Apollo 13

[allancw]

Everyone seems to agree that the Van Allen Belts were potentially dangerous to the astronauts. Therefore, all the Apollo missions must have taken this into account, i.e., the launches timed and the flight trajectories carefully plotted so the astronauts would not be 'dosed.'

I'll assume this is a given, from the above posts.

Therefore there surely are CONTEMPORANEOUS reports/accounts/papers/studies/documents proving this, or at least MENTIONING IT. Just to be sure you understand: when I say 'contemporaneous' I mean dated from the time of the missions, not some Youtube video or verbal claim from the 21st century.

I am saying, actually guaranteeing, that none of you can come up with the above, and for this reason: The Apollo missions were hoaxes.

So that's my 'proof': You cannot produce the stated evidence, which you surely could produce if the missions were done with the Van Allen Belt taken as a serious risk factor. (A risk factor that at least one of the astronauts was unaware of, i.e., Allan Bean.)

[Chew]

You have to be the laziest "investigative journalist" in recorded history.

[ApolloGnomon]

One point that hasn't been made so far is that the cabin pressure in Apollo craft was comparable to earth atmosphere at an altitude of 25000 feet. Convective heat loss is less efficient at lower pressure, meaning that even at 34F the apparent or perceived temperature would be higher.

And to address one comment in the inevitable Gish-gallop post (which should also have a bingo square), the BBC interview: the common Hoax Believer subjective analysis is that the Apollo 11 crew were lying. This notion is mutually incompatible with externally verifiable facts about the space program.

My subjective analysis is that they were hung over, which is compatible with externally verifiable facts about pilots in general and some of the Apollo crew in particular.

Both views are subjective. Only one creates more questions than it answers.

[Luckmeister]

Everyone seems to agree that the Van Allen Belts were potentially dangerous to the astronauts. Therefore, all the Apollo missions must have taken this into account, i.e., the launches timed and the flight trajectories carefully plotted so the astronauts would not be 'dosed.'

I'll assume this is a given, from the above posts.

Therefore there surely are CONTEMPORANEOUS reports/accounts/papers/studies/documents proving this, or at least MENTIONING IT. Just to be sure you understand: when I say 'contemporaneous' I mean dated from the time of the missions, not some Youtube video or verbal claim from the 21st century.

I am saying, actually guaranteeing, that none of you can come up with the above, and for this reason: The Apollo missions were hoaxes.

So that's my 'proof': You cannot produce the stated evidence, which you surely could produce if the missions were done with the Van Allen Belt taken as a serious risk factor. (A risk factor that at least one of the astronauts was unaware of, i.e., Allan Bean.)

Perhaps you did not see my Reply #88. Please read it and comment on it.

[Bob B.]

Therefore there surely are CONTEMPORANEOUS reports/accounts/papers/studies/documents proving this, or at least MENTIONING IT. Just to be sure you understand: when I say 'contemporaneous' I mean dated from the time of the missions, not some Youtube video or verbal claim from the 21st century.

The trajectories were well known at the time.  If I knew as much about orbital mechanics back then as I do today, I could have gleaned enough information from television and newspapers to calculate the trajectories accurately enough to know they'd miss the bulk of the radiation belts.

[Chew]

Therefore there surely are CONTEMPORANEOUS reports/accounts/papers/studies/documents proving this, or at least MENTIONING IT. Just to be sure you understand: when I say 'contemporaneous' I mean dated from the time of the missions, not some Youtube video or verbal claim from the 21st century.

I am saying, actually guaranteeing, that none of you can come up with the above, and for this reason: The Apollo missions were hoaxes.

Here you go: https://sites.google.com/site/chewtansy/msfn/A11_MissionReport.pdf

Page 94.

[JayUtah]

Everyone seems to agree that the Van Allen Belts were potentially dangerous to the astronauts.

As was the rocket blowing up, and a thousand other things.  Every manned space mission (and every human endeavor) faces "potential danger."  You're certainly playing this one up for all it's worth.  Noting that it's a danger and was recognized as such doesn't mean it was planned for in the specific manner you laid out.

