Why the Van Allen belts didn't stop us getting to the moon

To try everything Brilliant has to offer-free-for a full 30 days, visit brilliant.org/DaveMcKeegan . You’ll also get 20% off an annual premium subscription.
Scott Manley's Video: • How Deadly Are The Van...
PATREON: / davemckeegan
Please consider supporting the channel by making purchases through my Amazon affiliates: geni.us/Affiliate
This video was sponsored by Brilliant
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Music by Bensound.com
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

[@DaveMcKeegan]

To try everything Brilliant has to offer-free-for a full 30 days, visit brilliant.org/DaveMcKeegan . You’ll also get 20% off an annual premium subscription.

[@iavsj]

I think there is a much easier way to prove that the moon landing happened ! the fact that USSR EXISTED. think about it all this whole thing was being monitored by them you think all the communications done between the command center and the space craft would go unnoticed by them ? this is supposedly done to get ahead of USSR you think they would stay quiet the whole time ? for what ? the fact that they couldn't deny it is evidence enough that it happened otherwise they would have said something

[@philiphockenbury6563]

I gotta thank Flerfs and moon landing deniers for helping me learn about space, space missions, physics, and also photography. Just like our sponsor Brilliant. I haven’t gotten a subscription yet but damn does it tempt me like a bar does for alcoholics.

[@moxiesaint-clare4257]

I post this and it gets deleted. shielding ? No lead in space, This is gamma radiation. I type the figures but they keep on getting deleted, So 1% of the sun output is Gamma which is 1.4x10'18 joules per hour, convert that into Roentgen, 1,548,000 per hour (1000 is fatal) but you won't get hit by all of that, but still 1% of that Is fatal. And the only shield is the earth's magnetosphere, go outside that and you're dead.

[@jimalbi]

You are doing a fantastic job at convincing walls. But I'm glad you do because I learn things,

[@leftpastsaturn67]

@@moxiesaint-clare4257 "I post this and it gets deleted" Funny then how I've seen the same comment twice before.

[@callmekodiak]

I call BS on the whole "it's impossible to land on the sun" thing. You just go at night. Duh.

[@DaveMcKeegan]

I was going to say that's a bright idea ... But that sort of defeats the point 😂

[@clivedavis6859]

You just need to take a large supply of sunblock with you.

[@andidyouknow8208]

You should try that. I wish I could watch but of course I wouldn’t be able to see anything

[@bretsheeley4034]

But then how can you see where you are going?

[@pugasaurusrex8253]

@@bretsheeley4034the moon obviously, they’re on opposite sides. At night move directly away from the moon and you’ll meet the sun.

[@DavidBritton-nl1wv]

Van Allen. I'm a big fan, I've got all his albums. When he got his first guitar he couldn't afford a strap for it, so he made one out of his belt. That's why his belt's also famous.

[@mjjoe76]

This is more believable than anything moon landing deniers claim.

[@robertmahoney7162]

You win the internet! 🤣🤣🤣

[@Metaljacket420]

"The more you know" 🌈

[@rinzler4841]

i was gonna make this joke ._.

[@Arltratlo]

van Hallen....you must be American....short attention span coupled with knowing nothing!

[@dacutler]

The amusing thing is people who talk about the Van Allen belt being dangerous wouldn't even know it exists if it wasn't for people like James Van Allen, and he disagrees with their assumption.

[@MaxxJagX]

No kidding. They only believe whatever science they need to do validate their twisted worldview.

[@Landoparada360]

Operation paper clip NASANAZIS only took your imagination to the moon.

[@dextermorgan1]

The same people you speak of also couldn't get on the internet, and argue about the Earth being round, or flat, if it were actually flat. These people have a sever lack of understanding of anything Scientific whatsoever.

[@NormanLavin]

Their mostly all repeating to try and look smart but it's not working.

[@dextermorgan1]

@@NormanLavin That's all any of them ever do. They're too stupid to come to conclusions on their own.

[@entangledmindcells9359]

Fun fact.. they love to cite NASA about VABs but refuse to accept citations from the same source about how they delt with it.

[@collinweeks6322]

They dealt with it by saying "if the Van Allen Radiation Belt does exist it didn't effect us".

[@sharimeline3077]

Same thing with climate change deniers. They believe scientists when they say the earth has always gone through climate changes, but refuse to believe the same scientists when they say that THIS change is different.

[@entangledmindcells9359]

@@collinweeks6322 thank you for proving you have not looked into it. That is not remotely close to what NASA said on the matter.

[@dogwalker666]

Flurfs are hypocrites.

[@Kualinar]

For them, if something looks like it may support their narrative, then, the NASA is the highest and most trustworthy of all sources, BUT, if it goes against the Holy Narrative, that can only mean that the NASA is the Spawn of the Devil and always lies.

[@colinleighton7113]

I know it's going off topic, but I just love his dog and how he/she won't let him stop fussing him/her

[@NeutralDrow]

1:16 "Hey, daddy. If you have time to gesture, you have time to ear-scratch."

[@mehallica666]

He's called Rusty.

[@omega311888]

same here!

[@defenestrated23]

Mandatory pets

[@jeremey2072]

I know :-( poor puppy 😂

[@lXlDarKSuoLlXl]

"nasa lies, except when they say things that benefits my argument" You're so smart flerf, have a cookie 😂

[@DanielKolbin]

so real

[@mal74]

I've met these kind of people, logic has no effect on them.

[@Justin.Franks]

"Nasa lies, except when they say things -that- *they think* benefit their argument"

[@W1HURI]

Did you see those pictures from ”Mars” NASA released? One picture had a desert bunny behind a rock😂

[@Alysm-Aviation]

@@W1HURI got the specific image ID?

[@oldfartrick]

Fun fact...you can only have belts around a sphere object.

[@btkvi]

But I can take a belt and fit it around a Cube. Fun fact humans are not round.

[@O_Lee69]

I can take my belt from my trousers and put it around a Van Halen Album. Which is pretty flat.

[@taqresu5865]

​@@btkviMy mirror seems to suggest otherwise lol

[@damianbruno3507]

My ex uses belts, and she's flatter than Kansas City

[@The_Ragequit_Cannon]

​​@@btkvi Fun fact, round doesn't mean spherical

[@Harrery]

I was literally just watching Joe Rogan talk with a guy named Bart Sibrel 30 seconds ago who is a moon landing denier and was trying to misinterpret someone in 2014 talking about how they couldn’t safely send people through the belts. In reality, the quote was saying their instruments had not been radiation tested yet and for fear of losing on-board instrumentation during flight, they couldn’t send people on the mission until it had been test flighted Edit: 12:38 Could have watched the whole video first before commenting. This clip so easily shows how deniers can misinterpret and get things 180 degrees from the truth of what was actually said

[@MrJustinOtis]

Bart Sibrel is a clown.

