Is It Impossible to Go Through the Van Allen Radiation Belts? -- Spasics

You may have heard that astronauts couldn't possibly have gone to the Moon because it's impossible to travel through the Van Allen radiation belts. In this video, we'll explain why that's not true. It turns out, the Apollo astronauts who flew toward the Moon all flew through the Van Allen belts with no problems at all.
Lots of people believe things about space, astronomy, and space travel that simply aren't true. Some are fairly minor, like believing a dog was the very first animal in space; but others are a bit of a bigger deal, like denying one of the largest human accomplishments to date. In this series, we're going to tackle as many of these myths as we can. We're going to cover the space basics. From the Cosmosphere, this is "Spasics."
Sources:
science.nasa.gov/biological-ph...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Van_All...
www.popsci.com/blog-network/v...
• How did Apollo deal wi...
www.smithsonianmag.com/scienc...
explorer.lib.uiowa.edu
explorer.lib.uiowa.edu/data

[@jasondelano7702]

Keen observers may have noticed that this perfectly nice gentleman did not actually present anything here besides NASA's account of the story. He did not do anything to confirm their account is true. It's like OJ's defense team attempting to counter prosecutorial evidence with "Well, your honor, OJ says differently. I rest my case." This topic requires an actual deep dive to understand. For example, he says aluminum was enough to shield the craft, but what he doesn't tell you is that Van Allen's second probe was sent up with LEAD shielding (~4x the density of aluminum) and still registered readings off the scale. Yet they want us to accept aluminum was sufficient shielding? In fact, in Van Allen's second article on the matter, he says radiation is only "mildly" reduced by 4g/cm^2 of lead. So how can aluminum suffice when it is ~1/4 the density of lead? In addition, Apollo 14 does not claim to have gone "around" the belts, the mission report clearly claims they went through the heart of the belts. Likewise, Apollo 8's commander Frank Borman wrote in his book that they were in the thickest part of the belts. With this in mind, Van Allen's findings of a dose rate of 20 roentgens per hour in the heart of the belt, even within an IRON shielding (>2x the density of aluminum), suggests that a dose rate ABOVE 20r/hr is expected for aluminum. It is absurd to assume their presented rad reading are accurate when you consider these aspects. The problem with videos like this is that they simply regurgitate information they agree with. They don't perform any objective analysis, nor confirm any of the data is accurate or in line with the entirety of the claims. Their approach goes the "Well OJ says he didn't do it" route. That is highly insufficient, especially for such a topic as the moonlanding.

[@bobweiram6321]

Excellent analysis! I want to point out some points you left out. First, unlike OJ, NASA's defense is inconsistent and self-contradictory. NASA claims Apollo went through the belt, but they also claim it avoided the belts entirely by exiting out of the poles. Which one is it? Second, NASA apologists claim the radiation in the Van Allen belts can be stopped with a sheet of metal which is very misleading. The particles in the VAB have energy measured in the MeVs, or in the order of particle accelerators. Third, at such energies, any shielding is worse than no shielding due to scattering, creating X-rays and gamma rays. Finally, if NASA's is telling the truth, then why does KZbin shadow ban any content critiquing the Apollo missions? You'll find tons of content about the Apollo missions and aliens. Why hide information? If they are trying to protect viewers from misinformation, why do they bombard them with ads clearly intended to defraud them of their money?

[@Jan_Strzelecki]

@@bobweiram6321 _NASA claims Apollo went through the belt, but they also claim it avoided the belts entirely by exiting out of the poles. Which one is it?_ The first one. The second one is a false quote, and no one at NASA ever said that. _Second, NASA apologists claim the radiation in the Van Allen belts can be stopped with a sheet of metal which is very misleading._ Again, no one at NASA said that. _Some_ of the radiation can be stopped by a sheet of metal, some of it can even be stopped by human skin - but without concrete numbers, this statement is meaningless on top of being made-up. _Third, at such energies, any shielding is worse than no shielding due to scattering,_ Yes, and?.. _Finally, if NASA's is telling the truth, then why does KZbin shadow ban any content critiquing the Apollo missions?_ KZbin does no such thing. The conspiracy theory you've been misled to believe simply isn't as popular as you imagine it should be.

[@TELEVISIONARCHIVES]

Thank you for real Science!!

[@yusufessop]

Yeah? Explain the science of money?

[@geoffstern7652]

Forget humans going back to the moon, how come not a single human being has past through the Van Allen Radation belt since the last human maned mission to the moon. Not a single human being has past through them!!! Why not?

[@Jan_Strzelecki]

Because there was no manned mission that flew beyond the Van Allen Belts. Duh.

[@geoffstern7652]

Why not? Because it's not possible!!!

[@Jan_Strzelecki]

@@geoffstern7652 It's quite possible, though.

[@evanw.3473]

I can't wait for the next manned moon mission. how many years you think it'll take?

