Yes, Apollo Flew Through the Van Allen Belts Going to the Moon

No, the van Allen radiation belts weren't deal breakers for the Apollo astronauts. They really did go to the Moon. Want weekly Vintage Space ? Don't forget to SUBSCRIBE! / @amyshirateitel
The Apollo Experience Report on Radiation is here, if you're curious: ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/ca...
There's more about rockoons here:history.nasa.gov/SP-4401/ch4.htm
Also, thanks to Doctor Dad (as in my Dad) for helping me get my head around how annoying it is that radiation is measured in so many ways and coming up with the CT scan as a relatable reference point!
***And more even older space in my book, BREAKING THE CHAINS OF GRAVITY! You can order your copy on Amazon: bit.ly/astbtcog
Or get a signed hardcover edition on my website! www.amyshirateitel.com/store.html - IT'S BACK ONLINE! :) (But orders are slow for the moment - waiting for books from my publisher!)
My blog archives has lots of awesome olde timey space, too (and I'm looking for a new home for it, too!): www.popsci.com/blog-network/vi...
I've also got a PATREON PAGE! If you're a fan of Vintage Space, please consider becoming a patron! I've set up a Patreon account so I can raise funds to buy the gear I'll need to make an awesome podcast and also work with professionals to make better content all around. Any help is so hugely appreciated. / amyshirateitel
Connect on Facebook: / amyshirateitel
Google+: plus.google.com/u/0/+AmyShira...
Instagram: / astvintagespace
Twitter: / astvintagespace

[@theCodyReeder]

I wonder how much radiation you would get from a space elevator ride when it could take days to get through the belts.

[@MegaKilt]

You would travel that far up the elevator. Just far enough to get orbital velocity, which would be below the inner belt.

[@massimookissed1023]

KaptenKilt , given that a space elevator needs an anchor point down here, orbital velocity would be at 42,000km / 26,000miles geosynchronous orbit radius. (Way above the lower belt.)

[@rockyblacksmith]

+KaptenKilt Problem; The earthbound end of the elevator cable is stationary. Thus to reach in orbital velocity, you have to reach the hight of a geostationary orbit, which is about 10000 kilometers outside of the outer Van Allen belt.

[@debott4538]

Sry KaptenKilt, but by using such an elevator you'd only reach orbital velocity at about 36,000 km (GEO). That's farther up than the inner *and* in the middle of the outer belt. To answer the question: Humans simply can't practically use that elevator. At least not until low weight/highly effective shielding is invented or the belts get cleared of radiation. Both of which are insanely difficult to achieve, even after such an elevator could be built. So rockets it is. ;)

[@djc4799]

"It is the risk of homicidal insanity from sharing the trip with others for hours while listening to elevator music" ~ Isaac Arthur (best KZbin futurist)

[@icychill105]

so we have this radiation belt porblem, "just nuke the radiation away" genius scientist at work

[@im1who84u]

Even just normal every day uneducated people would know that's not a good idea.

[@SP35640SNAKE]

Yea because why trust the same people that make cell phones, medicine, airplane travel, agriculture, cars, architecture, and military technology possible while you sit there and look down on them with no real scientific knowledge on any subject

[@ann_onn]

They were not trying to remove the radiation belts. They were just testing nukes, that's all.

[@ann_onn]

_Giggles_

[@justjosie8963]

They sure are scary sometimes

[@abooswalehmosafeer173]

Van Allen Belts I wonder if they are pure leather.

[@TheLuckierbruh]

Yeah

[@kshamabadiger]

😂

[@zmyt_017]

if there is no belt in the moon no protection = death no camera raidreson brake film 🎞 storm or rain of deadly particles will hit them

[@gregnixon1296]

PETA said no to leather radiation belts

[@kragger1985]

Only the ass side is radioactive

[@johnguilfoyle3073]

When I listen to the engineer, he is speaking of shielding in the specific context of the electronics. Apollo created no data about the effects of the Van Allen radiation on an iPad. I'm confident that if asked about humans, he would not have given an ambiguous answer.

[@niallkinsella2687]

You are completely correct.

[@johnguilfoyle3073]

@Bobb Grimley You have to read All of the words to understand the context. "Apollo created no data about the effects of the Van Allen radiation on an iPad." This is an indisputable truth that you seem to want to find a way around. I am not ignoring "this obvious point" because it has nothing to do with my argument. The Apollo hoaxers like to make it seem that the Van Allen Radiation is so intense that astronauts would get microwaved and therefore we never went to the moon. The effects of radiation on the Apollo-era electronics do not directly translate to modern electronics and further study will need to be done on the next generation electronics using the data from the dosimeters.

[@johnguilfoyle3073]

@Bobb Grimley You as an individual do not have to do anything I or anyone else says. My point, which you seemed to have missed, is that all the words must be read by anyone in order to understand the context before making a response to the actual argument instead of what a cursory reading might suggest.

[@friendlyghost116]

He actually ends it with “before sending people” I don’t know why people hear what they want to hear smh

[@m7reapershorts315]

@@friendlyghost116 The fact most responses even the woman in the video leave this out is beautiful. Just highlights the sheep brother lol

[@MrFluffykat]

You can go thru them. The Fantastic Four did it

[@redskua]

MrFluffykat ,,,,in your dreams fool.

[@GooseCrack]

@@redskua ....

[@dsignstar]

MrFluffyka Whaha!

[@ann_onn]

kzbin.info/www/bejne/qaHKlXaghs1_j5I

[@elliegotfredson3712]

@Cliff Yablonski A man with a plan. Gotta love it!

[@UpcycleElectronics]

Never argue with stupid people. They drag you down to their level and beat you with experience. -Mark Twain

[@marias7599]

Lol it is both; hilarious and true

[@illumination101]

1000% agree

[@dalemartell8639]

Or make them president

[@revspikejonez]

@vic demize how about the ones who actually understand science and have looked at the proof and understood it, instead of paranoids confirming their cognitive biases because they think they're smarter than everyone even though they don't understand science above a grade school level? Which ones are being fucking stupid?

[@michaelthomas7898]

@vic demize A great representation of the quote. thanks for volunteering

[@Rob-xj7fr]

We went thru the belts once, but now we gotta figure out how to go thru again….amazing

[@Tim22222]

Been there, done that. No, they don't have to figure it out _again,_ they have to figure out how to protect the ship from long missions where radiation can become a problem. And they have! You're going by old news, Orion's radiation protection was tested 8 years ago! Passed, too, with flying colors.

[@eventcone]

That's like an aircraft designer saying "the Wright Brothers figured out how to make a powered, heavier than air vehicle fly - now we gotta go figure out how to do it again for the Boeing 707". Well, duh!

[@tct84]

@@Tim22222 go watch some more history channel dude, your critical thinking is gone. You think it begins and ends with a Van Allen belt it gets wackier or from there. You probably don’t know what predictive programming is but there’s at least 30 Hollywood movies laughing in your face about this with “Interstellar” being one of the last made. THEY ARE LAUGHING AT YOU, as they steal your money and give it to Israel

[@andreabindolini7452]

We went thru the belts with a spacecraft. Now we gotta figure out how a completely different spacecraft deals with the same belts. Strange? Suspectful? Well, I'm pretty sure that any new model of car is road tested before selling, even if countless of other models of cars were produced, tested, sold and driven on the same roads before. Amazing, isn't?

[@apollosun2913]

@@eventcone Your analogy is flawed. The Wright brothers didn't build a craft that has modern computers onboard. The Apollo computers were far less sensitive than modern computers. Are you arguing that technology hasn't advanced since the 60's?

[@robertdefoe2396]

to think through it, the NASA engineer stated the Van Alen belts diffcult to pass and this is due to modern technology being that bit more sensistive than 60s era wire chain computers. In other words microchips are far more likely to be damaged by radiation.

[@ann_onn]

Yeah... also, Orion plans to spend 6 months or more in deep space, not a few days. It's an entirely different problem. They are not really concerned about the Van Allen belts at all. They're concerned about long-term exposure to cosmic rays. They *deliberately* flew it through the belts to test it - five years ago. And it was fine.

[@anthonydavis9382]

NASA has the best technologists on the planet. Along with billions of dollars for funding. They could make new computers specifically for the belt. We can give Ukraine $200 billion but we can't give NASA $30 billion to go back to the moon? Could you imagine a Livestream from the moon

[@The_Establishment_Is_Satanic]

@@anthonydavis9382 NASA is also a very shady and deceptive organization and can never fully be trusted, just like our government and anything else it controls.

[@The_Establishment_Is_Satanic]

@ChillCat665 Exactly.

[@eventcone]

@ChillCat665 No one is making excuses. An explanation is not an excuse.

[@Ayelmar]

It's important to note that not all "radiation" is created equal -- the Van Allen belts consist almost entirely of charged particles, that is, alpha (helium nuclei stripped of electrons) and beta (free electrons or positrons) particles. Alpha particles are readily blocked by as little as a sheet of paper (or the very top layer of any exposed skin). Likewise, beta particles are easily stopped by a thin sheet of aluminum (such as the skin of the Apollo capsule). The real problem is that people hear the word "radiation" and completely freak out. Remember, people: your bananas are radioactive! (Seriously -- bananas are high in potassium, 0.01% of which is the radioactive isotope Potassium-40.) Keep up the great work, Amy!

[@Crlarl]

Don't forget cell phones! Those things will pop corn in your brain. /S

[@Ayelmar]

True, but cell phones emit microwave "radiation" -- that's non-ionizing radiation which might cause some heating, but won't rip apart your DNA like the ionizing alpha and beta particles, and high-energy gamma and x-rays.

[@Crlarl]

Ayelmar Yup, ionizing is the key along with intensity. If cell phones could actually "cook" a brain, it should have already destroyed all of its circuitry.

[@spacedogsbackyardastronomy8274]

If that's the case why did NASA worry about the belts and build this so call protective shield that she so eloquently mentioned you guys are really reaching but whatever floats your boat and Kelly didn't say that we have solve the problem just getting orion though the belts he said that they had to solve the problem before "we" they can send humans though so I'll take his word over yours!!!!

[@MegaKilt]

Because NASA didn't know for sure the effects of traveling through the belt until after the first Apollo missions. Also, the only form of radiation able to pass through the shielding of the command module is gamma and x-ray radiation, which is far less dangerous to tissue than alpha and beta radiation. This is because it passes straight through the body, unlike beta and alpha(if you were to ingest it). I'm sure none of the KZbin videos you've watched ever bothered to tell you this.

[@itsprivate4360]

I’ve got every Van Halen album...

[@geraldwalsh6489]

Its Van Morrison stupid!,,

[@avtl]

I’ve got the Van Allen belt and the watch - still boxed!

[@steadfastcoward]

I liked Professor Ludwig von Drake.

[@steadfastcoward]

@@avtl Ron Popeil: But WAIT! There's MORE!

[@Melvorgazh]

iZac Stein Ah! Good Aul Eddie :) There is a tram stop in Brussels named van Haelen :) I go there, throw a belt around that stop, manage to get through...

[@buca512boxer]

Suffice it to add that the most famous astronauts: Armstrong & Collins and Aldrin & Lovell died at 82 &, 90, respectively and are still alive at 93 & 94, respectively. So the Van Allen radiation didn't kill them.

[@tophinity]

Taking a step back though, do you not see how that would also be an argument in favor of the "didn't go to the moon" theory?

[@Ruda-n4h]

@@tophinity You could argue against anything with that logic.

[@mithrandea]

Sure you tell me after watching apollo 11s return press interview if a single one looks like a man who just flew to the moon and returned safely...... all I see is guilt and unease and the inability to recall any detail outside the script

[@markuskoivisto]

or you know, exhaustion.

[@pinnacleproductions6275]

Because they never went through it genius.

