But do not forget, no human has ever travelled through Van Allen Radiation Belt. I do not want anyone to tell me only Richard Nixon was crazy enough to send a countryman or two through Van Allen Radiation Belt. Not one world leader, post December, 1972 has sent a man or woman through Van Allen Radiation Belt
-
37
-
Your point? You do know "Tricky Dick" lied. wrote:
I will leave you alone regarding N A S A, Columbia and radio comm. if you admit Tricky Dick lied times six.
Not one world leader, after Richard Nixon wants to send a countryman to the moon? Really? You are telling me Tricky Dick sent U.S. citizens to the moon six times?
> Nixon had to pay for Great Society Programs passed during L B J administration.
> Nixon had to pay for SE Asia Conflicts. Nixon expanded the fight to numerous SE Asian countries.
> Nixon had to pay for his Law & Order promises. See Weathermen Underground and high crime all over the nation during Nixon administration.
Heck of a lot cheaper to pay for faux moon landing documentaries than to actually pay to travel to moon six times from 1969 to 1972.
So . . . no other country was much interested in being second to the moon when there was no commercial payoff? Gee, what a surprise! You got me there, chief! Irrefutable proof!
Oh, and there were other things that the US was paying for at the time - therefore it is impossible that the US also funded NASA.
Good thinking there, Sherlock! How could anyone argue against such air proof logic?
41 -
Armstronglivs wrote:
There are countless articles from peer approved scientists that confirm, again and again, the moon landings weren't faked.
Every single argument claiming that Nasa faked the Moon landings has been discredited. The only science worth exploring about that is why so many deluded lunatics still continue to maintain their conspiracy theories.
CORRECT!
74 -
Bad Wigins wrote:
This is exactly the same sort of weak argument I'm talking about.
What would this prove, poster? We went to the moon because the Soviets didn't? Speculating about their motives doesn't directly address the factual claim of a moon landing. (nor do downvotes, like it or not)
All those who get cocky about "deniers" offer no proof either. What they are trying to ignore, but keeps this thread going, is that the "denial" is frivolous posturing to bait them into revealing their shaky world view.
In the end, the government said it landed on the moon, you trust the government. Maybe it did, maybe it didn't, but your belief is founded significantly on either that trust, or the circumstantial claim that it couldn't have pulled off such an elaborate fake. None of us was actually there on the moon, or closely observing the journey in person.
Funny that you post this, literally the next post after Armstrong posts:
From the above.
"A final nail in the coffin of the Moon hoax theories is a simple instrument installed 50 years ago by Apollo 11. During their day on the Moon, Armstrong and Aldrin planted a lunar laser ranging retroreflector array on the surface. It’s still operational today, and allows us to reflect lasers off of it and measure the distance to the Moon down to the centimetre. We simply couldn’t do this if we hadn’t visited the Moon64 -
Timothy Foyle wrote:
Your point? You do know "Tricky Dick" lied. wrote:
I will leave you alone regarding N A S A, Columbia and radio comm. if you admit Tricky Dick lied times six.
Not one world leader, after Richard Nixon wants to send a countryman to the moon? Really? You are telling me Tricky Dick sent U.S. citizens to the moon six times?
> Nixon had to pay for Great Society Programs passed during L B J administration.
> Nixon had to pay for SE Asia Conflicts. Nixon expanded the fight to numerous SE Asian countries.
> Nixon had to pay for his Law & Order promises. See Weathermen Underground and high crime all over the nation during Nixon administration.
Heck of a lot cheaper to pay for faux moon landing documentaries than to actually pay to travel to moon six times from 1969 to 1972.
So . . . no other country was much interested in being second to the moon when there was no commercial payoff? Gee, what a surprise! You got me there, chief! Irrefutable proof!
Oh, and there were other things that the US was paying for at the time - therefore it is impossible that the US also funded NASA.
Good thinking there, Sherlock! How could anyone argue against such air proof logic?
Poor argument. Close to 1/2 a dozen nations have not minded sending spacecraft to the moon. Due to the fact that it is impossible to send humans to the moon, other nations send robots to the moon.
Don't want to be second? Nations are okay being second, 10th, 100th, etc. Have any nations flown a man across Atlantic Ocean after Lindbergh? Why did anyone bother to fly after Wright Brothers according to your logic? Why did U.S. automobile manufacturers bother to build autos after Germany got a head start according to your logic?
The only way to prove me wrong is to get in a spacecraft built by a billionaire and fly through Van Allen Radiation Belt. Saying witty one-liners won't prove anything.