[@Krektonix]

September 2026

[@evanw.3473]

@@Krektonix Awesome! will you be broadcasting the launch etc?

[@evanw.3473]

@@Krektonix Wait, that's with a spacex vehicle?

[@oSTYNCLSYo]

Never happened and never will.

[@TheUsuals47]

Depends when ai can create those perfectly

[@noirua]

Nice video

[@yusufessop]

Bullshit. Very very good bullshit. But crap is crap. It stinks to high heaven.

[@wildimpo]

So many people see a picture and say there's no way they did that! Do research watch how, who, when it was done,watch each Apollo mission if a person knows nothing about each mission and think a picture proves something I could easily sell snow shovels in the dessert

[@puertoricobackyard]

Ok, so How much are the tickets for the museum…

[@TheWokeFlatEarthTruth]

Which museum do you speak of?

[@2tommyrad]

What happens to audio and video signals going through radiation belts... if anything? Thanks.

[@TheWokeFlatEarthTruth]

The Apollo Communications System, The Unified S-Band System used the 2025-2120 MHz band for transmission to the spacecraft (uplinks), and used the 2200-2290 MHz band for transmissions from the spacecraft (downlinks). The particle radiation in the Van Allen Belts will have very little impact on electromagnetic radiation of these frequencies to the best of my knowledge. Take care.

[@2tommyrad]

@@TheWokeFlatEarthTruth Thanks! So the Hasselblad video cameras [I'm guessing it's video or type of video] used equipment to transmit back to Earth, what was being 'filmed' then sent via, some sort of transmitter/receiver at 2200-2290MHz, to then be 'reconstituted' into a MHz we watched on our RCA TV-Set which received at 54 - 890MHz [depending on the TV channel]?

[@Jan_Strzelecki]

@@2tommyrad There's no such thing as "Hasselblad video cameras".

[@BAN3FromNoWhere]

Hasselblad made the still image cameras, which they had 3 of, but the video camera was an RCA television camera (specifically an LM4)

@@2tommyrad yeah they used a advanced modem 14k4 :-)

[@RocknRollTennisCamps]

lol, according the article in the Smithsonian magazine 🤣

[@docbrown6550]

This information was a long time needed. 👍👍

[@joshmonroe6285]

Don't worry, they won't let silly things like facts get in the way of their strange ideas.

[@docbrown6550]

@@joshmonroe6285 Do you mean your facts or the real truth?

[@joshmonroe6285]

​​​@@docbrown6550I mean how some people can be so invested in an idea, no matter how far fetched it is, that they refuse to actually make sure that their beliefs, opinions, and mentally created reality will hold up to scrutiny in comparison to real reality. So, I mean the real truth. But some people can be shown that what they think doesn't match reality but they don't care and ignore the conflicting information even though it should be undeniable.

[@bobobobos2425]

this video gives me the impression of someone arguing in good faith - but I cannot help but feel there is circular logic here: we know that there is significant radiation but it must be safe because they went through it without problems 🤔

[@zounds010]

We have measurements of the radiation levels in the van Allen belts that tell us humans can travel through the belts safely. Those measurements were done by a series of satellite missions from 1958 to 1962.

[@jasondelano7702]

​​@@zounds010Why don't you post those measurements here then?

[@zounds010]

@@jasondelano7702 Radiation analysis of Moon and Mars missions, DOI 10.11648/j.ijass.20200803.11. Radiation level at 1000 km above the equator: 2.4 mSv/h, at 3000 km above the equator it's 465 mSv/h, both inside a spacecraft with a hull thickness of 4 mm. Lots more data is given in the paper. Radiation measurements by the Apollo crews show none of the crews were exposed to more than 11 mSv over the entire mission.

[@jameschains]

Look what happened to the fantastic 4 😅

[@leonardgibney2997]

Some of us brain-dead sceptics about Apollo were worried about how aircraft must avoid the South Atlantic anomaly. Just sayin'.

[@faizf]

Thanks 🙏 easiest way to understand Van Allen radiation belts

[@maumusa123]

If someone goes to the moon and comes back, I believe you.

[@zounds010]

27 people have already gone to the moon and come back, and lived healthy lives afterward. These are well-documented and supported by evidence. There's no reason not to believe them.

[@maumusa123]

@@zounds010 kzbin.info/www/bejne/i3uXh357iql0eas

[@Hobbes746]

@@maumusa123 Kaysing is a crank. None of his arguments hold up to scrutiny. The actual evidence shows the Apollo landings are real.

[@gianfranco_maldetto_92]

​@@zounds010 LMAO C'mon, a 60's technology managed to get men on the Moon. Even if no other person has travelled in space afterwards? None!

[@zounds010]

@@gianfranco_maldetto_92 After Apollo, we've had 135 Space Shuttle launches with crew, 103 manned Russian missions, 13 Crew Dragon launches and one Starliner launch. That's close to 250 manned flights in space after Apollo.

