other. Parts for the Apollo program were made at many different factories around the globe. For example the laser reflector supposedly left on the Moon was manufactured in France. NASA collected the unit from the French company, and that was the last they saw of it. Itís probably stashed away in some archive at Langley, but one things for certain itís not on the Moon. Are those French engineers proof they landed on the Moon? No of course not, as very few, (probably less than 200 people), were actually involved in bringing the whole lot together, so as to minimize what was actually taking place. No need for any of them to speak out because (A) They are 100% patriotic to the USA, and would say nothing that would go against America, even if it were true. (B) They do not need millions of dollars to safeguard their future, as they have already received substantial amounts from NASA just to ďkeep mumĒ. Read comments from people who worked on the Apollo program in the APOLLO FEEDBACK section.

    ----------------------------------------------------------------

    The Chinese space walks were obviously faked in a water tank and NASA's official position is that the Chinese space walks were real.
    http://es.youtube.com/watch?v=NVbBFwdmldA
    http://es.youtube.com/watch?v=kG4Z_r38ZDE
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lBL98p0wZ7g
    http://en.epochtimes.com/n2/content/view/8332/
    http://www.theepochtimes.com/n2/content/view/5809/

    The pro-Apollo posters at the forums of both the "Clavius" and "Bad Astronomy" websites tap danced around the evidence that the Chinese space walk was faked because they have to agree with the official US government version and they can't say it was faked without looking silly. Here are the threads. They're hilarious.

    http://www.bautforum.com/showthread....alk-conspiracy
    http://apollohoax.proboards.com/inde...ay&thread=2206

    They pretty much destroyed the credibility of those two sites when they didn't seriously address the evidence.
    http://www.opposingdigits.com/forums...pic.php?t=1222

    It's pretty clear that they're government damage-control sites.

    Here's some good research if anyone wants to delve further.
    http://s1.zetaboards.com/LooseChange...=48603&t=51606

    On this thread there's a debate between Jarrah White and Jay Windley.
    http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0446557/.../133905495?p=1

    Jay Windley is the most famous pro-Apollo person on the internet.
    http://www.clavius.org/about.html

    Jarrah White is the main hoax-believer on the internet.
    http://www.youtube.com/results?searc...moonfaker&aq=f

    In this video Jarrah says he stopped posting in that debate because the moderator was deleting his posts.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xK9TXFQLjg4

    Jay Windley will only debate where the moderator will ride to his rescue when he's cornered.

    Here's some more stuff about Clavius and Bad Astronomy.
    http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showthread.php?t=125628

    They may have faked the Mars missions too. Do a YouTube search on "MarsFaker" or click on this link.
    http://www.youtube.com/results?searc...252l3.6.1l10l0

  4. #4
    Senior Member majicbar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Minneapolis. Minnesota
    Posts
    1,192
    Intellectual graffiti is intellectual terrorism. Social collapse begins when the fundamental truth of reality is questioned and despite the reality of the truth, substitutes of fiction come to be believed instead of the truth. A half dozen such terrorists can work to such ends when the truth is so technical that the common man cannot easily differentiate the difference between such fiction and reality. One has to question why these individuals work to such ends, is it the same mindlessness that drives those who "tag" walls and rail cars and other targets? I find this thread as such material. I do not question the intent of Cosmored, but I would wonder how this is believable and not seen for the intellectual graffiti which it is?

  5. #5
    I have watched those videos before and for the life of me, I cannot understand how their conclusions are what they are. For instance, the reflection off the astronaut's visor; the astronaut is moving, the sun is reflecting appropriately. Another video claims that the antennae on the astronaut's backpacks are actually wires used to support the astronauts because their suits are too heavy. Much of this information is meant to mislead for one reason or another.
    This isn't poetry, this is the language of reality.

  6. #6
    For instance, the reflection off the astronaut's visor; the astronaut is moving, the sun is reflecting appropriately.
    I can't see how his moving would make the reflection look any bigger.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wdMvQTNLaUE

    The link in post #1 had a picture of a space-walking astronaut with the reflection of the sun in the visor when I first found it. That picture is not longer there. I can't find the same picture but here are two others.
    http://spaceflight.nasa.gov/gallery/...s115e05753.jpg
    http://cache2.allpostersimages.com/p...le-mission.jpg

    When I compare the reflection of the sun in the Apollo astronaut's visor with those of the shuttle astronauts, the one in the Apollo astronaut's visor looks quite bigger.

    Watch how the flag moves at the 2:35 time mark of this clip.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gn6MTrin5eU

    This video shows that is starts moving before he got close enough to touch it.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oFMpmjEv9o0

    It moves the same way it would move in air.

