I remember when I was a kid I did a science project on the different amounts of trace radiation from kinds of fruit. Nobody could believe that anything they’d ever ate could be radioactive and I got a bad grade.
People just cannot accept that anything associated with the word “radiation” isn’t deadly, and its directly related to scientific illiteracy, which is celebrated in our society. A radiator “radiates” heat into the air. My body “radiates” heat onto my bed at night, and I wake up sweaty. The Earth is constantly radiating radioactive radon and we all soak it up. Flying at altitude in a commercial jet or living in Denver also exposes people to cosmic radiation, all day every day. Bananas, nuts....anything high in potassium, including red meat and beer.....also radioactive. I think I read that if you eat two bananas per day for a year, its equivalent to about one chest x-ray.
Most people don't realize they're getting radiation all the time... every day. They don't understand the dose aspect of radiation and poison. They just think... radiation! I'm gonna die! Or get super powers!
I work in the nuclear pharmacy industry, and of course it's highly regulated. Any emerging superpowers need to be reported to Quality & Regulatory. You wouldn't believe the paperwork!
Actually everything on the planet has some degree of radiation in it including humans, furniture, food etc.. In some cases it may be a barely detectable amount, in other cases more. That rate at which something looses it’s radiation is one method used to determine the age of artifacts...
The sad thing is, if NASA took a prominent moon/space/flat earth conspritard to the moon, let them walk around on it, and take all of the pictures and samples they want, they would most likely still claim it was all fake.
Great video my friend! I don't know what did you do with the audio, your voice is delightful a good improvement of the video format too. Congratulations are in order my friend, keep going!
Agree; one of the best voices of TH-cam, and with the proper English pronunciation. Curious Droid, you might want to consider adding a little bit more information on yourself to your TH-cam channel description. Not necessary anything super personal, maybe things like how you have got interested in science-related matters in the first place, and whether this curiosity is your hobby or your job, et cetera. Thanks anyway.
Curious Droid i really enjoyed this. But the Earth is flat! Heheh just kidding just kidding:) but yes great video, and nice and calm voice. All the best wishes from Denmark
There's another TH-cam video "Nvidia" with this Chinese bloke showing Neil and Buzz at the landing site in HD doing a 360 degrees sweep in full colour and 3d effect. Great camera work.
rubbish letter not sent by Dr James at all. He would have had plenty of opportunity to say it publicly, on video. Letssee it, otherwise we know it wasnt written by him.
@@jameshungelmann8129 James Van Allen was evidently in on the moon landing hoax deception, confirmed by a video from a whistle blower. It was recently posted on Bart Sibrels youtube channel
Zem Zem Did this guy look at the actual lander?! It looks like it was made from kraft paper and aluminum rods!! The moon landings have huge issues with it no matter how much explaining you try to do! All the data tapes 1000s of feet of it went "missing"!! Also there is a contradiction here!! NASA said in the Orion video that they had to test the Orion shielding to go trough the Van Allen belts. Now this guy is saying they just go around the Van Allen belts?!?! So which one is it?!
Remember that the lunar lander was unoccupied during the entire trip to the moon, and was left behind on the return trip. The crew were safely in the command module for the entire trip through the radiation belts.
rAdiant Jet some people will believe the news and other agencies regardless what they tell you. I'm simply asking NASA to send a orbit around the moon, show us clear pictures of the lander, rover and flag. Then I will say I was a conspiracy theorist. It's only a conspiracy if it doesn't match what your local agencies are telling you.
ALEXANDER VILLA Fake facts?! These are known facts or are you just that indoctrinated?! Also look at those Chinese moon photos and then look at the Apollo ones! There are huge issues with the photos! But whatever I say to you won't matter! Your going to have to come to self-realization to see the truth! Once you know the truth you cannot un-see the truth.
You can shine a laser on the reflector they put on the Moon when they went there and you'll get a return reflection. All by itself that proves they went there.
*@Human Being* Bart Sibrel is well known to be a fraud. In that video, he asked Bean about Skylab, and Bean said they'd not been high enough to worry about the Van Allen belts. Sibrel edited it to make it seem he asked about Apollo. He claims to have obtained "secret footage", but the video was never secret; it was publicly available before his move. He removed the sound from that video, because they explained exactly what they're doing - ie closing the blind on the window. Not putting a template on it. He claims they were in low Earth orbit, but the picture is utterly unlike what you'd see from LEO - compare it to pictures from the ISS. He claims they show a small portion of Earth, using a template - yet you can see the cloud patterns of the entire Earth, and they match the weather for that day. Sibrel constantly harassed the astronauts and their families - famously resulting in Buzz punching him. Sibrel no longer works in movies. He's a taxi driver. He occasionally posts evangelical Christian videos, which hardly anyone watches.
I’ve always wondered about this particular (pun intended!) issue. This is the first time I’ve heard a comprehensive explanation. Great video, well done 👍
Killumination - I suspect you’re one of those people who just chooses to believe in pointless conspiracy theories rather than accept the more prosaic reality of life. I also suspect that you’re either misreading press releases or else reading bogus reports. NASA does not deny that they flew to the moon. Nor have they said it’s impossible to fly through space, say to Mars, but as the video points out, the longer the flight the more the crew is exposed to radiation which is cumulatively harmful. No lies, just a genuine technical difficulty that has to be overcome through the application of science.
@@rap1df1r3 At no point has NASA claimed they can no longer *pass through* the Van Allen belts. The truth (as if you want to know it) is that we no longer _need_ to send men so far into space. All current manned space craft (ISS and the supply ships) are confined, by choice, to low orbital space. Even geostationary satellites avoid it as the hard particulate radiation is injurious to the relatively sensative electronics inside them.
@@rap1df1r3 Who and when did NASA say that???We had no trouble from the exposure during Apollo..after all Apollo was just passing through the belts and not taking up residence...
Thanks for explaining all of that. I remember the TV program, "Lost In Space" and on a few occasions they talked about the Van Allen Radiation belt. I never knew much about. I was always curious. Now I know You've got some really good videos and explanations of our world, space travel and all the scientific achievements. I grew up with all of this stuff and never had any good explanations. Keep up the good work. I like watching these videos and how you explain them away. You're my favorite. :)
How about an even simpler problem? Why didn't they cook like steaks on the moon? Explain to me how the cooled them in a hot vacuum. Meanwhile the orbiter is supposedly flying around the moon with 400+ degree Fahrenheit shifts with crew onboard twice each orbit?
@Big gut Ed thank you for your comment. Why does NASA refuse to prove that the earth is round to silence those flat earthers? Why does NASA destroy the footage of a man allegedly walking on the moon after it was recorded in HD video by a camera ALLEGEDLY mounted to his chest? Why does NASA refuse to mount a Go-Pro camera to an astronauts helmet to record while standing on earth to record the travel of him or her with 0 cuts entering the rocket to launch and mount to the ISS to then allow the Astronaut to view the ALLEGED round earth from a porthole or window looking upon our planet from within the International Space Station? The obvious answer: Because they cant. As it does not exist. Yet NASA charges the US taxpayer at least 53 million dollars a day $53.000.000.00 to provide its citizens with CGI phony Stanley Kubrick inspired HOAX material. Since they send and retrieve astronauts several times a year to and from the ISS, why would they continuously refuse to provide us with an answer as to whether the earth truly is round or flat? IMO the writing is on the wall. They would easily have filmed this travel on a GoPro by now if it were not a HOAX. If someone could prove that we landed on the moon I would be happy. SMH!
As Dr James van Allen has publicly stated, only if astronauts orbited in the highest-flux regions of the outer belt for ONE WEEK would they receive a potentially lethal dose. Tissue damage depends on several factors including type, intensity and duration of radiation.
Have you heard of Cherenkov radiation ? That's fun too, and you can see it here: th-cam.com/video/pLBcp3nJlFQ/w-d-xo.html Not directly related - I just thought, if you found that interesting, you'd like that as well.
Curious Droid - thank you for being such an informed and eloquent spokesman for science and reason. In this current age, in which opinion speaks louder than facts, it is so mentally and intellectually stimulating to listen to your videos. Love the manner in which you pronounce the word "aluminum"!
Agree with you completely - but Curious Droid is quite correct in his pronunciation of the word ALUMINIUM. ;-) (That's the word used in England and in many other countries).
@@eventcone While you are completely correct that in UK and many other countries, the correct spelling and pronunciation is aluminium, is also needs to be said that in USA and possibly other countries, the correct spelling and pronunciation is aluminum. And this spelling is actually the older of the two options. So this is possibly the only case where UK and US spelling differs, and the US spelling is the older one.
@Mike O I don't think you read your own link. Let me quote from the wiki page you are linking: British chemist Humphry Davy ... is credited as the person who named the element. In 1808, he suggested the metal be named alumium. In 1812, Davy ... settled on the name aluminum, thus producing the modern name. In 1812, British scientist Thomas Young ... objected to aluminum and proposed the name aluminium.
shaan choudhury the Gemini X crew were expected to receive a decent dose, but were pleasantly surprised to find the dosimeters detecting less than they worried there might be.
Felton Mitchell Allan Bean was CAPCOM for Gemini XI and discussed the Van Allen belts and radiation with the crew when they were taking dosimeter readings. He was well aware of them.
I too find this video interesting and informative. I liked the video. Looking forward to see such informative videos. Gentleman, keep the journey, your fans are with you.
@ DenCo 303 , but they don't even know what facts are. They are used to facts proven with theories. That's how they can make their world what ever they want. Make up the right theories and anything can be fact
Red Baron273 I only picked your reply to respond to, because you only have seven comments. But, as for flat earth knowers, all of the back and forth is painful to watch and hear. Both sides use whatever they can to prove the other wrong. I thought the flat earth was non-sense until I watched just one video on it. The very next video I watched was a desperate attempt to convince myself otherwise. As for the Apollo B.S. one question. How is it that every communication between the Apollo crew and mission control was immediate. Meaning no lag at all. ZERO time laps whatsoever. Hmmm 🤔 238,900 mi away and no lag at all? We can't watch satellite TV without lag, or watch a news anchor from across seas communicate with another anchor here in the states without a lag in the transmission, so why haven't we raised an eyebrow to this obvious blunder in the Apollo performance? I mean, they were on the moon. 238,900 mi away and no gap in transmission? They don’t even try to play it off. Yet, just 12,000 mi or so and major lag of about 6 seconds or so with any communication from across sea transmission. The moon is suppose to be nearly 20 times that distance. That would mean 2 minutes will have passed before mission control should hear what has been said is happening on the moon. How could any issue be corrected in time if this was the case? So, in other words, something as simple as ”T-minus 10 seconds til the moon module touch down on the moon’s surface would take 2 minutes to reach earth. If any corrections had to be transmitted back to Apollo, from mission control, it would be 4 minutes too late. 2 minutes for the original transmitted issue to get to earth, and another 2 minutes of waiting for the response. 😕 😒not buying it. The world is definitely something other than what we are lead to believe. What, that I don’t know, but it isn’t what we are told. And videos like this is a desperate attempt to cover it up. Most want take the time to question. And those that may, will be crucified for it. Smh I say believe what you wish. But then there comes a time when you must know...
mj. rock your skepticism doesn’t make you right though. Science is about proving things through trials and experimentation not just assuming things because your brains too inferior and lacks the capacity to comprehend it.
