USA Basketball Player Stephen Curry (Golden State, California) doesn't think that USA Astronauts ever landed on Earth's Moon

The 11.4 rads is the radiation from the belts for astronauts unfortunate enough to be on the outside the command module during the journey through the Van Allen belts. Such an exposure, 11.4 rads/52 minutes, even for this unlucky buck-naked astronaut on the outside, is well below 300 rads/hour considered to be lethal. This was explained pretty well in the "spacemath" link. But "spacemath" was just a theoretical math exercise. On the inside, the astronauts were exposed to much less radiation. The 32 mrem (and 0.016 rads) was also just a theoretical computation, and the conversion from rems to rads sounds messy. But we don't need mrem conversions and theoretical computations, because NASA made real radiation measurements on the real astronauts during the real Apollo missions. Here is real NASA data (see Table 2) from all the Apollo missions 7 through 17, as measured by several radiation dosimeters in the command module and on the suits, which avoids any faulty mrem to rad conversions:https://history.nasa.gov/SP-368/s2ch3.htm Once again, we can see that total exposure for 6 days was very low, not just from the Van Allen belts, but from all radiation sources, where the largest average radiation does was 1.14 rads/6 days. "Radiation was not an operational problem during the Apollo Program. Doses received by the crewmen of Apollo missions 7 through 17 were small"

Orion, the Van Allen belts & Space Radiation Challenges by Mary DM Bennett

The BIRD Radiation Detector report seemingly confirms that the dosimetry radiation data for the manned Apollo lunar flights was collected while remaining in low-Earth-orbit.

The fact that the Apollo data is out of synch with the ISS and Orion might explain why it is totally ignored by the industry today.

It would also explain the problems surrounding this BIRD report.

This is another great find!!!

Look at what Mary DM Bennett inscribes in her CONCLUSION.

CONCLUSION

The presentation of this Orion BIRD data, together with the difficulties over its publication infers that some within the space agency have noticed that the Apollo radiation data doesn’t fit the template. Therefore it's become necessary for NASA staff to spend hours writing statements full of obfuscations in a literary exercise of 'simple avoidance'. But no amount of careful massaging of descriptions of the space environment through crafted vocabulary and pretty pictures can hide the truth contained in the actual figures.

This BIRD Radiation Detector report seemingly confirms that the dosimetry radiation data for the manned Apollo lunar flights was collected while remaining in LEO. Whether deliberately or unwittingly, NASA's own data has blown apart the notion that a manned Apollo crew ever travelled to the Moon.

- Mary DM Bennett, Aulis Online, October 2015

How much do we learn from this! Firstly, there were difficulties over its publication in the NASA-BIRD data. It couldn't pass Peer-Reviewed Science! This compared to van Allen's supposed fourth-hand casual comments to NASA engineers, who were unlikely to scrutinize.

Then, the Apollo radiation data doesn't fit the template. And some in the space agency (NASA) have noticed this! This gives an explanation for their "crafted vocabulary and pretty pictures" (easy lemming bait, seen in practice by LRC exemplars). Some of them probably work in "good faith", trying to paper over "minor details" that probably got booh-booh'ed decades ago. But ultimately, Science will be the winner.

But we don't need mrem conversions and theoretical computations, because NASA made real radiation measurements on the real astronauts during the real Apollo missions.

NASA telemetry also recorded fake radiation measurements during Apollo simulations at their testing bases.

The Humpty-Dumptiness is Having a Great Fall wrote:

CONCLUSION

The presentation of this Orion BIRD data, together with the difficulties over its publication infers (implies) that some within the space agency have noticed that the Apollo radiation data doesn’t fit the template. ...

This is arguable, because it depends on what "template" means. When that itself is an effect of Propaganda, you see what you want to believe. Maybe the Orion radiation data (if you can get it by FOIA) doesn't fit the Apollo template. Who's to say which the real, and which is the impostor?

Wrong. The dosimetry data for the Apollo program was collected while in LEO - not within the Van Allen belts.

Massive fail and another lame attempt by NASA to pull a fast one.