[@BlackbirdSSR]

I like how she said "the space rocket flew really fast through the belts, so barely any exposure". The rocket engine somehow blasting flames in a vacuum..... Then she shows a CARTOON to convince us all 🤣

[@BlackbirdSSR]

@Trebor basic what? Manipulation? Pseudo -science, outright lies. Space travel is a comic book premise, it's NEVER happened.

[@BlackbirdSSR]

@Trebor I only have to rely on Observable Reality to disprove NASA......you can so the same thing if you can break the spell.

[@nicholas.e5158]

@Trebor We understand the blast is internal........

[@coreyh5989]

I'm sorry you need every step explained to you. Her mistake for assuming basic human intelligence would be applied by all viewers.

[@BlackbirdSSR]

@@coreyh5989 NO experiment know to man can produce flames in a vacuum, are you sure I'm the remedial one?

[@UnixCommando]

So, what he's saying is the micro conductor circuitry in the Orion isn't robust enough to handle the radiation. The Apollo craft used core rope technology which despite being slower and less powerful compute wise, was more robust than the technology slated for Orion.

[@MichaelBerthelsen]

Robert Lamothe Our electronics these days are way more sensitive to interference, so makes sense.

[@ShadowFalcon]

Well, what he's saying is, "normal off the shelf micro conductor circuitry" isn't sufficient for deep space missions, and it is one of many "problems" (engineers tend to describe any job, or challenge as a "problem") that needs to be solved for the Orion to fly. We have after all sent plenty of robotic missions into space that use micro conductor circuitry before. It's not as if the Orion has an inherent design flaw, or is inherently inferior to Apollo (much as tech nostalgists would like it to, since it uses "that new-fangled computoor" equipment).

[@mglenadel]

And, when he said "before we send people through this region of space", he meant that, if they send people and the [modern electronics] guidance system fails [because of the radiation], those people may die [not because of the radiation itself, but] because the craft would be lost and not able to return to Earth [before the crew died from asphyxia or something else].

[@ShadowFalcon]

Marcelo Glenadel So in short. Don't use your iPhones as spacecraft guidance computers kids.

[@MichaelBerthelsen]

ShadowFalcon Well, I mean... With proper shielding... Should work. Oh, shielding AND some duct tape. Always add duct tape!

[@davidholder111]

just take some RAD X, you'll be fine

[@shmaglshere5621]

LARGE CARTOONY TYPE THUMBS UP !!!!

[@dankovac1609]

Drink vodka, stalker!

[@JordonTheo]

I see what you did there.

[@affiliated4life]

So why haven't we went back.

[@JMP_2203]

Or just wear your power armor!

[@TwoMuchDew]

Not sure if it was mentioned, but Alpha particles are not an issue because an Alpha particles can be stopped by a sheet of paper, Gamma and Neutrons posed the highest risk, followed by Xrays, and of course that is call changed depending on what kind of shielding they had

[@Tim22222]

And E-M radiation (gamma rays & x-rays) are not what's trapped by the van allen belts; there just aren't enough of those out there to pose a risk to humans for short-term exposure.

[@charlesg7926]

That’s because this video wasn’t made in good faith, it’s propaganda covering for NASA having faked Apollo 11

[@IncognitoActivado]

@@Tim22222 Are you lying or what?

[@eventcone]

@@IncognitoActivado No, he isn't. Sounds like someone else lied to you though. By any chance would that be a certain former taxi-driver by the name of Sibrel? What made you believe him?

[@IncognitoActivado]

@@eventcone Van Allen radiation belt, dude.

[@paulhart3812]

Back in the old days, the government wasn’t as concerned with moderate radiation doses to military or aeronautical personnel. They had Army infantry march into nuclear blast zones in the Nevada desert. So these smaller doses to astronauts wouldn’t have concerned NASA at all back then. Now we’re more attentive to such things.

[@eventcone]

Astronauts are now classed as radiation workers, and work within appropriate safety protocols.

[@teddyamok]

Just cant get my head around the fact that they had the tech in 60's but not in 2019. Have watched videos explaining why we dont but very ambiguous to the point were it smells like bs.

[@Tim22222]

The problem isn't technology, it's _money._ Sure, we could have kept going, even built a moon base by now. But congress took away the money for moon shots & spent it elsewhere. No money, no moon missions. If you smell BS it's coming from the videos you've watched.

[@ThatBoomerDude56]

There is no "tech" that is needed for going to the moon that is outside of well-known aerospace technology of the 1960's. We still have the technology. Quite a bit of it is still actively in use every day.

[@teddyamok]

@@ThatBoomerDude56 Peter Kosen my friend told me he travelled to the moon using only parts salvaged from his small garden shed. He said some of the parts he used was actually manufactured by nasa. I think my friend might be getting nasa equipment mixed up with Zanusi. I know, doesnt read or sound similar. He consumes a lot of acid though. He said he was not alone on his journey to the moon. He said he was accompanied by a female nordic type alien species. Again, im sceptical of this claim. As well as suspecting that rather than having built a craft capable of travelling to the moon and back, whilst on acid he has in fact merely climbed into his old broken industrial sized Zanusi washing machine that is stored in his garden shed, I also suspect that the nordic being who accompanied him on his journey to the moon was merely his fully accessorized blone and blue eyed life size sex doll which he chooses to store in the washing machine, away from the prying eyes of his girlfriend Brandeen. I personally dont know what to believe. I have emailed him requesting that he stop taking drugs when hes by himself but as he is such a filthy untrustworthy degenerate he is too unkept to visit my home, i wouldnt be seen in public with him as he would slurry my well maintained charachter. I visited his home one and couldnt actually see his carpet or furnishings due to strewn about rubbish and dirt. There was beasties crawling everywhere fer fuck sake. I had to throw all my clothes in the bin, burn them and get my neighbour to hose me down in my own front garden before I felt it was safe to go back in my own home. Will never go there again. Still, hes a really good mate and I dont want to hurt his feelings. Ive only went and accepted a limited one off return ticket to the moon when he offered me it. Fer fucks sake, i didnt have the heart to tell him that he maybe mentally ill, suffering from delusions and that I didnt want to visit his property ever again as it is infested with vermin and insects as well as probably many diseases. I didnt even mention that the ticket was a ripped up sheet of toilet paper where he has attempted to write on it with crayon. My loyalties are confused. I dont know if i should send him a letter telling him i cant go on the trip with him as I have a 2 week holiday booked in aspen and i have a fear of flying or whether i should pay for an experienced mental health professional to visit his home to asess him. There is also the personal scientific curiosity that the space vehicle he has built is indeed capable of travelling to the moon. As far as the nordic female i am 100% sure he is referring to his sex doll. No other woman, apart from his visually impaired, deaf girlfriend who has no sense of smell would ever want to be alone with him. Even if the female was from another planet.

[@ThatBoomerDude56]

@@teddyamok Whatever. You do realize that actual engineers exist, right? Some people understand how these things actually work in the real world. Or do you think that all "flying machines" are a hoax? Or like a guy told my grandmother back in 1904: "People are not meant to fly. That flying machine is the work of the Devil!" ... I guess some people need to make up stories for things that they don't understand. Because the real world can be a scary place.

[@teddyamok]

@@ThatBoomerDude56 with the greatest respect its not 1904 anymore and we now know that people are not meant to fly, machines do the flying. I dont actually know how ive ended up embroiled in these discussions. Im assuming i have been exceptionally bored for 10mins and seem both people either side of this argument wetting their pants with either the excitment of talking about the subject and defending it or anger that they find the subject ludicris. Either way i dont give a shit. I guess its my own fault for getting involved in race that I have no horse running in. This is how i see it (cannot fully remember the basis of this debate anymore), if nasa say they have been to moon but cant go back for whatever reason, thats great. It doesnt affect me. If some people think nasa did not go to moon and have never been to the moon, there is no moon or the moons made of cheese etc, again, so what. People are entitled to their opinions and beliefs (or are they? Its 2019 and u cannot call a boy/man, girl/woman by their actual gender anymore or u are a racist homophobe. Different argument I know). Its just funny to me how people live their lives on social media or video sharing networks and are aggressive about defending their principles on life etc against people who they do not even know. Me, im just dumb. I just like offending people and wasting their time. I have a very low iq. On par with a candy apple or some sort of nut. Maybe a brazil nut.

[@stephenandrusyszyn3444]

NASA used the RAD and not the Sievert because the Sievert had not been adopted as a unit yet. It did not become an official unit until 1980, and did not come into common usage for at least another few years.

[@scism2085]

Also, apparently they went thru the weakest part of the belts.

[@ZackWolfMusic]

No such thing as the van allen belts

[@companyinformation7066]

Pmsl

[@dadewalter3585]

Evidently you’re not old enough to know what a pyramid scheme is, it starts with you, the obedient consumer. And you trust in your handler’s, i.e.: the makers of these videos. You’ll notice that they’re not using “physicists“ because they know that other physicist would call them out on their bullshit. So they use “common people“ that you can relate to and you blindly jumping to defend them, may because she’s cute? This is classic psychological conditioning, a form of it is used to train monkeys, dogs and other animals(beasts of the field). It’s called conditioned response. You know you have the “mark of the beast” when you voluntarily object to any contradiction in the collective canonized version of public science.

[@Level_No_Curve]

@@ZackWolfMusic only a thing called the firmament

[@ZackWolfMusic]

@@Level_No_Curve Yupers

[@brandongaines1731]

Notice that the quote by the NASA engineer is talking about the computer systems being affected by the radiation belts, not the people aboard. Computer technology has advanced a lot since Apollo - the Apollo computer programs were literally hard-wired into the computers themselves, and therefore less susceptible to radiation than today's computers and their programs are. Depending on the types of radiation encountered, simply gold-plating the connections and wires might not be enough, as today's streams of ones and zeroes are more easily affected than the ones used by Apollo, simply due to the physical differences between the hardware of today and Apollo's, um, wireware? Jell-O-ware? Oobleck-ware? Not sure how one might name a computer component that is both hardware and software at the same time, but anyway, the point is, that Apollo's computers could rely on the spacecraft's own speed and built-in shielding just like the humans relying on it, but today's computers - well, let's just remember that someone playing Mario was documented being randomly sent up a level by a change in one or two bits caused by a single background-radiation-level space particle, so, out in space where those kinds of particle collisions are waaaaay more common - let's just not explore the kinds of worst case scenarios that can happen when a radiation particle hits the wrong bit of data at the wrong time.

[@IncognitoActivado]

The mental gymnastics of NASA fanboys have no limits. lol

[@garyk3478]

Radiation? Who else would've liked to see Buzz Aldrin turn green and hulk out before he punched Bart Sibrel?

[@akizeta]

His secret is, he's _always_ angry... at moonhoaxers.

[@paulhorn2665]

Buzz gave this Guy a shit and Buzz was right!!!

[@michaelryd6737]

Bart is never angry, that´s not his character!

[@KlunkerRider]

BUZZ SMASH !!!!

[@scowell]

I live near Austin... he's in town now for SXSW! Yay! Get Your Ass To Mars! But build a moon base first...

[@Mystakaphoros]

LOL of course the solution was "nuke it."

[@dormantrabbits]

Right?!! LMAO

[@flattruthtrucker9439]

Can you imagine these idiots in charge of our solar system. Yeah nuke something that you have no idea what will happen and see how you destroy us freaking retards

[@ann_onn]

And now, Mr. Trump wants to create a military "space force". I have no idea what they'll shoot, but I guess if they're there long enough, they'll shoot each other.

[@davidrynberk3675]

@@flattruthtrucker9439 you nailed it....the funny thing is the radiation belt that they said was dangerous then it wasn't but it still is they tried to nuke it.Houston we have a solution.