45 -
Going to the moon is easy. A small private company (SpaceX) basically bootstrapped their way there in a decade.
25 -
SpaceX haven't sent a human through Van Allen Radiation Belt and SpaceX haven't placed a man on the moon.
66 -
it is interesting ... wrote:
SpaceX haven't sent a human through Van Allen Radiation Belt and SpaceX haven't placed a man on the moon.
Getting to orbit is the hard part. Delta-v and all that.
35 -
Armstronglivs wrote:
There are countless articles from peer approved scientists that confirm, again and again, the moon landings weren't faked.
Every single argument claiming that Nasa faked the Moon landings has been discredited. The only science worth exploring about that is why so many deluded lunatics still continue to maintain their conspiracy theories.
Can’t you read? There have been many excellent posts explaining why the moon landings were science fiction. None have been discredited. NASA and the US administration are a bunch of liars.
24 -
Harambe wrote:
it is interesting ... wrote:
SpaceX haven't sent a human through Van Allen Radiation Belt and SpaceX haven't placed a man on the moon.
Getting to orbit is the hard part. Delta-v and all that.
Virologist AND astrophysicist. Wow. You imagine yourself to be expert in everything it seems.
43 -
it is interesting ... wrote:
Timothy Foyle wrote:
So . . . no other country was much interested in being second to the moon when there was no commercial payoff? Gee, what a surprise! You got me there, chief! Irrefutable proof!
Oh, and there were other things that the US was paying for at the time - therefore it is impossible that the US also funded NASA.
Good thinking there, Sherlock! How could anyone argue against such air proof logic?
Poor argument. Close to 1/2 a dozen nations have not minded sending spacecraft to the moon. Due to the fact that it is impossible to send humans to the moon, other nations send robots to the moon.
Don't want to be second? Nations are okay being second, 10th, 100th, etc. Have any nations flown a man across Atlantic Ocean after Lindbergh? Why did anyone bother to fly after Wright Brothers according to your logic? Why did U.S. automobile manufacturers bother to build autos after Germany got a head start according to your logic?
The only way to prove me wrong is to get in a spacecraft built by a billionaire and fly through Van Allen Radiation Belt. Saying witty one-liners won't prove anything.
There are so many examples that make this “we haven’t been back because nobody felt like going” argument nonsense it’s funny. Everest, solo circumnavigation, South Pole, North Pole, Marianas trench, volcanos, eye of a hurricane and many more places have been visited many times for lesser reasons than there are to go to the moon.
Also, The one example the “we went” conspiracy nuts point to, that Armstrong planted a reflector, is also dumb. Nobody is saying that unmanned vehicles haven’t been there.
35 -
Fall out wrote:
Armstronglivs wrote:
There are countless articles from peer approved scientists that confirm, again and again, the moon landings weren't faked.
Every single argument claiming that Nasa faked the Moon landings has been discredited. The only science worth exploring about that is why so many deluded lunatics still continue to maintain their conspiracy theories.
Can’t you read? There have been many excellent posts explaining why the moon landings were science fiction. None have been discredited. NASA and the US administration are a bunch of liars.
And another deluded lunatic speaks. The US leads the world for such.
48 -
Taking out the issue of whether or not it works, could a laser reflector not have been put there by other means anyway? A lot of craft have landed on the moon not containing humans.
22 -
wulfy wrote:
Taking out the issue of whether or not it works, could a laser reflector not have been put there by other means anyway? A lot of craft have landed on the moon not containing humans.
Probably it could be but what would be the point when the purpose of the mission was to put a man in the moon. if an unmanned mission could be sent to the moon so could a manned mission go there. It was men who put the reflector there.
43 -
Armstronglivs wrote:
wulfy wrote:
Taking out the issue of whether or not it works, could a laser reflector not have been put there by other means anyway? A lot of craft have landed on the moon not containing humans.
Probably it could be but what would be the point when the purpose of the mission was to put a man in the moon. if an unmanned mission could be sent to the moon so could a manned mission go there. It was men who put the reflector there.
Lol. Or a simple robot.