@@zombieepx1933 There are plenty of facts that support the skepticism. You'd have to be a complete idiot not to be skeptical, 50 years after the first time we (flawlessly on the first attempt) placed a man on the moon (allegedly) and then haven't done it since. For how many other firsts can this be said? th-cam.com/video/as0fxeNkW5s/w-d-xo.htmlm32s Lets see, we allegedly landed a craft on the moon with people on board then allegedly let those people get out and jumped up and down for 3 days on the moon then allegedly ushered them back to earth to cheering fan fanfare all the while without a single fatality nor even a case of vomit inducing radiation sickness (which certainly appears odd considering that the surface of the moon itself is a gamma ray source from all the cosmic ray particles constantly striking it at near light speeds, 30 per second from distant supernovas exploding from random directions, not even to mention the Van Allen belt radiation, which in itself is deadly), milestones that have never been duplicated after the Apollo missions by any organization on the earth, not even NASA; Yes, I'd definitely call that grounds for skepticism.
Stoney Sauce *There are plenty of facts that support skepticism* merely pointing out things you believe without bringing any supporting evidence of why it’s impossible isn’t facts. Evidence requires rigorous testing and observations, how do you have evidence with no data on your claims, how do you acquire data only being a skeptic. Being a skeptic means you’ve only created a hypothesis, there’s much more to the scientific method. There’s no point in debating with people who refuse listen to scientists explain how astronauts survive the almighty Van Allen belt. Why is it always the skeptics who bring up the impossibilities and not any actual experts on the subject lol.
They used this principle in the Juno mission to Jupiter as well. They tried to avoid the most severe part of Jupiter's radiation belts during most of the spacecraft's perijoves.
I've worked in the nuclear field for years and was aware of the difference penetrating abilities of different forms of radiation. I am so glad that you've made this video to explain the differences and how it impacted the Apollo program. So many folks equate radiation with lead shielding and nothing more.
I can understand why there would be some confusion. If you've ever gone for an x-ray, technicians make you wear a lead apron over your naughty bits to protect them. So some people probably equate all radiation with X-rays.
@@Americansikkunt Can you actually link this video instead of quoting it ad nauseam? I can't find any evidence of it online. The closest I got was someone claiming that the Orion vehicle couldn't make it safely through the belt YET due to it being untested. In other words you are taking someone's quote wildly out of context
You should start by pointing out that it is actually NASA who disagrees with you, they are the ones admitting today they can´t pass the Van Allen belts without significant protection: th-cam.com/video/IDBBUwdyz4I/w-d-xo.html
@Mark Smileer Flat Earth is a CIA psyop designed to discredit narratives labeled as "conspiracy theories". Independent studies have clearly established that youtube algorithms are responsible for the massive propagation of extremely high quality and expensively produced "Flat Earth" videos on their platform. www.theguardian.com/science/2019/feb/17/study-blames-youtube-for-rise-in-number-of-flat-earthers TH-cam is a google corporation platform. Google has had very well established links with the Central Intelligence Agency from its inception: sputniknews.com/analysis/201809271068358816-google-cia-nsa-creation/ If you want to learn more about flat Earth being used as a psyop to discredit narrative considered dangerous by the government: truth11.com/2016/06/14/flat-earth-psyop-cia-blackop-designed-to-destroy-the-truth-movement/ If you have doubts about the US government being involved in such psychological operations, please research Cass Sunstein book on Conspiracy theories and how to counter them, he was the Administrator of the White House Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs in the Obama administration from 2009 to 2012. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cass_Sunstein "Sunstein co-authored a 2008 paper with Adrian Vermeule, titled "Conspiracy Theories," dealing with the risks and possible government responses to conspiracy theories resulting from "cascades" of faulty information within groups that may ultimately lead to violence. In this article they wrote, "The existence of both domestic and foreign conspiracy theories, we suggest, is no trivial matter, posing real risks to the government's antiterrorism policies, whatever the latter may be." They go on to propose that, "the best response consists in cognitive infiltration of extremist groups",[38] where they suggest, among other tactics, "Government agents (and their allies) might enter chat rooms, online social networks, or even real-space groups and attempt to undermine percolating conspiracy theories by raising doubts about their factual premises, causal logic or implications for political action."[38] They refer, several times, to groups that promote the view that the US Government was responsible or complicit in the September 11 attacks as "extremist groups. .....The authors declare that there are five hypothetical responses a government can take toward conspiracy theories: "We can readily imagine a series of possible responses. (1) Government might ban conspiracy theorizing. (2) Government might impose some kind of tax, financial or otherwise, on those who disseminate such theories. (3) Government might itself engage in counterspeech, marshaling arguments to discredit conspiracy theories. (4) Government might formally hire credible private parties to engage in counterspeech. (5) Government might engage in informal communication with such parties, encouraging them to help." However, the authors advocate that each "instrument has a distinctive set of potential effects, or costs and benefits, and each will have a place under imaginable conditions. However, our main policy idea is that government should engage in cognitive infiltration of the groups that produce conspiracy theories, which involves a mix of (3), (4) and (5).""
Why so long to answer this simple question? The explanation here is a none answer and raises more questions than it answeres. The astronauts admitted that they were seeing flashes of light. These flashes was radiation penetrating and hitting directly the optical receptors in the eye. Therefore they were subject to very high levels of radiation in space contrary to what the gentleman is saying
@@alanstein3704 Lets go through what you just said.... The astronauts admitted to seeing flashes of light... The same astronauts that successfully made it through the Van Allen belts with light doses of radiation on the way to the moon saw flashes of light in their eyes due to said radiation... Now which is it? Did the astronauts go through the Van Allen belts and see low level radiation particles? Or did they not go and lie about seeing this radiation. You cant have it both ways. Either they went and survived to tell everyone what they saw or they lied about it. You cant use evidence that they did in fact travel through the belts as the evidence that they cant do it. Jesus! Are you reading what you write before you post it?
+ThrummerOfLove Somehow I missed his obituary notices so your post caught me a little bit by surprise. Cernan was always forthright in his observations. I think his was the concluding comment in Ron Howard's "In The Shadow Of The Moon" and it went something like : "Truth needs no defense. Nobody, nobody can ever take those footsteps I made on the surface of the Moon away from me.” Still a very salient comment in view of an apparent ocean of moon hoax propaganda on YT and other whacko websites that peddle the latest or recycle the usual absurd contentions!
He never made any footprints on the Moon none whatsoever. His footprints were made on Earth in a studio. Sorry but you are wrong. His job was to defend the lie for his entire life and that is what he did. He's likely nothing but a soul in agony burning eternally in Hell now.
Ignorance is not a virtue, yet you seem to hold massive amounts of it in abundance. The Man never went to the Moon and he took that lie to his grave, I see no honor in that!
M773 don't put all of us in the same boat I've never meet a conspiracy theorist that thought the earth was flat flat earthers are just internet nutjobs
Great vid. I've always wondered about the radiation issue. They went around the worst of it. As fast as they could. And the nature of the van Allen belts radiation was/is less dangerous than was implied. Even microwaves can be blocked by a flimsy microwave oven door. This is the first time I've heard an in depth explanation of how NASA dealt with radiation exposure. Good work.👍
@@DaveHammondDublin probably NASA is working to improve equipment and procedures. I would guess what was good enough then, isn't good enough now. The rush rush of sixty just isn't there anymore. Not without cold war.
@@DaveHammondDublin Modern electronics are far more vulnerable to radiation as the smaller the parts the more chance a stray particle could do enough damage to one to either change a value or even damage the individual transistor in an IC. As are they also planning for far longer duration flights than merely to the moon (so continual low dosage radiation would accumulate more).
I really liked this explanation. Before watching this, I did not fully understand, how the Astronauts, tolerated the radiation from the Van Allen Belt. I knew the limited exposure part, but did not realize that even the limited insulation in the command module helped. I also did not realize that the path taken was important.
The flight path is the most important of this. It was designed to avoid 99% of the belt. And this flight path is still standard for all launches headed away from earth, even unmanned.
@@Agarwaen ya the problem is there is quite alot of evidence. It's people like you who blieves anything their governments say. Fact. NASA astronauts said they can't leave the low earth orbit. Fact. NASA astronauts said they "destroyed " the technology to go to the moon. Fact. CIA made sure you got the lowest resolution video from the highest quality video camera they took to the moon. Fact. The president at that time talks to astronauts from his oval office with a "land line" telephone. Fact. You can clearly see flag of USA waving in a no atmosphere zone on moon. That's quite lot of evidence if you ask me
As always, it's been a pleasure watching a video presented by you. Not only the information, I really like the way you present it. As far as people who have doubts about landing on the moon etc., I do understand the fact that the achievement has been so significant that it's beyond the comprehension of people who are not positive in life. So, I'm not surprised that there are people who actually believe that Van Allen Belt exists (because NASA said so) but won't accept the fact that astronauts landed on the mood. Just shows how massive that achievement is to mankind and once again thank you so much for the lovely video.
Time. Distance. And shielding. Shorten the time in the radiation the smaller the dose. The more you Distance yourself from the radiation the smaller the dose. The more shielding between you and the radiation the smaller the dose
@Nim Chimpsky The video you are actually commenting literally explains why you're wrong and fucking stupid. Did you even bother watching it, you utterly moronic cretin?
@Nim Chimpsky Even NASA claims we somehow lost the technology; and more than one person in speeches refer to "if we could figure out how to get through the Van Allan Radiation belt"; including Bush #2 ; this video doesn't make sense anyway; how do you " go around" a belt that circles the Earth; so you are correct !
@Nim Chimpsky They did not spent 2 days in the belts, but only a couple hours in a shielded capsule. That amount of radiation is found only in the parts of the belts closer to the magnetic equator that they avoided since the spacecraft was in an inclined orbit. If you want a proper calculation of the amount of radiation absorbed by the astronauts, done using an accurate model of the belts and the actual characteristics of the Apollo capsule, you can find it here: web.archive.org/web/20160301115931/www.braeunig.us:80/apollo/VABraddose.htm Van Allen himself confirmed that the effects of the passage through the belt as done by the Apollo capsule were negligible.
