Moon landings---a partial 'hoax'?

[BenDhyan]

.
All these years, you two -- never wavering, dutifully in alignment with the establishment narratives on this (and a couple other long-running topics), despite the fact that -- particularly since the onset of the 21st century and particularly the last ~7 yrs -- almost all establishment narratives have been exposed as either partially misleading if not outright fraudulent. No matter: you remain loyal to the (faulty, at best) narratives.

And always relatively responsive here -- an achronistic, now largely vacant message board. Quite a feat. Almost like a job, eh?

Well done.

Hi Belligerent, concerning your funny belief that Apollo astronauts never went to the moon, do you at least admit they went through the Van Allan radiation belts without harm?

[stickdog99]

When is Artemis II actually launching?

https://youtu.be/ycqk3uN_N6g?t=1047

For some reason, the radiation exposure issue doesn't seem to be something that NASA already solved without issue over 50 years ago.

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-024-07927-7

Space radiation measurements during the Artemis I lunar mission

Abstract

Space radiation is a notable hazard for long-duration human spaceflight1. Associated risks include cancer, cataracts, degenerative diseases2 and tissue reactions from large, acute exposures3. Space radiation originates from diverse sources, including galactic cosmic rays4, trapped-particle (Van Allen) belts5 and solar-particle events6. Previous radiation data are from the International Space Station and the Space Shuttle in low-Earth orbit protected by heavy shielding and Earth’s magnetic field7,8 and lightly shielded interplanetary robotic probes such as Mars Science Laboratory and Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter9,10. Limited data from the Apollo missions11,12,13 and ground measurements with substantial caveats are also available14. Here we report radiation measurements from the heavily shielded Orion spacecraft on the uncrewed Artemis I lunar mission. At differing shielding locations inside the vehicle, a fourfold difference in dose rates was observed during proton-belt passes that are similar to large, reference solar-particle events. Interplanetary cosmic-ray dose equivalent rates in Orion were as much as 60% lower than previous observations9. Furthermore, a change in orientation of the spacecraft during the proton-belt transit resulted in a reduction of radiation dose rates of around 50%. These measurements validate the Orion for future crewed exploration and inform future human spaceflight mission design.

Does anyone know where can we find the papers comparing the radiation shielding strategies and measurements used in the Artemis missions to the radiation shielding strategies and measurements used in the Apollo missions?

[Belligerent Savant]

.
Good questions, Stickdog.

.
All these years, you two -- never wavering, dutifully in alignment with the establishment narratives on this (and a couple other long-running topics), despite the fact that -- particularly since the onset of the 21st century and particularly the last ~7 yrs -- almost all establishment narratives have been exposed as either partially misleading if not outright fraudulent. No matter: you remain loyal to the (faulty, at best) narratives.

And always relatively responsive here -- an achronistic, now largely vacant message board. Quite a feat. Almost like a job, eh?

Well done.

Hi Belligerent, concerning your funny belief that Apollo astronauts never went to the moon, do you at least admit they went through the Van Allan radiation belts without harm?

Hi Ben -

Before I answer, allow me to add a qualifier (which applies to all of my posts here over the years): I'm nothing more than a human traversing this plane, attempting to make sense of events. I endeavor to do so as objectively as possible, without bias or predispositions, though I fully realize -- especially over the years -- I've faltered at times in this endeavor. BUT: whatever I type here are always my earnestly-held positions at the time of posting. I have no agendas and mean no ill-will. I will readily admit to being a bit prickly and obnoxious at times in my rhetoric here, and at other times, perhaps I've been too sure of my positions (and a bit combative, in turns, as well -- justified or not). Though overall, and with the passage of time, I believe I've held a good/upper-tier track record, as far as 'finger on the pulse' of what may be actually going on out there.
(See my posts on covid and 9 11, as merely 2 examples. There are current topics -- such as the 'moon landings' & 'climate change' -- that can be labeled as 'TBD' for now).
It's a combo of intuition, learned experience, and exposure to various forms of information, with a healthy dosage of discernment & critical thinking, and with an open mind to challenging any/all dominant narratives, even those that I've previously or currently subscribed to and/or believed.