[@bobweiram6321]

Nonsense. The radiation in the Van Allen belts consists of very high energy particles with enough energy to penetrate metal.

[@TheWokeFlatEarthTruth]

The Van Allen Belts contain mainly Alpha and Beta particles. Alpha will be stopped by a sheet of paper and the majority of Beta by a few mm of Aluminium. Of more concern would be the Hydrogen Nuclei in the denser parts of the inner belt but the Apollo spacecraft spent very little time in the inner VAB. You must remember that not only did the spacecraft hull act as shielding but so did everything that it contained, fuel, fittings, equipment, etc. Interesting to note that you obviously believe NASA and Dr. James Van Allen when the tell you that these belts exist. Take care.

[@proto-geek248]

😂🤣😅

[@TheWokeFlatEarthTruth]

The Van Allen Belts contain mainly Alpha and Beta particles. Alpha will be stopped by a sheet of paper and the majority of Beta by a few mm of Aluminium. Of more concern would be the Hydrogen Nuclei in the denser parts of the inner belt but the Apollo spacecraft spent very little time in the inner VAB. You must remember that not only did the spacecraft hull act as shielding but so did everything that it contained, fuel, fittings, equipment, etc. Interesting to note that you obviously believe NASA and Dr. James Van Allen (who advised NASA) when the tell you that these belts exist so perhaps you should look up James Van Allen's explanation of how to pass through them.

[@bobweiram6321]

@@TheWokeFlatEarthTruth If you're going to try and debunk people, at least research the topic, learn some physics, and think critically. You don't have to believe either Van Allen or NASA in order to realize the official story is bull because it contradicts itself. Your understanding of radiation is at a basic high school level. Beta and Alpha particles can have different forces, depending on the source. When alpha and beta emitted from a radioisotope, they are generally weak and can be easily shielded. However, when they're emitted from a cyclotron or a collider, they have extremely high energies (MeV). When they collide with matter, such as a sheet of aluminum, they scatter and generate more energy (e=mc2), including gamma and x-rays. According to NASA and other sources, the Van Allen belts particles have energy exceeding cyclotrons and particle colliders. Even a small number of these particles would prove deadly to the astronauts. The time spent in traveling through the belts wouldn't make a difference either since the particle density is quite high.

[@zounds010]

@@bobweiram6321 The time spent traveling through the belts DOES make a difference, for the simple reason that radiation damage is determined by the total dose, which is the radiation level multiplied by the time you spend being exposed to that radiation. Even in the center of the belts where the level is highest, it takes a week to accumulate a lethal dose. None of the Apollo missions spent more than 3 hours traversing the belts, and they avoided the center entirely, traveling instead through regions that have radiation levels 10 to 1 million times lower.

[@chrisj8720]

Good job Sir!

[@penelopejane8120]

Hello from the UK.... So, in laymen's terms, why have actual humans not returned on a mission to the Moon since 1969? That is 55 years, over half a century. The world's technology has expanded almost beyond comprehension in that time. Please dont attempt to give or show me lots of facts about the Van Allen belt/the Sun/etc. etc....as I did say I was coming from the position of a Laymen. Anyway, thank you and have a lovely weekend. x

[@penelopejane8120]

Apparently........

[@TheWokeFlatEarthTruth]

(1) "why have actual humans not returned on a mission to the Moon since 1969"..........After Apollo 11 in 1969, Apollo 12, 14, 15, 16 & 17 all landed on the lunar surface and Apollo 13 also orbited the moon. (2) "world's technology has expanded almost beyond comprehension in that time"...Yet after the US congress cut NASA funding in 1972 effectively ending the Apollo program, who exactly was funding and manufacturing the technology needed for a crewed lunar mission? Take care.

[@bobweiram6321]

@@TheWokeFlatEarthTruthThat's the sorriest excuse!

[@TheWokeFlatEarthTruth]

@@bobweiram6321 It is simply a fact that in the early 1970's the US Congress cut NASA budget and effectively ended the Apollo Program. It is simply a fact that during Apollo Program NASA had up to 5% of US federal spending and just one main goal and that today NASA has less than 0.5% of US federal spending and has multiple projects. It is simply a fact that between the end of the Apollo Program and the current Artemis Program the technology to conduct a manned lunar mission was not funded or manufactured. Take care.

[@bobweiram6321]

@@TheWokeFlatEarthTruth Do you really believe the DOD would allow NASA to walk away from such an enormous military advantage? Get real!

[@DefiSenpai]

Weird video, came here for answers, left with the impression the speaker isnt very knowledgeable or confident on the subject

[@CharlesGervasi]

Would this mean radiation might be manageable for a crewed mission to Mars? What about Jupiter? I think its radiation belts are stronger, and it would be hard to shield even a small shelter compartment from that radiation.

[@gianfranco_maldetto_92]

Jupiter? LMAO

[@aok4418]

@@CharlesGervasi They still can't send humans the moon.