Therefore, all the Apollo missions must have taken this into account, i.e., the launches timed and the flight trajectories carefully plotted so the astronauts would not be 'dosed.'

And here you are, spinning an oddly specific expectation of what "must be the case" in Apollo planning.  Piling one layer of speculation on top of another does not create truth.

Therefore there surely are CONTEMPORANEOUS reports/accounts/papers/studies/documents proving this...

Begged question and a blatant straw man.  "I assume this specific, narrowly-defined thing must exist, therefore if you can't provide it, I'm right."  Do you really think that's how actual investigation works?  I agree -- you must be the world's most inept "investigative journalist."

I am saying, actually guaranteeing..., that none of you can come up with the above...

Of course not, because you've ham-fistedly proposed the existence of something you specifically arranged not to be available, for the sole purpose of pretending that this hypothetical document, if non-existent, stands in place of all the mountain of Apollo evidence and decides the question all by itself.

...and for this reason: The Apollo missions were hoaxes.

Well, that's your affirmative claim and therefore your burden of proof.  A better explanation for why such a suspiciously narrowly-described document may not be locatable is not that you have any legitimate interest in how Apollo prepared to traverse the magnetosphere, or that it was an elaborate hoax that -- among millions of pages of public cover-story documents -- forgot to include this one document, but that you're desperate to manufacture any dilemma you think can portray criticism against you as ill-informed or purely faith-based.  Rest assured we've seen these lame tactics before.

So that's my 'proof': You cannot produce the stated evidence...

Hm, NASA Technical Note D-7080 (1973).

[Chew]

Heh. You forget about the shutdown, Jay?

[JayUtah]

Heh. You forget about the shutdown, Jay?

The report still exists, despite the current unavailability of the NASA Technical Reports Server to serve a digital copy.

[Grashtel]

Heh. You forget about the shutdown, Jay?

The report still exists, despite the current unavailability of the NASA Technical Reports Server to serve a digital copy.

And with a bit of digging using Google (to get the URL) and Archive.org (to get an archived version) I was able to find a copy of it, should I post up the link or see if Allancw is able to figure out how to get to it himself?

[raven]

The Russians were also interested in going to the moon. Their planned moon rocket, the N1, was a very explosive dud unfortunately, blowing up in the first stage in all four launch attempts, with one example falling back onto the pad right after launch, destroying the pad in what can be considered the largest non nuclear explosion ever in terms of energy release.
No moon rocket, no moon mission.
However, before they gave up the project, they sent unmanned versions of their equivalent of the Apollo 8 CSM to test several things, including re-entry.
Among other things they tested was living creatures reaction to the conditions, including human cell cultures, such as HeLa cells and fibroblasts. As well, they included an experiment to measure the radiation levels directly.
They found that: "The comparison of the dosage evaluations with the permissible values allows the conclusion that, should no solar flare occur, seven-day flights along the trajectories of Zond-5 and 7 probes are safe from the radiation point of view."
So that's third party evidence that, if you follow the right trajectory, as everyone here has been saying, the Van Allen Belts are safe enough to traverse. Just who is this alleged "Everyone" you speak of, allancw?

[Halcyon Dayz, FCD]

Ok, I am a liar.

Indeed.

Yet you have the audacity to accuse a very large group of people of crimes based solely on lies told to you by hoaxmongers.
Shame on you.

How about referring me to the whole interview?

You're quite the investigator.

Yes, Jason, please refer me to where the belts avoidance is covered (by a contemporaneous account). As I say, this would shut me up. In fact, I'd apologize even to the jerk Halcyon if you do that. I promise.

Another lie?

I am saying, actually guaranteeing, that none of you can come up with the above, and for this reason: The Apollo missions were hoaxes.

You not having evidence is your evidence?

[Obviousman]

Check
Check
Check
Check
Check...... we got one!

[beedarko]

Still no answer. OK. Main thing is that my observation that three days in tinfoil and no climate control in deep space IS a new observation has been confirmed. I just wanted to make sure I was the first to point that out. Thanks, guys.

Ignorant *and* passive-aggressive.  What a lovely combination.

[Zakalwe]

Have I missed any?