[@johnzarollin2749]

@@ann_onn Your President is taking long term moves (at last a President that has the foresight to do so) to protect our futures. The "space force" is in response to the chinese efforts to circumvent our missile defenses with offensive missile launching platforms in space. Better hope we get them first. If we do it'll be thanks to President Trump. Like so many other things that amazing man has accomplished ALL BY HIMSELF. Either offensively or defensively they will be a good thing for our ultimate survival, including even fools like you..

[@rickwest2818]

The engineer said the radiation could harm the guidance system and other electronics. He didn't say it would harm people. What's implied here is that the harm to people would come from the harm to the ships guidance and electronics. There is a world of difference between the computers/electronics of the Apollo missions and those of today. Todays electronics are far more complex and far more dense. These microscopic transistors are much more susceptible to radiation than their older enormous counterparts.

[@chrismilton3895]

They wouldn't have been able to take the radiation.

[@rickwest2818]

@@chrismilton3895 and you know this how?

[@chrismilton3895]

@@rickwest2818 Trump told me! Lol

[@ikemreacts]

What a bullish*t explanation.

[@IncognitoActivado]

WHAT?!

[@johnmac7529]

And the little dog laughed to see such fun as the cow jumped over the moon 😃

[@ikemreacts]

More likely than Neil Armstrong going there!

[@user-ht1xu4gv2u]

@@ikemreacts one small step for. A MAN.......

[@WCornersfilms]

It still doesnt answer the question of why they cant do the same thing today if they could do it in 1969

[@niallkinsella2687]

Law of Polaris -North Star- Because there is no rocket system powerful enough to get a manned mission to the moon in use today. The Apollo-SaturnV system was the only one in history powerful enough to do it, but the US Congress cancelled the program early and the system was retired. Without demand for it, the skills and manufacturing methods required to build it became obsolete and died out. There are rocket systems powerful enough to do the job in development right now. Their first crewed flights are due in early 2020s.

[@corey2232]

That wasn't the question this video was addressing. Conspiracy theorists always move the goal posts once the question of the moment gets answered. This tackled one such question. But to answer your question, nobody says we "can't" do the same thing today, only that we don't/won't. The rockets powerful enough to make these flights were decomissioned long ago. The US usually just buys seats on Russian rockets these days to send men into space. Maintaining the shuttle system was extremely expensive, so congress shut that down too. The government has been letting the private sector pour their money into building new protoype rockets & delivery systems, although NASA has been developing their next rocket system for future Mars missions. Keep in mind that in our infinite wisdom, NASA's budget is but a fraction of what it used to be. They're asked to do more with less, and with less general interest by the average citizen. Even when NASA sends probes, and rovers to other planets, people constantly whine "who cares?" and "what a waste of money" or "with $300 million you could feed X amount of people!" People tend to ignore all the benefits we've gained from space technology, and have a cynical & jaded view on achieving any new goals when they don't receive any instant or tangible gratification from it. Back during the years leading up to the moon landing, NASA's budget was over 4% of the total budget of the US for several years, with it hitting 4.41% at its peak. Today, the budget is only 0.4% of our budget...less than 1%. They also employed *OVER 400,000 PEOPLE* at their height in 1965, compared to just over 17,000 today... They also had triple the amount of employees, and were of huge national interest at the time, having the support of the country as a whole. Even though every dollar put into NASA averages about $10 back into the economy, people don't do the research or seem to care. If we suddenly had 4.41% of the federal budget going towards NASA again, instead of having $20 billion to work with, they'd have *$180.54 BILLION* instead. The amount of shit they could accomplish with that funding, or even half the staffing they had at their height, they could be sending people to Mars in the next few years.

[@cheeseface99]

Corey errr nope

[@newrealm9187]

Exactly

[@newrealm9187]

Niall Kinsella the aluminum foil was the only thing strong enough to get through the belt

[@DDFergy1]

Another thing is the computers used in the Apollo missions had a lot of mass per computing power. This mass made them more robust against radiation and Radioactive particles. The computers would have to be military grade, which should not be a problem unless one is orbiting in the belts.

[@williamstamper442]

Not only just mass, it was the fact that the components were much more analog in nature. It's like comparing vacuum tubes in a 1950s AM radio with a modern 2024 GPS NAV system in your new SUV

[@RogerFusselman]

🎶 "Might as well launch. (LAUNCH!) Go ahead and launch!" 🎶

[@zmyt_017]

if there is no belt in the moon no protection = death no camera raidreson brake film 🎞 storm or rain of deadly particles will hit them

[@arthousefilms]

Do you have a whole video about the Starfish Prime?

[@Lime.-.Leaf.]

To those who don’t know Starfish prime is when NASA detonated a nuke in the V.A.R.B (Van Allen Radiation Belt) to create a hole so they could travel through it but they just ended up giving it more radiation go figure 😂😂

[@martinda7446]

Ha! So if Van Allen's belts are in space, how does he keep his trousers up? Answer that if you can.

[@martinda7446]

PS Don't say he uses braces.

[@geraldwalsh6489]

Due to zero gravity they stay anyway

[@duggydugg3937]

hood boyz know how to keep the pants up to their knees at least..just glad the hanes stay above the group

[@elliegotfredson3712]

Maybe he likes exposing himself to the female astronuts.

[@zmyt_017]

if there is no belt in the moon no protection = death no camera raidreson brake film 🎞 storm or rain of deadly particles will hit them

[@SenorZorrozzz]

In 1967, NASA consulted Batman. He had a can of spray in his utility belt which when used, caused radiation to disperse. Alfred made up an additional 14 such cans, NASA reproduced them and two years later, we were sailing through the Van Allen belt!

[@mpirokajosephmgcokoca2355]

Hahahahahahaha hahahahahahaha hahahahahahaha hahahahahahaha 😁

[@whyyeseyec]

Yes, I can confirm this is exactly how it happened! I know because I read it on the internet. Thank you, Batman and Alfred

[@alecmartin8324]

😂😂😂😂

[@Alrukitaf]

I think van allen was pulling everones leg when he suggested nuking the belts. But ionising radiation from the van allen belts had readings that went off the scale several times.

[@eventcone]

It all depends what scale was being used. A speedometer from a bus would often be "off the scale" in a Ferrari.

[@ann_onn]

*@Alrukitaf* Yes, Van Allen found that there were high levels of radiation in some part of the belts. So they didn't go through that part.

[@vicsaul5459]

i thought the ufo tv series was much more interesting, and that was back in the 70s , and only now were thinking about a moonbase! wow, that show was way ahead of its time, and rad!

[@lukeanthony9937]

this isn't possible since the earth is cube shaped

[@geriott609]

Luke Anthony True. Wake up sheeple

[@akizeta]

You lie! Everyone knows it's shaped like a dodecahedron!

[@psa727]

I thought it was shaped like a donut. Mmmm... donuts!

[@GumballAstronaut7206]

Fools! Everyone knows it's a flat triangle!

[@Alex_Off-Beat]

TIME CUBE! 24 HOURS = 4 CUBE DAYS!!!

[@docducttape9270]

Cognitive dissonance is strong here

[@edwardhatfield6991]

Totally agree, thank you, the earth is flat, the Orion, in 2015, admitted we never been high er than 240 off the ground we walk on, fact!!!

[@HumptyDumptyOakland]

@@edwardhatfield6991 Ignorance is strong in flat earthers

[@edwardhatfield6991]

@@HumptyDumptyOakland whatever buddy, humpty dumpty, bumbed his head, believe what you will, but if you believe the earth is a sphere, repent, cause you deny Gods written Word!!!!

[@Mathadar]

So much stupid in this thread. Given my own experience with Aerospace and Aeronautical engineering, just go look up how much lead protects you from radiation, then go research what the outer layers of the Apollo spacecraft were made of. Oh, then look at the windows and what they were made of, because you will find those were lead lined glass. Even when I went to Advanced Space Academy we practiced drills for if the sun released a mass ejection and we would be at risk, as there are special designated areas of the spacecraft with extra thick layers of lead shielding to protect astronauts aboard the ISS, and aboard the Mir when that was around. The video in question that keeps getting linked to her relates to the effect the radiation has on computer systems, as the computer systems we used in the 1960's were cathode, and the integrated circuits were larger. The modern microprocessors are more susceptible to ionized radiation and Electromagnetic pulses due to the complexity, and a modern ship like the Orion will be especially susceptible. Radios have crystals that need to be properly calibrated, and the more off frequency the less likely the signal gets through. Likewise any sort of clock that is required for properly timed firings of engines, thrusters, and the parachute has a quartz crystal in it, which can likewise be damaged by enough ionized radiation and get the timing off. This is what he was talking about.

[@HumptyDumptyOakland]

@@edwardhatfield6991 You mean the fiction that is the bible? Lol

[@ronaldworthy157]

The van Allen belt parkway is under construction until further notice .

[@MuzixMaker]

And under water.

[@Janko1972]

Why are women so good at explaining technical issues? I would have never passed my Air Force electronics training without female instructors

[@detective6099]

😂

[@manofthehour5580]

Ko

[@DVGuitarCovers]

Women are used very effectively in the world of marketing.

[@drazenkunovic5168]

@TermsofService they probably got her from acting class

[@JessicaSeverin]

Another detail about the Kelly video is that modern computer chips use much smaller nm features than the types of flight computers used on Apollo which makes them much more susceptible to cosmic radiation. For example the processors of the Curiosity probes (circa 2011) is a radiation hardened chip called RAD750 and it's a 250nm, 200Mhz CPU chip (compare to a modern 1.5ghz, 14nm chip in your laptop or phone). Although it is not mentioned in the Kelly video, it is likely that Orion is going to need onboard computers more powerful than something like the RAD750 and he was most likely referring to the effect or VanAllen on these next generation radiation hardened CPUs which are still under development.

[@casinoz8013]

I actually watch the full-video and realize he was talking about the precautions for the Orion ship/mission specifically. Lol lesson learned, watch things in context.

[@ronin-insanosmc4554]

Thank you

[@michaeldavid6832]

This is true. We're having an issue with chips today in that even their own quantum effects are limiting how small the circuits can be. External radiation would play havoc which such small fabrication process.

[@WatermelonDog512]

Thank you for this explanation :)

[@JessicaSeverin]

RAD750 is still being used today. It is in the Perseverance rover (2020) and the James Webb Space Telescope (2021). This is not my field, but it does appear that the next generation radiation hardened processor (RAD5500, 45nm) is not being utilized as much and designers are still favoring the older RAD750.

[@heatheranne87]

Do you know what material Apollo used for radiation shielding? Did they conduct metallurgical analysis to study the effect on the material properties afterward due to the high level of radiation exposure?

[@barbarashorttobrien1337]

No she doesnt know and its funny look at Hiroshima and the Van Allen Belt which would have been exposed to the most radiation.

[@luscent3737]

They used a tin foil hat...cuz they never went to the moon. NASA is just another agency fooling the masses like everything else.

[@stardolphin2]

*Reactors* on Earth take far more...

[@AlbertMilliron]

I get that as well! But they were in it for 5 hours and it amounted to like 2 ct scans - not 5 SV like people say

[@patrikpass2962]

No one with brains think we went there back then. This comment section is cleaned, just watch the likes.

[@caseysimon2098]

​@patrikpass2962 your definitely voting for biden aren't you.

[@AlbertMilliron]

@@patrikpass2962 I beg to differ. I have a communications background and the deep space radio communications were definitely pointed at the moon when they were talking and for giggles the moon surveyor took photos of the Apollo landing sites. The LROC camera aboard NASA's Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter spacecraft took photos and so did China. Why would they take photos and report it?

[@Issacharite]

Just one question, who was that guy that stayed on the moon that tilted the camera upwards so perfectly as everyone else went back home?