@@timklein3962 By going above them in a 3D space. The worst part of the belts is only 15 degrees above and below the magnetic equator and the radiation density decreases very fast as you move away from that region.
I work with a guy who believes we didn't go to the moon because of the Van Allen radiation belts. I was going to show him this video, but after reading through the comments I realize I'd be wasting my time.
Nasa's own spokes people say that we don't know if we can safely get people these belts. It's Nasa's own spokespeople that say we had the technology 50 years ago but "lost" it. Don't criticize the skeptics for listening to nasa's spokespeople.
Wow, Way to misinterpret the first video, "it passes through Van Allen Belts, an area of dangerous radiation"......" Radiation like this can harm the GUIDANCE SYSTEMS, onboard COMPUTERS, or other ELECTRONICS on Orion"....that's the challenge they must solve BEFORE sending people through this region of Space. And that second one was laughable. The tech is 50 years old, that's way it isn't around anymore. th-cam.com/video/bLtgS2_qxJk/w-d-xo.html
Quote-mining bullshit. Orion was *a new spaceship,* and had to overcome the problems, the same as Apollo did. They did, and flew through the belts in 2014, twice. Petit was saying we cannot go past LEO *today* - because we don't have a spaceship that can do it. Seriously, how fucking hard is that to understand? And why do you choose to believe those few seconds, and not the rest of the videos, or the thousands of others?
Why do yet another thorium reactor video - there's a hundred of them already. My favorite is the one by GeorgiaTechTalks, "The Liquid Fluoride Thorium Reactor: What Fusion Wanted To Be"
Thorium? Isn't that a nuclear reactor fuel that is less radio active than Uranium? But Thorium has a waste product that has the big draw back of NOT BEING ABLE TO BE WEAPONIZED?
Kirk March Thorium is not as fissionable as Uranium isotopes, and delivers less energy. But it can be transmuted into U233, which is highly fissionable, in a Breeder Reactor.
@@ann_onn Quite, sorry to miss them, I was in a rush and they were the first to come to mind. Cernan, Bean, Young and Armstrong have only really gone recently to be fair.
@@wildchameleon7 Really? , that’s why my text was dated in the first place. 90 is a great age, humans don’t last forever, Plus There’s no evidence for any correlation. But thanks for the update. Do you really feel the need to trawl and scour through comments in an attempt to correct people, because you’ve just failed miserably.
@@sphericalempirical9359 I didn't mean any of that in a bad way, it was barely just an update. I'm sorry if you felt like I was correcting you. Of course he wasn't going to live forever, and as time passes by, just like other big events from the last century, there will be less and less people to have lived those times, maybe reinforcing doubters in their beliefs.
Why does NASA refuse to prove that the earth is round to silence those flat earthers? Why does NASA destroy the footage of a man allegedly walking on the moon after it was recorded in HD video by a camera ALLEGEDLY mounted to his chest? Why does NASA refuse to mount a Go-Pro camera to an astronauts helmet to record while standing on earth to record the travel of him or her with 0 cuts entering the rocket to launch and mount to the ISS to then allow the Astronaut to view the ALLEGED round earth from a porthole or window looking upon our planet from within the International Space Station? The obvious answer: Because they cant. As it does not exist. Yet NASA charges the US taxpayer at least 53 million dollars a day $53.000.000.00 to provide its citizens with CGI phony Stanley Kubrick inspired HOAX material. Since they send and retrieve astronauts several times a year to and from the ISS, why would they continuously refuse to provide us with an answer as to whether the earth truly is round or flat? IMO the writing is on the wall. They would easily have filmed this travel on a GoPro by now if it were not a HOAX. If someone could prove that we landed on the moon I would be happy. SMH!
This was a well made video. factually concise and easily understood. Thank you! By the way the closing statement "Why go through it, when you can just go around it?" is a statement I often say when watching sci-fi movies involving the traversing of an unrealistic depiction of an asteroid belt. 😅
There was another video putting the amount of radiation the astronauts were subjected to into context, and the amount they were subjected to was around the same as what you would get during a CT scan. Wikipedia says this: The total radiation received by the astronauts varied from mission to mission but was measured to be between 0.16 and 1.14 rads (1.6 and 11.4 mGy), much less than the standard of 5 rem (50 mSv) per year set by the United States Atomic Energy Commission for people who work with radioactivity.
Sadly, most of the deniers won't accept this very well done explanation. The only answer they will entertain is we didn't go. All the facts that point to us going fall on deaf ears. Well done, none the less.
No matter how many times I watch your videos Paul they`re every bit as entertaining and informative as they were the very first time. And I can’t fault your presentation.
This way above my education but am able to follow. Very very cool to be exposed to this information. I could not form a question but i do learn things about space. People are so smart to figure this stuff out. Thanks for explaining this so well.
@Got Kowal Who says previous solutions were lost? There is different circuitry today (solid state microelectronics vs. rope memory), hence it needs different types of protection. Try putting a 1940s flathead V8 in a modern car and see how that works. Same thing that you're flippantly denying out of worship of ignorance.
*@shents aceve* Yes, manned Moon landings were cancelled because of ignorant idiots like you. Fortunately, we are going again in 2024. If you think Pettit believes the Moon landings were a hoax, then you're probably beyond help. That's so stupid.... it's hard to know where to begin. Do you really think he _literally_ meant the tech was destroyed? Like, with hammers? There's a Saturn V sitting in Kennedy right now, so... I guess they missed that one???
@@shentsaceve5642 _DON'T LIE!!_ Pettit _never_ said we don't have the "information"! He said we don't have the Apollo technology anymore - and he is right! It was retired decades ago.
@M L It's the kid who merely stood there and smiled while being harassed by some old creep banging a drum in his face. Degenerate left wing scum in the media lied about him and are being sued for defamation.
I tried to explain to a Moon Denier that his "Impenetrable Van Allen Belt" was actually 2 belts in a Toroidal field. But of course when you challenge their claims with logic and science they get triggered, and reply with Insults, Lol's, and Emoji's to deflect from their insecurities and ignorance....
@@jeffmaraman8149 Wrong on both counts. Netwons third law still applies in a vacuum: Throw some mass one way, and you will move into the opposite direction. And a flame, being the chemical reaction of some substance with oxygen, CAN burn in a vacuum. The only difference to a regular flame is that you have to bring the oxygen along with you. The combination of those two gives you a rocket engine: Mix oxygen and fuel, light it in a rocket nozzle, let it hurl itself out the back end, and you'll move in the opposite direction.
@@rockyblacksmith lets say your little theory is correct which it is not. you still need an environment with oxygen to push off against to manuever as well as speed up and slow down.. this has been tested in a vacuum hundreds if not thousands of times at this point. with oxygen boosted igniters and drones etc etc etc..cant fly in an oxygen less environment
@@jeffmaraman8149 "this has been tested in a vacuum hundreds if not thousands of times at this point" Care to name a source? Because I'm willing to bet money on the fact that if those engines didn't work in a vacuum, they weren't rocket engines.
Yes they seem to never be able to just talk about the topic at hand period. I've given up trying to convince people that the moon landings happened. All I do is try to get them to stay on topic and realize that the point they made is bad.That's it.
There was never any controversy, except in the mind of crazy conspiracy theorists. There's radiation everywhere in the universe. It's normal. Like... bananas are radioactive. It might hurt if you ate a few million of them. The VAB is radioactive. It might hurt if you stayed in the most active parts for a few weeks. I have no idea why anyone would do that. The VAB protects Earth from solar radiation. If we want to live in space for months or years, we need to work out ways to avoid it. NASA are working on that... which is why, 5 years ago, they deliberately flew Orion through the most active part of the belts. Not because they were worried about the belts, but because it's a good way to test the shielding on a new spaceship. Somehow, conspiracy theorists see that as evidence that Apollo couldn't make a short trip... but Orion isn't planning short trips; it's planning to spend 6 months going to Mars. The Moon is just a stopping-off point.
I wonder how many people saying "We didn't land on the moon" actually watched the video to the end and/or actually understood anything of it. Oh, and I wonder how many "deniers" just write to anoy people. Well explained and actually founded on science and engineering.
@@effigy42 The girl was asking Buzz Aldrin why no one went to the moon after 1972. This video of his answer is truncated and completely out of context.
I think its people that are either dumb or corrupt tend to think most everyone else must be.......maybe. Yes they are annoying and depressing to listen to and we have to live in the same world as they do unfortunately.
This is exactly why testing must be undertaken. We already have the findings from five countries (The US, Russia, China, India, Japan) with all the data necessary to know what types of radiation can be found in space, and the engineering to deal with it is straightforward. The hoaxtards never acknowledge this. It runs counter to their agenda and completely refutes their argument. The other main reason why they never acknowledge it is that none of them have the education or training to know how to talk about science, technology, or engineering in terms that can be proven or disproven. That's why opinion, belief, and "feelings" are so important to them. They can't scientifically back it up.
As far as i know solar wind radiation is mostly Alpha particles and any ship that cannot protect against alpha particles has no bussines being in space. Beta particles and ionised protons are more problematic, but if we can get through the belts then solar wind won't be much of a problem.
A serious solar storm or coronal mass ejection (generally shortened to read 'CME') would certainly present a hazard to the cosmonaut/astronauts aboard any vessel travelling out toward or back from Mars. As explained, surprising materials can offer some protection from radiation, but I believe the potential damage from 'hard' radiation is a real issue. I don't know what shielding Orion, in particular, has for such an unfortunate event. Certainly, the engineers and other scientists developing on an interplanetary spacecraft ~ I include Spacex ~ would be working to mitigate any dangerous effect upon the ship and her occupants. I would be fascinated to find out what array of measures have been tested and put in place.
@@ann_onn yes they do. Why do you think Orion isnt flying up there. It's not just radiation. Its 20000k temperatures. That's 35000 f. The twin towers imploded at less than 2000f.
*@Randy Wagner* Hello. I'd like to assume you are not stupid, So... I assume you know that the boiling point of things depends on the pressure. Right? Water boils at about 100 C, 212 F... at sea level. Climb a mountain, and it boils at about 70 C. 160 F. So... what is the boiling point of water in a vacuum?
Nitpick: "...the second type of radiation is charged particles ... electrons, protons and neutrons". Neutrons are NOT charged particles (which is pretty easy to remember by the name, neutrons are neutral). However, once a neutron leaves a nucleus it will start to decay into a proton and an electron, half of the neutrons will have decayed this way after about 10 minutes. As the neutrons from the solar wind take about a day to reach earth nearly all neutrons have had time to be converted to protons and electrons and therefore trapable by the Van Allen belt.