[@grahvis]

Deniers hear what they want to hear, not necessarily what was actually said.

[@mjjoe76]

Joe Rogan is a blight on society.

[@Jan_Strzelecki]

Yeah, Sibrel is a grifter. He _knows_ that the Moon landings are real, but is _pretending_ otherwise in order to exploit people.

[@davidh.4944]

Sibrel is still around? I thoroughly enjoyed laughing at him over 20 years ago, especially when Buzz clocked him.

[@MrEjwheeler]

Is it true that the Van Halen belts are full of rock?

[@DaveMcKeegan]

Indeed, and getting past them is easy ... You just have to jump

[@nunya_bizniz]

​@@DaveMcKeeganmight as well

[@markwood1159]

@@nunya_bizniz go ahead

[@damianbruno3507]

Just ask Jack Black

[@adrianhjordan1981]

Apparently the only place on Earth they're detectable is Panama

[@mattilindstrom]

As a physicist and a radiation protection certified professional, in my (hopefully never) duties of my microdistrict's radiation protection person: - I'm certified in wartime to get a maximum of 200 mGray in life saving operations - I'm certified to get a maximum of 50 mGray in life saving civilian defence operations - I'm not allowed to go within the 50 µGray/hr limit of a nuclear plant without special dispensation based on my schooling The allowable dose is a slave to the law, but in special conditions a dispensation for the informed and willing personnel can be granted. The Apollo astronaut dose was about 0.4 mGray, nothing to get worked up about as Dave says.

[@akizeta]

How far is the 50 µGray/hr limit in practice? Metres? Hundreds of metres?

[@Yehan-xt7cw]

I suppose that after those doses, you are required to be in a radiation free (sort of) environment for some time? To "cool down" so to speak?

[@mattilindstrom]

@@akizeta That depends on a multitude of variables. On the traning TRIGA reactor (max 250 kW pulse, max 1 kW continuous) we had it was right on the lip of the pool. In a normally working power reactor, that may vary drastically from the head top. I'd never go anywhere without having the most current data. To get all the guesswork out of the equation there is a requirement to mark the worst case line in high vis yellow tape with the associated dose rate limits.

[@mattilindstrom]

@@akizeta I realize I didn't answer your question directly. The norm would be at the door to the reactor hall, be it real or just precautionary. That would make it less than 50 meters from the closest approach to the head.

[@mattilindstrom]

@@Yehan-xt7cw In those dire circumstances I described, there will not be time to get over it. In normal civilian life, a radiation worker in the national RW registry would have an yearly limit of 20 mGray, which will put the worker for an extended paid leave until the radiation safety authority of Finland grants a permission to continue work.

[@Nine-Signs]

For anyone wanting the short version, once we had invented Van Allen trousers to go with the belts it was no longer an issue.

[@riluna3695]

The underlying problem seems to be that all logic and calculations are done using incredibly shallow understandings of the concepts involved. "Radiation is harmful and can kill people." "This thing around the Earth has radiation." Both of these are true facts, and from there it sounds like it makes sense to say "therefore anyone who enters the area around Earth will die to radiation", but when you rely on logic like this, you miss a breathtaking number of details that can vastly change the outcome. "Radiation can kill people." Okay, how much does it take? "This thing around the Earth has radiation." Okay, how much does it have? With nothing but those two questions alone, it's easy to see how the original conclusion could be way off the mark. All it takes is for the first value to be higher than the second value, and you're alive. Then you can do the same with the "Radiation causes damage" amount to see if you're safe from that, too. If you ever want to be someone who knows the real, honest truth of the world, you can't be using logic this shallow to come to conclusions. Math is not some silly tool of pretentious people, it's a critical facet of learning how the world works. When "one number is smaller than another number" is all it takes to undermine your entire logical chain, you have done thinking wrong. You have misthunk. You are having a bad brain problem and you will not learn about space today.

[@EnglishMike]

It's more that they start with the conclusion "We didn't go to the Moon" and have to work backwards from there, denying any math or science data that invalidates their conclusion.

[@antondovydaitis2261]

The problem with Flat Earth and other forms of denial is that they are a direct attack on meaning and reason. Once you believe A and not A, literally all things are logical.

[@riluna3695]

@@EnglishMike That too. Some people start from their conclusion and stop the instant they find something that superficially supports it, and some people just don't put much thought into things and come to bizarre conclusions. Bonus points when the latter group ends up hearing the logic of the former and going "wow, that makes perfect sense" even though it doesn't, and now you have new supporters. Who may sometimes (but of course not always) then fall into the conspiracy rabbit hole by finding community within people who all loathe things like the government and the established science, which then becomes the position you're expected to hold by everyone you value. A vicious spiral downwards into ignorant, spiteful beings. There are always going to be some people who do this of their own volition, but a not insignificant amount get sucked into this hatred slowly over time despite being otherwise perfectly good people. All because they believed in and trusted the wrong people. Such a tragic fate.

[@adamwalker3560]

You do not even need math to understand this principle. There are several cases of people dying to water intoxication (ie, drinking too much water too quickly and dying because of it) every year. If even drinking water can kill you, in sufficient doses, than pretty much anything else can or cannot, depending on concentration. If radiation was immediately lethal, we'd all basically be like vampires, because the sun would KFC us on contact.

[@Fairburne69]

@@riluna3695 Religious people do this all the time. Christians, Muslims etc. etc. Start with the conclusion God is real and work backwards. They find some weak evidence that their God is real and stop thinking.

[@user-rx3cg3ul3t]

In 1966 the Soviets has also sent a Kosmos-110 spacecraft with two dogs named Veterok and Ugolyok to spend some time in space. The apogee of their orbit was at about 900 km, which means that they've been touching radiation belts. Dogs were returned to Earth and studied. They've not only survived the radiation, but weren't seriously harmed by it. Another independent proof that radiation belts are not an unsolvable problem.

[@spiderprime]

Those brave poochies!

[@Cara.314]

​@spiderprime I don't think they had much choice...

[@Viktor_Git]

​@@Cara.314 That's true. But they were very good boys😊

[@txag007]

@@Viktor_Git Maybe they were very bad boys and that's why they were blasted into orbit?

[@samuilzaychev9636]

​@@txag007omg your comment made jojo siwas new song stuck in my head again😭

[@russbaxter1806]

I can remember being at school back in the 1970s where we had 3 boxes with alpha, beta and gamma radiation sources, and the teacher getting us to prove that a sheet of paper stopped the alpha, and a thin sheet of aluminium stopped the beta particles. It's like when flerfs and the like say "do your own research" - well I did.

[@tubecated_development]

When they say ‘do your own research’ what they _mean_ is “Here’s some thread and a needle, now sew yourself into our human-caterpillar”

[@aden538]

@@tubecated_development I always assumed it meant "I ran out of bullshit excuses, so I'm giving up, but in a snarky and superior way that doesn't admit any fault or defeat."