The Sun is an open fusion reactor and you fly without shielding to the moon??? Not even special robots can enter the failed cores of Fukushima, so how can a human survive in an aluminium spacecraft?

[@Hobbes746]

The sun is an open fusion reactor, 150 million km away. At Fukushima, those robots would have to operate next to the fuel rods. The radiation level in space is many orders of magnitude lower than in a nuclear reactor.

[@TheWokeFlatEarthTruth]

Does it really have to be explained to you that there are different nature, types and intensities of what is termed radiation and that the dosage received by a human will depend on all these factors and more? Or do you just focus on the word "radiation" without understanding all this? Take care.

@@Hobbes746 150 million km is nothing in space. The Sun is sending out: gamma rays, x-rays, ultraviolet rays, visible radiation, infrared radiation, microwaves and radio waves (a lot). There is nothing in space that could absorbs or block this radiation. You need a lot of lead or concrete or you need the shielding of the earth with the atmosphere.

@@TheWokeFlatEarthTruth The Sun is sending out: gamma rays, x-rays, ultraviolet rays, visible radiation, infrared radiation, microwaves and radio waves (a lot). There is nothing in space that could absorbs or block this radiation. You need a lot of lead or concrete or you need the shielding of the earth with the atmosphere.

[@zounds010]

Welcome to the inverse square law: as you get farther away from the sun, the amount of radiation per unit of volume decreases with the square of the distance to the sun. 150 million km gives you a decrease in radiation per m3 of 10E16 compared to the radiation level at the surface of the sun. We've been measuring the radiation levels in space since 1958. On the surface of the moon, and in the area above the van Allen belts, the radiation level is around 60 micro-Sv per hour. i.e. you can spend a thousand hours before you get to the maximum dose people are allowed to be exposed to in one year (50 mSv). That's 41 days with no shielding at all.

[@tomflanders117]

Yeah, that's not how ionized particle physics or mechanics works. The moment that an ionized particle from the Van Allen belts or any other radioactive source for that matter hit a solid medium, what happens at that point is that the ionized particle transfers its energy to various other particles within the physical medium in this case being the thin layer of aluminum and the heat shield of the capsules neither of which had particularly dense materials in them such as lead which still suffers from this which is why you need inches to feet to ensure reliable radioactive shielding. In the case of the aluminum foil and regular Steel and metals used in the space capsules these ionized particles would end up essentially shotgunning through the Hull of The Craft at that point peppering every person inside of these crafts with a constant bombardment of ionized electrons and protons even more so than they would have been exposed to by simply just being out side of the crafts. The only way to stop this particle shrapnel effect is with exceptionally thick layers of dense materials such as lead or alternatively specialty oriented magnetic fields. Neither of which did any of these capsules have nor does the International Space Station have such defenses which brings up a number of questions in regards to the validity of that craft as well. FYI I actually do believe that we did go to the Moon but we did not use those glorified tin cans to do so, nor is the government willing to acknowledge or discuss what we actually encountered up there so yes any and all footage that is publicly available of the Moon missions is likely fake, and there is ample amounts of evidences found within each of those respective films to indicate such as the case.

[@zounds010]

The effect you're describing is real, for high-energy particles. But much of the radiation in the VA belts is low-energy particles which are stopped by the aluminium used in the pressure hull of the command module, so the radiation level in the Apollo CM was more than low enough to get through the belts without endangering the astronauts. We did use the Apollo hardware to go to the moon. All of the public footage was recorded, provably, on the moon and not on Earth. We can measure how objects move in those videos, and we find those were made in 1/6 g gravity and not the 1 g we find on Earth. I.e. the evidence in those films indicates they're real, and they were made on the moon.

[@aok4418]

@@zounds010 The Apollo 11 crews were exposed to 1.67 mSv per second as they crossed the Van Allen radiation belt. This amounts to a total exposure of 1.8 Sv in 3 hours of travel through the radiation belt during the mission. Any exposure to 1 Sv or more, however, brings about fatal injuries. The radiation readings for the Apollo 11 astronauts’ skin of 0.18 rad, significantly, did not differ from radiation readings from missions restricted to low earth orbit. Data clearly proves that the Apollo 11 astronauts were not sufficiently protected against radiation: Neither the spaceship nor the spacesuits contained lead. Aluminum is ineffective against gamma and neutron rays. The calculated exposure of the Apollo crew was 1.8 Sv, an amount associated with nausea, vomiting, bone marrow changes, and 20% mortality. Surprisingly, no Apollo astronaut showed any ill effects from radiation exposure. These inconsistencies seem to reflect either possible over-estimation or under-reporting of the health hazards summarized in Safe Passage. Furthermore, these medical inconsistencies seem to highlight the surprising observations that the Apollo 11 astronauts did not show any signs of space sickness from microgravity upon their return to Earth.

[@aok4418]

@@zounds010 Flags don't blow around on the moon, yet they do. You don't hear sound on the moon, yet you can hear sound. And the shadows running in different directions. c'mon!