Your right, and now anything he says is not believable. I'm very suspicious of anything I read but a few seconds of research on your comment makes this guy a liar. Thanks
@@michattac You completely miss the point. My comment just pointed out minor nitpick. Everything he says in the video about the Van Allen belts and how the Apollo dealt with them is true. If you read my comment you'll also note that despite the sun spewing out tons of neutrons in the solar wind, nearly all of them will have converted to protons and electrons before arrival to earth.
@@andersbackman3977 I'll go out on a limb and guess that Michael didn't even understand what you said about neutrons. (Which was an interesting point, thank you.)
Thankyou for this explantion. It was prety much what I had already figured. I just wish some people would go back to school and learn a little physics before they start denying everything because they don't have the brain power to understand it.
Interesting. But why in the video "a strange thing happened on the way to the moon" when asked about the radiation belts, some of the astronauts didn't know about them or how they got through them. Also, a few NASA people, including some on the ISS, and even Obama have said the Orion project will let them get past lower earth orbit?
it's quite possible that the dangers of the VAB weren't completely explained in detail to the astronauts. right now we can't get higher than LEO because we don't have any Saturn V rockets left working, the dangers Orion will face going to Mars is alot different than going to the moon.
+daveash123 I wouldn't have explained it to the astronauts either, was I running NASA. Most of these men were pilots, not scientists. The last thing I need is for my astronauts getting cold feet before or after launch. These men were ex-Air Force, and thus trained to obey the chain of command and not ask questions. I would have concluded that they simply didn't need to know. That's what I imagine NASA top brass would have concluded. Getting to the moon and completing experiments is a bigger priority than telling them the truth of the risks. That's NASA's priorities and mine. They reported flashes from radiation hitting their eyes, NASA wisely told them to stop worrying about them and focus on the mission. Being well trained by the Air Force, they followed these orders and silenced their doubts.
I find it interesting that, of the 24 men who flew through the VARB, eleven are still alive (mean age 88, five are in their 90s), and seven died in their 80s. Of the other six, one died in a motorcycle accident, and two from heart attacks. The last three could, I suppose, possibly be blamed on radiation exposure (2 cancer, and one pancreatitis - although, one of the cancer deaths was age 74), but considering the longevity of their fellows it seems almost like this specific type of radiation is good for you.
Bear in mind they were all extremely fit, healthy and active men - that goes some way to explain their unusual longevity. They lived relatively healthy lifestyles too. It's also worth noting that Irwin, who died young from a heart attack, had a pre-existing heart condition which was identified duing their training. There's abaolutely no reason at all to think radiation affected them in any way at all. They received an utterly trivial dose, similar to a routine medical scan. They'd have had to spend weeks in the Van Allen belts to get sick.
@@ann_onn - Agreed. They were thoroughly screened for physical fitness and overall health, so as a group, whether they had left the planet or not, they would most likely outlive the average. My comment about the radiation being good for you was tongue-in-cheek.
@@finaoo1167 There is absolutely no evidence that the Moon landings were fake. The conspiracy claims are nonsense - check the facts, and their silly ideas fall apart. There are basically three types of claim. 1. Misunderstandings of basic science. For example, they say a rocket wouldn't work because it has nothing to push against in space. Rockets don't push against anything. If you fire a gun, you go backwards - whether or not the bullet hits anything. The same thing happens in space. Every action has an equal and opposite reaction. Squirt gas in one direction, and you go the other way. 2. Lies. For example, they show edited footage of Nixon's phone call, where the delay has been edited out. 3. Quote-mining. For example, they show a 2-second clip of Buzz Aldrin saying "we didn't go." They do not show the rest of the interview, where he talked extensively about Apollo. All he meant was, we didn't go after 1974. If you have any doubt about the Moon landings, tell me why - and I'll explain why it's nonsense.
@@reggiemac7693 If I were to take an educated guess, I'd bet that you experienced a lot of rejection in your childhood which lead to you being vulnerable to these crackpot theories. But if this is what gives you a sense of identity, who am I stop to you? But I still wouldn't give that goon the time of day if I was Neil Armstrong either
tell you what when we're fighting the revolution against corruption in government @Origami Mambo Project you can go hide under a rock and read your f****** Bible
What references or source materials did you use to come to these conclusions? Maybe post these within the video description, so that myself and others can read and review as well. Thanks!
I remember when I was a kid I did a science project on the different amounts of trace radiation from kinds of fruit. Nobody could believe that anything they’d ever ate could be radioactive and I got a bad grade.
Oof size: large
Yeah I find this hard to believe
People just cannot accept that anything associated with the word “radiation” isn’t deadly, and its directly related to scientific illiteracy, which is celebrated in our society. A radiator “radiates” heat into the air. My body “radiates” heat onto my bed at night, and I wake up sweaty. The Earth is constantly radiating radioactive radon and we all soak it up. Flying at altitude in a commercial jet or living in Denver also exposes people to cosmic radiation, all day every day. Bananas, nuts....anything high in potassium, including red meat and beer.....also radioactive. I think I read that if you eat two bananas per day for a year, its equivalent to about one chest x-ray.
@@tangerinetech5300 :
www.mcgill.ca/oss/article/you-asked/it-true-banana-radioactive
www.forbes.com/sites/quora/2016/10/18/yes-bananas-are-radioactive-and-yes-you-should-keep-eating-them-anyway/#320ab70230bb
@@drewthompson7457 Do work for the banana republic?
Most people don't realize they're getting radiation all the time... every day. They don't understand the dose aspect of radiation and poison. They just think... radiation! I'm gonna die! Or get super powers!
Exactly
Spider-Man!
I work in the nuclear pharmacy industry, and of course it's highly regulated. Any emerging superpowers need to be reported to Quality & Regulatory. You wouldn't believe the paperwork!
Actually everything on the planet has some degree of radiation in it including humans, furniture, food etc.. In some cases it may be a barely detectable amount, in other cases more. That rate at which something looses it’s radiation is one method used to determine the age of artifacts...
Deep space radiation is much more deadly.
I say let's go back to the Moon! One quick trip and end all the questions. Mars can wait!
At least a quick trip around it,Apollo 8 style perhaps.
Nasa has no profits to do this and they haven't got anymore the money they had by the state in the 1960
The sad thing is, if NASA took a prominent moon/space/flat earth conspritard to the moon, let them walk around on it, and take all of the pictures and samples they want, they would most likely still claim it was all fake.
casey lawhead So can heaven...
Mark Beiser
The sad thing is even if you were to look directly at the prove you will still dismissed it!.
I find your videos very interesting, particularly on seemingly dry subjects. Great job!
Nice Illustrations, perfect captions. Thanks.
Great video my friend! I don't know what did you do with the audio, your voice is delightful a good improvement of the video format too.
Congratulations are in order my friend, keep going!
Agree; one of the best voices of TH-cam, and with the proper English pronunciation. Curious Droid, you might want to consider adding a little bit more information on yourself to your TH-cam channel description. Not necessary anything super personal, maybe things like how you have got interested in science-related matters in the first place, and whether this curiosity is your hobby or your job, et cetera. Thanks anyway.
Curious Droid i really enjoyed this. But the Earth is flat! Heheh just kidding just kidding:) but yes great video, and nice and calm voice. All the best wishes from Denmark
The Earth is as flat as Denmark? :-D
Havar Eriksen oh Lord i hope not hehe, but yeah bad joke i know😊 have a nice day 😄
moenkopiaz He only said "friend" twice. How is that creepy?
Was a kid in high school during Apollo and this has always been a question for me. Thank for putting this up!
There's another TH-cam video "Nvidia" with this Chinese bloke showing Neil and Buzz at the landing site in HD doing a 360 degrees sweep in full colour and 3d effect. Great camera work.
rubbish letter not sent by Dr James at all. He would have had plenty of opportunity to say it publicly, on video. Letssee it, otherwise we know it wasnt written by him.
Lies.
@@jameshungelmann8129 James Van Allen was evidently in on the moon landing hoax deception, confirmed by a video from a whistle blower. It was recently posted on Bart Sibrels youtube channel
Did you never find a way to use search engines?
Your videos are very good, engaging, interesting, set at the right level to understand and not too long thanks
Did anyone ever see the HD photos of the moon lander's pods? It looked like a badly wrapped Christmas present.
Zem Zem Did this guy look at the actual lander?! It looks like it was made from kraft paper and aluminum rods!! The moon landings have huge issues with it no matter how much explaining you try to do! All the data tapes 1000s of feet of it went "missing"!! Also there is a contradiction here!! NASA said in the Orion video that they had to test the Orion shielding to go trough the Van Allen belts. Now this guy is saying they just go around the Van Allen belts?!?! So which one is it?!
Remember that the lunar lander was unoccupied during the entire trip to the moon, and was left behind on the return trip. The crew were safely in the command module for the entire trip through the radiation belts.
rAdiant Jet some people will believe the news and other agencies regardless what they tell you. I'm simply asking NASA to send a orbit around the moon, show us clear pictures of the lander, rover and flag. Then I will say I was a conspiracy theorist. It's only a conspiracy if it doesn't match what your local agencies are telling you.
ALEXANDER VILLA Fake facts?! These are known facts or are you just that indoctrinated?! Also look at those Chinese moon photos and then look at the Apollo ones! There are huge issues with the photos! But whatever I say to you won't matter! Your going to have to come to self-realization to see the truth! Once you know the truth you cannot un-see the truth.
You can shine a laser on the reflector they put on the Moon when they went there and you'll get a return reflection. All by itself that proves they went there.
excellent presentation, good enough for a tv documentary series. well done to all involved.
thanks for your comment. everyones opinion is valed. all the best.@Human Being
*@Human Being* Bart Sibrel is well known to be a fraud.
In that video, he asked Bean about Skylab, and Bean said they'd not been high enough to worry about the Van Allen belts. Sibrel edited it to make it seem he asked about Apollo.
He claims to have obtained "secret footage", but the video was never secret; it was publicly available before his move.
He removed the sound from that video, because they explained exactly what they're doing - ie closing the blind on the window. Not putting a template on it.
He claims they were in low Earth orbit, but the picture is utterly unlike what you'd see from LEO - compare it to pictures from the ISS.
He claims they show a small portion of Earth, using a template - yet you can see the cloud patterns of the entire Earth, and they match the weather for that day.
Sibrel constantly harassed the astronauts and their families - famously resulting in Buzz punching him.
Sibrel no longer works in movies. He's a taxi driver. He occasionally posts evangelical Christian videos, which hardly anyone watches.