OneGiantLie

Still lost 10% of body weight wrote:

"The tortoise, Testudo horsfieldi, enjoys a unique radiation resistance in the animal world. The lethal dose required to kill up to 50 percent of a population of the species is 40,000 Roentgens, compared to only 800 Roentgens needed to kill 50 percent of a human population. The tortoise can survive doses of tens of thousands of Roentgens."

How can this be? Surely it is metabolically costly to have this level of resistance, meaning sometime in their evolution, tortoises must have actually had to use it to survive some massive radiation event. Did that event kill everything else off?

Or, maybe the tortoises were sent to Earth from somewhere else.

Errg, I didn't even notice that in my quick read!! We can go further with Mary DM Bennett.

You'd think it was a National Security Issue the extent to wish the cover-up was controlled.

FOREGROUND

A Case of Simple Avoidance

Just why such monitoring should then be considered an unmentionable item for the Orion flight objectives is rather a mystery. As is the fact that when the technical reports for Orion EFT-1 were published on NASA’s Technical Report Server, it included an incorrectly titled PDF document on the engineering undertaken for the protection against radiation for the Guidance Navigation & Control (GN&C) components of the spacecraft[12], but the radiation data acquired by Orion relative to the interior of the craft and its future human occupants was not immediately apparent.

As it turned out, for that data to be available a FOIA (US Freedom of Information Act) request was required. That was a saga in itself and best told by the participant[13] who kindly sent us a copy in September 2015. The report was dated 01-06-2015 and I saw that the reference for accessing this ‘UNCLASSIFIED document with unlimited distribution’[14] was the very NASA Technical Report website where it was only remarkable by its absence. However some weeks later, this report was posted on another NASA site, under a completely different electronic title.[15]

Wow, that doesn't sound like Science to me! Even Climategate emails didn't hide *actual data* (just the decline), so why did FOIA need to be invoked in USA just get the govt scientists' data?

Even if most LRC Hoax Deniers can't understand the actual Science Facts of Mary DM Bennett, they can at least be affirmed to the nefarious activities necessitated by NASA in the sprawling course of their shambolic coverup.

What gives? Popular USA science magazine (Propaganda?) doesn't mention Soviet tortoises at 500x human levels, only Harvard researchers bdelloids at 100x?

This math is wrong. Soviet tortoises are only 50x humans (40000 divided by 800).

Yet Soviets sure knew how to pick radiation-resistant species to send to space. They even research the seasonal dependence in Testudo horsifeldi. While USA meal-worm (beetle) data comes from popular television TV programme (Hollywood effect again).

Which Drosophilia the wine flies were are not clear, but general concept is directed. These genera are also debunking the Wikipedia favorite "Linear No-Threshhold" Model (noting the data used by USA National Academy of Sciences have the error bars are so large that this data might just as well support a threshold). When you can pick what the data mean, where's the science?

Even if the math (division) is wrong, why didn't Soviets send these to Earth's Moon with the testudos, mealworm beetles, and wine flies?

What's even stranger, from an evolutionary biologist's point of view, is the bdelloid's long-term asexuality. For perhaps 80 million years, all bdelloids have been shes, contentedly reproducing without males -- and defying biologists' ideas about the centrality of sex. Sexual reproduction, the thinking goes, introduces genetic variation and so allows a species to adapt to a changing environment and to genetic degradation. It's commonly thought that animals that forgo sex eventually go extinct, but the bdelloid provides a glaring exception to the rule. Legendary biologist John Maynard Smith was so flummoxed by the bdelloids that he called them an "evolutionary scandal."

OK, maybe not every last detail wrote:

Not sure nuking it would fix that problem? wrote:

This looks how USA depicted the van Allen belts, again using Hollywood for Propaganda.

This is actually scientifically feasible, in recent years.

Already in 1962, Starfish Prime was the Hollywood-style attempt to wipe out the van Allen's.

The ‘Starfish Prime’ test experimented with radiation belts in the Earth’s magnetosphere known as Van Allen belts, they consist of energetic particles located in the inner region of Earth’s magnetosphere. James Van Allen had discovered them shortly before, in 1958, and agreed to cooperate with the military in a study on how they could be disrupted by nuclear explosions.