[@aok4418]

@@zounds010 Flags don't blow around on the moon, yet they do. You don't hear sound on the moon, yet you can hear sound. And the shadows running in different directions. c'mon!

[@zounds010]

@@aok4418 The only two instances where the flag moves is 1. when the astronauts push the flagpole into the soil, and 2. when the ascent engine is ignited and its exhaust blasts past the flag. In between, we have an entire EVA with the flag staying completely still in a way impossible to replicate on Earth. Sound transmits through the space suit just fine. And no, we have no shadows running in different directions.

[@flashback-devilsadvocate]

fruit flies

[@ProbablyTooPolitical]

If a video on KZbin has the context under the title, you know the video is close to the actual truth. I've never seen any "context" from KZbin that turned out to be non bias and factual.

[@pfrischknecht]

I do like your demeanor...but perhaps you could be sloghtly less condescending to those who have arrived to this point from a different road. Why dont you make a series to tackle all the hurdles of space flight, how nasa solved it, leading tk the eventual culmination of all the work in a Moon landing. I would watch it, and gladly supply suggestions for further explanation. There is much about the moon landing that could use clarification (like the van Allen brlt) First suggestion: propulsion and guidance.

[@tonykovich]

Aluminum. LOL 😂

[@TheWokeFlatEarthTruth]

The Van Allen Belts contain mainly Alpha and Beta particles. Alpha will be stopped by a sheet of paper and the majority of Beta by a few mm of Aluminium. Of more concern would be the Hydrogen Nuclei in the denser parts of the inner belt but the Apollo spacecraft spent very little time in the inner VAB. Also you must remember that not only did the spacecraft hull act as shielding but so did everything that it contained, fuel, fittings, equipment, etc. Take care.

[@ToMbA_La_BoMbA]

​@@TheWokeFlatEarthTruthkzbin.info/www/bejne/Z2ewfo2AodWSZrssi=tCxjJZUUazEPMlgz

[@gianfranco_maldetto_92]

​@@TheWokeFlatEarthTruth Do you even realize what the Apollo spacecrafts' size is? Do you truly believe they managed several times to travel to the Moon back and forth? Pathetic!

[@TheWokeFlatEarthTruth]

@@gianfranco_maldetto_92 What exactly do you mean by " the Apollo spaceshafts"...?????Take care.

[@zounds010]

@@ToMbA_La_BoMbA Pettit was right: in 2010, when he gave that interview, the USA didn't have a moon-capable spacecraft in production. We "lost the technology" in the sense that the US stopped producing lunar landers. Not in the sense that the knowledge of how to build moon-capable spacecraft was lost. This is obvious: all of the Apollo data is sitting in public archives and can easily be looked up.

[@Mr5riven]

Thank you, that was very informative, but I think you've missed the point. Sceptics think these space ships are going through a soup of 20000 K and are looking at it as an oven heating up to that temperature as if it's an atmosphere. It's the opposite. It's cold going through the Van Allan belt with heated subatomic particles hitting the spacecraft and astronauts. These tiny particles can hit you (as you've described) but only have the ability to knock off electrons from the nucleus causing a positive ion, not melt the aluminium. Unfortunately every time you ask google the temperature of the Van Allan belt they quote the temperature of the Ions being 2000 to 20000. This seems to confuse people.

[@TheWokeFlatEarthTruth]

Heat and Temperature are not the same thing. Majority of deniers do not seem to understand this.

[@zounds010]

You're mixing up two moon landing denier claims. One claim is that we can't survive the thermosphere (80-600 km), because the temperature is so high. The other claim is we can't survive the van Allen belts (640 to 58,000 km) because of the radiation levels in those belts. Both of those claims are not supported by evidence. In the thermosphere, the individual atoms are hot, but there are so few of them that they can't transfer a large amount of heat to a passing spacecraft: the spacecraft heats up far less from atoms in the thermosphere than from the sun shining on it. The radiation level in the van Allen belts has been measured. This level varies: in the center of the inner belt, the level is high enough that a human in a spacecraft gets a lethal dose of radiation in one week. Going from the center to the edges of the belts, the radiation level drops by at least 4 orders of magnitude. To get to the moon, the astronauts spent 3 hours traveling through the outer regions of the belts, getting about 1/1000 of a lethal dose of radiation.

[@TheWokeFlatEarthTruth]

@@zounds010 Quite a good summary of reality. Take care.

[@user-wg1ks6mk6x]

the fact is that you ....none has a clue how it would be ...and certainly not aluminium of no kind that could block anything.....

[@zounds010]

@@user-wg1ks6mk6x We do have a clue of what the environment in space is like, because we have measured it. Aluminium trivially blocks alpha and beta radiation, and those are two of the main classes of radiation in the van Allen belts. The amount of high-energy stuff that goes through the hull is low enough that we don't have to care about it for short missions (up to a few months). Radiation shielding only becomes important if we want to do very long missions.