I’ve always wondered about this particular (pun intended!) issue. This is the first time I’ve heard a comprehensive explanation. Great video, well done 👍
I didn't get the pun. Until I realized particle-ular. 😴
It explained nothing. NASA told a few years ago that they can't get through it, now it turns out it's no problem at all. Someone is lying.
Killumination - I suspect you’re one of those people who just chooses to believe in pointless conspiracy theories rather than accept the more prosaic reality of life. I also suspect that you’re either misreading press releases or else reading bogus reports. NASA does not deny that they flew to the moon. Nor have they said it’s impossible to fly through space, say to Mars, but as the video points out, the longer the flight the more the crew is exposed to radiation which is cumulatively harmful. No lies, just a genuine technical difficulty that has to be overcome through the application of science.
@@rap1df1r3 At no point has NASA claimed they can no longer *pass through* the Van Allen belts. The truth (as if you want to know it) is that we no longer _need_ to send men so far into space. All current manned space craft (ISS and the supply ships) are confined, by choice, to low orbital space. Even geostationary satellites avoid it as the hard particulate radiation is injurious to the relatively sensative electronics inside them.
@@rap1df1r3 Who and when did NASA say that???We had no trouble from the exposure during Apollo..after all Apollo was just passing through the belts and not taking up residence...
Best and clearest explanation I've ever heard.
Thanks.
Thank you, great video and explanation!
Clicked this because i read it “van halen belt”
🤣😂🤣
I’m surprised this doesn’t have more likes. This is the best comment on this video.
Rock on Kikyo!
Kikyo Tail haha !!
Should v featured on Beavis n Butthead lol
Thanks for explaining all of that. I remember the TV program, "Lost In Space" and on a few occasions they talked about the Van Allen Radiation belt. I never knew much about. I was always curious. Now I know
You've got some really good videos and explanations of our world, space travel and all the scientific achievements. I grew up with all of this stuff and never had any good explanations. Keep up the good work. I like watching these videos and how you explain them away. You're my favorite. :)
As with all your videos, this was very informative and well done. Keep up the great work.
How about an even simpler problem? Why didn't they cook like steaks on the moon? Explain to me how the cooled them in a hot vacuum. Meanwhile the orbiter is supposedly flying around the moon with 400+ degree Fahrenheit shifts with crew onboard twice each orbit?
@Mark Smileer flattards? Sorry nope, not a chance;)
Thank you for explaining this to me, I’ve wondered about this for a long time.
You should do more research!
@@neoone9820 so why did you watch if you already new smart guy?
@@DARRENTINOnz Checking it's validity. Plus it's entertaining. Also it's knew not new.
@Big gut Ed thank you for your comment. Why does NASA refuse to prove that the earth is round to silence those flat earthers? Why does NASA destroy the footage of a man allegedly walking on the moon after it was recorded in HD video by a camera ALLEGEDLY mounted to his chest? Why does NASA refuse to mount a Go-Pro camera to an astronauts helmet to record while standing on earth to record the travel of him or her with 0 cuts entering the rocket to launch and mount to the ISS to then allow the Astronaut to view the ALLEGED round earth from a porthole or window looking upon our planet from within the International Space Station?
The obvious answer: Because they cant. As it does not exist.
Yet NASA charges the US taxpayer at least 53 million dollars a day $53.000.000.00 to provide its citizens with CGI phony Stanley Kubrick inspired HOAX material. Since they send and retrieve astronauts several times a year to and from the ISS, why would they continuously refuse to provide us with an answer as to whether the earth truly is round or flat?
IMO the writing is on the wall. They would easily have filmed this travel on a GoPro by now if it were not a HOAX.
If someone could prove that we landed on the moon I would be happy. SMH!
Why is it...
After over 50 yrs in space
And numerous spacewomen
We've never seen a video of how tits look in zero gravity....
great explanation -thats for that detailed informative insight to how Nasa managed to avoid the lethal Van Allen belts
As Dr James van Allen has publicly stated, only if astronauts orbited in the highest-flux regions of the outer belt for ONE WEEK would they receive a potentially lethal dose. Tissue damage depends on several factors including type, intensity and duration of radiation.
Great video, so brief, clear and accurate explanations. Didn't know about Bremsstrahlung effect before. Thank you!
Have you heard of Cherenkov radiation ? That's fun too, and you can see it here: th-cam.com/video/pLBcp3nJlFQ/w-d-xo.html
Not directly related - I just thought, if you found that interesting, you'd like that as well.
Curious Droid - thank you for being such an informed and eloquent spokesman for science and reason. In this current age, in which opinion speaks louder than facts, it is so mentally and intellectually stimulating to listen to your videos.
Love the manner in which you pronounce the word "aluminum"!
Agree with you completely - but Curious Droid is quite correct in his pronunciation of the word ALUMINIUM. ;-)
(That's the word used in England and in many other countries).
@@eventcone While you are completely correct that in UK and many other countries, the correct spelling and pronunciation is aluminium, is also needs to be said that in USA and possibly other countries, the correct spelling and pronunciation is aluminum. And this spelling is actually the older of the two options.
So this is possibly the only case where UK and US spelling differs, and the US spelling is the older one.
@Mike O I don't think you read your own link. Let me quote from the wiki page you are linking:
British chemist Humphry Davy ... is credited as the person who named the element. In 1808, he suggested the metal be named alumium.
In 1812, Davy ... settled on the name aluminum, thus producing the modern name.
In 1812, British scientist Thomas Young ... objected to aluminum and proposed the name aluminium.
eventcone both are correct🤟🏻.
SHUT UP YOU IDIOT. THIS DUDES A FOOL! HE DOESN'T KNOW WHAT THE HELL HE'S TALKIN ABOUT!
Thank you for this and all the other videos I have viewed. Today, I learned about the Bremsstrahlung Effect
James Miller the earth is flat look into it please don’t be ignorant you have to fully understand the flat earth model to have a valid opinion on it
yes that is a big one , sure glad we know
@Mark Smileer flattards community is slowly dying;)
NASA solved the Van Allen riddle during the Gemini program. Their experiments are available online
shaan choudhury the Gemini X crew were expected to receive a decent dose, but were pleasantly surprised to find the dosimeters detecting less than they worried there might be.
Shaan tell that to Alan bean according to him they didn't travel far enough to experience the van Allen belts lol. Someone is lying
Felton Mitchell Allan Bean was CAPCOM for Gemini XI and discussed the Van Allen belts and radiation with the crew when they were taking dosimeter readings. He was well aware of them.
then give Kelly Smith NASA Engineer a call....he seems to be worried about VARB!.. th-cam.com/video/jnqdF4-PoHI/w-d-xo.html
And yet, they had to fake the Moon landing... th-cam.com/video/xciCJfbTvE4/w-d-xo.html
I love your videos. Always informative and easy to absorb. Keep them coming!!
Propaganda is very easy to absorb. That's kind of the whole point of it
I too find this video interesting and informative. I liked the video. Looking forward to see such informative videos. Gentleman, keep the journey, your fans are with you.
love your vids, but just gotta ask - are you the voice of the geico gekko?
Chris CR Randell My little sister was on that website, I fap to the vid daily!
ghost of jdizzle I need the link to the video for "research purposes"
^ ONE OF THE TOP TH-cam COMMENTS OF ALL TIME
Dave Hughes YESS!! I am also curious now
Dave Hughes 15 minutes 15 percent!
Thank you for helping me fully understand something that has perplexed me for a long time.
That is a joke they only went to honeymoon
I love these kind of videos because i can finaly start to explain myself with actuall facts, keep up the great videos
Red Baron273 what a load of garbage lol
Jake Heke well I hope you find it, Godspeed and good luck on your endeavor.
Facts?.. the only fact here is that people keep eating this bullshit..
Man o man , no real evidence besides words....
@ DenCo 303 , but they don't even know what facts are. They are used to facts proven with theories. That's how they can make their world what ever they want. Make up the right theories and anything can be fact
Red Baron273 I only picked your reply to respond to, because you only have seven comments.
But, as for flat earth knowers, all of the back and forth is painful to watch and hear. Both sides use whatever they can to prove the other wrong. I thought the flat earth was non-sense until I watched just one video on it. The very next video I watched was a desperate attempt to convince myself otherwise.
As for the Apollo B.S. one question. How is it that every communication between the Apollo crew and mission control was immediate. Meaning no lag at all. ZERO time laps whatsoever. Hmmm 🤔 238,900 mi away and no lag at all?
We can't watch satellite TV without lag, or watch a news anchor from across seas communicate with another anchor here in the states without a lag in the transmission, so why haven't we raised an eyebrow to this obvious blunder in the Apollo performance?
I mean, they were on the moon. 238,900 mi away and no gap in transmission? They don’t even try to play it off. Yet, just 12,000 mi or so and major lag of about 6 seconds or so with any communication from across sea transmission. The moon is suppose to be nearly 20 times that distance. That would mean 2 minutes will have passed before mission control should hear what has been said is happening on the moon. How could any issue be corrected in time if this was the case?
So, in other words, something as simple as ”T-minus 10 seconds til the moon module touch down on the moon’s surface would take 2 minutes to reach earth. If any corrections had to be transmitted back to Apollo, from mission control, it would be 4 minutes too late. 2 minutes for the original transmitted issue to get to earth, and another 2 minutes of waiting for the response. 😕
😒not buying it. The world is definitely something other than what we are lead to believe. What, that I don’t know, but it isn’t what we are told.
And videos like this is a desperate attempt to cover it up. Most want take the time to question. And those that may, will be crucified for it. Smh I say believe what you wish. But then there comes a time when you must know...
Thanks for the great explanation. I learned a few things by watching your video. 👍
Your videos give off a scott manly vibe. Great vid!
Just letting you know, I found this video interesting and informative.
:-)
interesting, albeit disinformative and abetting of fraud.
mj. rock your skepticism doesn’t make you right though. Science is about proving things through trials and experimentation not just assuming things because your brains too inferior and lacks the capacity to comprehend it.
@@zombieepx1933 There are plenty of facts that support the skepticism. You'd have to be a complete idiot not to be skeptical, 50 years after the first time we (flawlessly on the first attempt) placed a man on the moon (allegedly) and then haven't done it since. For how many other firsts can this be said?
th-cam.com/video/as0fxeNkW5s/w-d-xo.htmlm32s
Lets see, we allegedly landed a craft on the moon with people on board then allegedly let those people get out and jumped up and down for 3 days on the moon then allegedly ushered them back to earth to cheering fan fanfare all the while without a single fatality nor even a case of vomit inducing radiation sickness (which certainly appears odd considering that the surface of the moon itself is a gamma ray source from all the cosmic ray particles constantly striking it at near light speeds, 30 per second from distant supernovas exploding from random directions, not even to mention the Van Allen belt radiation, which in itself is deadly), milestones that have never been duplicated after the Apollo missions by any organization on the earth, not even NASA; Yes, I'd definitely call that grounds for skepticism.