[@radarlockeify]

Flerfers really don't think in 3D

[@markboz3366]

Flerfers really don't think -in 3D-

[@damianbruno3507]

Flerfers think with the D

[@kernicterus1233]

Flerfers … really?

[@giin97]

​@@kernicterus1233first time hearing this extremely common and old contraction?

[@vonwux]

I think this subject is all the more frustrating because we learned the basics about different types of radation and what can shield against them, along with the damage they'll do to people and so on in standard grade physics (14-15 age range) It's not some mystifying subject that requires further education and the ability to research advanced topics, the basics are so simple.

[@5peciesunkn0wn]

Well, when you failed out of kindergarten, it's kind of hard to learn about radiation types in middle and high school.

[@briishcabbage568]

Suggesting moon-landing deniers went to high school.

[@adamwalker3560]

Sadly, there are many places where public education doesn't teach that, even in high school (I've experienced it myself). Usually, at best the explanations are about UV rays. Which they tend to phrase as rays or light, not as radiation (so thus the term "radiation" is still something strange and dangerous to public perception).

[@hartmutholzgraefe]

@@5peciesunkn0wn "I didn't fail at kindergarten, I was so good at it that they did let me play for five seasons!"

[@hartmutholzgraefe]

Thinking back to my school time in the 1980s here in Germany I think it was not covered before 11 or 12th grade, with the majority back then leaving school after 10th grade already. But then again it's been quite a while, and it might have been covered more briefly earlier in middle school, with me now just remembering the more detailed lessons from later years.

[@jaypaint4855]

Most people who shout “van Allen belts” don’t know much about it other than “deadly radiation”. If you asked, they couldn’t calculate the radiation exposure per unit time in the belts, nor could they tell you how long it takes to pass through them. They also wouldn’t know that the radiation they experienced for the 20-30 minutes in the belts was actually less than the lunar EVAs themselves.

[@johnburn8031]

Those people also probably think asteroid belts look like the ones in Sci-Fi films. 🤦🏻‍♂️

[@PrototypeSpaceMonkey]

Can't fly through those either. The asteroid worms are gonna eat you!

[@johnburn8031]

@@PrototypeSpaceMonkey indeed! 😂

[@robadams1645]

Star Wars can be blamed for a lot of misconceptions about space. People don't understand that it was a fantasy movie not science fiction.

[@adrianhjordan1981]

When everyone knows they actually look like the ones in the intro to Star Trek Voyager

[@collinweeks6322]

There are no asteroids therefor no astroid belt.

[@sergiykyivua]

Old soviet joke: Brezhnev summons Soviet cosmonauts and says: “The Americans have landed on the Moon, but we shall show them real power - you will fly to the Sun!” The cosmonauts replies: “But the Sun is very hot, we will burn!” - Do you think the Politburo is stupid?! You'll fly at night!

[@EnglishMike]

The Soviets actually drew up plans to send manned missions to Mars and Venus in the early 70s (the TMK-1 project) as part of the Space Race. It never got off the ground.

[@dogwalker666]

Actually that's from the Goon Show!

[@mikefochtman7164]

You may joke about the Soviets, but THEY are the ones that managed to land something on venus and keep it running (albeit for less than an hour).

[@sergiykyivua]

​@@dogwalker666 I am not familiar with the Goon Show, but according to the Wikipedia article the show ended before the first manned moon landing occurred.

[@sergiykyivua]

@@mikefochtman7164 This is a joke of the Soviet people themselves. They were aware of the cost of all Soviet successes and their impact on their well-being. But they could not choose a new government, even to joke about it was dangerous.

[@scottplumer3668]

I never doubted the Moon landings, but when I first heard the Van Allen belt question, I was admittedly curious. So, like any normal person, I Googled it, and found out how they dealt with it, and the issue was closed. This is how non-conspiracy kooks do it.

[@Tinil0]

You obviously aren't contrarian enough! Channel your teenage years and just be so overwhelmingly mistrustful of ALL authority that you will instantly latch onto any alternative explanations and commit so hard you will never again fear evidence you are wrong. Then you can finally become a moon-landing denier!

[@tristanridley1601]

Bingo. Hello, fellow totally normal kook. ;)

[@wiredforstereo]

Exactly. You looked it up. They: invent a conspiracy with the imagination.

[@aden538]

Indeed, you skipped the first crucial conspiracy steps in answering any question: 1) Make an assumption with your minimal-zero knowledge on the subject, mainly just what "feels right". 2) Assume anyone who disagrees with your baseless assumption is a dirty liar hell-bent on oppressing you. 3) Start your search.

[@jflaplaylistchannelunoffic3951]

But did you also come across contrary scientific arguments, like the ones presented by e.g. Jarrah White?

[@TheWokeFlatEarthTruth]

For those interested, here are the words of Dr. James Van Allen himself: "The outbound and inbound trajectories of the Apollo spacecraft cut through the outer portions of the inner belt and because of their high speed spent only about 15 minutes in traversing the region and less than 2 hours in traversing the much less penetrating radiation in the outer radiation belt. The resulting radiation exposure for the round trip was less than 1% of a fatal dosage - a very minor risk among the far greater other risks of such flights. I made such estimates in the early 1960s and so informed NASA engineers who were planning the Apollo flights. These estimates are still reliable. The recent Fox TV show, which I saw, is an ingenious and entertaining assemblage of nonsense. The claim that radiation exposure during the Apollo missions would have been fatal to the astronauts is only one example of such nonsense." Dr. James A. Van Allen.

[@stambo1983]

Is this taken from the letter that James Van Allen wrote in reply to someone claiming the radiation would be fatal?

[@Tinil0]

@@stambo1983 Close, it was a 2003 letter that a debunker wrote to Professor Van Allen asking for his own personal statement on the conspiracy. The original letter said: "My question to you, Professor Van Allen, is this. I have read that you have "denounced" the conspiracy theorists' claims that radiation in the Van Allen belts would have killed the astronauts. I have also seen a quote from you about what utter nonsense the Fox special was. Could you please, if possible, point me to any sources in print or on the web where you have been extensively quoted? If there are none that you know of, and it wouldn't be too much trouble, I would appreciate it if you could reply with a brief statement on the subject. In all my recent studies about the moon-conspiracy theories, the cornerstone of most arguments appears to be that radiation is what makes interplanetary space travel impossible. I feel that there is no person better qualified to debunk this absurd claim (and no one more likely to be taken seriously) than you. Of course, some conspiracists will say that you are in on the conspiracy yourself, but we can never hope actually to convince them. "

[@5peciesunkn0wn]

​​@@stambo1983that or an interview about what he thought of some Fox TV broadcast judging by the last couple sentences.

