Ok, so in Part 4: http://www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1&v=2U- ... =endscreen, while not acknowleding his mistake about how low the SAA goes, he at least admits that hubble does go high enough to go into the belt. He considers it significant now that hubble must shut down as it goes through the belt for half the time that the apollo astronoauts went through it. He concludes therefore that the Apollos couldn't have gone through it without all the instruments going dead.
He shows some guy who made a vacuum box, found his glove couldn't move much, and concludes that therefore the astronauts would not have been able to have fine motor control in the vacuum of space. Now, I don't know enough about the physics here, but I'd question whether that little contraption is a suitable replication of the space experience. White doesn't address this issue so we don't know his opinion on this.
White then goes to refer to a lens that NASA said was improperly ground - and apparently doubts this because school kids can apparently grind these kind of things. I'm sorry, but c'mon! That's a ludicrous argument. Especially if you don't examine whether there were any differences between the hubble version and the do it yourself version. White doesn't go into any more detail so we don't know whether he contemplated this.
He goes into a weird digression of whether hubble was really a spy telescope. Not sure what that has to do with it going through the SAA.
He spends the rest of the video alleging some sort of fakery involving repairs made to Hubble. He again refers to that guy's vaccuum test as being determinative. It is so far off topic that I don't know why he includes it in this video, and that subject is outside the confines of this thread. (if anyone wants to focus on that please do so in the other thread, or create a thread.)
After 40 minutes of this video, I am suitably underwhelmed. I'm trying to approach this objectively. If anyone has a different interpretation I'd welcome it.
So far though he's approached this topic in a rather strange way.