Stoney Sauce *There are plenty of facts that support skepticism* merely pointing out things you believe without bringing any supporting evidence of why it’s impossible isn’t facts. Evidence requires rigorous testing and observations, how do you have evidence with no data on your claims, how do you acquire data only being a skeptic. Being a skeptic means you’ve only created a hypothesis, there’s much more to the scientific method. There’s no point in debating with people who refuse listen to scientists explain how astronauts survive the almighty Van Allen belt. Why is it always the skeptics who bring up the impossibilities and not any actual experts on the subject lol.
Superb informational doc , and very well presented, thank you
Excellent and informative video. Well done.
They used this principle in the Juno mission to Jupiter as well. They tried to avoid the most severe part of Jupiter's radiation belts during most of the spacecraft's perijoves.
Yes indeed - very interesting, concise & informative. Thank you very much. Great stuff.
Great video! Thanks !
I've worked in the nuclear field for years and was aware of the difference penetrating abilities of different forms of radiation. I am so glad that you've made this video to explain the differences and how it impacted the Apollo program. So many folks equate radiation with lead shielding and nothing more.
th-cam.com/video/Bmc9NFfhx74/w-d-xo.html
I can understand why there would be some confusion. If you've ever gone for an x-ray, technicians make you wear a lead apron over your naughty bits to protect them. So some people probably equate all radiation with X-rays.
Do you like helmets?
@@stevelowe2647 I referred to a NASA video that claimed they didn’t have the technology to pass through The Van Allen Belts.
@@Americansikkunt Can you actually link this video instead of quoting it ad nauseam? I can't find any evidence of it online. The closest I got was someone claiming that the Orion vehicle couldn't make it safely through the belt YET due to it being untested. In other words you are taking someone's quote wildly out of context
Well explained. Thanks for your effort.
is the fat guy uncle fester from the adams family. the earth is flat shame is stomach isnt
You should start by pointing out that it is actually NASA who disagrees with you, they are the ones admitting today they can´t pass the Van Allen belts without significant protection:
th-cam.com/video/IDBBUwdyz4I/w-d-xo.html
@Mark Smileer Flat Earth is a CIA psyop designed to discredit narratives labeled as "conspiracy theories". Independent studies have clearly established that youtube algorithms are responsible for the massive propagation of extremely high quality and expensively produced "Flat Earth" videos on their platform.
www.theguardian.com/science/2019/feb/17/study-blames-youtube-for-rise-in-number-of-flat-earthers
TH-cam is a google corporation platform. Google has had very well established links with the Central Intelligence Agency from its inception:
sputniknews.com/analysis/201809271068358816-google-cia-nsa-creation/
If you want to learn more about flat Earth being used as a psyop to discredit narrative considered dangerous by the government:
truth11.com/2016/06/14/flat-earth-psyop-cia-blackop-designed-to-destroy-the-truth-movement/
If you have doubts about the US government being involved in such psychological operations, please research Cass Sunstein book on Conspiracy theories and how to counter them, he was the Administrator of the White House Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs in the Obama administration from 2009 to 2012.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cass_Sunstein
"Sunstein co-authored a 2008 paper with Adrian Vermeule, titled "Conspiracy Theories," dealing with the risks and possible government responses to conspiracy theories resulting from "cascades" of faulty information within groups that may ultimately lead to violence. In this article they wrote, "The existence of both domestic and foreign conspiracy theories, we suggest, is no trivial matter, posing real risks to the government's antiterrorism policies, whatever the latter may be." They go on to propose that, "the best response consists in cognitive infiltration of extremist groups",[38] where they suggest, among other tactics, "Government agents (and their allies) might enter chat rooms, online social networks, or even real-space groups and attempt to undermine percolating conspiracy theories by raising doubts about their factual premises, causal logic or implications for political action."[38] They refer, several times, to groups that promote the view that the US Government was responsible or complicit in the September 11 attacks as "extremist groups. .....The authors declare that there are five hypothetical responses a government can take toward conspiracy theories: "We can readily imagine a series of possible responses. (1) Government might ban conspiracy theorizing. (2) Government might impose some kind of tax, financial or otherwise, on those who disseminate such theories. (3) Government might itself engage in counterspeech, marshaling arguments to discredit conspiracy theories. (4) Government might formally hire credible private parties to engage in counterspeech. (5) Government might engage in informal communication with such parties, encouraging them to help." However, the authors advocate that each "instrument has a distinctive set of potential effects, or costs and benefits, and each will have a place under imaginable conditions. However, our main policy idea is that government should engage in cognitive infiltration of the groups that produce conspiracy theories, which involves a mix of (3), (4) and (5).""
I always jam to Running With The Devil when i get near the Van Halen belt.
I thought Van Allen only wore suspenders.
Sure does , you can tell by the way he walks.
With fish net stockings? Hmmm.
MugofBrown Stop. I’m getting horny
You mean van halen Allen?
I thought it’s a rock band 🤦🏻♂️
Finally someone answered the question I've had for over a decade thank you, no snark no conspiracy sarcasm genuinely thank you
Why so long to answer this simple question? The explanation here is a none answer and raises more questions than it answeres. The astronauts admitted that they were seeing flashes of light. These flashes was radiation penetrating and hitting directly the optical receptors in the eye. Therefore they were subject to very high levels of radiation in space contrary to what the gentleman is saying
@@alanstein3704 Lets go through what you just said.... The astronauts admitted to seeing flashes of light... The same astronauts that successfully made it through the Van Allen belts with light doses of radiation on the way to the moon saw flashes of light in their eyes due to said radiation... Now which is it? Did the astronauts go through the Van Allen belts and see low level radiation particles? Or did they not go and lie about seeing this radiation. You cant have it both ways. Either they went and survived to tell everyone what they saw or they lied about it. You cant use evidence that they did in fact travel through the belts as the evidence that they cant do it. Jesus! Are you reading what you write before you post it?
Eugene Cernan has just passed away. RIP Gene
+ThrummerOfLove Somehow I missed his obituary notices so your post caught me a little bit by surprise. Cernan was always forthright in his observations. I think his was the concluding comment in Ron Howard's "In The Shadow Of The Moon" and it went something like : "Truth needs no defense. Nobody, nobody can ever take those footsteps I made on the surface of the Moon away from me.” Still a very salient comment in view of an apparent ocean of moon hoax propaganda on YT and other whacko websites that peddle the latest or recycle the usual absurd contentions!
He never made any footprints on the Moon none whatsoever. His footprints were made on Earth in a studio. Sorry but you are wrong. His job was to defend the lie for his entire life and that is what he did. He's likely nothing but a soul in agony burning eternally in Hell now.
Mouse Nuts trying to figure out how the mental hospital that you are in allowed you on the internet
Ignorance is not a virtue, yet you seem to hold massive amounts of it in abundance. The Man never went to the Moon and he took that lie to his grave, I see no honor in that!
M773 don't put all of us in the same boat I've never meet a conspiracy theorist that thought the earth was flat flat earthers are just internet nutjobs
Excellent explanation. Thank you so much.
Me: tells stupid person that visible light is radiation
also stupid person: stabs eye to not get radiation
"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled
Are u vaguely aware what is the radiation level outside Earth's magnetic field (shield)? You will have maximum few seconds to live.
Great vid. I've always wondered about the radiation issue. They went around the worst of it. As fast as they could. And the nature of the van Allen belts radiation was/is less dangerous than was implied. Even microwaves can be blocked by a flimsy microwave oven door. This is the first time I've heard an in depth explanation of how NASA dealt with radiation exposure. Good work.👍
@@DaveHammondDublin probably NASA is working to improve equipment and procedures. I would guess what was good enough then, isn't good enough now. The rush rush of sixty just isn't there anymore. Not without cold war.
@@DaveHammondDublin Modern electronics are far more vulnerable to radiation as the smaller the parts the more chance a stray particle could do enough damage to one to either change a value or even damage the individual transistor in an IC. As are they also planning for far longer duration flights than merely to the moon (so continual low dosage radiation would accumulate more).
The question is how they managed the 20000k heat. 35000f?
Space is cold@@randywagner6961
I really liked this explanation. Before watching this, I did not fully understand, how the Astronauts, tolerated the radiation from the Van Allen Belt. I knew the limited exposure part, but did not realize that even the limited insulation in the command module helped. I also did not realize that the path taken was important.
The flight path is the most important of this. It was designed to avoid 99% of the belt. And this flight path is still standard for all launches headed away from earth, even unmanned.
Oh. You should let NASA know so we can go back.
@@sowellbear2283 They know, do you have some sort of mental problem?
DE J no. no. I’m not a naive boomer who believes everything I’m told.
@@sowellbear2283 Yes you are, you just chose to believe someone else because it feels good, someone with no evidence and against all evidence.
@@Agarwaen ya the problem is there is quite alot of evidence. It's people like you who blieves anything their governments say.
Fact. NASA astronauts said they can't leave the low earth orbit.
Fact. NASA astronauts said they "destroyed " the technology to go to the moon.
Fact. CIA made sure you got the lowest resolution video from the highest quality video camera they took to the moon.
Fact. The president at that time talks to astronauts from his oval office with a "land line" telephone.
Fact. You can clearly see flag of USA waving in a no atmosphere zone on moon.
That's quite lot of evidence if you ask me
Man those Shirts are Awesome. this channel rocks going back years. 🤟🏼
love the show thanks for making them . keep dosing us with space knowledge
Good explanation well narrated thank you
I love your channel you explain things that are complicated and confusing for some people very clearly and I appreciate it, thank you.
Fun fact about infrared. It can be seen on any old digital camera. Grab a TV remote and point it at your phone's camera. It shows as purple/white.
As always, it's been a pleasure watching a video presented by you. Not only the information, I really like the way you present it.
As far as people who have doubts about landing on the moon etc., I do understand the fact that the achievement has been so significant that it's beyond the comprehension of people who are not positive in life. So, I'm not surprised that there are people who actually believe that Van Allen Belt exists (because NASA said so) but won't accept the fact that astronauts landed on the mood.
Just shows how massive that achievement is to mankind and once again thank you so much for the lovely video.
I'm here for the shirt
The ' Styx T - Shirt ' !!!
That shirt only works if you're bald...
you are great, in depth information, no BS, facts pondered very intelligently!
Jesus fucking christ he JUST told you in the video that they have gone around them you dunce
Ha ha!!
Thank you for this explanation. Always wondered about that. 😊
Time. Distance. And shielding. Shorten the time in the radiation the smaller the dose. The more you Distance yourself from the radiation the smaller the dose. The more shielding between you and the radiation the smaller the dose
Now this is just the explanation I was looking for. This issue has always played with me but now I get it Cheers.