Here's another winning prediction (Wehrner von Braun):

“Before the year 2000 is over, the first child will have been born on the moon.” Wernher von Braun, Taped TV interview, broadcast on WMAL, Washington, (7 Jan 1972), as reported in 'Birth of Child on Moon Foreseen by von Braun[/]u', New York Times (7 Jan 1972), page 14.

Oops, forgot that USA would decide no longer to fund their man-on-moon "missions" from 1972 onward.

Military Co-operator wrote:

Already in 1962, Starfish Prime was the Hollywood-style attempt to wipe out the van Allen's.

The ‘Starfish Prime’ test experimented with radiation belts in the Earth’s magnetosphere known as Van Allen belts, they consist of energetic particles located in the inner region of Earth’s magnetosphere. James Van Allen had discovered them shortly before, in 1958, and agreed to cooperate with the military in a study on how they could be disrupted by nuclear explosions.

Meanwhile, anti-hoax believers' Wikipedia on Starfish Prime DOESN"T EVEN LIST the van Allen belts!

How can they trust this as a source???

Barren Moon wrote:

Here's another winning prediction (Wehrner von Braun):

“Before the year 2000 is over, the first child will have been born on the moon.” Wernher von Braun, Taped TV interview, broadcast on WMAL, Washington, (7 Jan 1972), as reported in 'Birth of Child on Moon Foreseen by von Braun', New York Times (7 Jan 1972), page 14.

Oops, forgot that USA would decide no longer to fund their man-on-moon "missions" from 1972 onward.

It's not surprising. He had a fall-out with the anti-hoax regime at NASA and was in their cross-hairs no matter what (he was just the engine builder, could easily have been outside the loop). Here what anti-hoax believers' Wikipedia has to say about him.

After a series of conflicts associated with the truncation of the Apollo program, and facing severe budget constraints, von Braun retired from NASA on May 26, 1972. Not only had it become evident by this time that NASA and his visions for future U.S. space flight projects were incompatible, but also it was perhaps even more frustrating for him to see popular support for a continued presence of man in space wane dramatically once the goal to reach the Moon had been accomplished.

Yet another reason the Soviets kept quiet: USA bought them off.

Shortly after the alleged manned Moon landings ended, the USA started shipping hundreds of thousands of tons of grain as humanitarian aid to the allegedly starving USSR. This is in fact evidence of a cover-up, the grain being the price of silence.

Here is the actual source:PROSPECTS FOR INTERSTELLAR TRAVEL by John H. Mauldin (NASA Voyager program) Volume 80 , Science and Technology SeriesAmerican Astronautical Society Publication (1992) Page 226 (photo below):

Cosmic particles are dangerous, come from all sides, and require at least 2 meters of solid shielding all around living organisms.

Of course, organisms like bdelloids or Soviet tortoises would only need 1/100 or 1/50 of 2m.

He wrote this 2 decades after USA gave up their "man on moon" missions.

You need 2 meters FOR INTERSTELLAR TRAVEL.

But the moon is not interstellar (hint: between stars).

September 30, 2008: Popular Science

“In ten years I think this conspiracy theory will be gone,” says astronomer Phil Plait, who points out that in 2009 NASA’s Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter will give us clear photos of the moon landing sites, and says the U.S. goal of returning to the moon by 2020 will refocus us on the triumph of the Apollo mission.

Only an archive.org version exists, looks like they scrubbed this "prediction" for its obvious inconvenience to reality (on many junctures, no "clear photos" only canals claimed as shoe prints, and the "US goal" of 2020 is dormant especially after Orion found out how deadly the van Allen's are).

Julian Scheer once delighted 200 guests at a private party with footage of astronauts apparently on a landscape. It had been made on a mission film set and was identical to what NASA claimed was their real lunar landscape.

Julian Weisel Scheer was an American merchant mariner, journalist, flack and author. He is best known as the assistant administrator of public affairs for the National Aeronautics and Space Administration in Washington, D.C., from 1962 to 1971.