[@niallkinsella2687]

Ed Fendel was the engineer in charge of programming and operating the remote camera on the rover.

[@niallkinsella2687]

@@tw1stedgrav1ty7 Neither was there a shot of the lunar module ascending from the surface during Apollo 11. That only happened on Apollo 15, 16, and 17 (only successful on 17), which all had rovers.

[@babyboi98]

😂😂😂

[@maximest-pierre6987]

Sorry I can t read you, Im on earth without any network service

[@zmyt_017]

if there is no belt in the moon no protection = death no camera raidreson brake film 🎞 storm or rain of deadly particles will hit them

[@EtzEchad]

Clearly we didn't go to the Moon because human beings aren't smart enough to have done it. As evidence, I submit all the idiots who say we didn't go to the Moon...

[@sfcbjs1]

David Messer luckily, it was their grandfather's generation that worked all the miracles needed to do the improbable. not the snowflakes.

[@Rainer67059]

You didn't goto the moon because American aren't smart enough to get it done. The Soviets went to the moon though. They filmed it. They were gentle enough to give the films to the Americans to NASA, so that NASA could modify the films with Hollywood technology to make it look like a live broadcast of American astronauts rather than Russian cosmonauts. The Soviets allowed this because they knew America's ego is easily bruised, they knew America needs it. The Russians were that magnanimous just like they were magnanimous to take their nukes away from Cuba while allowing America to station its nukes in Kaiserslautern. Communism is superior to the degenerate west. Mankind was on the moon, NASA wasn't. This is all ironic, of course, except for the remark with nukes.

[@sfcbjs1]

Rainer67059 BHAHAHAHAHAHAHA, good one.

[@Rainer67059]

*"decadent west" not "degenerate west"

[@davidhurd6074]

Ahhhhh Irony :3

[@DonaldSleightholme]

I'm wondering if you have a geiger counter, to test the gold piece of apollo foil. it might still be radioactive 🤔

[@niallkinsella2687]

The surface which was exposed to radiation would have burned off during reentry. There may still be ...some... elevated radiation levels coming from the piece of foil, but after so long it would be nearly impossible to tell it apart from normal background radiation. :D

[@Agarwaen]

Radiation isn't contageous. You could get a very small amount of captures creating a few atoms of some radioactive element, but aside from that it's not something that gets absorbed and sent back out later.

[@rickwest2818]

Does your food still contain microwaves after you remove it from the microwave oven? 😉

[@PabloGonzalez-hv3td]

@@rickwest2818 - Microwaves are not radioactive

[@markcopeland4448]

No amount of fact will every convince a conspiracy theorist. It's a waste of time, but I do appreciate your efforts. It's like talking to a wall, only the wall is more reasonable.

[@johnchapman8131]

The theories are the conspiracy. Science is full of imaginary theoretical thoughts generic scientist have proven to be facts through non recorded,well documented on paper experiments

[@yassassin6425]

@@johnchapman8131 You clearly have zero understanding of the scientific meaning of 'theory'.

[@kurtnelle]

How long would an unshielded Astronaut need to loiter in the inner Van Allen belt before they obtained that 2,5 rad and begin to exhibit symptoms of radiation poisoning?

[@ann_onn]

A few weeks. Fortunately, they passed through them in a few hours.

[@davidkeenan5642]

@Shawn Lewis Van Allen himself stated that spending a week in the Space Shuttle in the most intense regions of the VARBs could be fatal. But as Ann said, they traversed through the belts in a matter of hours. And they only skirted them! On average, they left Earth at an angle of about 35 degrees to the equator, thereby avoiding the most intense radiation.

[@jacobnielsen5319]

I'm no mathematician but 1.14 is not 1.4.

[@Cmurphy_27]

Jacob Nielsen 😂😂

[@FakeMoonRocks]

I'm no radiobiologist, but wouldn't it make more sense to have sent an animal, such as a chimpanzee, to the Moon and back, instead of a human Apollo 8 crew, for proof that such a mission was survivable? Also, is NASA's own chart at 7:42 , that claims the astronaut's radiation exposure was minimal, really acceptable proof that NASA sent men through the Van Allen radiation belts and onto the Moon? I mean, if the Apollo Moon missions were faked, wouldn't it stand to reason that NASA would concoct a phony radiation exposure chart to support their claim?

[@jd.3493]

I’m no asshole, but give her a break for misspeaking

[@drazenkunovic5168]

@@jd.3493 mistakes do happen if you are reading to fast for youtube video

[@Maxo11x]

did anyone notice that the scientist in "that video" was talking about the guidance system and not the astronauts?

[@scottpc1234]

Maxo11x great point bravo sir

[@SternLX]

Not a very good Scientist if he's never heard of shielding. He should talk to GE, they make CT scanners and know a thing or 2 about shielding electronics.

[@almostfm]

And that would be cool, if weight wasn't an issue. Also, CT scanners use x-rays. The VAB is particle radiation, and requires different shielding.

[@ThatBoomerDude56]

@@SternLX And how would CT scan shielding work for charged particles???

[@American-Plague]

@Maxollx Yes. This is the point that flatworm retards/ moon landing conspiracy retards don't understand or conveniently ignore.

[@js_models]

So one CT scan is enough to destroy modern electronics?

[@niallkinsella2687]

No, but an equivalent amount of energy in the form of particle radiation is more than enough to damage modern electronics. You don't need to shatter a hard drive to make the data in it inaccessible, just corrupt a few bits in the right place. You don't need to fry a CPU to crash your computer, just flip a few bits in the right place so it gets errors it can't handle (or even worse, processes that bad signal as if it were good, without noticing that it is now spitting out junk data).

[@DODFather]

Don't forget - the computer systems we use today are completely different from the computer systems on Apollo. The program code was stored in wires (physically) for Apollo - the wire coding was not susceptible to radiation.

[@johnzarollin2749]

I built the cable harnesses for Apollo, as they were called. Your statement about program code being stored in the wires reflects you know zip about any topic here but that you're an idiot. " Program codes" were/are stored in RAM modules you MORON and are not affected by anything EXCEPT electromagnetic surges of radiation EMIs you DUMMY...

[@heyarno]

I remember that video about orion. The focus was on radiation shielding for the technology on board. Modern electronic devices are much more sensitive to radiation. So the challenge of shielding is greater.

[@YDDES]

Yes. And the test was performed in 2014, with no problems occurring...

[@heyarno]

Nice, I missed that. Better radiation shielding means modern electronics, which translates to lower power consumption. With the freed up resources we can do fun new things.

[@ericephemetherson3964]

People are sensitive to radiation, too. Radiation may not kill you instantly. It kills later. Radiation does and will cause cancer. Cumulative 1000 mSv will cause cancer for sure. And somehow none of the alleged people that spent time in space going to the alleged Moon and being on the alleged Moon never developed any cancer. You know why? Because no one flew to the Moon and no one ever landed on the Moon. Why is this bull shit since 1960's stil going around the World?

[@heyarno]

@@ericephemetherson3964 Where did you get that number?

[@chairbornefobbit]

Pretty good summary, Amy. I'm a nuclear engineer and I'd like to point out something else that matters that aids the conclusion radiation wasn't a big deal - time of exposure. A large acute dose of radiation is generally more biologically harmful than a prolonged exposure of a lower amount. The Apollo missions obviously took days, so a CT scan is a relatively acute event. Therefore the radiation exposure the astronauts saw would be biologically even less than common medical procedures. It relates back to biology. A small, prolonged dose affords the body time to identify, destroy, and replace damaged cells. The most radiosenstive tissues are the ones that undergo rapid cell division. The cell is really only vulnerable while its DNA is replicating. If it becomes damaged at some other time in its life cycle, the cell just dies. Some circles even argue low level radiation exposure is therapeutic to a degree, but it's almost impossible to quantify due to our inability to isolate the variable of radiation exposure in order to tie it to effects not encountered until decades later in life.

[@rackha5369]

bollocks to much radiation is a good think? hahahahaaaaa

[@unclewerner]

Yes, short exposure to radiation activates the immune system. I once lived in a town in Germany were the tap water would contain up to 6ug of Uranium per liter. 100 years ago the radioactive springs in the region were sold as healing water! Damn. Think about that. How much perception can change.

[@robertproctor239]

Todd McLaughlin ] I say this, when you take your head out of your ass, you will then be able to smell the air better. I think you will look the same though.

[@robertproctor239]

steve dover ] NASA will never stop the LIE,

[@TrueNorth333]

What is the heat level in moon dust / on moon rock surfaces?

[@looselygaming6130]

still haven't explained who film the space craft taking off from the moon...

[@Kylemsguy]

remote controlled/automated camera on the lunar rover

[@niallkinsella2687]

His name was Ed Fendell. He was in charge of calculating the tilt rate required to keep the ascending spacecraft in frame and programming the remote camera to do so. I don't understand why hoaxers first assumption is that someone had to be there in person to get a shot like that.

[@brianperro435]

NO ONE CAN!

[@robertwraith7264]

So the van Allen belts protect Earth from being the same as Mars (we would all be dead if it didn't collect all the radiation) and then she said there's not enough to kill us ?

[@eventcone]

More likely we would never have been born! Our planet has had to sit in the flux of particle radiation from solar and cosmic sources for billions of years. Apollo astronauts popped outside of Earth's magnetic field for a few days. Bit of a difference.

[@artistjoh]

Robert Wraith You do need to listen better. The belts would indeed kill us if we were in them for a sufficient time. Professor Van Allen estimated that a week in the inner belt would be fatal and that the outer belt is bigger but far less deadly. The Apollo ships were in the inner belt for about 15 minutes, and the outer belt for about two hours. The total exposure was around 1% of the fatal dose which is not a problem and is about the same as getting a abdomen and pelvic CT scan. So in order to die from the radiation the astronaut would need to go to the moon and back 100 times, or someone on Earth would need to have 100 CT scans. At no point did she say that there is not enough radiation to kill us, she said that by travelling fast the spaceship does not spend enough time in the radiation belt to accumulate sufficient exposure to kill the astronauts. It is the accumulation over longer time periods that is deadly.

[@sporksgaming556]

I stumbled across this video, didn't realize this was a thing... for those interested in how radiation works, you can look independently to how radiation is used in the medical field. The reason Amy is so confused about all the different ways we measure radiation is because we use those units to answer different questions. Pertinent to this video, rads are the old unit for what is now the Gray, with 1 rad being equal to 1cGy. This is a measurement of absorbed radiation dose. When we think about radiation, we are often principally concerned with its effects on the body. So we convert to a unit called Sieverts (Sv) via radiation weighting factors. For x-rays and gamma-rays [essentially the same thing but from different sources], the weighting factor is 1, so 1Sv = 1Gy or 1mSv = 1mGy. Different particles have different weighting factors. If, as is suggested, the Van Allen Belts are filled with charged particles [say alpha particles] then the Sievert takes this into account as it is about 20 times more biologically damaging than your average photon [so 1Gy of alpha particles = 20Sv]. I hope that clears up the units. When you consider the independent body of evidence that makes up radiobiology and fields like radiation oncology, we know that the biggest impact on radiation safety is a function of time [how long you are exposed], distance, and shielding [with all 3 playing a major role]. If scientists knew what type of radiation was in the Van Allen belt, it is reasonable to believe that they understood the shielding requirements and the impat of time the same way a medical physicist designs a medical linear accelerator vault to ensure that no radiation exits the vault to injure anyone outside the treatment room. The dosimeters that the astronauts used would have recorded the absolute dose to the skin, which would be conservatively assumed to be applied to the whole body, in rads, which later would have been converted to Sieverts to see the equivalent dose [biological dose]. Even if we took a highly biologically damaging particle like an alpha particle or thermal neutron and applied a weighting factor of 20-50, Apollo 14 would have only gotten 57cSv, or 0.57Sv.... an easily survivable level for a human. Considering this is dose after a combined total of a couple of hours, I can see that becoming fatal with enough exposure [the lethal acute dose for 50% of the population is calculated to be ~4Sv, or 7x the calculated amount]. But I guess if you don't believe the data provided to you, then that probably won't hold water. But recognize that how radiation affects the body and what we can do to avoid it is fairly well understood, even back in the day when the moon flights were going on.

