They do exist! - Page 2

Faabio · 07-24-2008, 08:38 PM

You are listening to a crack pot with no credentials.

I'm sure his almost-degree from community college is enough to convince the masses, but not me!

lulz

Laodaron · 07-24-2008, 08:40 PM

I merely pointing out that its impossible to get people onto the moon with our current technology. Let alone 40 years ago.

Daedalus · 07-24-2008, 08:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Laodaron

I merely pointing out that its impossible to get people onto the moon with our current technology. Let alone 40 years ago.

How difficult is it to make a rocket?

Srsly.

Ethar · 07-24-2008, 08:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Laodaron

I merely pointing out that its impossible to get people onto the moon with our current technology. Let alone 40 years ago.

By the way when you keep trolling it becomes really obvious and people stop paying attention after a while. lIEK zomahgawd mah stands r so controversial lolol.

Laodaron · 07-24-2008, 08:54 PM

WTF are you talking about? I haven't trolled here in months. I honestly don't see it being a possibility that we landed on the moon. Especially since NASA has all but said we don't hold the technology now to actually send people to a moon landing and bring them home.

Daedalus · 07-24-2008, 08:59 PM

Do you also not believe that we have a space station in orbit?

Also, satellite TV: Fact or myth?

Laodaron · 07-24-2008, 09:06 PM

No no. That's what I do in the military, well, a variation. But we don't bring satellites home. They die in space, and fall back.

Also, satellites aren't the moon. I know we can send objects into space. Just not living human beings.

Daedalus · 07-24-2008, 09:07 PM

So you don't believe that the space station is real, right?

Laodaron · 07-24-2008, 09:15 PM

Quote:

Radiation plays a big part in space travel. Solar flares could have affected the astronauts at any time. The Apollo leaving Earth would travel through 2 specific areas of very high radiation called the Van Allen Belt. The first field is 272 miles out from Earth. The amount of radiation in the belts actually varies from year to year, but every 11 years its at its worst when the sunspot cycle is at its highest. And guess what? 1969 to 1970 was one of the worst times to go, as this was the time where the radiation was at its peak. I have had numerous internet chats with sceptics who say that the radiation would not play a part in the missions because Man would have not been in the radiation belt for too long. My answer to that is, when Dentists or Doctors take X ray pictures they either leave the room or stand behind a sheet of thick lead to shelter from the radiation. Why did NASA only use a small sheet of aluminium to protect the astronauts when they knew that the radiation levels in Space and on the Moon's surface would be many hundreds of times more deadly? And why would they risk their astronauts to such conditions? In 1959 Bill Kaysing was privy to a study made by the Russians. The Russians discovered that the radiation on the moon would require astronauts to be clothed in four feet of lead to avoid being killed. Why didn't NASA heed their warnings?
Did you know that the US Government tried to blast a hole in the belt 248 miles above Earth in 1962? During Operation Starfish Prime a Megaton Nuclear Bomb was used to try and force an unnatural corridor through the Van Allen Belt... Unfortunately, the radiation levels actually got worse, not better. What they created was a third belt that was 100 times more intense than the natural belts, and as estimated by Mary Bennett in 'Dark Moon - Apollo and the Whistle-Blowers, by 2002 this artificial zone will still have 25 times more radiation than the other 2 belts. There is no agreement to how wide these radiation belts actually are. Dr James Van Allen, the discoverer of the belts estimated that they were at least 64,000 miles deep, but NASA say they are only 24,000 miles deep. Each Apollo craft spent approximately 4 hours within the belts.
So to what lengths did NASA take to shield the astronauts against the radiation? Its accepted that a minimum of 10 cm width of aluminium would be needed at the very least to keep out radiation. However the walls of the Apollo craft and capsule were made as thin and as light as possible and as a result the craft initially could not carry enough air inside to withstand the equivalent to sea level air pressure. NASA had to reduce air pressure inside the cabin to cope. Here are the official stats from a NASA website: (Apollo Lunar Surface Journal)
'At sea level, the Earth's atmosphere is a mixture of gases - primarily of nitrogen (78% by volume), oxygen (21%), water vapour (varying amounts depending on temperature and humidity), and traces of carbon dioxide and other gases. Oxygen is, by far, the most important component of what we breathe and, indeed, the Apollo astronauts breathed almost pure oxygen laced with controlled amounts of water vapour. With the nitrogen eliminated, the cabin pressure could be considerably less than sea-level pressure on Earth - about 4.8 psi (pounds per square inch) versus 14.7 psi - and, consequently, the cabin walls could be relatively thin and, therefore, light in weight.'
One of the worst sun flares ever recorded happened in August 1972, which was between the Apollo 16 and 17 missions. This single flare would have delivered 960 rem of virtually instant death to any astronaut who was up in Space, and yet all of the Apollo astronauts were carrying out their missions in what amounts to nothing more than a thick linen suit. These pressure suits may have helped protect the astronauts against heat or micro meteorites, but certainly would not have given any radiation protection. By the way, there is no known method of registering when and how strong Solar flare activity will be. So, I guess NASA just struck lucky!
The radiation would have greatly affected the film that was shot on the Moon. Physicist Dr David Groves Ph.D., has carried out radiation tests on similar film and found that the lowest radiation level (25 rem) applied to a portion of the film after exposure made the image on the film almost entirely obliterated. Why didn't that happen to the Apollo films?
Readers will be interested to hear that the biggest Solar Flare for 25 years was recorded in April, 2001. So sceptics who are claiming that NASA know when the Solar Flares are going to appear are talking rubbish - as usual. If this were the case, why didn't they bring down the astronauts from the Shuttle and ISS if they knew this gigantic Solar Flare was about to erupt?
Probably the most convincing argument however about the dangers of radiation to astronauts comes from NASA themselves. Read this report made on 8th September, 2005. It makes very interesting reading, especially when you have a number of sceptics like I have breathing down my neck trying to claim otherwise!

Quote:

On average, the ISS (International Space Station), is about 199 to 215 miles above the surface of the Earth.

Huh.

Ethar · 07-24-2008, 09:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Laodaron

WTF are you talking about? I haven't trolled here in months. I honestly don't see it being a possibility that we landed on the moon. Especially since NASA has all but said we don't hold the technology now to actually send people to a moon landing and bring them home.

OK well if you honestly don't see it as a possibility...

I'm not gonna lie though there's hordes of very educated people (PhD) who would say you're crazy :P.