    The flag in the vacuum chamber at the 00:50 time mark of this video...
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I7yc2rVOs00

    ...moves quite differently from the Apollo flag at the 1:50 time mark.

    In this video Collins' jacket corner bounces around the way it would in gravity when they were supposed to be halfway to the moon.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6fqdB1b53jc

    The Apollo record is filled with anomalies that show they were in a studio. I see no proof that they were on the moon. If they been on the moon, there wouldn't be any anomalies.

  7. #7
    I was in a hurry yesterday and forgot to deal with this issue.
    For instance, the reflection off the astronaut's visor; the astronaut is moving, the sun is reflecting appropriately. Another video claims that the antennae on the astronaut's backpacks are actually wires used to support the astronauts because their suits are too heavy.
    You're misrepresenting the hoax-believer position. They don't say the antennea are wires. They say there are both antennae and wires.

    Here are some videos that deal with this. Some were made by Apollo truthers and some were made by professional sophists.
    http://www.youtube.com/results?searc...be.r1L7izmnJPg

  8. #8
    This link from post #2 just went dead so I'm going to post the whole article as it's important info.
    http://www.buzzcreek.com/grade-a/MOON/articles1.htm

    --------------------------------------------------------

    Did NASA steal $30 Billion to Fake
    The Apollo Moon Landings?
    Home Paper Moon Page

    ARTICLE IN MEDIA BYPASS MAGAZINE, SEPT. 1997
    THE VAN ALLEN ENIGMA
    By Phylis and James Collier

    In the early 1950's, a 35-year-old State University of Iowa physics professor and some of his students were cruising the cold waters ofnorthern Canada and the Atlantic Ocean, sending a series ofrocket-carrying balloons- which they dubbed "rockoons" - 12 to 15 miles into space.

    They were trying to measure the nature of low-energy cosmic raysswirling around the earth. The experiments continued for five more years. Then, in 1958,Professor James Van Allen discovered his monster. Suddenly, his instrumentation warned of a giant beast of a thing, spewing enough deadly radiation counts to kill any human who ventured into its domain unprotected.

    Van Allen and his students weren't sure of the size, shape and texture of the monster, they just knew they had encountered an incredible phenomenon.

    Then, in l958, as part of the International Geophysical Year (a year in which men like James A. Van Allen were praised for exploring the realms of time and space) the young professor asked the U.S. military to send his experiments deeper into space, this time using a Geiger Counter to measure the intensity of the radiation. He further requested the most sophisticated rockets that would penetrate l00,000 miles into space.

    That's when the monster grew all encompassing. It appeared to surround the entire earth and extend out some 65,000 miles, maybe even 100,000 miles. The Geiger Counter confirmed that the region above the earth, and in the path of the rocket, was cooking with deadly radiation. That radiation was born from solar flares that would race through the universe and become trapped by the earth's magnetic field. A deadly mixture of protons and electrons.

    It was then that Van Allen realized the Aurora Borealis, the northern lights, was actually a visual manifestation of that tremendous energy from the sun. You could actually see the radiation swirling in a magnificent and deadly dance. His eventual finding of two such lethal radiation belts, put his name in the history books as the man who discovered the Van Allen Radiation Belts. There was an inner belt and an outer belt. The inner belt went from 40 degrees north and south of the Equator and was basically a doughnut surrounding the earth. Scientific experiments conducted by Van Allen and the military proved that belt was so deadly that no human could survive in its orbit. The outer belt was equally as destructive, and separated from the inner belt by an area of lesser radiation.

    Van Allen's conclusion was delivered in a speech to the Academy of Science in 1959. He warned future space travelers they would have to race through these two zones on their way to outer planets.

    "All manned space flight attempts must steer clear of these two belts of radiation until adequate means of safeguarding the astronauts has been developed" he said. Moreover, Van Allen advised they would have to be shielded with some extra layers of protection beyond that of the spacecraft itself. These findings were also published in Scientific American Magazine, March, 1959.

    Two years later, Van Allen updated his report in Space World Magazine, December, 1961. In brief, he reported that everything he had found in 1959 was still valid. It was also in that year that President John F. Kennedy told an assembled group of students and dignitaries at Rice University in Houston, that it was America's destiny to put a man on the moon by the end of the decade. With that statement, the space race become a political game, worth 30 billion in taxpayer dollars to the winners. National Aeronautic and Space Administration (NASA), which is part of the Department of Defense and the CIA, became the caretaker of Kennedy's dream.