[@Markos581973]

Dont listen to this guy.

[@kipdavis9938]

How many non Apollo astronauts have gone through the Van Allen Radiation belt? If the number is zero then why in the hell is that the case.

[@Jan_Strzelecki]

At least two of the _Gemini_ astronauts, speaking off the top of my head, and the ISS regularly dips into lower parts of the Belts.

[@zounds010]

After Apollo, most manned flights went to the ISS, which orbits below the belts (except for the South Atlantic Anomaly), so there was no reason for manned flights to go through the belts.

[@gianfranco_maldetto_92]

​@@Jan_Strzelecki Deeps into lower parts ... Yeah, right, where the radiation level is 100 times less than higher parts. It's sad people still buy into this propaganda.

[@zounds010]

@@gianfranco_maldetto_92 Reality is not propaganda.

[@gianfranco_maldetto_92]

@@zounds010 LMAO

[@oSTYNCLSYo]

But yet we threw the technology in the trash and we can't create new lol.

[@TheWokeFlatEarthTruth]

Whoever told you that has seriously mislead you. Take care.

[@AmyPond-sq6tf]

​@@TheWokeFlatEarthTruth bot much?

[@AmyPond-sq6tf]

Yeah and we can't produce better, but Neil Tyson said they actually kept the blueprints of that technology somewhere and we don't go to space because there is no purpose anymore lol total bs for whole humanity and I'm ashamed of those generations that "did great things" and left us "so much" , but in the end it's all an illusion and those same people that "opened the whole world of possibilities" for younger generations they now tell us that alone you cannot change shit. Well maybe they should have been thinking more critically about the future of humanity and not how to better lie and trick us, but limited minds are so weak that they said in the end we must let our youth think critically for us while we control and ruin their whole lives.

[@TheWokeFlatEarthTruth]

@@AmyPond-sq6tf Post irrelevant comments much? Take care.

[@AmyPond-sq6tf]

@@TheWokeFlatEarthTruth yeah I'm a bit behind watching all the videos, so yeah I'm always commenting 20 years into the future. Happens when getting banned all the time because of being anti woke 😜

[@cesaralexis73]

Whatever, dude..

[@whirledpeas3477]

Pray for the bubble heads that can't believe facts 🙏

[@pfrischknecht]

The problem, kind sir, is "belief" "Facts", as it would appear, are fungible. 2 people watch the same event and would describe it differently. Truth is far more subjective than "facts". This government has lied to us about everything....a healthy dose of skepticism is warranted. If you disagree, you are a bot, and is likely up to date on your covid shot and every booster. Congratulations, you are sheep.

[@bobweiram6321]

You mean the facts from a nation who lied to the world about Iraq having weapons of mass destruction?

[@fookusamatube]

Somehow NASA’s Don Petitt and the astronauts from the Orion mission say they can’t do that anymore. I am repeating their statements: They forgot or lost the ability to do that. What?

[@Hobbes746]

That is incorrect. Don Pettit: in an interview from 2010, he says he’d like to go to the moon, but he can’t. He was right: the only manned spacecraft the US had in active service in 2010, the Space Shuttle, cannot carry enough fuel to get to the moon. It also can’t land on the moon. This has nothing to do with the van Allen belts. To get to the moon, we’d have to design and build a new spacecraft, which is an expensive and complex process, even though we’ve done it before. Orion: you are misquoting a 2014 interview with Kelly Smith, an engineer working on Orion’s avionics. Modern electronics are very susceptible to radiation: the transistors in a chip are only a few atoms wide, so one charged particle that hits a transistor can flip the bit stored in that transistor. We have been dealing with this for decades: we operate hundreds of satellites in and above the van Allen belts. We found ways to design integrated circuits to make them far more resistant to radiation. These radiation-hardened ICs are available off the shelf. Orion is the first manned spacecraft to use such electronics. The individual ICs are well-proven, but the combination used in Orion was not: unmanned satellites don’t need a life support system, for instance. The risk tolerance on Orion is also lower: while we accept the occasional malfunction and reset in a satellite, we don’t want that to happen on a manned spacecraft. They designed Orion with this in mind, and then, just to make sure, they did an unmanned test flight so they could test Orion's systems in practice. The electronics on Apollo are 30 generations older. Instead of integrated circuits with transistors 20 nanometers wide, the transistors on Apollo were millimeters wide, which means they are a million times less susceptible to radiation damage. We still tested the Apollo Command Module and Lunar Module in unmanned tests several times before putting a crew on board.