[@jamesquinn4115]

None of these people are interested in doing "research" beyond Googling "moon hoax democrat."

[@cceast7890]

It seems common opinion as to the required shielding is either 6' of water, or 6" of lead. I have seen this plenty of times and not once was it challenged. NASA also stated they do not have the power to lift the added weight.

[@michaellyne8773]

The radiation levels did not harm the astronauts...because they went there full stop! Irrefutable Proof from three gentlemen. TERRY VIRTS SPEECH. Well, that’s a great question. The plan that NASA has is to build a rocket called SLS, which is a heavy lift rocket. It’s something that is much bigger than what we have today, and it will be able to launch the Orion capsule with humans on board as well as landers or other components to destinations beyond Earth orbit. Right now we only can fly in Earth orbit, that’s the farthest that we can go, and this new system that we’re building is gonna allow us to go beyond and hopefully take humans into the Solar System to explore. So the Moon, Mars, asteroids... there’s a lot of destinations that we could go to and we’re building these building-block components in order to allow us to do that eventually. NASA ENGINEER SPEECH. Radiation like this could harm the guidance systems, on-board computers or other electronics on Orion," Smith says. "Shielding will be put to the test as the vehicle cuts through the waves of radiation… We must solve these challenges before we send people through this region of space." DON PETTIT In an interview, Donald Pettit -a NASA astronaut- mentioned that he’d go the moon in a nano of a second! but they no longer have the technology to do that. All the technology from the Apollo mission has been destroyed, and it is a painful process to build it back again. Neil Armstrong said : There are great ideas undiscovered, breakthroughs available to those who can remove one of truth's protective layers. There are places to go beyond belief. Those challenges are yours -- in many fields, not the least of which is space, because there lies human destiny. Thank you. Need anymore be said? 😊

[@Tim22222]

@@cceast7890 That "common" opinion is dead wrong. Lead is not the appropriate shielding for proton radiation (the kind found in the van allen belts) and no one ever said it was.

[@joshseguin2043]

ok there expert

[@sneakyfox4651]

My neighbour is a Moon-hoax nut and bases his claim solely on it allegedly being impossible to survive passing through the van Allen Belts. So, as a biologist I did the only thing I could do, namely to download the dosimeter report (which has the same radiation table for the manned Apollo flights as shown in this video) and tell him that the doses received equaled a flight from New York and London and back. And not only did they gain extra speed to pass the Belt fast; they also chose a trajectory through the weakest part of the Belt, and they positioned the CSM in such a way that the hull shielded the crew the most from the radiation. But since he was predetermined that he had that special insight to see through all "the lies" from Nasa that conspiracy hotheads believe they have, he wouldn't accept hard numbers and calculations from a certified scientist. Well, at lest it gives me the opportunity to flip him off every time I meet him in our courtyard. And I do. Because he deserves it.

[@Tim22222]

If he's so sure the van allen belts were impassable, ask him _how he knows about the belts at all._ Ask him how radioactive the belts are - demand figures - and ask him what portion of a lethal dose the astronauts would have received passing through them. He won't be able to answer any of those questions, of course.

[@sneakyfox4651]

@@Tim22222 I did that already, and his reply was that the "proof" was all in this KZbin video with a professor saying that it was impossible to survive the passage. And then never mind all the rest like photos of boot tracks on the Lunar surface, carefully collected rock- and dust samples, ALSAP data, and so on. I even told the fool that van Allen himself had said that survival was possible. Granted, you cannot park a spacecraft there for months and survive, but a few minutes fly-thtough, yes, easily. But my neighbour (which was in fact a good friend for a decade until this came up) has turned out to be a lustful lair, making things up as he goes along, and who got angry every time I called him out on it with facts. Consequently, there is no reason to waste more time on him since nothing computes: He has COPD and less than 40% of his lung capacity left, but still he smokes cigarettes, claiming that it was the hashish that he smoked (and quit from only because the only dealer in this rural area died a couple of years ago), not the cigarettes that caused it, hence ignoring all the scientific evidence. I can use my time much better than trying to reason with him because it can only be an exercise in futility.

[@Tim22222]

@@sneakyfox4651 Yeah, facts simply do not have any effect on such people. Their conspiracy beliefs are too closely tied to their sense of identity. Sad.

[@critthought2866]

@@sneakyfox4651 You've got to love people who trust NASA when it tells them the VAB exist and that they are full of "deadly radiation" but then don't trust NASA when it says it devised a way to avoid the worst of the belts, or that it put shielding on the craft.

[@sneakyfox4651]

@@critthought2866 Yeah. I always wondered how people could just pick and choose what fitted their narrative, discard all contradicting evidence, even from the same source, and still look at themselves in the mirror.

[@MrBuzzBill]

"CAN'T" An axiom chanted by losers throughout history. "Can't climb Everest" "Cant run a 4 minute mile" "Can't break the sound barrier" The amazing, massive, crowd of people who worked tirelessly to get men to the moon and back are the opposite. Winners! Thank you for ignoring the "CANT" chanters before and after your triumphant trip the the moon!

[@fuckthathalilintars6654]

Don't worry sir...she's not US citizen..that's why she shout it out...she didn't realized that the safest way going to the moon has been found...it's callled now as Boeing's MCAS

[@MrBuzzBill]

@Aldo G LOL! I can't help you. And you sure can't help me. Nice try though.

[@yakovspivak962]

Forget about hallow Moon, we decided to go on the Mars mission first - we don't like the easy way..

[@SleepySkull1]

I see your logic. I can't get a girlfriend! AH! Take that!

[@patriotwolf2810]

EXCUSE ME PLEASE YOU CAN BREAK THE SOUND BARRIER MY COUSIN WAS A NAVAL FIGHTER PILOT HE DID IT IN HIS TOMCAT

[@michaelportaloo1981]

They went OK but never made it back and were replaced with doubles. Do i get commission for starting a new conspiracy theory?

[@davidwithrow8065]

I have a feeling your conspiracy theory might be a conspiracy in itself. Hmmm.

[@jbenkidu]

That's like the Challenger conspiracy.

[@michaelportaloo1981]

@@jbenkidu isn't that the same in reverse? They did make it back and were allocated new identities?

[@jbenkidu]

@@michaelportaloo1981 yes I believe so. Conspiracy 1; they went and they died, never came back. - they are still alive. Conspiracy 2; they went and came back. - they never came back, they are doubles.

[@mr.nobodyhere]

Bob..Nope on comission. Just a plain box of cookies from Amazon..NASA already spent their funding on green-screens and CGI.

[@Chris.Waddell]

Man I LOVE Van Halen! ;)

[@miklameshxe5479]

I heard they slowed down and watched the whole concert.

[@SlayALLDay1979]

Chris Waddell it was only a matter of time.

[@michaelbrito2978]

There have been hundreds of brave women (groupies) who have made it through the "Van Halen belts!"

[@shondiego]

I been to the edge And there I stood and looked down

[@johnchandler271]

You can't get to space w/o an Eruption first.

[@bazoo513]

Let me stress _again_ that Mr. Smith talks about radiation effects on modern electronics, which is, even in rad-hard version, hundreds of times more susceptible to radiation damage (or just corruption) than Apollo-era discrete transistors and rope memory. And I don't think we are ready to make do with rope-memory computers today.

[@GortonaGaming]

super helpful, thx! Subscribed!

[@alexanderdurig4474]

I'm 59 - every time the astronauts returned to earth, we all always had to endure exactly 6 minutes of radio static as the astronauts went through the Van Allen Belt, which denied all electronic transmission and we all held our breath until they emerged alive on the other side. They thought it was plenty dangerous. But they never explained how tv/radio transmission from the moon made it though the Van Allen Belt no problem.

[@Tim22222]

I'm 58! :-) The radio silence was not caused by the van allen belts, it was caused by the super-heated air (plasma) that surrounded the capsule during re-entry into the atmosphere. Nothing to do with radiation. And the transmissions from the moon were microwaves, not TV/radio. There's no reason at all that passing through the VAB should be a problem.

[@alexanderdurig4474]

@@Tim22222 Thanks for the good word - do you believe in the single electron?

[@michaelpanter5156]

@@Tim22222 can you explain how the president called them from a land line and the connection was perfectly clear and there was no nine second delay ?

[@Tim22222]

@@michaelpanter5156 You're joking - right? You're putting me on, right? I mean, you can't really be THAT dumb so you must be having me on, right?? You can't really imagine how they arranged that call? Hint: Do you think they had the technology in 1969 for the president to place a call to _Houston?_ Take your time ...

[@michaelpanter5156]

@@Tim22222 listen to some tapes that Buzz and Armstrong are talking to Houston and it's not that good of audio, then listen to the president's phone call. There is no time delay and the audio is a lot more clearer.

[@tmh565]

It is 2019 and cell phone calls still fail on a regular basis however back in 1969 the audio transmission 238,900 miles away was "Spot On!" I would suggest taking a visit to the US Aero and Space museum and take a look at what was actually recovered in the Pacific. A fraction of what is in the shuttle which actually does space travel. How would it be that man's greatest accomplishment of landing on the moon is now lost because of the technology being gone? Just remember Santa Clause will not come unless you are fast asleep................

[@Tim22222]

WTF is wrong with you? Comparing cell-phones to S-band microwave transmissions is apples v. oranges. It's a loser's argument, totally off-topic. And the moon landings were not lost because _THEY HAPPENED!_ We stopped going after the goal was met. What's suspicious about that? I really don't understand where you losers are coming from.

[@Jake-zp8gi]

My phone works fine

[@ericephemetherson3964]

Because these gus were on the Moon while you slept. Radiation may not kill you instantly. It kills later. Radiation does and will cause cancer. Cumulative 1000 mSv will cause cancer for sure. And somehow none of the alleged people that spent time in space going to the alleged Moon and being on the alleged Moon never developed any cancer. You know why? Because no one flew to the Moon and no one ever landed on the Moon. Why is this bull shit since 1960's stil going around the World?

[@ericephemetherson3964]

@@Tim22222 The goal was met? What goal? To hop on the Moon like wild bunnies? So, why, after Europeans discovered America - thus meeting the goal of descovering the new land - kept coming to the American continent? Should they have just met the goal of descovering and going back to Europe without ever returning? What kind of weird argument are you using? By exploring the Moon and excavating Helium 3 our World would have plenty of energy. So, once we land on Mars, we will never return to it?

[@hurricaneq8411]

@@Tim22222 it didn’t happen

[@jodadi5362]

No your video didn’t explain or solve anything for me. But please tell me who this NASA worker was that said “we destroyed the technology of the craft that took us to the moon”?

[@ann_onn]

Can't you google? Don Pettit, when speaking metaphorically about the tragic cancellation of the Apollo program.

[@xx_redwood_xx9737]

The Saturn V cannot be re-used because it is a disposable launch vehicle, meaning the only parts that make it back to Earth intact is the command module, the astronauts, and the samples collected. That's what that worker meant.

[@stevensonDonnie]

The Gemini space craft, coupled with the Agena space vehicle, went to over 400 miles and over 700 miles altitude. Beyond the Van Allen belt.

[@Level_No_Curve]

No it did not you bafoon

[@michaelmurratti4687]

The Belt STARTS at 1 Thousand Miles...MORON!

