Is NASA Lying about the Levels and Nature of Space Radiation?

Discussion in 'Conspiracies' started by FatFreddy, Sep 29, 2015.

  1. FatFreddy Registered Senior Member

    This link just went dead.

    It led to an important article on space radiation. Luckily, I saved the article. I'm going to post the whole thing.

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

    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.
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  3. FatFreddy Registered Senior Member

    Here's some more stuff I've found.
    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.

    This link is dead but I saved part of the article.
    To prove his thesis, Rene tries to get certain solar data from NATIONAL
    OCEANIC & ATMOSPHERIC ADMINISTRATION, (NOAA) using clever techniques
    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.
    (23 parts)

    NASA engineer admits they can't get past the Van Allen Belts (Just for you Gary Gorrell)

    There's a good discussion on it here.

    Of course this issue isn't about whether they faked the moon missions. It's about why they faked them as there is a mountain of proof of fakery in the footage and still pictures.
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  5. Kristoffer Giant Hyrax Valued Senior Member

    This should be in conspiracies or the cesspool.
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  7. origin In a democracy you deserve the leaders you elect. Valued Senior Member

    Absolutely. Reported to have it moved out of the reality section of the forum.
  8. Russ_Watters Not a Trump supporter... Valued Senior Member

  9. iceaura Valued Senior Member

    My dentist does not use two inch lead vests. They would weigh more than 120 pounds.

    That was the first "fact" in the article I could check with no effort. I quit reading at that point.
  10. Bells Staff Member

    What utter bollocks.

    Yet another moon landing denial thread. And easily refuted with the fact that the astronauts who went to the moon installed laser reflectors on the moon, that scientists on Earth used for over 40 years. It is because of those reflectors that we know the following:

    Lunar laser ranging measurement data is available from the Paris Observatory Lunar Analysis Center,[8] and the active stations. Some of the findings of this long-term experiment are:

    • The Moon is spiraling away from Earth at a rate of 3.8 cm per year.[6] This rate has been described as anomalously high.[9]
    • The Moon probably has a liquid core of about 20% of the Moon's radius.[3]
    • The universal force of gravity is very stable. The experiments have constrained the change in Newton's gravitational constant G to (2±7)×10−13 per year. [10]
    • The likelihood of any "Nordtvedt effect" (a differential acceleration of the Moon and Earth towards the Sun caused by their different degrees of compactness) has been ruled out to high precision,[11][12] strongly supporting the validity of the Strong Equivalence Principle.
    • Einstein's theory of gravity (the general theory of relativity) predicts the Moon's orbit to within the accuracy of the laser ranging measurements.[3]

    Moving thread to Conspiracies.
  11. FatFreddy Registered Senior Member

    Mirrors on the moon are not proof that there were people on the moon.

    What Happened on the Moon

    (3:26:10 time mark)

    If the Surveyor program was real, they had the technology to land unmanned remote-controlled craft on the moon back then.

  12. Aqueous Id flat Earth skeptic Valued Senior Member

    Oh really. So why don't all manned missions just go to autopilot then? HMMM?

    Look, it's obvious WE went to the moon. You just didn't get to go since you were then bitching that WE LEFT SOMEONE BEHIND !!!

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    What? That was you? Oh. Well nice of them to provide you that broadband, huh? I wonder how much the taxpayers shelled out for that !!
    Last edited: Sep 30, 2015
  13. FatFreddy Registered Senior Member

    Pictures are fakable and they don't make the anomalies go away.
  14. spidergoat Venued Serial Membership Valued Senior Member

    Reality has anomalies. Lack of anomalies is what makes pictures look fake.
    Aqueous Id likes this.
  15. Aqueous Id flat Earth skeptic Valued Senior Member

    You mean video. But I disagree. The moon landing is the ONLY thing I know for sure is true, because I WAS THERE. Every other video ever recorded is a fake. C'mon: Donald Trump would never make a fool of himself! And look how the press vilified poor George W Bush! And Monica Lewinsky? C'mon! OBVIOUSLY AN OPERATIVE OF POLAND. And Clarence Thomas? Archie Bunker with makeup. You know, people will swallow anything the press feeds them. But leave my moon landing alone. That's sacred, man.
  16. David C The print that nails this troofer Registered Senior Member

    And if that technology exists for unmanned, then manned is even easier. As for your cobblers about unmanned missions to land on the Moon in secret, do you have any evidence of such necessarily enormous rockets taking off to do this? Such rockets would need a definitive launch window to enable the correct trajectory to put them in the correct spot. I'm sure you've fully researched this and have full data on it. Or are you just blowing air out of your backside yet again?
  17. FatFreddy Registered Senior Member

    This would be classified info to which only someone with a high security clearance would have access. You know this.
    19. Ignore proof presented, demand impossible proofs
    This is perhaps a variant of the 'play dumb' rule. Regardless of what material may be presented by an opponent in public forums, claim the material irrelevant and demand proof that is impossible for the opponent to come by (it may exist, but not be at his disposal, ...
  18. spidergoat Venued Serial Membership Valued Senior Member

    Your "proof" is not compelling. But you will never recognize that.
  19. David C The print that nails this troofer Registered Senior Member

    Forest Gump logic. Make a ridiculous claim, when asked to prove it, say it is impossible to prove it. Stupid is as stupid does. Life is like a box a of chocolates, sometimes you get a recognisable flavour, sometimes you got one made up of bovine excrement.

    These enormous rockets are visible for literally hundreds and hundreds of miles and must, MUST, follow a specific launch window and trajectory. You are too ignorant to understand why you are too ignorant to understand.
    krash661 and paddoboy like this.
  20. danshawen Valued Senior Member

    Aluminum shielding would be more than adequate to protect astronauts from the alpha or beta decay of radioisotopes. It would however provide only marginally effective shielding from the sterilizing effects of higher energy ionizing gamma or cosmic radiation.

    On the surface of the Earth, we are not sterilized because miles of atmosphere and the ozone layer protects us from all but the most intense bursts of radiation from outer space.

    All of this has been known since the 1950s.
  21. FatFreddy Registered Senior Member

    There are mixtures of different fuels and oxidizing agents that produce no smoke. I used to live in south Florida and I saw a rocket going up during the day that was producing zero smoke. It was not that easy to see. I don't think very many people noticed it.

    Rockets can be launched during the day from secret locations too.

    Your statement doesn't make the anomalies that prove the hoax go away.

    The radiation issue isn't about whether they faked the missions. It's about why they faked the missions.
  22. David C The print that nails this troofer Registered Senior Member

    Is that it? Seriously? You get told about trajectories launch windows and rockets that can be heard from different states, especially as they cross the sky on the relevant trajectory, and you talk about the "smoke"? It's called a plume. Your ignorance is so profound, you can make up any old crap.

    Ahhh, the super secret launches with special magic trajectories and launch windows that you don't have any "impossible" proof for. It is true. Being dumb about a subject means you really can make up ridiculous claims. There is no way you can be that stupid to believe this bull!

    You are like a broken record. You have nothing but butt air. There aren't any anomalies. All you do is talk about the same rubbishy Apollo 15 flag that you are too dense to understand.

    No it isn't. They solved the "radiation issue" and provable so. They brought back 842lbs of peer reviewed lunar samples that your mega spammed link doesn't even come close to explaining. There is visible impossible to fake signs of lunar gravity and numerous videos that you are afraid to respond to. Here's one -

  23. krash661 [MK6] transitioning scifi to reality Valued Senior Member

    danshawen likes this.

Share This Page