[@TheWokeFlatEarthTruth]

@@stambo1983 Correct.

[@mackymode8185]

Hey Sherlock, radiation exists anywhere in space not just Van Allen belt, that's why NASA is hell-bent on making Artemis radiation-proof

[@thegrumpyoldmechanic6245]

The vast body of scientific literature on the data and samples from the Apollo moon landings get criminally little attention.

[@DannyTruthMagnified]

All of the telemetry data for the Apollo missions is lost, outside of the data for Apollo 9, which was flown in low Earth orbit, never actually leaving for the moon.

[@Agarwaen]

@@DannyTruthMagnified false.

[@mjjoe76]

I know a retired earth science professor who has examined moon rocks. His opinion: if you think we had the technology to create these minerals on earth and fool scientists for 50+ years, going to the moon would be simple by comparison.

[@DannyTruthMagnified]

​@@AgarwaenGo read the The Apollo 11 Telemetry Data Recordings

[@frantaspacek9583]

​@@DannyTruthMagnified "All of the telemetry data for the Apollo missions is lost" that's completely false. Did you even read your own source? Because if you did, you would know you're mistaken. This is a quote from the very first paragraph: "engineers at three tracking stations would tape the original signals onto one-inch telemetry tapes for backup and then also convert the raw feed into a conventional format compatible with American broadcast standards" That's what was lost, the original tapes. There's countless copies, so what you claim is a lie.

[@colty7764]

The Moon landings happened. It disturbs me that some people still use flawed logic ( not understanding basic physics) to explain their views. The Moon videos from (especially Apollo 15, 16 and 17 seem very real and genuine to me.

[@kerwynbrat5771]

As I was there, saw it in person as did all of the world, I know it was real. I like to point out that CGI didn't exist back then.

[@johnburn8031]

Don't you know Stanley Kubrick filmed those? But he insisted on filming them on location! 💁🏻‍♂️🙆🏻‍♂️😉

[@bass-dc9175]

Was a rather interesting experience for me a couple years ago when I had the chance to visit an Observatory in france capable of LLR. I was even allowed to punch in random coordinates and then the coordinates of the reflectors left on the moon. For Moon Landing deniers to deal with that, they would have to accept that we sent robots there to set up the reflectors, which would require better technology, than sending humans. Meaning they would have to believe that they had the means to do it and the people willing to do it but then faked it anyways for some reason.

[@5peciesunkn0wn]

@@bass-dc9175 Well, the first reflector was on Apollo 11, then another was dropped by a soviet probe later on. The biggest problem with their claims of 'probes did it' is that no probes landed anywhere near the apollo landing sites...

[@wncjan]

In 1969 we had the technoly to land on the moon, but not video technology to fake it.

[@LetMyPeopleKnowMinistry]

Please consider doing a video about their claims that propulsion can't happen in the vacuum of space without air to push on.

[@jonathanadams5903]

My thing with the radiation belts was even if they were as dangerous as people say, we still could have gone to the moon. Even lethal doses of radiation could take days or years to manifest, plenty of time to complete the moon landings. They all knew there was a chance they wouldn't make it back at all, so I don't think it would have stopped them.

[@mschedler4984]

No one dare enter the Van Halen belts. Eddie will shred anyone like he shreds his righteous solos.

[@mschedler4984]

RIP Eddie.

[@Forest_Fifer]

Apparently most of the radiation is caused by solar Eruptions.

[@leonxpc1]

My favorite response to the van Allen belts is: The van Allen belts? The things that only real if space is real, the sun not local and the planet a sphere? Are those the ones you are referring as real ?

[@DaveMcKeegan]

"NASA Lies about everything ... what's that? NASA says there are deadly radiation belts? ... Ok i'll believe that"

[@leonxpc1]

@@DaveMcKeegan you should make a video of all the NASA truths that flerfs accepts. Would love to see the implosion

[@joerichardson4325]

​@@DaveMcKeegan And that other gem they cherry-pick from NASA documentation..."assuming a flat, non-rotating Earth" (for some flight description)! "Yeah... everything NASA says is a lie...except for these 5-6 words"! (Will Rusty ever have any speaking parts?😊) Look forward every week to your vids!

[@mobbkopf]

@@joerichardson4325It is so ridiculous, isn’t it? They see a ten-second clip on KZbin of some former astronaut or some random guy saying five words out of context (e. g. „we have lost the technology“ or „we can not go higher than 10 miles“) and conclude that they can throw all the research and all the work that has been done in the last 70 years around the world out the window, because of course the only reason some random guy said five words must be a centuries old global conspiracy of the elites.

[@Kualinar]

Lead shielding is required against gamma rays and neutron radiation. Those are absent from the Van Allen belts as they can't be affected by a magnetic field. For the Van Allen belts, it charged particle radiation. Those are MUCH easier to shield against. Consumer grade aluminium foil over some thermal insulation and an metallic structure of the Apollo capsules where more than enough.

[@cantusvivus]

Even a tin foil hat provides some shielding…

[@Kualinar]

@@cantusvivus To bad it don't shield against stupidity and conspiratorial narratives...

[@gunternetzer9621]

Each mission flew a slightly different course in order to access its landing site, but the orbital inclination of the translunar coast trajectory was inclined to the Earth’s equator by about 30°. A spacecraft following that trajectory would bypass all but the edges of the Van Allen belts. The command module’s outer hull was made of stainless steel and the (upper) heat shield from epoxy resin, which along with the fibrous insulation between the inner and outer hulls was a very effective form of shielding against protonic radiation.

[@Kualinar]

@@gunternetzer9621 The shiny part was polished aluminium that got vaporized during reentry. The steel was under the ceramic layer.

[@profphilbell2075]

The flat earthers talk about the van Allen belts as if they are experts on the subject. And at the same time say space is fake. So where is the container between the ground and 3000 km

[@yag-yet_another_gamer]

whatever it is, that's what all the stars were painted on.

[@Capt.Turner]

I'm so glad you're bringing up Scott Manley's excellent video on this topic. He's about the best source of information on these topics and I cheer you for joining him in your own analysis. The van Allen belts are not a major obstacle when leaving lower earth orbit. You checked all the major boxes brief and on point. I left a subscription for you. Looking forward to watching more of your stuff.

[@thecoinguy6757]

My dad is working on software they’re using for the Artemis program. He had to fly from Houston to Boston to blast the computers with radiation here in a lab before the launch just to see what the upper limits of the equipment is.

[@Requiem4aDr3Am]

carrying two tortoises? uh oh the flerfs will love that. I'm sure there were 4 elephants as well since they stand on the tortoises back to hold up flat earth.

[@lyndafjellman3315]

Ah come on, it's turtles all the way down!

[@Requiem4aDr3Am]

@@lyndafjellman3315 the infinite turtle soceity?