With the above in mind, I will indicate once more: with the passage of time I am increasingly doubting many aspects of what is claimed about our activities up there in 'Space'. At the moment, no: I do not believe humans traversed the Van Allen Belts. I'll go a step further and indicate that I wonder aloud the extent that the 'Van Allen Belts' are some sort of misdirection/red herring. I remain frankly agnostic about ANY/ALL information we've received in the modern era about Space, and especially, 'Space Travel'.

I may revise (or fortify) this position in time as any new information may become available.

[BenDhyan]

When is Artemis II actually launching?

https://youtu.be/ycqk3uN_N6g?t=1047

For some reason, the radiation exposure issue doesn't seem to be something that NASA already solved without issue over 50 years ago.

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-024-07927-7

Space radiation measurements during the Artemis I lunar mission

Abstract

Space radiation is a notable hazard for long-duration human spaceflight1. Associated risks include cancer, cataracts, degenerative diseases2 and tissue reactions from large, acute exposures3. Space radiation originates from diverse sources, including galactic cosmic rays4, trapped-particle (Van Allen) belts5 and solar-particle events6. Previous radiation data are from the International Space Station and the Space Shuttle in low-Earth orbit protected by heavy shielding and Earth’s magnetic field7,8 and lightly shielded interplanetary robotic probes such as Mars Science Laboratory and Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter9,10. Limited data from the Apollo missions11,12,13 and ground measurements with substantial caveats are also available14. Here we report radiation measurements from the heavily shielded Orion spacecraft on the uncrewed Artemis I lunar mission. At differing shielding locations inside the vehicle, a fourfold difference in dose rates was observed during proton-belt passes that are similar to large, reference solar-particle events. Interplanetary cosmic-ray dose equivalent rates in Orion were as much as 60% lower than previous observations9. Furthermore, a change in orientation of the spacecraft during the proton-belt transit resulted in a reduction of radiation dose rates of around 50%. These measurements validate the Orion for future crewed exploration and inform future human spaceflight mission design.

Does anyone know where can we find the papers comparing the radiation shielding strategies and measurements used in the Artemis missions to the radiation shielding strategies and measurements used in the Apollo missions?

Re Artemis II launch date, NASA has not announced a launch date or time for Artemis II, but it will now be no earlier than March 2026

Re Van Allan belt shielding and strategies for radiation mitigation on Apollo and Artemis programs, watch this...




Hmmmm, I wonder what percentage of the 10% flat earthers are also in the 12% NASA faked moon landings?

Conspiracy vs. Science: A Survey of U.S. Public Beliefs

[stickdog99]

Nice video for trying to debunk a claim that I have never made.

Now, where are the scientific papers comparing the radiation shielding strategies and measurements used in the Artemis I mission to the radiation shielding strategies and measurements used in the Apollo missions?

[Belligerent Savant]

.
The Apollo astronauts were all just "extremely lucky".

Space radiation: the Apollo crews were extremely lucky

Published: July 17, 2019 6:14am EDT

https://theconversation.com/space-radia ... cky-120339

[BenDhyan]

Hi Ben -

Before I answer, allow me to add a qualifier (which applies to all of my posts here over the years): I'm nothing more than a human traversing this plane, attempting to make sense of events. I endeavor to do so as objectively as possible, without bias or predispositions, though I fully realize -- especially over the years -- I've faltered at times in this endeavor. BUT: whatever I type here are always my earnestly-held positions at the time of posting. I have no agendas and mean no ill-will. I will readily admit to being a bit prickly and obnoxious at times in my rhetoric here, and at other times, perhaps I've been too sure of my positions (and a bit combative, in turns, as well -- justified or not). Though overall, and with the passage of time, I believe I've held a good/upper-tier track record, as far as 'finger on the pulse' of what may be actually going on out there.
(See my posts on covid and 9 11, as merely 2 examples. There are current topics -- such as the 'moon landings' & 'climate change' -- that can be labeled as 'TBD' for now).
It's a combo of intuition, learned experience, and exposure to various forms of information, with a healthy dosage of discernment & critical thinking, and with an open mind to challenging any/all dominant narratives, even those that I've previously or currently subscribed to and/or believed.