@Nim Chimpsky The video you are actually commenting literally explains why you're wrong and fucking stupid. Did you even bother watching it, you utterly moronic cretin?
@Nim Chimpsky Even NASA claims we somehow lost the technology; and more than one person in speeches refer to "if we could figure out how to get through the Van Allan Radiation belt"; including Bush #2 ; this video doesn't make sense anyway; how do you " go around" a belt that circles the Earth; so you are correct !
@Nim Chimpsky They did not spent 2 days in the belts, but only a couple hours in a shielded capsule. That amount of radiation is found only in the parts of the belts closer to the magnetic equator that they avoided since the spacecraft was in an inclined orbit. If you want a proper calculation of the amount of radiation absorbed by the astronauts, done using an accurate model of the belts and the actual characteristics of the Apollo capsule, you can find it here:
web.archive.org/web/20160301115931/www.braeunig.us:80/apollo/VABraddose.htm
Van Allen himself confirmed that the effects of the passage through the belt as done by the Apollo capsule were negligible.
@@timklein3962 By going above them in a 3D space. The worst part of the belts is only 15 degrees above and below the magnetic equator and the radiation density decreases very fast as you move away from that region.
@@marcop1563 Thanks for your response;
Dude, you should have like three times the subscribers you have 🤷🏻♂️
Thank you for your videos ✌🏼
Superb explanation!!!
More informative videos like this should be made rather than all the crazies by people that don’t understand basic science.
the one that believe we wen to the moon
I work with a guy who believes we didn't go to the moon because of the Van Allen radiation belts.
I was going to show him this video, but after reading through the comments I realize I'd be wasting my time.
Nasa's own spokes people say that we don't know if we can safely get people these belts. It's Nasa's own spokespeople that say we had the technology 50 years ago but "lost" it. Don't criticize the skeptics for listening to nasa's spokespeople.
Do you have a source for that statement? I'd like to read it.
Thx for asking: th-cam.com/video/4O5dPsu66Kw/w-d-xo.html and th-cam.com/video/wl1H1WxWTuc/w-d-xo.html
Wow, Way to misinterpret the first video,
"it passes through Van Allen Belts, an area of dangerous radiation"......" Radiation like this can harm the GUIDANCE SYSTEMS, onboard COMPUTERS, or other ELECTRONICS on Orion"....that's the challenge they must solve BEFORE sending people through this region of Space.
And that second one was laughable. The tech is 50 years old, that's way it isn't around anymore.
th-cam.com/video/bLtgS2_qxJk/w-d-xo.html
Quote-mining bullshit. Orion was *a new spaceship,* and had to overcome the problems, the same as Apollo did. They did, and flew through the belts in 2014, twice. Petit was saying we cannot go past LEO *today* - because we don't have a spaceship that can do it.
Seriously, how fucking hard is that to understand? And why do you choose to believe those few seconds, and not the rest of the videos, or the thousands of others?
Very informative sir...thumbs up for u...
Very good as always
can you do a video on thorium reactors?
Why do yet another thorium reactor video - there's a hundred of them already. My favorite is the one by GeorgiaTechTalks, "The Liquid Fluoride Thorium Reactor: What Fusion Wanted To Be"
Thorium? Isn't that a nuclear reactor fuel that is less radio active than Uranium? But Thorium has a waste product that has the big draw back of NOT BEING ABLE TO BE WEAPONIZED?
Kirk March still, it only stays radioactive for some 300 years instead of thousands
Kirk March
Thorium is not as fissionable as Uranium isotopes, and delivers less energy. But it can be transmuted into U233, which is highly fissionable, in a Breeder Reactor.
Jeffrey314159 Thank you! All information is appreciated.
Considering Lovell, Haise, Mattingly, Collins, Aldrin are all STILL alive (01/02/21) .... i’d say the guys at NASA got it pretty much spot on.
And Scott, and Duke, and Schmitt
@@ann_onn
Quite, sorry to miss them, I was in a rush and they were the first to come to mind. Cernan, Bean, Young and Armstrong have only really gone recently to be fair.
@@sphericalempirical9359 And Collins, now
@@wildchameleon7
Really? , that’s why my text was dated in the first place. 90 is a great age, humans don’t last forever, Plus There’s no evidence for any correlation. But thanks for the update. Do you really feel the need to trawl and scour through comments in an attempt to correct people, because you’ve just failed miserably.
@@sphericalempirical9359 I didn't mean any of that in a bad way, it was barely just an update. I'm sorry if you felt like I was correcting you. Of course he wasn't going to live forever, and as time passes by, just like other big events from the last century, there will be less and less people to have lived those times, maybe reinforcing doubters in their beliefs.
I'm glad I brought my EpiPen cause there's a lot of nuts in here.
Why does NASA refuse to prove that the earth is round to silence those flat earthers? Why does NASA destroy the footage of a man allegedly walking on the moon after it was recorded in HD video by a camera ALLEGEDLY mounted to his chest? Why does NASA refuse to mount a Go-Pro camera to an astronauts helmet to record while standing on earth to record the travel of him or her with 0 cuts entering the rocket to launch and mount to the ISS to then allow the Astronaut to view the ALLEGED round earth from a porthole or window looking upon our planet from within the International Space Station?
The obvious answer: Because they cant. As it does not exist.
Yet NASA charges the US taxpayer at least 53 million dollars a day $53.000.000.00 to provide its citizens with CGI phony Stanley Kubrick inspired HOAX material. Since they send and retrieve astronauts several times a year to and from the ISS, why would they continuously refuse to provide us with an answer as to whether the earth truly is round or flat?
IMO the writing is on the wall. They would easily have filmed this travel on a GoPro by now if it were not a HOAX.
If someone could prove that we landed on the moon I would be happy. SMH!
@@dub2536 it's much harder to fake the moon landing in 1969 than landing on the moon itself.
this made me giggle
@@dub2536 lmao dude you are hilarious, truly a next level troll :D
@@dub2536 In a way, this guy is right...as nobody can actually prove him wrong. So there!
This was a well made video. factually concise and easily understood. Thank you! By the way the closing statement "Why go through it, when you can just go around it?" is a statement I often say when watching sci-fi movies involving the traversing of an unrealistic depiction of an asteroid belt. 😅
There was another video putting the amount of radiation the astronauts were subjected to into context, and the amount they were subjected to was around the same as what you would get during a CT scan.
Wikipedia says this:
The total radiation received by the astronauts varied from mission to mission but was measured to be between 0.16 and 1.14 rads (1.6 and 11.4 mGy), much less than the standard of 5 rem (50 mSv) per year set by the United States Atomic Energy Commission for people who work with radioactivity.
Sadly, most of the deniers won't accept this very well done explanation. The only answer they will entertain is we didn't go. All the facts that point to us going fall on deaf ears.
Well done, none the less.
Landrar excellent post.
Therka Marka of course you can't stop laughing. You can't understand what's being said so you deal with that cognitive dissonance by laughing.
Therka Marka Idiot troll.
terrypussypower you must be a liberal. The most intelligent response you can come up with is 3rd grader names. That's exactly what liberals do.
Bryan Hensley Because you replying to him makes you look so much more intelligent.
No matter how many times I watch your videos Paul they`re every bit as entertaining and informative as they were the very first time.
And I can’t fault your presentation.
Excellent explanation! Very well described.
Thankyou for explaining that issue...………………...I always wondered!
Thanks for clearing up something I have wondered about for ages.
th-cam.com/video/gFSt-vcD6Xk/w-d-xo.html
This way above my education but am able to follow. Very very cool to be exposed to this information. I could not form a question but i do learn things about space. People are so smart to figure this stuff out. Thanks for explaining this so well.
@Got Kowal Who says previous solutions were lost? There is different circuitry today (solid state microelectronics vs. rope memory), hence it needs different types of protection.
Try putting a 1940s flathead V8 in a modern car and see how that works. Same thing that you're flippantly denying out of worship of ignorance.
@Got Kowal Are you an expert? Do you work in the aerospace engineering industry? Somehow I doubt it.
Phenomenal science thank you for the explanation keep these videos coming please
1969 - we went to the moon. 2019 - we think we know how to go to the moon again in the next 10 years.
"We destroyed all the technology, don't have any of the information and it's a pain on the neck to rebuild..."
- Don Petit, nasa
Yeah, sure.
*@shents aceve* Yes, manned Moon landings were cancelled because of ignorant idiots like you.
Fortunately, we are going again in 2024.
If you think Pettit believes the Moon landings were a hoax, then you're probably beyond help. That's so stupid.... it's hard to know where to begin.
Do you really think he _literally_ meant the tech was destroyed? Like, with hammers?
There's a Saturn V sitting in Kennedy right now, so... I guess they missed that one???
@@shentsaceve5642 _DON'T LIE!!_ Pettit _never_ said we don't have the "information"! He said we don't have the Apollo technology anymore - and he is right! It was retired decades ago.
"BAAAA!!" goes the sheeple 🐑
1969, we went to the moon. 2019, some people think the earth is flat. FFS.
Thx for this. Best explanation I've seen.
MAGA..!!!
Why is it a problem for mission Orion?
@M L It's the kid who merely stood there and smiled while being harassed by some old creep banging a drum in his face. Degenerate left wing scum in the media lied about him and are being sued for defamation.
I tried to explain to a Moon Denier that his "Impenetrable Van Allen Belt" was actually 2 belts in a Toroidal field. But of course when you challenge their claims with logic and science they get triggered, and reply with Insults, Lol's, and Emoji's to deflect from their insecurities and ignorance....
Considering that you can't propel a vehicle in a vacuum nor burn a flame, i imagine your friend was annoyed by your ignorance.
@@jeffmaraman8149 Wrong on both counts. Netwons third law still applies in a vacuum: Throw some mass one way, and you will move into the opposite direction.
And a flame, being the chemical reaction of some substance with oxygen, CAN burn in a vacuum. The only difference to a regular flame is that you have to bring the oxygen along with you.
The combination of those two gives you a rocket engine: Mix oxygen and fuel, light it in a rocket nozzle, let it hurl itself out the back end, and you'll move in the opposite direction.
@@rockyblacksmith lets say your little theory is correct which it is not. you still need an environment with oxygen to push off against to manuever as well as speed up and slow down.. this has been tested in a vacuum hundreds if not thousands of times at this point. with oxygen boosted igniters and drones etc etc etc..cant fly in an oxygen less environment
@@jeffmaraman8149 "this has been tested in a vacuum hundreds if not thousands of times at this point"
Care to name a source?