    It was their job to build a spacecraft that would meet Van Allen's scientific requirements of safety through the radiation belts. Van Allen stated that the ship's skin, made of aluminum, would not be enough protection for the astronauts. Extra shielding of lead or another substance that would absorb the radiation would be needed. That, of course, posed the problem of weight. More weight created a booster problem. In other words, they would need a bigger rocket to carry a ship that was properly lined against radiation penetration. One of the most interesting of Van Allen's findings was that once protons and electrons hit the aluminum skin of the spacecraft, they would turn into x-rays. The kind the average dentist protects patients against with two inch lead vests. Those rays would naturally penetrate the astronaut's bodies and create anything from nausea and vomiting to eventual death, depending on the length of the exposure.

    All of this scientific data presented a big problem for NASA. How could they build a spacecraft that would meet radiation standards and yet get off the ground?

    The National Committee on Radiation Protection (NCRP) and the International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP) had established low "permissible doses" of radiation at levels that were consistent with living on earth. However, where the critical dosage on earth might be 5 rems of radiation in a year, the astronauts would receive that amount within minutes passing through the lower zone of the radiation belt.

    In order to penetrate Van Allen's belt, in l965 NASA requested the two regulatory groups modify the existing standards for space flight. It was simply a matter of "risk over gain" and NASA convinced them to change the standards and allow them to take the risk. Whether or not future astronauts would be advised of these dramatically lowered standards and substantial risk is unknown at this time.

    The next problem NASA faced was the shielding of the spacecraft. It was solved in a report NASA issued in Aerospace Medicine Magazine in 1965 and 1969. The report was written prior to the first Apollo mission to the moon.

    NASA announced that a simple aluminum skin on the command module was enough to protect astronauts from lethal doses of radiation. This conclusion was based on studies NASA had conducted. Now NASA had ingeniously solved their two basic problems, protection and weight. They had eliminated the danger of radiation penetration, along with the problem of radiation shielding and spacecraft weight. We telephoned North American Rockwell, the builder of the Command Module which carried the astronauts to the moon and back. They verified that the craft was not protected by any additional shielding.

    It was at this point in our research that we realized the Van Allen Report had been seriously compromised by NASA. Professor Van Allen had become an icon in the scientific community for warning of radiation dangers. One of his most important tenets was that even if you raced quickly through the 65,000 mile belt, which starts 400 miles above the earth's surface (thus allowing for inner space travel) you would still need considerable additional shielding. Were his findings now bogus? We had to speak to Van Allen.

    Professor James A. Van Allen now 83, is Professor Emeritus in Geophysics at the University of Iowa. Our first question was why he did not speak up after NASA's claims and defend his original findings. Astonishingly, he told us that his seminal Scientific American article
    in 1959 was merely "popular science."

    "Are you refuting your findings?" we asked.

    "Absolutely not," he answered, "I stand by them." In the next breath, Van Allen again acquiesced to NASA's point of view. He became positively mercurial in his answers. Basically he defended NASA's position that any material, even aluminum without shielding, was adequate to protect the astronauts from the radiation he once called deadly. When we asked him the point of his original warning about rushing through the Belt, he said, "It must have been a sloppy statement." So there we were, down the rabbit hole, chasing Van Allen through halls of mirrors. Was he taking the line of least resistance to government pressure? Was he trashing his own report in order not to be labeled a whistle blower? Could this renowned scientist actually be capable of a "sloppy statement" and blatant hyperbole published in a scientific journal?

    If you don't believe we went to the moon, then you will say that NASA created the perfect cover story. It allowed them to continue receiving funding for a spacecraft they could not build, to enter a region of space they could not penetrate. If you believe we went to the moon, then you have to disregard Van Allen's years of research and published findings. You would also have to believe that aluminum, and not lead, is adequate protection against radiation in the very heart of the Belt. . .exactly the spot where Apollo rocket ships entered from Cape Canaveral in Florida.

  9. #9
    Senior Member majicbar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Minneapolis. Minnesota
    Posts
    1,192
    We indeed went to the Moon. Arguments otherwise, show the gulibility of the common man. We know from out takes that production could not have possibly pulled off faking the Moon flights on a sound stage. The argument for the radiation environment prohibiting the Lunar flights, the science says otherwise. Van Allen was wrong, that happens. Science is an evolving knowledge, this is a clear example of that.

    http://www.popsci.com/blog-network/v...an-allen-belts

  10. #10
    Lead Moderator calikid's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Sunny California
    Posts
    8,260
    Blog Entries
    19
    Just another example of the bravery the Astronauts displayed.
    I would hope they received full disclosure of the risks (from radiation exposure), and chose to go anyway.
    Real American heroes, they had "The Right Stuff".
    The aim of an argument or discussion should not be victory, but
    progress. -- Joseph Joubert
    Attachment 1008

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •