Q 4 U wrote:
What is the most significant hoax of all time, perpetrated by "official" sources (US government, etc.), that was once nearly universally accepted but was eventually exposed and it is now nearly universally accepted that it was a hoax?
So, not one person on this thread can point to even one example of such a "hoax" in all of history.
Hmmmmmm . . .
Actual 1959 science wrote:
In 1959, the question voiced by host Earl Herald was one of the key scientific mysteries at the start of the Space Race: "what [are these radiation belts] going to mean for the first person to take off from the earth as a space traveller?"
Herald interviewed three researchers at the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (then known as the Lawrence Radiation Laboratory at UC Berkeley). Dr. R. Stephen White (Leader of the Nuclear Effects Group), Dr. Stanley Freden (Senior Staff Physicist), and Dr. Hal Oliver (Head of Processing Department), explained LLNL's method of radiation testing in the Van Allen belts: mounting an emulsion stack on a rocket, which was then launched into the region of the radiation belts using a rockoon (a rocket suspended from a high-altitude balloon), recovered upon returning to Earth, and processed to test for radiation intensity.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=szh5cuzfiN4
Nice find. Around the 20 min mark, one of the researchers pointed out that it would take 1" of lead shielding to stop 90% of the protons and 6" to stop 99% of the protons for the strongest radiation zone of the Van Allen belts.
We know the Apollo did not employ this amount lead protection on the LM. This is just another nail in the Apollo defender coffin.
OneGiantLie
Furthermore, in the video it was said that radiation exposure of only 1 Roentgen/month was dangerous for humans. The actornauts would have been exposed to up to 100 Roentgens/HOUR.
Anti-hoaxers, it's over. You lost. We never landed on the moon.
OneGiantLie
Q 4 U wrote:
Q 4 U wrote:
What is the most significant hoax of all time, perpetrated by "official" sources (US government, etc.), that was once nearly universally accepted but was eventually exposed and it is now nearly universally accepted that it was a hoax?
So, not one person on this thread can point to even one example of such a "hoax" in all of history.
Hmmmmmm . . .
Anyone? Anyone?
Legit question wrote:
Furthermore, in the video it was said that radiation exposure of only 1 Roentgen/month was dangerous for humans. The actornauts would have been exposed to up to 100 Roentgens/HOUR.
Anti-hoaxers, it's over. You lost. We never landed on the moon.
OneGiantLie
Which is 73,000x the safe maximum limit of radiation for an adult. Not only did the Apollo astronauts have to make two traversals of the belts on a round trip, some of the astronauts made multiple missions to the Moon yet they died in old age of natural causes, experiencing no side effects of the radiation. Add to this, the enormous exposure endured outside of the belts in the form of ambient solar wind and cosmic rays.
Q 4 U wrote:
Q 4 U wrote:
So, not one person on this thread can point to even one example of such a "hoax" in all of history.
Hmmmmmm . . .
Anyone? Anyone?
Anyone?
Q 4 U wrote:
Q 4 U wrote:
Anyone? Anyone?
Anyone?
In another 50 years or so, the Apollo program will be revealed by "official" sources as the greatest hoax of all time.
OneGiantLie
Anti-hoax believers never admit their cultish errors, so you CAN'T get "near universal" admission.
Belka + Strelka wrote:
CCCP. wrote:
The real conspiracy isn't that about Neil Armstrong, it's about the COVERUP of Soviet cosmonauts GETTING THERE FIRST, but of course USA media propaganda never covers this.
Russian basketball players have never claimed this about Russian cosmonauts
In Russia, the Robots are exposed as being Humans.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GsL_vPxQUMALegit question wrote:
Q 4 U wrote:
Anyone?
In another 50 years or so, the Apollo program will be revealed by "official" sources as the greatest hoax of all time.
OneGiantLie
Anyone?
Duh? wrote:
Anti-hoax believers never admit their cultish errors, so you CAN'T get "near universal" admission.
Anyone?
Legit question wrote:
Actual 1959 science wrote:
In 1959, the question voiced by host Earl Herald was one of the key scientific mysteries at the start of the Space Race: "what [are these radiation belts] going to mean for the first person to take off from the earth as a space traveller?"