Because I'm willing to bet money on the fact that if those engines didn't work in a vacuum, they weren't rocket engines.
Yes they seem to never be able to just talk about the topic at hand period. I've given up trying to convince people that the moon landings happened. All I do is try to get them to stay on topic and realize that the point they made is bad.That's it.
Excellent summary.👍
The radiation controversy was never an issue for me, but I have never had it explained fully. great presentation. Thank you.
There was never any controversy, except in the mind of crazy conspiracy theorists.
There's radiation everywhere in the universe. It's normal. Like... bananas are radioactive. It might hurt if you ate a few million of them.
The VAB is radioactive. It might hurt if you stayed in the most active parts for a few weeks. I have no idea why anyone would do that.
The VAB protects Earth from solar radiation. If we want to live in space for months or years, we need to work out ways to avoid it. NASA are working on that... which is why, 5 years ago, they deliberately flew Orion through the most active part of the belts. Not because they were worried about the belts, but because it's a good way to test the shielding on a new spaceship. Somehow, conspiracy theorists see that as evidence that Apollo couldn't make a short trip... but Orion isn't planning short trips; it's planning to spend 6 months going to Mars. The Moon is just a stopping-off point.
I wonder how many people saying "We didn't land on the moon" actually watched the video to the end and/or actually understood anything of it.
Oh, and I wonder how many "deniers" just write to anoy people.
Well explained and actually founded on science and engineering.
2manyIce I’m guilty of trolling with this to people dumb enough to believe it😂😂😂
How about video footage of buzz aldrin saying they’ve never been to the moon 2:51 th-cam.com/video/5GL_hCqQ4hk/w-d-xo.html
@@effigy42 The girl was asking Buzz Aldrin why no one went to the moon after 1972. This video of his answer is truncated and completely out of context.
I think its people that are either dumb or corrupt tend to think most everyone else must be.......maybe. Yes they are annoying and depressing to listen to and we have to live in the same world as they do unfortunately.
NASA needs to ask old droid how to avoid the VA belts as they seem to have forgotten
Thank you for the informative and very well presented info! Awesome.
Really????? If you want the truth do research on AGENDA21 . If not then keep watching these videos and stay asleep.. this is my deed for the day
Curious little droid.....just like R2-D2, you’re a wealth of information and full of surprises! Always enjoy your content...👍🏻👍🏻😃
Just discovered your channel and really enjoying the videos so far. Clear and informative, very good!
How good is the spacecraft shielding against the solar wind radiation? Can the same shielding be use for the mars mission?
This is exactly why testing must be undertaken.
We already have the findings from five countries (The US, Russia, China, India, Japan) with all the data necessary to know what types of radiation can be found in space, and the engineering to deal with it is straightforward.
The hoaxtards never acknowledge this. It runs counter to their agenda and completely refutes their argument. The other main reason why they never acknowledge it is that none of them have the education or training to know how to talk about science, technology, or engineering in terms that can be proven or disproven. That's why opinion, belief, and "feelings" are so important to them. They can't scientifically back it up.
As far as i know solar wind radiation is mostly Alpha particles and any ship that cannot protect against alpha particles has no bussines being in space. Beta particles and ionised protons are more problematic, but if we can get through the belts then solar wind won't be much of a problem.
lol!
A serious solar storm or coronal mass ejection (generally shortened to read 'CME') would certainly present a hazard to the cosmonaut/astronauts aboard any vessel travelling out toward or back from Mars. As explained, surprising materials can offer some protection from radiation, but I believe the potential damage from 'hard' radiation is a real issue. I don't know what shielding Orion, in particular, has for such an unfortunate event. Certainly, the engineers and other scientists developing on an interplanetary spacecraft ~ I include Spacex ~ would be working to mitigate any dangerous effect upon the ship and her occupants. I would be fascinated to find out what array of measures have been tested and put in place.
and this ppl never had single headache
Nice tutorial. Just the right amount of detail and very clear explanation. Than you!
Wow! I've always wondered how they dealt with the Van Allen belts when going to the moon. This video beautifully explains it
but somehow they say they can’t get through those belts 🤷🏼♂️
@@ahdexter7688 No they don't.
@@ann_onn yes they do. Why do you think Orion isnt flying up there. It's not just radiation. Its 20000k temperatures. That's 35000 f. The twin towers imploded at less than 2000f.
*@Randy Wagner* Hello.
I'd like to assume you are not stupid,
So... I assume you know that the boiling point of things depends on the pressure. Right?
Water boils at about 100 C, 212 F... at sea level.
Climb a mountain, and it boils at about 70 C. 160 F.
So... what is the boiling point of water in a vacuum?
[Some comments from Randy Wagner have been deleted]
Nitpick: "...the second type of radiation is charged particles ... electrons, protons and neutrons". Neutrons are NOT charged particles (which is pretty easy to remember by the name, neutrons are neutral). However, once a neutron leaves a nucleus it will start to decay into a proton and an electron, half of the neutrons will have decayed this way after about 10 minutes. As the neutrons from the solar wind take about a day to reach earth nearly all neutrons have had time to be converted to protons and electrons and therefore trapable by the Van Allen belt.
Your right, and now anything he says is not believable. I'm very suspicious of anything I read but a few seconds of research on your comment makes this guy a liar. Thanks
@@michattac You completely miss the point. My comment just pointed out minor nitpick. Everything he says in the video about the Van Allen belts and how the Apollo dealt with them is true. If you read my comment you'll also note that despite the sun spewing out tons of neutrons in the solar wind, nearly all of them will have converted to protons and electrons before arrival to earth.
@@andersbackman3977 I'll go out on a limb and guess that Michael didn't even understand what you said about neutrons. (Which was an interesting point, thank you.)
Thankyou for this explantion. It was prety much what I had already figured. I just wish some people would go back to school and learn a little physics before they start denying everything because they don't have the brain power to understand it.
Interesting. But why in the video "a strange thing happened on the way to the moon" when asked about the radiation belts, some of the astronauts didn't know about them or how they got through them. Also, a few NASA people, including some on the ISS, and even Obama have said the Orion project will let them get past lower earth orbit?
Did you know the astrounauts were more pilots than scientists, back then?
it's quite possible that the dangers of the VAB weren't completely explained in detail to the astronauts. right now we can't get higher than LEO because we don't have any Saturn V rockets left working, the dangers Orion will face going to Mars is alot different than going to the moon.
daveash123 exactly !!!
the elites fucked themselves up many times but people don't look
+daveash123
I wouldn't have explained it to the astronauts either, was I running NASA. Most of these men were pilots, not scientists. The last thing I need is for my astronauts getting cold feet before or after launch. These men were ex-Air Force, and thus trained to obey the chain of command and not ask questions. I would have concluded that they simply didn't need to know. That's what I imagine NASA top brass would have concluded. Getting to the moon and completing experiments is a bigger priority than telling them the truth of the risks. That's NASA's priorities and mine.
They reported flashes from radiation hitting their eyes, NASA wisely told them to stop worrying about them and focus on the mission. Being well trained by the Air Force, they followed these orders and silenced their doubts.
Outstanding video, thank you!
I find it interesting that, of the 24 men who flew through the VARB, eleven are still alive (mean age 88, five are in their 90s), and seven died in their 80s. Of the other six, one died in a motorcycle accident, and two from heart attacks. The last three could, I suppose, possibly be blamed on radiation exposure (2 cancer, and one pancreatitis - although, one of the cancer deaths was age 74), but considering the longevity of their fellows it seems almost like this specific type of radiation is good for you.
Bear in mind they were all extremely fit, healthy and active men - that goes some way to explain their unusual longevity. They lived relatively healthy lifestyles too.
It's also worth noting that Irwin, who died young from a heart attack, had a pre-existing heart condition which was identified duing their training.
There's abaolutely no reason at all to think radiation affected them in any way at all. They received an utterly trivial dose, similar to a routine medical scan. They'd have had to spend weeks in the Van Allen belts to get sick.
@@ann_onn - Agreed. They were thoroughly screened for physical fitness and overall health, so as a group, whether they had left the planet or not, they would most likely outlive the average. My comment about the radiation being good for you was tongue-in-cheek.
@@finaoo1167 There is absolutely no evidence that the Moon landings were fake. The conspiracy claims are nonsense - check the facts, and their silly ideas fall apart.
There are basically three types of claim.
1. Misunderstandings of basic science.
For example, they say a rocket wouldn't work because it has nothing to push against in space.
Rockets don't push against anything. If you fire a gun, you go backwards - whether or not the bullet hits anything.
The same thing happens in space.
Every action has an equal and opposite reaction.
Squirt gas in one direction, and you go the other way.
2. Lies. For example, they show edited footage of Nixon's phone call, where the delay has been edited out.
3. Quote-mining. For example, they show a 2-second clip of Buzz Aldrin saying "we didn't go." They do not show the rest of the interview, where he talked extensively about Apollo. All he meant was, we didn't go after 1974.
If you have any doubt about the Moon landings, tell me why - and I'll explain why it's nonsense.
@@ann_onn - what did I say to make you think I doubt that we put men on the moon? Moon landing deniers are about a half step up from flat earthers.
@@finaoo1167 You said, "whether they left the planet or not".
There is no question about it, it's not debatable.
I found this interesting and informative.
if I were to take an educated guess I bet you believe in Jesus too lmao
th-cam.com/video/gFSt-vcD6Xk/w-d-xo.html
@@reggiemac7693 If I were to take an educated guess, I'd bet that you experienced a lot of rejection in your childhood which lead to you being vulnerable to these crackpot theories. But if this is what gives you a sense of identity, who am I stop to you? But I still wouldn't give that goon the time of day if I was Neil Armstrong either
go read your Bible you f****** idiot@Origami Mambo Project
tell you what when we're fighting the revolution against corruption in government @Origami Mambo Project you can go hide under a rock and read your f****** Bible
What references or source materials did you use to come to these conclusions? Maybe post these within the video description, so that myself and others can read and review as well. Thanks!
Fantastic video 💪
I almost thought the “Van Allen” belts was a ‘70’s rock group
It is what you get when crossing Van Halen with the Allen Parsons Project.
And flying through the Van Halen belt makes your hair grow long and fuzzy ;)
Warribo farribo marribo jarribo parribo
:)
they just went around it just like germany invading france :p
Warribo, and it turns you into an alcoholic hypocrite.
Thats the spirit keep it funny and not nasty like others,10 out of 10 .
Informative. Until now I thought the Van Allen's belts were used to keep the good Professor's trousers up.
lmao
No ,real smart men use suspenders.
Very interesting love your content and your shirts
Outstanding content and well-presented! I'd hate to be at a bar trying to argue these technical points with you 😝
More lies to cover the past lies