[@aok4418]

​@@Hobbes746 Kelly Smith on radiation Van Allen belts "We must solve these challenges before we send people through this region of space"

[@aok4418]

Dr Ellen Stofan, Chief Scientist, NASA, and principal advisor to NASA Administrator BBC Newsnight interview, November 2014 “NASA’s focus now is on sending humans beyond low-Earth orbit to Mars… We are trying to develop the technologies to get there, it is actually a huge technological challenge. There are a couple of really big issues. For one thing, radiation. Once you get outside the Earth’s magnetic field we are going to be exposing the astronauts to not just radiation coming from the Sun, but also to cosmic radiation. That's a higher dose than we think humans right now should really get.”

[@Hobbes746]

@@aok4418 Smith was responsible for some of the electronic systems on Orion. The challenge he had so solve is that because the transistors in the chips used by Orion are a million times smaller than the ones used in Apollo, making them 10E12 times more susceptible to radiation. We know how to deal with this: you can get radiation-hardened electronic components off the shelf. We’ve built hundreds of satellites that operate in and above the van Allen belts. In Orion, those components were combined in a configuration not used before. So NASA did what it’s done for every new manned spacecraft except the Space Shuttle: launch the spacecraft for unmanned tests, to make sure it will function correctly. That had to be done before Orion could be used for manned missions.

[@aok4418]

@@Hobbes746 The electronics are just one hurdle of many when it comes to radiation. Artemis hasn't sent a manned mission. I doubt they will anytime soon.

[@MrAphorism]

Lots of talk with zero evidence. So what metals or material was used back then on the rockets so they wouldn’t be burnt to a crisp from the 20,000 deg celcius temperatures?

[@oSTYNCLSYo]

Agree

[@TheWokeFlatEarthTruth]

Heat and Temperature are not the same thing. The Van Allen Belts are regions with very few particles. These particles have high velocity therefore by definition a very high temperature but there are far too few of them to transfer any significant amount of Heat Energy to a passing spacecraft. Take care.

[@oSTYNCLSYo]

@@TheWokeFlatEarthTruth lol

[@TheWokeFlatEarthTruth]

@@oSTYNCLSYo What I have outlined is the most basic of Physics. Do you not understand it? Take care.

[@entangledmindcells9359]

@@TheWokeFlatEarthTruth they would miss the analogy of putting your hand in the oven verse putting your hand against the inside of the same over.

[@scottfergusson8411]

It’s all BS

[@paulford5942]

I find it strange when you show a radiation meter, I saw an interview with one of the Appolo crew, can't remememner which one, he was asked about the Van Allen radiation belt, he seemed unaware one existed, when it was pointed out what it was, he said, we must have flown right trough it, then why did he not refer to these radiation detection meters, he seemed oblivious to the whole Van Allen belt thing, I am not a conspiracy theorest, but we have to look at all these things that are presented to us, one thing that stands out was the technology in 1969 when the moon landing was resented to the world, it was easier to believe then, but things have moved on. People are challenging what was taken as fact, this video for example is also unconvincing, low radiation, high radiation, I watched the whole thing on TV I belied it then, I am not convinced anymore. I watched a promotional Bass video about going back to the moon, they say they had the technology in 1969 but we lost it, how on earth, or should I say, how in the Moon did we loose it, cthe most important thing they claim happened to mankind, was lost!!! They are not helping themselves when you see it. Not one giant leap for mankind, it's one giant lie for mankind, nothing I see convinces me, man went to the moon, many samples were brought back, I truly believe they have samples, but not brought back from manned moon landings, it tells its own story that 55 years later Nasa are still trying to convince people Man went to the moon, if they did, they never got back Alive.

[@TheWokeFlatEarthTruth]

You may not be a "conspiracy theorist" but I suspect that the producer of the video that you saw was. Take care.

[@Jan_Strzelecki]

​@@TheWokeFlatEarthTruthYeah, that was Bart Sibrel asking Alan Bean about Skylab being in the Belts.

[@TheWokeFlatEarthTruth]

@@Jan_Strzelecki And then pretending that he was talking about Apollo 12.

[@Rausku4360]

We really did lost the technology. For example part of the lunar lander was left in moon and it is hard to get it back from moon. Of course we have blueprints still and those are public but hardware lost due being build for one time use. Easy to understand I think.

[@aok4418]

I remember that as well.

Why the gloves? Aluminium protecting against radiation? what a BS. He is even laughing about the BS

[@Jan_Strzelecki]

Aluminium can cut radiation down to safe levels.

@@Jan_Strzelecki Tel that to somebody working in a nuclear reactor. The Sun is sending out: gamma rays, x-rays, ultraviolet rays, visible radiation, infrared radiation, microwaves and radio waves (a lot). There is nothing in space that could absorbs or block this radiation. You need a lot of lead or concrete or you need the shielding of the earth with the atmosphere.

[@Hobbes746]

The inverse square law works for radiation too: double the distance to the sun, and the radiation level halves. 150 million km gives a lot of halvings of the radiation level. The level around Earth is low enough that a human can live on the surface of the moon for a year before the dose gets anywhere near dangerous.

[@aok4418]

​@@Jan_Strzelecki Lol. No it can't. Let me know how aluminum protects people and equipment in space?