[@AlexanderTzalumen]

don't forget, Apollo era electronics were so bulky they weren't particularly sensitive to... much of anything. it's modern precision computers with etchings only about 120 atoms in width that are sensitive to ionizing radiation. that's the big problem for Orion that wasn't a difficult challenge for Apollo.

[@blucifer4397]

Absolutely right Alexander. The nasa engineer Kelly smith specifically mentions the belts could damage the guidance systems and onboard electronics.

[@MisterLepton]

Blu Cifer I’m not some moon landing denier but I’m not really buying this “computer damage” thing. Otherwise, what about all the other probes we’ve sent to Mars, Jupiter, Saturn, etc.

[@AlexanderTzalumen]

MisterLepton Weight constraints are dramatically more flexible when you don't have to provide a livable environment for passengers, or engines with enough thrust to get to the destination before the astronauts die. In those cases you can afford the shielding weight. Our probes moved far slower (years in transit) than is viable for human survival.

[@MisterLepton]

Alexander Tzalumen then we’ll just need to build a sufficient ship, piece by piece, in LEO.

[@AlexanderTzalumen]

MisterLepton Expensive, but doable. We'll build it one Tesla Roadster at a time.

[@quan7umjack]

One problem is there are 2 apparent explanations. One is the one you gave, that they went through quickly with some shielding limiting total exposure. Another common explanation is that the flight trajectory took it past the poles to completely avoid the lower belt and pass through the thinnest portion of the upper belt. The thing is both of these explanations can be true, perhaps some missions made use of one, and some missions the other, or a combination. But different "official" explanations make paranoid people suspicious. Add in the fact that nasa supposedly lost the telemetry data for the entire apollo mission in less than 10 years, data of the most significant achievement of human ingenuity, and the fact that our "moon rock" gift to the netherlands was actually petrified wood, and bureaucratic incompetency starts looking an awful lot like someone intentionally hiding the truth. Not saying i BELIEVE the conspiracy theories, but its not like every single person who doubts the moon landings legitimacy is illogical and unreasonable.

[@Tim22222]

"nasa supposedly lost the telemetry data for the entire apollo mission in less than 10 years" This is a gross overstatement from moon-landing deniers and it's _not true!_ They lost _some_ of the raw data from _one_ of the missions - and they had already copied & used the data they "lost." Just another lie from the moon-hoax nuts.

[@dwaynewilburn7921]

oh yeah rockets need friction/resistance and space has neither if its a vacuumn right?

[@Agarwaen]

@@dwaynewilburn7921 No they don't. Learn basic physics.

[@808fishman8]

@@Agarwaen hes right. no thrust without atmosphere

[@Agarwaen]

@@808fishman8 absolutely wrong. learn some basic physics.

[@justinherbert9146]

Six Apollo manned missions landed on the moon between 1969 and 1972 -- in those six missions there was not one fatality or catastrophic failure - in the last 51 years there has not been one manned mission to the moon - not by the USA, China, Russia, Japan, etc. - some say no human has ever traveled past low Earth orbit - To get to the moon and safely back home, the Apollo astronauts not only had to cross the Van Allen belts, but also the quarter of a million miles between the Earth and the moon. During the Apollo missions, the spacecraft were outside the Earth’s protective magnetosphere for most of their flight. As such, they and their crews were vulnerable to unpredictable solar flares and events and the steady flux of galactic cosmic rays. The crewed Apollo flights actually coincided with the height of a solar cycle, the periodic waxing and waning of activity that occurs every 11 years. Given that solar flares and solar energetic particle events are more common during times of heightened solar activity, this might seem like a cavalier approach to astronaut safety. I for one can understand why some highly educated, intelligent people question whether we really went over 50 years ago.

[@eventcone]

You (conveniently?) leave out the fact that there were 7 attempts at manned moonlandings between 1969 and 1972, and that that of Apollo 13 nearly ended in a fatality when the crew barely managed to get their crippled spacecraft back to Earth. In the last 50 years there has not been one manned mission to the Moon, because no one in that period has been willing to commit to the necessary expenditure to do so. This is changing. Neil Armstrong NEVER attempted to 'land' the lunar module on Earth because the LM was incapable of flight in Earth gravity. The vehicle he lost control of was a flying simulator called the Lunar Landing Research Vehicle (LLRV) - designed to simulate the experience of flying in lunar gravity and in vacuum. It was not some sort of LM prototype. He did not lose control because of any design flaw but because of a malfunction. Prior to the crash he had already made 21 successful flights in the vehicle and would go on to make about 50 successful flights in total as part of his mission training. No Apollo crew were outside the protection of the Earth's magnetic field long enough in the prevailing radiation flux to accumulate even a dangerous dose of radiation, the longest such mission being only 12 days. The largest average dose of any crew was about 1% of a fatal dose. There were no solar flares ejected in the direction of the Earth-Moon system (of which even at 'solar maximum' there was small chance) during any Apollo mission. NASA's approach in this respect was hardly 'cavalier' - they had some procedures in place in the unlikely event that a flare should be headed their way. However such a radiation challenge - such as it was - may have been one of the reasons for ceasing further lunar missions. In other words, the more you continue to 'try your luck', even when the odds are in your favour, eventually you would come unstuck with continued flights. You can't have it both ways by saying that flights to the moon were dangerous because of the possibility of solar flares, therefore suspicious, and then by saying they stopped going after 9 such flights, therefore suspicious. Risk accumulates - the more times you fly, the greater the chance of an accident and/or fatality. The vast majority of people who question whether we really went over 50 years ago are neither highly educated nor highly intelligent, whilst it is also true that the vast majority of 'highly educated, highly intelligent people' who also have expertise in aerospace engineering, rocket engineering, the relevant sciences and other relevant specialised fields have no such doubts.

[@justinherbert9146]

@@eventcone I did not leave it out - Apollo 13 - because if you read my comment I was only addressing the 6 successful Apollo moon missions only - Apollo 13 was unsuccessful but there were no fatalities and not catastrophic - I did not address Apollo 1 either - Before Apollo 1's planned launch on February 21, 1967, the Command Module interior caught fire and burned on January 27, 1967, during a pre-launch test on Launch Pad 34 at Cape Kennedy. Astronauts Grissom, White, and Chaffee, who were working inside the closed Command Module, were asphyxiated. Grissom reported difficulty in hearing responses to his comments from those at mission control. Grissom said, "How are we going to get to the Moon if we can't talk between two or three buildings." He then yelled "fire." Two years later men walked on the moon. A pretty quick turn around in solving Apollo's hazardous electrical problems. Hmm...

[@robertdonnell8114]

Now I have a picture of you with a tail in my head.

[@billflanigin9231]

Not really related, exactly. But why is there a flat earth movement? There is a guy in my town that has his house and vehicles plastered with flat earth "facts". I'm about to lose it.

[@michaeltuz608]

bill flanigin Actually, your question is related, sadly enough. There seems to be a growing trend for people to denounce science and to claim that most anything that scientists tell us is untrue. I suspect this comes from the fact that the truth isn't always pretty or what we want it to be, and impartial science has a way of revealing the unpleasant truths and disproving comfortable misconceptions. So when disappointed with the message, many folks find it easier to condemn the messenger than to change their paradigm. The result: believers in a flat Earth and the moon landings being hoaxes.

[@SUA37]

Average People are asking questions, here's a few. 1) How come we don't have an actual photo of the earth from space? ( or the tens of thousands of satleites in orbit ) What we are shown is cgi and composites of a perfect marble with cloned clouds etc... 2) Earth is a 25k circumference ball. Rate of curve = 8"/mile-squared... Pythagoras theory. But we don't observe this anywhere. We are seeing structures,boats, etc far beyond where the curve is supposed to be. They are not leaning away either like on a ball. 3) Horizon is ALWAYS flat and at eye level. No matter the altitude. Doesnt matter how large the sphere is, it should drop. Fish eye lense cams don't count for curve proof. My question is why the hostility against simple questions??? Google "eric dubay 200 proofs Earth is not a spinning ball" if you're open minded... I'd rather have questions that can't be answered than answers that can't be questioned.

[@OmarTerol]

Why the hostility? Because idiots repeat this "questions" phrasing them like they have some sort of validity when in fact they don't. Because what would be the point of the whole scientific communications history since Newton lying to you? Because idiots don't seem to grasp how fucking small they are and just how fucking massive the Earth is. Because I can say the Moon is full of cheese and everyone else is lying, come up with a few calculations and basically just rationalize my stupidity against all measurements ever made and still I would be completely wrong. Because "Horizon is ALWAYS flat and at eye level. No matter the altitude." implies you have measured it from all altitudes... and you haven't, yet idiots decide to trust an edgy group that claims to know "the truth" over the scientific community. I think that's why.

[@SUA37]

Omar Terol dang you a mad😂😂😂 lol calm down you're letting your emotions dominate your superior intellect!

[@OmarTerol]

Rick Perry nice reply.

[@d5uncr]

Another thing not mentioned in this video is that the Apollo crafts, from what I understand, didn't fly though the thickest parts of the belts but on a more polar trajectory. And the Apollo computers were made of very large and sturdy transistors, not the minuscule, one gazilion per square inch, ones we have today.

[@duggydugg3937]

anything to avoid the facts...

[@justinmadrid8712]

Keep making excuses bud. It's painfully obvious the moon landings were fake to anyone who spends 8 or so hours looking into it.

[@d5uncr]

@@justinmadrid8712 Oh, Mr. Top Notch Science Expert, please give us clueless folks a few examples of exactly why it was fake. And please explain why the Russians didn't expose that fakery immediately...

[@justinmadrid8712]

@@d5uncr Your condescending demeanor only demonstrates your close-mindedness. Russia likely believed the moon landing was genuine, just as most people did initially. Most of the damning evidence came about long after the Space Race was over. By then, Russia had already denied that they were even participating in the Space Race (they were lying to save face), so they would have had little motivation to expose the supposed hoax. The reasons I believe the moon landings were fake are too numerous to put in a KZbin comment. Plus you would just dismiss them anyways, so I won't waste my time with you, unless you really want me to.

[@d5uncr]

@@justinmadrid8712 Ah, so you're saying that you're more of a space/moon/rocket expert than all of the Russian scientific elite - past and present. Interesting... Well, give me the top reason then - and let's discuss that. I _do_ hope it's not the old and thoroughly explained "But the flag moved...".

[@leroyd4049]

So what was the radiation shielding in the capsule?

[@niallkinsella2687]

Steel, aluminium, low density insulation. These are ideal for shielding against the charged particle radiation found in the solar wind and van Allen belts.

[@beetlebayley5237]

So the VA belts does not interfere with the asstronaught's pelvic thrust?

[@michaelmurratti4687]

It's just a Jump to the Left!

[@derhesligebonsaibaum]

The comment section gives me more cancer than an astronaut without protection would get when passing the Van-Allan Belts...

[@arnesaknussemm2427]

Nice one. Please let NASA know how safe they are as they are under the miscomprehension that they could be dangerous.

[@timfleming5405]

CGMeadia/Spaceley- Sound Art Media systems kzbin.info/www/bejne/aqbPpoiHjc6dn5Y

[@grahamcrawford4203]

Derhesligebonsaibaum Yeah, brain cancer!

[@trafficjon400]

DAM THOSE EYE'S !! LOL

[@mandymayne8759]

15 CT scans? Girl, I hope you’re feeling better and all healthy now.

[@geraldwalsh6489]

It's been well documented now...you Americans did not go to the moom

[@geraldwalsh6489]

Girl,you've been drinking too much Coca cola......No way you Americans went to the moon....just look at all the evidence,photographic and otherwise.

[@JT_1]

@@geraldwalsh6489 what evidence, all the crap posted by deniers?