With the above in mind, I will indicate once more: with the passage of time I am increasingly doubting many aspects of what is claimed about our activities up there in 'Space'. At the moment, no: I do not believe humans traversed the Van Allen Belts. I'll go a step further and indicate that I wonder aloud the extent that the 'Van Allen Belts' are some sort of misdirection/red herring. I remain frankly agnostic about ANY/ALL information we've received in the modern era about Space, and especially, 'Space Travel'.

I may revise (or fortify) this position in time as any new information may become available.

Hi Belligerent, what a nice post. No worries my friend, we all to some degree, are probably guilty of some of those traits you allude to. I accept your skeptical position on Apollo, and just pray you will see the light one day.

[BenDhyan]

The Chinese apparently also imagine it is possible to send humans astronauts through the Van Allan belts without harm..

https://www.universetoday.com/articles/china-successfully-tests-their-new-rocket-and-lunar-crew-capsule-placing-them-on-track-to-reach-the
China Successfully Tests Their New Rocket and Lunar Crew Capsule, Placing them On-Track to Reach the Moon
China has achieved several impressive milestones in its space program in recent years. As part of their plan to build an outpost on the Moon that will compete with NASA's Artemis Program - the International Lunar Research Station (ILRS) - they are busy developing a super-heavy launch system and a crew-capable spacecraft that will take taikonauts to the Moon by the end of the decade. That is the plan, at any rate, and recent tests indicate that they are on track to achieve that goal. On Wednesday, Feb. 11th, the China Manned Spaceflight Agency (CMSA) completed a major test of its Long March-10 rocket and the Mengzhou spacecraft.

The test took place at the Wenchang Spacecraft Launch Site in south China's Hainan Province. It combined a low-altitude demonstration of the Long March-10 and an in-flight abort test of the Mengzhou spacecraft. This was the first ignition flight of the Long March-10 rocket and saw the spacecraft power through the most dangerous phase of ascent - maximum dynamic pressure (or Max Q). This phase occurs as the vehicle accelerates in the lower, denser atmosphere into the thinner upper atmosphere, when aerodynamic stress peaks.

An in-flight abort test, meanwhile, evaluates the crew capsule's safety system, which separates from the rocket in case of emergency. Both the capsule and the rocket's first stage were successful and landed in their designated recovery zones. Key moments in the flight test are featured in the video below, via the state-owned China Global Television Network.



This test places China a step closer to its goal of landing astronauts on the Moon by 2030 and sending crews to other locations in deep space - like Mars. Combined with their planned expansion of the Tiangong space station, robotic missions to explore a Near Earth Asteroid (NEA), a Main Belt comet, and a Mars Sample Return (Tianwen-2 and -3, respectively), China is assuming a leadership role in space.

[Elihu]

Nice video for trying to debunk a claim that I have never made.

Now, where are the scientific papers comparing the radiation shielding strategies and measurements used in the Artemis I mission to the radiation shielding strategies and measurements used in the Apollo missions?

they're nowhere cuz there ain't any
this cheezy video was trying not to work for me, hope yall can view it.

[Elihu]

which speaks to the issue of relentless lowest-common-denominator character assassination in "arguments". if they are not outright employees then they are not nature lovers or ball earthers. they are statists first and last.

this is curious. i'm surprised i haven't focused on this more. in a couple of books (and many more i'm sure), like "The Trial" and "1984". there was this concept of a bifurcated society. example, the Party members or the banks and legal profession. In both cases they were a conscious group over the other half of society which was a blind herd. literally. Party members were indoctrinated, insular, subject to vaporization and controlled by terror. i've known for decades that what passes for respectability in this world is nothing more than stolen money (harvested from the herd). if that's true it would have to have been going somewhere for some purpose. looking about today, with the tankers of cash involved, it stands to reason that it would bifurcate humanity and that party members would cohere around, and build, a consensus interpretation of history and reality. the herd would have no standards of comparison and only their eyeballs and common sense to fall back on at risk of their lives of course. at this point, it doesn't matter if we went to the moon or not, or if the ground is round, or if the sky is falling. it's all just business as usual. corrupt money coupled with human nature is the cause.