[@lyndafjellman3315]

@@Requiem4aDr3Am That's the one.

[@KonradTheWizzard]

Eight elephants. They carried flat earth and a backup for safety. That's why they also needed two tortoises.

[@xczechr]

The turtle moves.

[@JustWasted3HoursHere]

Lead shielding would actually be terrible because it would convert the high energy particle radiation into x-rays, making it far worse for the astronauts.

[@phillwainewright4221]

Moon-landing deniers always cite the Van Allen belts without understanding how they work, or even what they are.

[@5peciesunkn0wn]

definitely my favorite part. It's alpha and beta particles. Sufficiently thick *PAPER* can block them lol. "U need led!" no you don't.

[@hartmutholzgraefe]

McToon often tricks them by saying Van Halen belts, and more often then not the "debate" opponent then uses that term in his replies, too ;)

[@hartmutholzgraefe]

@@5peciesunkn0wn a continuous layer of leds would work out, too, esp the smd types which can be aligned without gaps. Lead on the other hand would indeed be overdue here :)

[@michaelburk9171]

Their simple unsupported assertion that humans can't survive in the Van Allen take 10 seconds to say and an hour to refute. Then they move the goal post and repeat with something similar. They're like Christian apologists doing the "Gish Gallop". Basically they pull shit out of their asses faster than their interlocutors can clean it up.

[@adamwalker3560]

@@5peciesunkn0wn Best part is that even if you needed lead, you could literally just use old fashioned lead-based paint for it. Problem solved. There isn't anything magical about lead, it's just dense. There's a large number of other substances that can work in differing thicknesses (like gold or osmium), not to mention as you said, alpha and beta particles have less armor penetration than a rubber band. In fact, beta particles are only a major problem if you breathe a sufficient density of them in. Not to mention, as humans we can just take a certain amount of even gamma rays (in fact, we technically do every day, just tiny tiny amounts. Just another argument not understanding dosage and quantity mattering more than what it is).

[@Vespuchian]

'Radiation is like Education' is a phrase begging for a pithy punchline, like 'it's meaningless below a certain level', or 'it's only significant if it penetrates'. 'Long term exposure may lead to changes of vision'?

[@jumpman8282]

I exposed a flerf to some education once and it almost killed him.

[@corey2232]

I'm so glad you mentioned how it makes no sense for flat earthers to bring up the Van Allen belts! They claim space is fake & that we live under a "firmament" (with a local sun), yet the Van Allen belts, which exist in space, are real? And they believe NASA when it comes to their existence, what they consist of, and the density of the radiation, but nothing else 😂

[@5peciesunkn0wn]

they also believe/cherrypick/hide-the-context when nasa says "We lost the technology" or "we don't have the technology".

[@julesdomes6064]

@@5peciesunkn0wn And that was just a random quote from a random NASA astronaut (Don Pettit) that paranoid nut jobs can twist and mangle to suit their fantasies. But everything else that Mr. Pettit has ever said about the Apollo missions are of course just evil lies... 😂 Cherry picking, anyone?

[@hyau512]

The same argument can be made about free-fall while inside the ISS - if space doesn’t exist, why invent the effect of weightlessness? To do so is hard given the almost lack of it being shown in movies.

[@WCDavis-cl7si]

African, Australian, Aztec, Babylonian, Celtic, Chinese, Greek, Hebrew, Inca, Indian, Japanese, Mayan, Mesa, Navajo, Persian, Slavic, Sumerian, Viking; all were FLAT AND DOMED before 1900. The 1958 Encyclopedia Britannica says the Antarctica Ice Wall has a dome at 13,000 feet. 1940 Hammond's Air Age Map of the World (military) is also a flat earth map... The world was changed after WW2. We don't know anything before 1945. Do you feel dumb yet?

[@5peciesunkn0wn]

@@WCDavis-cl7si All of them also had the sun go *under* the world. So congrats. You're actively dumber than them. (Also the greeks knew the earth was a sphere over 2k years ago so nice try you fail)

[@Fabian46544]

crazy person: "moonlandings never happened" some person: "so you are a flat earther" crazy person: "Listen, I'm crazy but not that crazy, ok?"

[@RichardinNC1]

I know a few like that!

[@Tallorian]

I wish they would actually admit their craziness like that 😂 But for them flerfs are crazy, but they themselves, with the same disingenuous behavior and kindergarten-level argumentation, are the smartest and bestest people above all those fools who "religiously believe" in Moon landing. Projection much...

[@tristanridley1601]

Denying the moon landing has these prerequisites: You believe the USA government could/would engage in large conspiracy to appear to win the space race. (Sounds plausible to me.) You never learned/forgot about the constant live streamed video that countless children watched, or think we somehow faked all that. Very little of that is ever mentioned or available to the public. You never realized how difficult faking the landing would be with special effects of the time, which is reasonable since faking video is SO easy this decade. Belief in flat earth quickly demands you claim a global and ridiculously huge conspiracy, including almost all scientists since you have to deny basic scientific facts anyone could demonstrate with home experiments. Flerfs are the World Cup of crazy. Moon landing denial is a casual game at the park with friends, by comparison.

[@tristanridley1601]

Moon landing denial is to flat earthers as a puff of a joint is to a life-consuming heroin addiction. It can only even start to be a slope if the mild one becomes a regular habit, and you like it enough to try more.

[@jex-the-notebook-guy1002]

Flat Earth isn't crazy

[@PsychoMuffinSDM]

THANK YOU SO MUCH for finally bringing up the inclination to go over the belts. So many debunkers just lean on the short duration and shielding. Very few note that you can just go over or under them!

[@cascadesouthernmodeltrains7547]

I have a friend who tries to convince me about this radiation BS and how all radiation is bad… he usually does this while on a cell phone talking to me. Irony I know. He doesn’t grasp the concept that light, you know the light that allows us to see is part of the EM spectrum and is radiation. So is heat, we can’t see heat but we feel it. Not all radiation is bad, and some radiation can even pass through us and still not be bad, hell some of this said radiation is essential for life.

[@aethertoast4320]

The main thing I have heard about the Radiation Belts being an issue is that they are a problem for our more modern equipment. The electronics and equipment used nowadays are a bit more sensitive and could be more prone to error cause of the radiation's interference.

[@simonwatson2399]

True, but not the particles in the van Allen belts, it's too low energy. The stuff the sun throws out in big solar storms and high energy cosmic rays are the problem. That's why there are satellites dedicated to detecting solar flares and sensitive earth orbit satellites shut down when the bad ones are detected.

[@jameshart2622]

This is exactly correct. The major computing innovation between then and now was minification, but smaller electronics inevitably makes it more sensitive to noise, and stray radiation causes all kinds of noise. Things that the Apollo program considered "trivial" would turn modern circuit boards into paperweights. This causes real problems for satellites. (Not _unsolvable_ problems though. Just real ones. They've been solved, more or less.) People are no more or less sensitive than before, though, so no problem there.