[@dwaynewilburn7921]

@@geraldwalsh6489 No 1 has/will

[@dwaynewilburn7921]

@harrylongbaugh1 ....ummm....we dont have decent healthcare either

[@michaelsegura5410]

Also how many satellites have been shot and left up their jus curious

[@rogm8577]

First Ive heard of Operation Dominique. I was under the impression that the nukes released into space by Operation Argus (1958) did increase the radioactivity of the inner belt for the first 2 apollo missions.

[@tag1462]

Hi. I have heard accounts of the early space missions where animals were used as test subjects. Were these animals recovered or simply sacrificed for science?

[@YDDES]

Most were recovered. Or at least they tried to recover them. Sometimes it failed. Laika, the first dog it orbit, died when the air conditioning system failed, but that satellite wasn't planned to be recovered anyhow.

[@lindataylor2131]

Tag...for the most part the animal testing occurred before any manned flights took place. Way way back even before the Gemini program. Check this out history.nasa.gov/animals.html. That ought to give you the answers to your questions.

[@rickrivethead]

Russia sacrificed a few animals by all accounts, that with the early test pilots, but i wont say anymore about that!

[@MsSomeonenew]

Most died, most still die today. There are test mice on ISS all the time for any number of tests and they almost never go back to Earth alive.

[@lindataylor2131]

Ms....quite a few test mice on earth don't live long either. Besides Mice don't live long. They breed the way they do because they don't have long lifespans. This is also why they are ideal test animals. Because there are so many of them. One male in a tank with 5 females can, in a very short time, produce up to 40 offspring in a few weeks. LOL. Is truth.

[@captainpanda5533]

I'm curious to know why the average radiation level for Apollo 14 was so much higher than any of the other missions. Is there any reason why this might be?

[@paulsengupta971]

Solar flares perhaps? Maybe we could look up sunspot activity for the days of the missions.

[@quarthinos]

Looks like the data was skewed by a failed dosimeter. There was also a solar flare a week prior to launch.

[@PassiveSmoking]

Brad Scarp well there was a computer glitch that held up the landing for a while while they worked out a workaround. Maybe that was a contributing factor?

[@jesusgonzalez6715]

Brad Scarp I don't know, but I'd guess solar flare

[@morskojvolk]

Turns out golf balls act as a radiation amplifier. Damn shame...

[@alanbauder5089]

There was no radiation protection in the capsule, lunar lander, or space suits. The Apollo capsule was thin aluminum except for the re-entry heat shield. The LEM was even much thinner aluminum. Also they removed theirs suits shortly after launch. People have actually talked to the people responsible for making the space suits. They said there was no protection for radiation. They were also told it was not a requirement in the original plans. This radiation problem has still not been solved 50 years later. They are planning a Mars mission and still trying to figure out how to deal with this problem. Also being exposed to the Suns radiation for that long trip would be a disaster. If they would ever make it to Mars an underground shelter would be one of first priorities for the same reason.

[@Tim22222]

The only area of radiation of concern were the Van Allen belts; beyond the belts there wasn't enough radiation to worry about for such a short journey. So the suits & the LM don't matter. As for the CM, the walls contained some materials that had some shielding benefit. Otherwise, the trajectory kept them out of the worst bits & they passed quickly. BTW you'd know all this if you'd, you know, _bothered to watch the video you're commenting on._

[@Tim22222]

The Mars situation is different & requires different solutions because a mission to Mars will be measured in months, not days.

[@ikemreacts]

@@Tim22222 Got that telemetry data? Link me! Thanks.

[@alanbauder5089]

@@Tim22222 So what you are telling me being exposed directly to the suns radiation is no big deal, but if it wasn't for those Van Allen Belts and our atmosphere the earth would be a dead planet. Also during the 1969 trip to moon the had some of the largest solar flares ever recorded.

[@alanbauder5089]

@@Tim22222 Please believe what ever you want. I am just telling you that there so much evidence to prove they never went there. If you think they were on the moon then that is it. I just people would look more at a lot the facts. There is a video produced my the same guy that got punched by Buzz Aldrin on KZbin called Something Funny Happened on the Way to the Moon which you should watch. It's not the best one, but does have some interesting info. I have watched and read books with better information. This girl that does this KZbin video seems to be a cover story for NASA. Oh and by the way NASA was created by the CIA after the Russians launched the first satellite in orbit 1957. We all know what the CIA is capable of.

[@alexmarin820]

I had X ray on a couple times in my life, but for no more than 10 seconds... different than take 54 minutes of constant radiation.

[@ann_onn]

Ever eaten a banana? Those are radioactive too. You are exposed to constant radiation, just by living on Earth. Not much. Not enough to do harm. You'd have to spend months in the Van Allen belt to get a dangerous dose. They passed through them in minutes. Their total radiation dose for the entire trip was about 1 rad. That's trivial.

[@tmo4330]

@@ann_onn Watch "listen to these astronauts" a 3 minute video that will change your mind for ever.

[@YDDES]

alexmarin820. Yes and I have inhaled smoke from woodfire for several minutes and it’s totally different to inhale it for hours or days. So, What? I’m still here, 80 years old.

[@wdtj]

As I remember the Apollo TV broadcasts (yes I am that old) they said that the TLI burns were timed so that the spacecraft would pass through the belts nearest the Earth poles, minimizing the radiation since the belts are thinner and weaker there.

[@MilkoOfficialChannel]

But they didn’t take that route…check it online. NASA site shows the trajectory was through the equator not near the poles.

[@koff41]

Its stronger at the poles and NAZAS van allen belt is bogus, its not a donut shape.

[@enlightenSAINT]

Why haven’t they done this again? Since it timed it perfectly before? Go figure Sherlock.

[@jaykay4137]

Apollo 11 didn't land on the moon Technically only the Eagle landed

[@KingBobXVI]

There was no moon rocket. Our rocket didn't move the moon.

[@lonestarwolfentertainment7184]

Jay Kay and

[@owenwilkinson4991]

Jay Kay technically you are correct

[@carpy1970]

Well technically, Apollo 11 was the name of the mission, not of the craft, so technically it did go to the moon.

[@joewylen8942]

carpy1970 Apollo was the name of the crew capsule, It just became the common way to refer to the mission, just like Mercury and Gemini.

[@brianarbenz7206]

Gee, the astronauts got a CT scan, and they didn't get a lolly pop!

[@G-ra-ha-m]

Their 160ASA Kodak film never got that CT scan however as there's not a fogged roll during the entire ridiculous fictional series. This is what Kodak say about film fogging. Read this then look at the Apollo photos. kodak.com/global/en/service/tib/tib5201.shtml#SEC47

[@G-ra-ha-m]

@Karl Collier 6 hours? Most Apollo tales were of 12 day trips and over 11 hours in the belt zone! Which leaves about 11 days in unprotected space withe the solar wind and cosmic radiation :) Outward 2:44 in history.nasa.gov/afj/ap11fj/02earth-orbit-tli.html 8:30 in history.nasa.gov/afj/ap11fj/04nav-housekeep.html 5.75hrs, 3.8 orbits Inward 189:28 history.nasa.gov/afj/ap11fj/26day9-reentry.html 194:53 history.nasa.gov/afj/ap11fj/26day9-reentry.html 5.5 hours, unknown orbits. Total in + out time = 5.75 + 5.5 = 11.25 hours.

[@crazyhq270]

It also seemed like he was talking about the electronics. Not actual people itself. If the electronics don't survive then the rocket wont function and the rest follows. Now you might ask why Apollo was able to do this but modern craft can't (easily). Well Apollo computers used different material for its computing which is vastly different than modern semiconductor based computer that we have. And those even though had much less power were physically tougher. Contrary to that modern computers have much more power but they are also fragile. And radiation can alter calculations. Even slight mistake of 1% error could send the flight computer off course and miss the moon (or any trajectory ) by a large margin. You can definitely see engineer talk about guidance system and on board computers.

[@crazyhq270]

@Wendell Payne 14 Kilobyte will be barely enough for future, self driven autonomous rockets. kzbin.info/www/bejne/mnqQe4poiq50fZI

[@Noneyabuiness]

It’s a good thing there is no radiation on the sound stage

[@tomtroszak]

In the original NASA video, Kelly Smith says: “Radiation like this can harm the guidance systems, onboard computers, or other electronics on Orion”. That is true because because modern CMOS memory chips are much more fragile than the 36,864 sixteen-bit words of core rope memory (ROM) and 4,096 words of magnetic core memory (RAM) that the Apollo Guidance Computer used. The AGC operating system code was LITERALLY hard-wired into transformers (not transistors) for each bit of core rope memory, hand-woven by “little old ladies”, and could not be erased except with a sturdy pair of scissors or maybe a blowtorch. And for the original processor chips, (2,800 ICs, each with dual three-input NOR gates) even lightning striking the Apollo rocket during liftoff just prompted a quick system restart, no big deal. By comparison, modern memory chips and processors can easily be erased, or completely destroyed because the logic components inside them operate at *a few million times lower wattage* than the RTL ICs used in the 1960s AGC. A modern computer chip can be wiped out with a single ‘snap’ of static electricity, for real. Not good if you are hundreds or thousands of miles away from Earth, so thorough testing of unmanned vehicles in actual spaceflight is a great idea. The high-energy charged particles in the Van Allen Belts could fry a CMOS chip faster than a cat in a polyester sweater, but if you try adding shielding any heavier than polyester film and aluminum foil, high-energy electrons from the VAB striking the shield the could actually create dangerous X-rays via the "bremsstrahlung effect" that could fry the people inside the craft. In the NASA video, Smith also says: ‘We must solve these challenges before we send people through this region of space”. Maybe all he left out was “IN ORION, which is loaded with modern electronic gadgets not yet thoroughly tested in actual spaceflight”.

[@ChrisFEJackson]

CMOS is more susceptible than say TTL due to the fact that it can be damaged by lesser static discharge events. Which if happened the electronics are protected sufficiently. CMOS chips are very vulnerable when being handled out of circuit! Hey! are aeroplanes using cmos technology? I guess so, so how is radiation worse for CMOS than say TTL?

[@tomtroszak]

ChrisFE Jackson - Airplanes charge/discharge continually into the air, I think CMOS in space could more easily (than TTL) be fried by accumulation of charged particles, e.g. - "Space assets are continuously bathed by charged particles making their components susceptible to the effects of spacecraft charging. While their orbits are not embedded within the radiation belts, low earth orbiting assets with high inclinations do pass through the horns of these belts during each polar crossing, transiting through potentially dangerous charged particle populations many times per day. Occasionally, these low altitude horns include significant populations of energetic ~1 MeV electrons, which can penetrate typical spacecraft shielding and accumulate within dielectric materials and on ungrounded conductors, a process known as internal charging." ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/7930487/

[@ChrisFEJackson]

Yes, by having static wicks on the wings. I personally think that for such static build ups, on 'spacecraft', only becomes an issue when the discharge event occurs. For example, I walk on a nylon carpet all day without affect until I come into contact with something that is either grounded or has a lesser static charge build up. Then I get the discharge event occurring which could be many KV 30 - 40+. Now if I am floating in free space through a highly charged field or I am generating charge by movement, I still have to have the discharge event to occur to cause damage, otherwise the charge build up would continue, to what level? well that is a thought and whole other explanation due to many factors, but such levels would also impact TTL devices just as much (Bipolar) as it would CMOS, because of the levels. Check out how the ISS or how NASA say they ground it out!! believe me I've looked into it and even their records and documents conflict!