[@Jan_Strzelecki]

@@aok4418 It provides a lightweight air tight shelter against the vacuum and direct sunlight, while cutting _some_ of radiation down. What is it that you're misunderstanding this time?

[@KoRntech]

Hmmm Nuh-uh thats flerf talk right there😂. Well I will be sharing this in Flat Earth Friends and moon hoax pages if I need to. I dont think you want the vile comments that will come from those "freethinkers" 😐

[@pfrischknecht]

"Freethinkers" is a pejorative to you? There is great cooperation between intelligence and imagination. Not every one has the ratio correct. Be a little kinder.

[@brap5829]

That doesn't matter. Proof is that as a practical matter it's easier not to go than to go because then there's zero chance you have to get on TV 'there's something we have to tell you' so there mr. Coverup

[@Jan_Strzelecki]

As a practical manner it was also impossible to fake it, so it has to be real. Unless NASA is concealing a holodeck-style tech.

[@user-wg1ks6mk6x]

this guy presenting the video dont have all his cookies in the same jar.......he says :" the ship is able to block MOST OF THE RADIATIONS of the belt"...so it wasn t much od a deal to fly through it most ridiculous statement of all times.......ridiculous..........its like we could ever block even a small pourcentage of the energy of the sun ,as ridiculous.....

[@zounds010]

The statement is correct. The radiation level in space is far lower than you imagine.

[@user-wg1ks6mk6x]

@@zounds010 other studies suggest otherwise,respectfully...

[@zounds010]

@@user-wg1ks6mk6x No, there are no studies that suggest otherwise. The only people who suggest otherwise are reality deniers making unsupported statements.

[@TheWokeFlatEarthTruth]

The Van Allen Belts contain mainly Alpha and Beta particles. Alpha will be stopped by a sheet of paper and the majority of Beta by a few mm of Aluminium. Of more concern would be the Hydrogen Nuclei in the denser parts of the inner belt but the Apollo spacecraft spent very little time in the inner VAB. You must remember that not only did the spacecraft hull act as shielding but so did everything that it contained, fuel, fittings, equipment, etc. Interesting to note that you obviously believe NASA and Dr. James Van Allen (who advised NASA) when the tell you that these belts exist so perhaps you should look up James Van Allen's explanation of how to pass through them. Take care.

[@rusty6365]

How about those amazing pics from the latest odysseus landing? So real! They prove apollo went!

[@tubecated_development]

What does Odysseus have to do with Apollo? Different region of the moon. Different tech. Different engines. Different methods. And, it was only a (barely) partial success..

I have seen better game animations :-)

[@mynsonanderson2726]

BS

[@kinggordon8762]

Not buying it.

[@Jan_Strzelecki]

Too bad.

[@brentchambers1320]

Thank you, woke Professer LMAO! This is propaganda. We've never been!

[@TheWokeFlatEarthTruth]

Any actual evidence to back up your claim?

[@zounds010]

The evidence proves you wrong.

[@joeldriver-sp2rg]

This is one of the things that the idiot moon landing deniers will bring up and it literally takes less than 5 minutes of research to completely debunk. Over 60K of the country's brightest minds came together to make the moon landings happen. Every one of those people were considerably smarter than any moon landing denier out there. It's the greatest accomplishment in the history of mankind and we did it right here in America in with what can only be described now as primitive technology. It's amazing and deserves respect.

[@pfrischknecht]

"Idiot moon landing deniers" I bet you have never fallen for a lie from your government.....or that the government does not lie This is the same government who lied to you about the Korean War and the Vietnam War. There are lots of very smart people who believe very dumb things. That does not mean they are idiots.

[@leonardgibney2997]

You obviously have much faith in the official version.

[@Jan_Strzelecki]

@@leonardgibney2997 Unless you actually can show us that it's wrong (and better people than you have tried and failed), then we will continue to believe in the official version, thank you very much.

[@entangledmindcells9359]

@@leonardgibney2997 You mean the official version of the repeated landings, done in front of the whole world, verified by other countries, even congratulated by adversaries for this great human accomplishment.. did I say repeated.. Until I see an reasonable evidnece by these "idiot moon landing deniers" I will believe the official version.

[@gianfranco_maldetto_92]

​@@Jan_Strzelecki Good for you! Beh-beh

[@critterfestsanctuary2446]

Thank you. You just proved the earth is flat. It's flat right ? 🤔 😂

[@Cunning.Stunt7]

When I have travelled through belts or to the moon... I can argue. Till then... I'm null and void.... so is everyone reading this. That's a true fact that you will see today. YESSSSS I win! 💪🦾💃🏼 (👈 p.s New Salsa dancer emoji, looks like a C U Next Tuesday!... What has the "walk like an Egyptian" dance, got to do with Salsa dancing??? FML Please shoot me through the valhal belt already!!!) PPS. We all lose.... don't we 😔😶‍🌫️🫥😶