[@joerichardson4325]

​@@jameshart2622 "Paperweights"? In space, we don't need no steenkin' paperweights! ✌️

[@StevenCorr]

I guy I used to live with was a moon landing denier but only Apollo 11. He's fine with all the others. 😊

[@pariah6775]

Given the political climate back then, I can understand the cause for suspicion, but that should be cause for investigation and examination of evidence, not outright denial.

[@pariah6775]

and same lol I have room mate that has some far out there views on things

[@StevenCorr]

@pariah6775 Yep, that was pretty much the basis of his denial. That and the obvious and easily debunked things like the flag moving. Oh, and he smoked a lot of weed too. I would get stoned just being in the same room as him. 🤪😵‍💫

[@lyndafjellman3315]

@@pariah6775 Why? why should they investigate? They are being told by "sources" that what they believe is correct so no further investigation is needed. (anyone contradicting this is "in on it") Just check out flat earth deniers who give "200 proofs" and then back it up with reasonable looking "investigations" or anti-vaxers who do the same with spurious "tests" and "surveys".

[@NeutralDrow]

Was he a big fan of golf, perhaps? 😄 "Neil Armstrong this, Buzz Aldrin, that...pah! Now ALAN SHEPARD, on the other hands..."

[@michaeldarby3503]

What is lesser known is the belt of noise, this of course is the "Van Halen belt"

[@janus1958]

Another factor to take into account is that the Moon's orbit around the Earth isn't over the equator, but ~5 degrees from the ecliptic. Meaning, that if you choose your launch date correctly, a 28 degree orbital inclination to the equator is the best option for a Earth-Moon trajectory and prevents having to do a "broken plane" maneuver along the way (And also allowed for the "free return" trajectory used by Apollo 11). This also avoided the worst of the belts. It did, however limit available launch windows. The purpose of Orion is to establish a more permanent presence on the Moon, and such a launch window limitation is less than desirable for this. Thus, it has to be designed to be able to pass a bit deeper into the heart of the belts to increase the flexibility of launch dates.

[@gunternetzer9621]

Excellent analysis.

[@DeltaH-9]

You are hands-down the best debunker I have had the pleasure of subscribing to. Everything perfectly explained with nothing left to question. Please don't stop doing what you're doing.

[@ryanabrams5980]

I always believed we landed on the moon I'm having trouble understanding how it took 3 days to get there wen they say we were traveling 25000 miles an hour to get thru the belt in an hour in order to minimize exposure the moon is 250000 miles away so at that speed it would take 10 hrs at half speed it would take 20 hours at 1/4 that speed it would take 40 hrs so I guess we were only traveling 4000 miles an hour the rest of the trip after traveling 25000 miles an hour

[@WildfireCryptoTrading]

This was interesting and informative, that was literally the only question I had left about the moon landing the rest is provable already, Got me convinced

[@raptorwhite6468]

It's always nice to see people who can accept evidence that doesn't support their beliefs and admit they were wrong

[@ninaaniston1717]

Mate, just to clarify, our (nuclear industry workers) allowed annual dose is quarter of regular civilian’s annual safe dose. I won’t go into a total exposure vs single exposure levels, the point is, we have to deal with regular background, plus our work. So, my final point is, the vanAllen belt dose is so pitiful it is barely worth a fuss flerfs are making.

[@allanwidner9276]

Tangentially, the whole "experts say modern stuff can't do it, how could they have done it back then" argument doesn't realize how resilient more primitive systems actually are.

[@benj1008]

I often see people saying that the temperatures the temperatures in the VAB are tens of thousands degrees and would melt anything trying to pass through it. Of course that's not how temperature works with some alpha and beta particles in the vacuum of space. It would have been nice if that were covered by the video as well. Nevertheless, great video and as usual I learnt quite a few things!

[@TMAC_burninator]

Your segues into the sponsor reads have been really smooth lately 😆 Thanks for making these videos!

[@brendanpells912]

The dosimetry results from the Apollo 11 mission shows that they received a total dose of 0.18 rads which is 1.8 mSv. The statutory limit in the UK for nuclear workers is 20 mSv in any calendar year.

[@lauriuusitalo764]

In Finland the average dose for non radiation worker is about 4 mSv. Of this about 2 mSv from Radon in the air in the buildings and 1 mSv from the background radiation. Of this 1 mSv roughly 0,3 mSv is cosmic radiation. In the end, they received quite a low dose. In some places on earth you can get up to 2 mSv from cosmic radiation and tens of mSvs just from the background radiation from the earth/rock.

[@erics2133]

One more minor point on safety and testing of the Orion: during the Apollo program, OSHA didn't have any regulations regarding maximum radiation exposure that applied to astronauts. Now, they do, so if NASA didn't test this, they'd be opening themselves up to liability.

[@Hobbes746]

The Orion test wasn’t so much for the radiation exposure of the astronauts (we already know what to expect and are just filling in the minor details), but to test the resilience of the spacecraft’s electronics when exposed to higher levels of radiation.

[@ceejay0137]

The greatest radiation danger for the Apollo astronauts would have been a large solar flare or coronal mass ejection directed towards the Earth and Moon. They would have received high (possibly lethal) radiation doses from that. Pointing the service module towards the Sun would have given maximum shielding, but it might have been too little.

[@obsidiancurse429]

I’ve heard the reason the 3 astronauts looked so downbeat in their first press interviews was because they didn’t gain super powers from the radiation. Apparently they had already spent a fortune on their “fantastic 3” costumes 🤣

[@TheLoobis]

I want to see the outtakes where the dog is trying to lick your face.

[@InfernosReaper]

Plus, how could the VAB prove flat earth when it literally requires the planet to be round to work

[@DavidPalin]

I didn't know anything about the van alan belt (probably spelt it wrong) but the explanation you give make sense. Won't make a difference to the FE crew, though. Some people can't cope with reality. Ive been there, its not easy to escape from (denial, not the van alan belt😂). Love your videos because they are full of common sense, again, something i lack.😅

[@vimalramachandran]

This was well researched and presented. Brilliant!

[@littlefluffybushbaby7256]

And it had a dog. What's not to like?

[@Joe-306]

Thank you for the very informative crash course on this. I keep hearing the belt thrown in conversations but never really knew what it was.

[@GingerNorseman]

Honestly, I only heard about the Van Allen belt recently, and the video I heard about it in, it didn't really clear up much. Thanks for the clear and concise explanation, mate.

[@lumntoob999]

There’s a reason flat eathers don’t talk about the specifics, because they know it’s not actually a problem. They just say it’s deadly to pass through and that’s it, it coincides with their religion so they can make a simple statement on faith.