[@tomtroszak]

ChrisFE Jackson, if you get a chance, check out the paper I linked to in the previous comment. It was just published in 2017, and the full text can be read for free. It is a study of the long term effects of highly charged electrons on POES and Metop spacecraft. From the paper: ""Of the hazards encountered by modern spacecraft, anomalies directly attributable to interactions with charged particles cover the range from recoverable to catastrophic failure of important systems (...) Environmental impacts to spacecraft include electrostatic discharge (ESD) from an accumulation of electrons (keV to MeV) on surface and internal components, single event effects (SEE) due to energetic heavy ions (MeV to GeV), and degradation due to total ionizing dose (TID). While spacecraft subsystems are designed to shunt charges away from susceptible components, if the electric potential from charge accumulation exceeds the breakdown voltage then an internal ESD (IESD) occurs, which can cause soft anomalies and permanent damage."

[@ChrisFEJackson]

Hey Tom, I just had a brief overview of the page thankyou. Read the abstract etc. To me it is quite interesting (sad I know) but can see how the electronics and sub systems can be susceptible to such charges, especially where differing materials are used in close approximation to each other which may, as I'm sure you'll agree may allow for the ESD event to occur, due to the static build up upon differing materials. Again, the ISS if you look at all the differing materials used from plastic inserts to metal surrounds of interface, orbiting at an astonishing 17,500 mph in an environment which I assume is NOT a complete vacuum, the charges reaching the breakdown voltage of say CMOS channels and/or Bipolar junctions must be easily reached, I loosely state. However, it is only an issue when the discharge event occurs. So to prevent and monitor, they utilise Langmuir gauges to measure the density of the plasma field surrounding the ISS (or from their docs) around the solar arrays! Then there are the plasma control units (PCU's) that ionize xenon gas and eject out to neutralize the field, but these PCU's (two of them) are located on the Z1 truss of the ISS so presumably it covers the whole station and neutralizes the field as they move, perhaps. BUT, that is only for that finite time, move on a few seconds with respect to the speed and I'm sure the field must build up again & again. Given the fact that the station has been up there from the early 2,000's they must have sorted the heinous issues of ESD events from occurring, but offer up little information on how they actually do sort it continually. I do like this subject as you may be aware :) and have been involved in many projects relating to preventing ESD events from occurring to ensure the integrity of customers' systems over the long term. ESD events may not directly destruct components per say, but can stress the electronics leading to early 'life' failures. Given the time, it's a wonder how the ISS is not more troublesome, you would not get me on it, not now :)

[@Mike-tv9rk]

Anyone know how to successfully navigate the Greg Secker Belt !?

[@Ektalon]

But are the Van Allen Belts on fire? Without Peter Lorre and the Seaview, we’re screwed!

[@MrJchildress053189]

Pete is one lucky cat

[@clyran5507]

I used to think the majority of humans could think critically. After seeing the majority of the comments, it seems I was wrong.

[@Defrap22]

Stfu african

[@ShortSaleCompliance]

@Clyran One Cognitive dissonance within a Statist mindset can be devastating.

[@donniebaker5984]

Clyran One this is why some say "i would rather be red than dead in the head ...take a little trip back in time to the 1980's when the united states elected an old burnt out movie star for president of the united states of america . His name was Ronald Reagan . He had answers for everything . But never any correct answers .like " let no child be left behind". And another good one " just say no to drugsl So if a kid showed up on graduation day in a cap and gown , he or she got a diploma ..like the gal on jay leno , "jay walking" when jay ask her how many stars are on the flag flying above her head at her outdoor graduation and her answer was " i dont know , it's moving to fast to count them all " i done a little survey of my own a while back and found that my bar tender girl never heard of a war between the unites states and england ..simply because she was never taught american history in high school but she did graduate . Ask americans of ages 30 - 40 why we honor july 4th with fireworks displays ...they will tell you its to show respect to the manufactures of fireworks ...looks like they failed to invade area51 ...seems they all got wound up in las vegas at the pre-invasion party ! The one thing they know how to do ! Tell them the chinese landed on the moon over 5 years ago and a successful landing on the far side 3 days after new years of this year , and they will tell you that you are bat shit crazy . Now we got local collage students telling me that the earth is flat . I can remember when ronnie "ray gun" stood up to the russian president and said " mr. President tear down this wall" now we got a president who only wants to build walls ...like i have said before " the spade was trumped (the black man always gets it first) and now it's donald's turn to shuffle and deal " off the bottom of his deck) and deal with it as you will . Cause the united states doesn't really exist anymore since the opening of the federal reserve bank that is not a part of any banking system of any country's banking system , but it is owned by the royal family ..as it has been said many times before " the sun never sets on the Union Jack, never did and it never will!" look around you and think about it !!! George ( 1st pres.) and his army rowed their life boat arcross a river in a storm with George standing up in the bow aggressively swinging his sword at the British Navy of 90 cannons per ship that could shoot 5 miles inland on target of 500 pound exploding cannonballs . And ol' George ( cousin to the Queen ohf England) made all of the British Navy give up the battle and sail back home in defeat with a piece of paper for his cousin the Queen of England to sign over the united states to the colonists ...and every president since save one are all blood related to the royal family even all of those who ran for president of the united states, all cousins and uncles ...so now the stage is all set up with totally illiterate brain dead idiots who think they are in charge simply because they are now the majority ,but not knowing they are powerless over the rest of the world and the 6% of the population who own the world who by the way all have the most rare blood type on earth of being AB Negative of all the elite ! As old man president George Bush said " we will not be ruled by the laws of the jungle ,but by the laws of a " New World Order ...wecome to the jungle "One" cya

[@dennismason3740]

I'm just gonna pull on that skin-tight spun gold costume with the mirror helmet, I'll be fine.

[@bwade79]

My goodness!!! Why on earth have you had 15 abdominal CT scans?

[@joeb7373]

Having grown up in Central Nevada in the 1950s I guess I soaked up my fair share of rays. They used to measure in Roentgens.

[@michaeldaugustine9249]

If the claim that the electronics on the spacecraft couldn't handle the journey through the Van Allen belts are true, then how is it that we've sent countless probes with sensitive electronic components to the far reaches of the solar system? How did we send multiple rovers to Mars? How did we send Voyager I and II to get fly by pictures of the outer planets and actually leave the solar system? How did we send New Horizons to get those beautiful pictures of Pluto? How did we send Juno to Jupiter to get amazing photos of it's clouds?

[@niallkinsella2687]

Brand new systems in the Orion. Never been in space before. The stuff used in probes isn't up to the task of fulfilling the Orion's mission parameters so they've had to design new systems. These new systems had to be tested before sending the ship up with a person in it.

[@michaeldaugustine9249]

That's not really the point I was making. I was pointing out that if moon skeptics are cherry picking "electronics can't survive the Van Allen belts" from this unrelated video about a completely different project, then they must also be claiming that no probes have ever left earth's orbit regardless of the evidence.

[@niallkinsella2687]

Woops. I thought you were asking it as a question.

[@shevek2384]

It's definitely worth remembering that technology evolves. I used to have a job where I would work with discarded technology to recycle or scrap it and I got ahold of some computers made back in the 1980s a few times. It reminded me how exciting these ancient PCs and first generation Macs were when we first saw them, and how satisfying it was to turn one on and get interesting results fast. Nowadays a typical computer has thousands of times the processing power and clock speeds, but we expect the computer to do millions of things "under the hood" that were simply undreamed of 30 years ago, and these things clog up the operating system and suck up all that power and jam up the speed, so that opening a file today can take much more time than it did on a Mac SE! This is partially because the file does a million times more things of course and is much larger. So it is that we rely on tinier and tinier micro components, and these are inherently more and more sensitive to a given level of disruption. Thus, radiation events that would not be noticed by Apollo's pre-silicon clunky electronics would wipe out entire chip sets today. Obviously if the Air Force expects a modern spy satellite to do its job they are looking into ways to harden the equipment, or use redundant systems to recover after the fact. The point is, modern astronauts and mission planners would be horrified to have to work within the limits of 1960s electronics, and yet the modern stuff we want is much more delicate versus space radiation. Therefore it is perfectly logical that a modern spaceship needs new levels of design attention one in the 1960s could let ride.

[@michaeldaugustine9249]

exactly. The Apollo missions got to the moon with the computing power less than that of a TI-83 calculator, They didn't have tiny electronic components on the spacecraft because the microprocessor wasn't even invented until 1971. They relied on large electronic components with wires all over the place, they had to manually change the configuration of the wires if they needed to reprogram the system. Back on earth, mission control was using pen and paper and giant tape drive computers. The Apollo missions had no sensitive electronics on board. They barely even had electronics on board. It was pretty much just a rocket with some wires inside. The most sensitive "electrical components" in the Apollo missions were the astronauts' nervous systems, which was already covered. They saw flashes of light from the radiation exciting neurons, but they had no lingering effects once back home. But we've already shown that we can send small sensitive electronic components through the Van Allen belts provided they are properly protected, since we've sent modern probes and rovers to Mars, Pluto, Jupiter, etc. since the 21st century.

[@odin5327]

I'm not sure either way but why haven't we been back since?

[@ann_onn]

Lack of funding. When Russia launched Sputnik, Americans were terrified, so Apollo got almost 5% of the total national budget. Once they'd been, people resented the cost and the cold-war ended. Now, NASA gets less than 0.5%. No government has thought it worth spending 100 billion or more just to become the 13th man on the Moon. Robotic missions are far cheaper and safer.

[@arthousefilms]

Our economy is degraded, teachers are using their own money to buy pencils. You think America would make space travel a priority when people are denying science and don't even believe in global warming when they can see its effects in their own neighborhood?

[@ann_onn]

Jeff Who? ;-) jk

[@odin5327]

@@ann_onn That argument doesn't hold weight. India sent a rocket to the moon for less than 2 billion. Nasa's annual budget is 21.5 billion. US also gives Isreal 4 billion annually. Money is not the issue.

[@ann_onn]

*@​Odin* Apollo cost over $100 bill.

[@gregnixon1296]

If we keep nuking space, the aliens will be angry with us.

[@diveactive]

Explain why the films used in the cameras were not fogged Or even melted from the radiation and heat. I use Hasselblad.

[@Tim22222]

Because the radiation is not x-rays. Watch the video.

[@eventcone]

What exposure does it take for particle radiation to "fog" film? You don't know. The films were also NOT exposed to any significant levels of heat.

[@diveactive]

You don't either . But I studied back in the 70s light and film and radiation to how film can be fogged . Have you ? I took photo chemistry. Did you ? You may come back at me time and time again, And I know you have been trained to avoid and come up with strategy roles to over come answers to knock it all out of perspective.

[@eventcone]

@@diveactive You haven't answered my question. Maybe you've been "trained to avoid", huh?

[@diveactive]

Image result for is the X rays from the suns raysscience.nasa.gov The X-rays we detect from the Sun do not come from the Sun's surface, but from the solar corona, which is the upper layer of the Sun's atmosphere. Only very hot gases can emit X-rays, and the corona, at millions of degrees, is hot enough to emit X-rays, while the much cooler surface of the Sun is not.

[@awesomusmaximus3766]

That was a rad presentation

[@AmyShiraTeitel]

+Awesomus Maximus Heh, cheers.

[@MMXX_CE]

Attila the pun over here...

[@derekhenschel1632]

Awesomus Maximus lol

[@QuasiRandomViewer]

REMarkable!

[@midnite2159]

Haha

[@louthivierge3374]

The moon is not even out of earth's atmosphere

[@eventcone]

Yes it is. Where the Moon orbits there may well be some atoms or molecules from Earth's atmosphere that are gravitationally bound to Earth, but which are so rarified that they do not act like a gas. This region is referred to as an exosphere and is to all intents and purposes a vacuum.

[@deeweyant3164]

Eddy removed that layer of truth and blew right throo the van Halen radiation belts I herd. 🎻🎹🎶🔉