[BenDhyan]

Now, where are the scientific papers comparing the radiation shielding strategies and measurements used in the Artemis I mission to the radiation shielding strategies and measurements used in the Apollo missions?

they're nowhere cuz there ain't any

Radiation shielding strategies for the Artemis I mission represent a significant evolution from the Apollo era
AI Overview

The Artemis I mission utilized advanced, multi-layered radiation protection and active, high-fidelity monitoring, marking a significant evolution from the passive,, time-managed strategies used in the Apollo missions. While Apollo relied primarily on the aluminum skin of the Command Module and avoiding solar particle events (SPEs), Artemis I employed "storm shelters," hydrogen-rich material shielding, and specialized protective vests.

Radiation Shielding Strategies: Apollo vs. Artemis I

Apollo Missions (1960s-1970s):

Passive Shielding: Protection depended on the aluminum structure of the Command Module.
Operational Mitigation: The main strategy was to avoid Solar Particle Events (SPEs). Missions were timed based on solar activity cycles.
Limitations: A major solar storm in August 1972 (between Apollo 16 and 17) would have delivered a lethal dose to astronauts on the lunar surface, as the Lunar Module offered minimal protection.

Artemis I Mission (2022):

Storm Shelter: The Orion crew module was designed with a dedicated "storm shelter" in the central part of the module, specifically between the floor and the heat shield, for use during high-energy events.
Hydrogen-Rich Materials: Instead of heavy lead, Artemis I used materials high in hydrogen, such as polyethylene, which are more effective at absorbing high-energy solar protons.
Stowage Utilization: Supplies and equipment were strategically packed in lockers around the crew to provide additional mass shielding.
AstroRad Vest: The mission tested the "AstroRad" vest, a personal protective garment designed to block solar energetic particles, particularly protecting radiosensitive organs.
Orientation Maneuvers: The crew capsule altered its orientation (a "flip" maneuver) during engine burns in the Van Allen belts, reducing radiation exposure by ~50%.

Measurement Techniques and Technologies

Apollo Measurements: Primarily used passive dosimeters (film badges) worn by astronauts to measure cumulative, total dose after the mission.
Artemis I Measurements (High-Fidelity):
MARE Phantoms (Helga and Zohar): Two female-torso phantoms were equipped with 5,600 passive sensors and 34 active dosimeters to measure radiation impacts on specific organs, with Zohar testing the AstroRad vest.
HERA (Hybrid Electronic Radiation Assessor): The main active detector on Orion, providing real-time data to flight controllers on radiation levels in different zones of the spacecraft.
Active Dosimeters (DLR M-42 & ESA EAD): These mobile sensors recorded energy-deposition spectra and absorbed dose rates, allowing researchers to create a detailed, 3D map of the radiation environment inside the capsule.

Key Findings

Artemis I proved that the Orion spacecraft's design significantly reduces radiation risks compared to previous, less shielded designs, with the most shielded areas providing four times more protection than the least-shielded ones. Additionally, galactic cosmic ray (GCR) exposures were 60% lower on Artemis I than in previous deep-space missions.

[Elihu]

mute sound

[Elihu]

so much radiation

[Belligerent Savant]

.

NASA announces Artemis III mission no longer aims to send humans to moon

Plans to return humans to the moon will come in later mission as agency grapples with delays and glitches


Nasa announced on Friday radical changes to its delayed Artemis III mission to land humans back on the moon, as the US space agency grapples with technical glitches and criticism that it is trying to do too much too soon. BSavant comment: 'too much too soon'? It's been well over 50 years since the last reported 'moon landing'. Laughable.

https://www.theguardian.com/science/202 ... n-missions

Wow, what a shocker!