[@NeutralDrow]

"NASA always lies! Unless they're saying something I want to believe!" - flerf credo

[@lumntoob999]

@@NeutralDrow probably the most important commandment of flerf religion, “thou shalt cherry pickith.”

[@wardrobegirl67]

Every belief regarding cosmology is based on faith. Whether religious or non religious because none of us have been there or observed it for ourselves.

[@lumntoob999]

@@wardrobegirl67 sounds like your faith is science denial, and reality denial but that goes right along with science denial anyway.

[@NeutralDrow]

@@wardrobegirl67 If me knowing that Australia exists, despite my never having laid eyes on it personally, is "faith"...that's an utterly useless and nonsensical definition of "faith."

[@paulbooth3953]

The thing with flerfs, the inability to think in three dimensions, perhaps explains their lack of imagination when it comes to scale.

[@suzannepottsshorts]

Van Allen belts are only dangerous if they catch on fire, but we can shoot missiles at them to fix it. "Voyage to the Bottom of the Sea" is a fun movie!

[@user-db5qd3wd6z]

Those were Irwin Allen belts.

[@colincampbell3679]

And another thing about the Moon Landings and the Radiation problem, The time of the Moon landing Happened when the Sun was in Solar Minimum, So the solar wind and charged partials were at the lowest the sun was putting out. So even on the Moon those Solar Winds and partials could not effect the Astronauts since they stayed there for a short time and the shielding of the Moon Lander and their space suits was enough protection for that time spent there.

[@whoisbriannab]

I think it's interesting how Dave's channel went from photography to debunks! I also learn something new every video as Dave just presents the facts and the science behind them and doesn't resort to condescending insults!

[@Mykst]

What's cool as well is that he also uses some of his photography expertise in some of the debunks he does as well.

[@JhericFury]

Every now and again KZbin recommends another debunker, but I miss the dog and the calm explanation of science things I often didn't know before.

[@mikefochtman7164]

Well this particular video is the 'exception that proves the rule'. Hehehe. Most of the time Dave analyses the 'photographic evidence' that flat earthers, moon-landing deniers, and others try to use to prove their pet conspiracy. With those, it's quite enlightening the details of photography he goes into on the subjects.

[@bobweiram6321]

Meanwhile KZbin shadow bans excellent content raising valid questions about the moon landing.

[@leftpastsaturn67]

@@bobweiram6321 Ah, the tired old 'KZbin shadow bans excellent content' excuse. Priceless.

[@B.r.i.a.n.1]

I like how they believe in the van allen belts because they bolster their argument even tbough they cant prove they exist. Let alone how dangerous they are or arent.

[@dennisdouglas5941]

Thank you very much. I knew most of what you said already, but did get a few more things that I did not know before... But nice to have my notions met.

[@mikefochtman7164]

So glad you touched on the different forms of radiation. Most folks just assume, "Oooo radiation. You need LEAD to be safe from that!". The very fact that the Van Allen belts are formed interacting with the earth's magnetic field proves it is a form of charged particles. And charged particle radiation is shielded against by different shielding. Simple aluminum sheathing works very well. Of course there's a bit more to it than just wrapping things in 'tin foil', but it's not as hard as deniers seem to think.

[@5peciesunkn0wn]

It's as simple as 'thick enough paper' lol

[@AlexBarbu]

I wish we had conspiracy theorists with more originality. Imagine a Moon landing denialist that thinks the Apollo 11 crew went to Venus. Now THAT would be an interesting conversation.

[@tubecated_development]

I imagine one who has a moral conundrum. Although he believes that shoelaces are ‘tiny evil snakes’ , he still fought very hard to learn to tie his own shoelaces because he believes that NASA are evil and that they invented Velcro. “If Velcro was real, then how would it know exactly the right moment for the one type of tiny hands to grip the other type of tiny hands?”

[@mrshonk3948]

"they faked the moon landing... ON VENUS"

[@whiptonguebulborb]

Can we just appreciate Dave’s sponsor transitions for a sec

[@robadams1645]

I love them. They tell me exactly when I need to start skipping.

[@tomr6955]

No

[@CadillacDriver]

Why would NASA tell us about the Van Halen belt, if it were impossible to pass through it? They'd instantly put a hole in their own "fakery" by telling us about it.

[@bobweiram6321]

Not everyone reads the same script.

[@andreaswiklund7197]

The Van Halen belts are easy to penetrate. At least to take off - ask all the groupies. Just do your insertion burn right over "Panama" and you will instantly "Jump" through it. Then you ... hmm ... ...

[@CadillacDriver]

@@andreaswiklund7197 🤣

[@PhysicsGamer]

@@bobweiram6321 So now there were multiple simultaneous coverups competing with each other?

[@bobweiram6321]

@@PhysicsGamer You can only do so much to keep everyone on the same script when covering up a lie. The vast majority of NASA scientists and engineers are cluelessly working on their particular specialty. Higher level officials are responsible for writing the script according to their work and other scientists. Anomalies do surface, but can often be faked, ignored, or explained away despite being implausible, such as calculating complex trajectories on a primitive computer. The bigger ones, however, such as the Van Allen belts, are much harder to script for, nor can it be ignored under the scrutiny of the outside scientific community. Consequently, NASA officials have no choice but to address them head on. This often means going off script or changing the script to make it more plausible when challenged. This uncritically thinking KZbinr tried to explain it away by comparing high energy particles in the Van Allen Belts to radiation from radioisotopes. Huge fail!

[@TheHellis]

9:37 what about the ice wall?? Surely it would crash in to the massive ice wall nobody has images of

[@brianfileman]

The ice wall isn’t a problem for spacecraft. It’s not that high: although it is protected by machine gun wielding penguins. The ice wall is there to stop us getting to where the dome intersects with the flat Earth. I thought everyone knew that. Great video from Dave, as per usual.

[@kylie_h1978]

I always have to bang my head on the table whenever someone brings up the need for lead shielding to pass through the VA Belts. The radiation in the VA Belts is charged particle radiation, both electrons and protons and high energy charged particles entering a heavy metal such as lead create Bremsstrahlung or "braking radiation" because the large metal nuclei deflect the particles negatively accelerating them, making them expend that energy as electromagnetic radiation. Using lead to shield the CSM would be one of the worst things you could do. The best shielding would be water, followed by heavy polymers and light metals, exactly what the hull of the CSM was made from. Also, the number of people who think the crew passed through the VA Belts inside the LM is patently ridiculous. They were of course in the Command Module, not the Landing Module.

[@rohdri]

Ah, the radiation belts. That have been explained time and again. But they just can't figure it out.

[@donmacmurray3108]

Always enjoy your videos, Dave. Clear and concise. Logical. “Jus’ like that.”