14 -
it is interesting ... wrote:
But do not forget, no human has ever travelled through Van Allen Radiation Belt. I do not want anyone to tell me only Richard Nixon was crazy enough to send a countryman or two through Van Allen Radiation Belt. Not one world leader, post December, 1972 has sent a man or woman through Van Allen Radiation Belt
Can you explain why the Van Allen belt is dangerous and why the precautions that NASA reports taking to avoid it during the Apollo missions were either insufficient or farcical? The radiation flux there is high, but not that high. The radiation dosage received by someone traveling through the belt for a few hours in a minimally shielded spacecraft would be roughly equivalent to the amount a commercial airline pilot would receive over a few years of flying. Obviously, that's concerning if you're spending weeks there, but not if you're only transiting through
42 -
vaIjean wrote:
it is interesting ... wrote:
But do not forget, no human has ever travelled through Van Allen Radiation Belt. I do not want anyone to tell me only Richard Nixon was crazy enough to send a countryman or two through Van Allen Radiation Belt. Not one world leader, post December, 1972 has sent a man or woman through Van Allen Radiation Belt
Can you explain why the Van Allen belt is dangerous and why the precautions that NASA reports taking to avoid it during the Apollo missions were either insufficient or farcical? The radiation flux there is high, but not that high. The radiation dosage received by someone traveling through the belt for a few hours in a minimally shielded spacecraft would be roughly equivalent to the amount a commercial airline pilot would receive over a few years of flying. Obviously, that's concerning if you're spending weeks there, but not if you're only transiting through
+1
Wasn't one of the precautions to fly around it?
NASA picked a trajectory that avoided the inner belt, and only flew through part of the outer belt.
Even before 1972, Nixon/NASA was not "crazy enough to send a countryman or two through Van Allen Radiation Belt."
13 -
it is interesting ... wrote:
But do not forget, no human has ever travelled through Van Allen Radiation Belt. I do not want anyone to tell me only Richard Nixon was crazy enough to send a countryman or two through Van Allen Radiation Belt. Not one world leader, post December, 1972 has sent a man or woman through Van Allen Radiation Belt
Really, where is your proof. What because you say so or some other uneducated nitwit.
11 -
rekrunner wrote:
vaIjean wrote:
Can you explain why the Van Allen belt is dangerous and why the precautions that NASA reports taking to avoid it during the Apollo missions were either insufficient or farcical? The radiation flux there is high, but not that high. The radiation dosage received by someone traveling through the belt for a few hours in a minimally shielded spacecraft would be roughly equivalent to the amount a commercial airline pilot would receive over a few years of flying. Obviously, that's concerning if you're spending weeks there, but not if you're only transiting through
+1
Wasn't one of the precautions to fly around it?
NASA picked a trajectory that avoided the inner belt, and only flew through part of the outer belt.
Even before 1972, Nixon/NASA was not "crazy enough to send a countryman or two through Van Allen Radiation Belt."
Yes, they avoided it where possible (to protect both the astronauts and their sensitive equipment), but Apollo 14 flew straight through it without incident. Again, the radiation flux is not that high. A full 24hr in the belt would give you ~60mSv. The maximum amount of exposure allowed for nuke plant workers is 50mSv/y, the minimum dose reqd for a clear causal link to cancer is 100mSv/y, and a standard fatal single-exposure dose is somewhere north of 2000mSv. So 60mSv/day is not good, but you would need to spend days or weeks in the belt to receive a fatal dose.
12 -
Real Obvi wrote:
Bad Wigins wrote:
This is exactly the same sort of weak argument I'm talking about.
What would this prove, poster? We went to the moon because the Soviets didn't? Speculating about their motives doesn't directly address the factual claim of a moon landing. (nor do downvotes, like it or not)
All those who get cocky about "deniers" offer no proof either. What they are trying to ignore, but keeps this thread going, is that the "denial" is frivolous posturing to bait them into revealing their shaky world view.
In the end, the government said it landed on the moon, you trust the government. Maybe it did, maybe it didn't, but your belief is founded significantly on either that trust, or the circumstantial claim that it couldn't have pulled off such an elaborate fake. None of us was actually there on the moon, or closely observing the journey in person.
Funny that you post this, literally the next post after Armstrong posts:
From the above.
"A final nail in the coffin of the Moon hoax theories is a simple instrument installed 50 years ago by Apollo 11. During their day on the Moon, Armstrong and Aldrin planted a lunar laser ranging retroreflector array on the surface. It’s still operational today, and allows us to reflect lasers off of it and measure the distance to the Moon down to the centimetre. We simply couldn’t do this if we hadn’t visited the MoonHe didn't post it. I did. You can't read.
01
What People Are Talking About On LetsRun
Of General Interest
-
Does not wanting my kids to watch a bisexual threesome at the Olympics make me a bigot?
-
2024 College Track & Field Open Coaching Positions Discussion
-
No scholarship limits anymore! (NCAA Track and Field inequality is going to get way worse, right?)
-
Gudaf Tsegay will not race the 10000m? Just to spite the federation?