Herald interviewed three researchers at the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (then known as the Lawrence Radiation Laboratory at UC Berkeley). Dr. R. Stephen White (Leader of the Nuclear Effects Group), Dr. Stanley Freden (Senior Staff Physicist), and Dr. Hal Oliver (Head of Processing Department), explained LLNL's method of radiation testing in the Van Allen belts: mounting an emulsion stack on a rocket, which was then launched into the region of the radiation belts using a rockoon (a rocket suspended from a high-altitude balloon), recovered upon returning to Earth, and processed to test for radiation intensity.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=szh5cuzfiN4Nice find. Around the 20 min mark, one of the researchers pointed out that it would take 1" of lead shielding to stop 90% of the protons and 6" to stop 99% of the protons for the strongest radiation zone of the Van Allen belts.
We know the Apollo did not employ this amount lead protection on the LM. This is just another nail in the Apollo defender coffin.
OneGiantLie
And the 6" of lead protection to lower radiation to 99% is still insufficient.
1% still corresponds to receiving 730x the maximum radiation safe limit.
Wow, this message board is still going?
I posted a long message here a few days ago of a lengthy argument of why I think we actually went to the moon (even though I don't think it's preposterous to question if we did).
I realized I could boil down my whole argument to something much more concise. Here goes;
Moon landing skeptic; "If we really went to the moon 50 years ago, why haven't we gone back?"
Moon hoax skeptic; "If we were able to fake the moon landing 50 years ago, why haven't we been able to fake it again? Or fake a Mars mission, etc?"
End Thread
Moon hoax skeptic; "If we were able to fake the moon landing 50 years ago, why haven't we been able to fake it again? Or fake a Mars mission, etc?"
People are much more sceptical of their government today.
Back in 1969-1972, everyone (USA) was Rah-Rah to defeat the Soviets.
Plus, NASA would be scrutinized more today for destroying so much evidence.
My reasoning wrote:
Moon hoax skeptic; "If we were able to fake the moon landing 50 years ago, why haven't we been able to fake it again? Or fake a Mars mission, etc?"
People are much more sceptical of their government today.
Back in 1969-1972, everyone (USA) was Rah-Rah to defeat the Soviets.
Plus, NASA would be scrutinized more today for destroying so much evidence.
Good point. They did NOT have an LRC invigilator possé back in 1969 to DEBUNK Neil + Buzz at the time!
Why is that Deep State is "suddenly" aiming to remove another USA President, like they did with Nixon?
Here's the official "kiddie" lesson (space-math) from official NASA website...
Begging to ask, Why is James van Allen so "famous" if his radiation belts AREN'T so deadly after all???
And the NASA cultists/anti-hoaxers continue to go "but, but, but, I saw it on TV! It has to be real, our government would never lie. We never went back because it's too expensive, we lost the technology..."
Enough. Stop with the lame excuses. We never landed on the moon.
OneGiantLie
Black von Belt wrote:
Here's the official "kiddie" lesson (space-math) from official NASA website...
Begging to ask, Why is James van Allen so "famous" if his radiation belts AREN'T so deadly after all???
https://spacemath.gsfc.nasa.gov/Algebra1/3Page7.pdf
Why are you putting faith into what NASA has to say? LOL
NASATOLOGY is a cult.
OneGiantLie
Even the Fun kiddie-math (NASA) admits the astronauts would absorb 11.4 Rad in under an hour! But how much is that, really?
According to the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission, the lethal dose of radiation is in the range of 400 to 450 rem. This level of radiation causes death to around 50 percent of a population that has been exposed over a period of 30 days.
Rads, rems, really? Well, it depends on what *kind* of rads your rems are, which NASA kiddie math ignores!!
For x-rays and gamma rays, 1 rad = 1 rem = 10 mSv
For neutrons, 1 rad = 5 to 20 rem (depending on energy level) = 50-200 mSv
For alpha radiation (helium-4 nuclei), 1 rad = 20 rem = 200 mSv
11.4 * 2 (both ways) = 22.8 per "moon trip", if multiplied by high-energy neutrons (20) or alpha (20), would be 456 rems which is GREATER > than the 450 rem called lethal, and that OVER A 30-DAY PERIOD!!
Meanwhile, the "acceptable" risk is (now) said at 3% cancer risk increase over a lifetime... how the bio-data change, when the narrative needs some new tweaking...
Here's some more figures: 500 rem = 5000 MSv
Single does which would kill half of those exposed to it within a month 5,000.00 MSv (millisieverts)
Accumulated dosage to cause a fatal cancer many years later in 5% of people 1,000.00 Millisieverts
1000 MSv = 100 rem
So it's only 100 rem (accumulated) that would be FATAL cancer in 5% of people (more than > 3% risk!). Even low-energy neutrons would from the 22.8 rad would totally fry the USA astronauts claiming to pass through (twice).
And... this doesn't even BEGIN to account all the OTHER (non van Allen belt) radiation the astronauts would absorb.