[@stevekitt52]

i remember as a kid, the PG Tips 'The race into space' back in 1971 and that talked about the VA belts plus a nice image of Explorer1 and also the Zond spacecraft.

[@gunternetzer9621]

I still have it - still makes interesting reading.

[@lilgto64]

This reminds me of so many examples of things which were once thought impossible. Breaking the sound "barrier" or a human running a mile in less than 4 minutes. If your only "evidence" for something being impossible is that someone, or even many, at some point in the past claimed it was impossible, then your argument is quite weak. My recollection for the first time I heard about the Van Allen Belts was that it was a known risk that was of not entirely known magnitude since we did not at that time have fleets of satellites out there measuring them.

[@LewesMint]

Well done. I learned a couple of things I didn't alredy know.

[@michaelhorning6014]

Professor Van Allen and his assistants built Explorer I on tables in the hallway of McLean Hall at the University of Iowa. My Dad worked at a paint store a few blocks away and sold him sheets of linoleum to cover the tabletops.

[@FerretWarlord1]

Holy cripes, your moon landing videos draw out more nutters than your flat earth ones.

[@AM-rd9pu]

I think it just has to do with the fact that moon landing denial is slightly less fringe than flat earth. There are just more moon landing deniers than flerfs.

[@kernicterus1233]

It won’t matter, these people have to feel special about knowing something that no one else does, whether it’s true or not.

[@dno8025]

Best video I have seen on the Van Allen belts.

[@user-bs9wq1lk4o]

keep it up .... I am amazed that people can't admit that they didn't or don't get science easily , it is OK to ask questions ... onwards and upwards

[@sneakyfox4651]

The van Allen Belts are flat! No. Wait, er… ;0)

[@MysticJhn]

It's almost like saying, "Nobody can get to my house, there's a fence around the yard." Well, yes, nobody is running through the fence, but people can still jump over it.

[@adriannabcustomfurniture]

Thank you for this video. This is the best and most simplistic explanation I've ever heard. FE still wont listen or even try to understand, but as a normal human being (who knows Earth is a Globe and knows we landed on the Moon), this actually helped me understand.

[@nirorbach8046]

Thanks for another good video. A small scientific comment: The Van Allen belts contain only particles, and not waves (other the ones that happen to pass right through). That is because they are produced by Earth's magnetic field. And that field affects only electrically charged particles.

[@misterocain]

Closing statement so true. How do Flatties know the belts exist?

[@christiankalk4668]

Moon Landing Deniers: You can't get to the Moon because of the impenetrable Van Allen Belts. Scientists: Well, they're not *that* dangerous. You see... MLD: Impenetrable Van Allen Belts Scientists: Plus the capsule is shielded, so the actual exposure... MLD: Impenetrable Scientists: And we also have the option of flying around... MLD: IM-PEN-E-TRA-BLE!!!

[@TurdBoi-tf5lf]

The belt is a solid object you can't pass through it

[@TurdBoi-tf5lf]

Btw I am being sarcastic

[@JeremiahStrozewski]

I just got Doctor Who goosebumps, LOL! those Pesky Daleks.

[@Packhorse-bh8qn]

@@TurdBoi-tf5lf "Btw I am being sarcastic:" The sad part is, you really DID need to add that disclaimer! =:O 😁

[@dennismayhem4894]

We did not land on the Moon!

[@Packhorse-bh8qn]

Just as radiation has some very interesting effects, the word, "radiation" has some interesting effects. Depending on the hearer, it can pique interest, or it can shut down all thinking processes. There is a range of effects in between, of course.

[@mackenziehunter4593]

You are the best at segwaying into your sponsers. I just love how you do it. I wish others were as good as you.

[@joshkrause2977]

Well it’s a “belt” that could be a clue, also it has thinner parts. Do people really think they have to fly right through the middle of it only??

[@leftpastsaturn67]

It's the thinking part where they have the problem.

[@mjjoe76]

It would be odd to find a flat earther who wasn’t a moon landing denier. But people are strange creatures, so this person probably exists.

[@mchevre]

Yeah I'd say pretty much all flat earthers are also moon landing deniers, but most moon landing deniers aren't flat earthers.

[@mistertagnan]

I wouldn’t be surprised to encounter someone who thinks “aliens” live on the moon, and also thinks the Earth is flat. I can definitely imagine some sort of religious basis for such a claim (and consequently, some conspiracy for government trying to remove evidence on the moon or whatever)

[@rickyjanzen6684]

But probably more common to find moon landing deniers who aren't flat earthers. I feel like things like moon landing deniers, UFO nuts, and the like are more "entry-level" conspiracies that often don't have many others attached. Flat earth gets pretty deep and is more often the bowl (plate?) holding a plethora of wacky theories.

[@mbblat8415]

Put a moon landing denier in the same chat as a UFOLOGIST who think that NASA is hiding the alien encounters during Apollo and watch sparks fly. In fact one of the earliest moan hoax debunking page was created by one of the latter.

[@tomr6955]

​@@rickyjanzen6684factually speaking, the odds of a faked moon landing are much higher than a flat earth. Hence you'll find more moon landing deniers. Simple really.

[@Cloverjay555]

I went to Van Allen elementary school in Mount Pleasant, Iowa. He’s related to us on my moms side of the family. I forget how now, but still kinda cool.

[@SpasticSpelunker]

As a person who has a small collection of radioactive clocks (and other things) it’s great seeing the look on peoples faces when you bring a Geiger counter near them: the needle rises up and makes hundreds of clicks a second and they think your insane and that your arm will drop off in a week. Of course, in the grand scheme of things the level of radiation they emit is minute (not that you would want them strapped to your body for days on end). And thanks to shielding, distance (they’re in the shed) due to inverse square law and time it’s hardly an issue.

[@Jeartozer]

Its almost like they planned this, and took these things into account, and planned for them, not literally flying by the seat of their pants.... weird...

[@alakazam482]

hey dave! i think you'd like to know that im currently in flatzoids stream, and i was trying to debunk their arguments as they go. despite me never getting rude or calling them names, i got muted by a moderator

[@5peciesunkn0wn]

Well of course. They can't "debunk" you in return without hours of cherrypicking quotes from the ass end of the internet.

[@rustyshackleford48]

I recently suffered through the episode of Rogan with Bart Sibrel. No matter how many of these points I shouted towards my radio, he never changed his stance. He's the type to ignore indisputable evidence while simultaneously cherry picking tiny details from the same documents that he claims are falsified.

[@testep02]

Yet another awesome video, Dave! When I see a video from you drop, I know it's going to be a good day!

[@zeendaniels5809]

I always laugh at this "argument"... They: NASA lies! Don't trust them! Also they: Van Allen belts? Yes, they do exist... No, people can't pass that! NASA said so... Wait... What!? There's no end to the cherry picking... 😂