View Active Topics          Latest 100 Topics          View Your Posts          Switch to Mobile

Moon Hoax Debate - The Radiation Issue

Discuss Conspiracies and Cover Ups - e.g. 9/11 Truth, JFK Assassination, New World Order, Roswell, Moon Hoax, Secret Societies, etc. whatever conspiracy floats your boat.

Re: Moon Hoax Debate - The Radiation Issue

Postby really? » 03 Jan 2013, 13:03

Misha wrote:
I agree with Really's first statement that the discrepancy's are not easily addressed. It's a minefield in so many respects.

It is my understanding that the Soviets had every reason to keep their mouths shut. We provided them with the means to build their railroads, mine their manganese, build big truck factories, give them grain, and continue to engage in the multi-corporate world. Also, we had the goods on their space program too. Wisnewski gets into some of this. White touches on this also. Moreover, there is more to this with what the Soviets knew. The Jodrell facility in England helps define the cooperation between the space programs.


Check your history again. We were enemies after WWII. The cold war occurred from 1945 - 1989,91. The height of the Cold war took place in the 60's. We weren't helping them at all.
really?
 
Posts: 1009
Joined: 06 Mar 2010, 20:58






Re: Moon Hoax Debate - The Radiation Issue

Postby Misha » 03 Jan 2013, 13:09

really? wrote:
Misha wrote:
I agree with Really's first statement that the discrepancy's are not easily addressed. It's a minefield in so many respects.

It is my understanding that the Soviets had every reason to keep their mouths shut. We provided them with the means to build their railroads, mine their manganese, build big truck factories, give them grain, and continue to engage in the multi-corporate world. Also, we had the goods on their space program too. Wisnewski gets into some of this. White touches on this also. Moreover, there is more to this with what the Soviets knew. The Jodrell facility in England helps define the cooperation between the space programs.


Check your history again. We were enemies after WWII. The cold war occurred from 1945 - 1989,91. The height of the Cold war took place in the 60's. We weren't helping them at all.


Check your history, Really. We were sending the Soviets grain. We even gave them "Permissible Action Links" for suitcase nukes as a safeguard against unwarranted nuclear suitcase detonations. Even Tom Clancy admitted this on C-SPAN as one example of cooperation between two super powers. Enemy or no enemy, business is business. Really, get out of the dialectic and understand the dynamics of commerce and trade. This is the stability that eventually stopped us from nuking ourselves and fostered cooperation Cold War or no Cold War.
Misha
 
Posts: 438
Joined: 19 Aug 2012, 03:42

Re: Moon Hoax Debate - The Radiation Issue

Postby SydneyPSIder » 03 Jan 2013, 13:19

Arouet wrote:Misha, I pulled up the press conference (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BI_ZehPOMwI). It's an hour and a half so I didn't watch the whole thing, just jumped around a bit. I don't see them as morose, serious yes, but there were a few jokes certainly and some self deprecating humour as well by the guy about his driving and doing three things at once. I might go through the whole thing over the weekend, but if those guys are actors, they are pretty good ones!

ha ha, faking fakers. they are VERY morose. you should check the bit where Mike Collins somehow answers a question for the guys on the ground when they look uncomfortable about the stars -- although he was orbiting and never set foot on the moon. NASA later doctored the transcript to have Aldrin make the remark instead. The video doesn't lie. Question by Patrick Moore, I believe.

Their answers are very superficial and pointless by and large also when you listen.

Arouet wrote:Another question on the video and photo analysis: there's been a lot of talk about light sources and shadows and calculations, etc. Is there reason to believe that light behaves exactly the same on the moon as it does on earth? With different atmospheres would there perhaps be different calculations necessary? I don't know the answer. Anyone know if this question has been addressed?

Well, no, light doesn't behave 'differently', except for effects of refraction in fluids on earth including air and water, e.g. you can get light bending here as it passes between two media, or shimmering effects in the atmosphere due to different temps etc. There's no water or atmosphere on the moon to create such effects. Also colours as light refracts in different wavelengths, e.g. a blue sky or a rainbow through water drops. Speed of light in a vacuum is slightly different when passing through different media.

But otherwise light is light pretty well everywhere we know about in the universe.
SydneyPSIder
 
Posts: 1124
Joined: 10 Sep 2012, 18:24

Re: Moon Hoax Debate - The Radiation Issue

Postby Arouet » 03 Jan 2013, 14:22

SydneyPSIder wrote:Well, no, light doesn't behave 'differently', except for effects of refraction in fluids on earth including air and water, e.g. you can get light bending here as it passes between two media, or shimmering effects in the atmosphere due to different temps etc. There's no water or atmosphere on the moon to create such effects. Also colours as light refracts in different wavelengths, e.g. a blue sky or a rainbow through water drops. Speed of light in a vacuum is slightly different when passing through different media.

But otherwise light is light pretty well everywhere we know about in the universe.


Yes Sydney, that is indeed what I meant by light behaving differently. I guess I could have been more precise and clarified that I meant exactly what you are referring to: that light is passing through a different atmosphere. I was musing on whether that might create different effects on camera - such that the measurements that were used may have been inappropriate for outerspace. I don't know the answer. It may be a non-issue (please keep in mind that your gut instinct is not a sufficient answer to the question.)
User avatar
Arouet
 
Posts: 2544
Joined: 07 Aug 2010, 03:07

Re: Moon Hoax Debate - The Radiation Issue

Postby SydneyPSIder » 03 Jan 2013, 19:05

Arouet wrote:
SydneyPSIder wrote:Well, no, light doesn't behave 'differently', except for effects of refraction in fluids on earth including air and water, e.g. you can get light bending here as it passes between two media, or shimmering effects in the atmosphere due to different temps etc. There's no water or atmosphere on the moon to create such effects. Also colours as light refracts in different wavelengths, e.g. a blue sky or a rainbow through water drops. Speed of light in a vacuum is slightly different when passing through different media.

