Moon Hoax Debate - The Radiation Issue

[Arouet]

[The23rdman]

Nothing like stretching the truth for a good story.

[Arouet]

[Arouet]

[Arouet]

[Arouet]

FYI: the above quotations were all from the summary.

[Arouet]

Here's a NASA report that was drafted in March, 1973- after the Apollo missions. Looks relevant, though I haven't read it yet.

APOLLO EXPERIENCE REPORT -
PROTECTION AGAINST RADIATION


http://www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/tnD7080RadProtect.pdf

[Arouet]

[Arouet]

[Arouet]

[Misha]

Thanks, Arouet. This will take some time to read. Keep in mind, if I may play devil's advocate, we are still relying on NASA's word solely. Aside from Percy, Bennett, Wisnewksi, Rene, Kaysing or White, do we have any other sources out there which offers a counterpoint to the radiation record. So in essence, I am asking you guys to do what 23rdman suggest in "zetetic" form. Find something in the opposing camp's argument which you think is logical and worthy against NASA's radiation claim. Maybe this can help define the argument further?

[Arouet]

[Arouet]

Ok, so I decided to start watching Whites "Radioactive Anomaly" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9xlKooAbKpM

I watched part 1. He details that in the late 1990s-early 2000s scientists learned that some solar flares reach close to the speed of light. There is no indication that this was known in the 1960s and 1970s. He cites several sources that astronauts caught out in the open would be in pretty bad shape.

His one line referring to the apollo missions is along the lines him musing how the astronauts would have not had effects while being subject to those flares. He makes no mention of whether such flares did actually hit the astronauts. He also notes some radiation levels in the belt, notes they are twice what humans should absorb, but doesn't indicate the effects of shielding.

He spends some time quoting some forum user named "svector" who swears at him a lot. Unless I missed it, he doesn't indicate that svector is anyone in particular. Not sure how some random internet abuser is relevant to much.

It may be that some of these issues are clarified in later episodes, but I'm going to post as I go along. Otherwise I'll forget.

Anyone else have a different impression of episode 1? I was not terribly impressed.

[Arouet]

[Misha]