But otherwise light is light pretty well everywhere we know about in the universe.


Yes Sydney, that is indeed what I meant by light behaving differently. I guess I could have been more precise and clarified that I meant exactly what you are referring to: that light is passing through a different atmosphere. I was musing on whether that might create different effects on camera - such that the measurements that were used may have been inappropriate for outerspace. I don't know the answer. It may be a non-issue (please keep in mind that your gut instinct is not a sufficient answer to the question.)


Well, my physics and optics training at university tells me it's a non-issue. Obviously there shouldn't be any rainbows appearing on the moon, but with NASA at the helm, anything is possible.
SydneyPSIder
 
Posts: 1124
Joined: 10 Sep 2012, 18:24

Re: Moon Hoax Debate - The Radiation Issue

Postby Arouet » 03 Jan 2013, 21:55

You could be right on that.

But what's your opinion on the fogging issue? Are you suggesting that every space photo that is not fogged is a fake? Whether from the moon photos or elsewhere?
User avatar
Arouet
 
Posts: 2544
Joined: 07 Aug 2010, 03:07

Re: Moon Hoax Debate - The Radiation Issue

Postby really? » 03 Jan 2013, 23:07

Misha wrote:I agree with Really's first statement that the discrepancy's are not easily addressed. It's a minefield in so many respects.

Thank you.

Misha wrote:It is my understanding that the Soviets had every reason to keep their mouths shut. We provided them with the means to build their railroads, mine their manganese, build big truck factories, give them grain, and continue to engage in the multi-corporate world. Also, we had the goods on their space program too. Wisnewski gets into some of this. White touches on this also. Moreover, there is more to this with what the Soviets knew. The Jodrell facility in England helps define the cooperation between the space programs.


really? wrote:Check your history again. We were enemies after WWII. The cold war occurred from 1945 - 1989,91. The height of the Cold war took place in the 60's. We weren't helping them at all.


Misha wrote:Check your history, Really. We were sending the Soviets grain. We even gave them "Permissible Action Links" for suitcase nukes as a safeguard against unwarranted nuclear suitcase detonations. Even Tom Clancy admitted this on C-SPAN as one example of cooperation between two super powers. Enemy or no enemy, business is business. Really, get out of the dialectic and understand the dynamics of commerce and trade. This is the stability that eventually stopped us from nuking ourselves and fostered cooperation Cold War or no Cold War.

You make it sound as if the US and the USSR were hand in hand singing Kumbayah. PAL took place during the 70's after the first moon landing.
As for importing grain to them this may have occurred in the 70's during the period of détente, again after the first moon landing. The USSR refused the Marshall Plan. You did know that, yes ? There was no business as usual and know reason for them to keep their mouths shut
really?
 
Posts: 1009
Joined: 06 Mar 2010, 20:58

Re: Moon Hoax Debate - The Radiation Issue

Postby SydneyPSIder » 04 Jan 2013, 08:21

Arouet wrote:You could be right on that.

But what's your opinion on the fogging issue? Are you suggesting that every space photo that is not fogged is a fake? Whether from the moon photos or elsewhere?

Dunno - fogging is a bit intriguing. Many probes send back a digital stream of info, I presume, they don't use film? As many of them are not designed to return to earth. So there aren't many 'space photos' out there except for Apollo and possibly a handful of others -- they are digital streams converted to photos back on earth. The ISS and space shuttle by and large are protected from radiation by the magnetosphere which they fly under. Thoughts? Research?
SydneyPSIder
 
Posts: 1124
Joined: 10 Sep 2012, 18:24

Re: Moon Hoax Debate - The Radiation Issue

Postby SydneyPSIder » 15 Jan 2013, 18:46

You don't seem to have come back with any views on the fogging issue, Arou.
SydneyPSIder
 
Posts: 1124
Joined: 10 Sep 2012, 18:24

Re: Moon Hoax Debate - The Radiation Issue

Postby SydneyPSIder » 15 Jan 2013, 18:56

According to the Fox doco from all that time ago, there was a problem with the Apollo 16 mission -- the largest solar flare outbreak that had occurred up to that time in the 20th c. Except the astronauts were just fine at the end.

Radiation treatment starts at 35:50



What is your view on the strength of the solar flares during the Apollo 16 missions, Arou? What protections did the astronots have?


On another topic, the ill-fated Apollo 1 was only just ready for tests/trials by 1967, with a deadline of reaching the moon by 1969, a mere two years away. It was obvious Apollo 1 was nowhere near spaceworthy, nor was the entire mission control comms infrastructure up to puff. Gus Grissom was critical of progress, and died in an oxygen fire in Apollo 1.

Thomas Ronald Baron was a govt inspector who found the Apollo project was substandard and well behind schedule at about the same time, he died in a car crash at the time, and his report mysteriously disappeared and was never submitted. He spoke on camera before he died of having been harassed at home, but that the harassment had died down. (32:28)
SydneyPSIder
 
Posts: 1124
Joined: 10 Sep 2012, 18:24

Previous

Return to Conspiracies / Cover Ups

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Baidu [Spider] and 2 guests