Video: Moon Hoax; "The Apollo Moon Landings Special" With Scott Henderson and Marcus Allen

[PJTHEDOORS]

I've seen/heard alot of Moon landing topics with experts thru the years. This is superb.

 

[Melonfeud]

Hey man,have you ever YouTubed and listened to the Epic of Gilgamesh(the version narrator's being Richard Paxton seems superior)
My inquiry is based upon justifiable use ( and wastse) of a persons time,,,as these Hollywood moon hoaxes are actually NASA approved in the attempt of concealing what was learned by going there& landing & subsequently being told to leave& not to come back

 

[speedkilz88]

 

[DallasEast]

I got to the international space station part about 20 minutes in but that's it.

 

[PJTHEDOORS]

Well Nasa is a clown show.

 

[nobody]

https://www.space.com/33948-van-allen-radiation-belts.html

https://teachnuclear.ca/all-things-...diation/effects-of-ionizing-radiation-on-dna/

https://bioethicsarchive.georgetown.edu/achre/final/intro_9_5.html

https://opentextbc.ca/physicstestbook2/chapter/biological-effects-of-ionizing-radiation/

I post all of these for one reason. This video claims that radiation is radiation and it's all the same. That's not accurate. Different ionizing radiations (The radiation that damages cells the most, as opposed to non-ionizing radiation) affect living cells differently, and some require more Rads than others to do possible (not guaranteed) damage to a person. The effects might even take up to 70 years to show if that sort of damage is done.

The Van Allen belts change their amount of radioactivity and their size and shape based on solar activity. The more active the sun, the bigger and stronger the belts. They've even expanded into the range of the path of the ISS at times, but those astronauts didn't die.

So their argument about us not having the shielding to even survive the Van Allen radiation belts is ridiculous. And because different types of ionizing radiation have different strengths and effects on DNA, of course a spacesuit that might offer a tiny bit of protection from radiation in space would do nothing near Fukushima.

I skipped through the video here and there to hear some of their "evidence" that it was faked. Maybe it was, maybe it wasn't, but their argument about the radiation just isn't scientifically accurate. If they're that mistaken about even that one argument, it's kind of hard not to question their arguments for other parts of it. Obviously they did little to no research.

 

[PJTHEDOORS]

https://www.space.com/33948-van-allen-radiation-belts.html

https://teachnuclear.ca/all-things-...diation/effects-of-ionizing-radiation-on-dna/

https://bioethicsarchive.georgetown.edu/achre/final/intro_9_5.html

https://opentextbc.ca/physicstestbook2/chapter/biological-effects-of-ionizing-radiation/

I post all of these for one reason. This video claims that radiation is radiation and it's all the same. That's not accurate. Different ionizing radiations (The radiation that damages cells the most, as opposed to non-ionizing radiation) affect living cells differently, and some require more Rads than others to do possible (not guaranteed) damage to a person. The effects might even take up to 70 years to show if that sort of damage is done.

The Van Allen belts change their amount of radioactivity and their size and shape based on solar activity. The more active the sun, the bigger and stronger the belts. They've even expanded into the range of the path of the ISS at times, but those astronauts didn't die.

So their argument about us not having the shielding to even survive the Van Allen radiation belts is ridiculous. And because different types of ionizing radiation have different strengths and effects on DNA, of course a spacesuit that might offer a tiny bit of protection from radiation in space would do nothing near Fukushima.

I skipped through the video here and there to hear some of their "evidence" that it was faked. Maybe it was, maybe it wasn't, but their argument about the radiation just isn't scientifically accurate. If they're that mistaken about even that one argument, it's kind of hard not to question their arguments for other parts of it. Obviously they did little to no research.

Watch the entire video. Good luck debunking all their evidence.

 

[darthseinfeld]

https://www.space.com/33948-van-allen-radiation-belts.html

https://teachnuclear.ca/all-things-...diation/effects-of-ionizing-radiation-on-dna/

https://bioethicsarchive.georgetown.edu/achre/final/intro_9_5.html

https://opentextbc.ca/physicstestbook2/chapter/biological-effects-of-ionizing-radiation/

I post all of these for one reason. This video claims that radiation is radiation and it's all the same. That's not accurate. Different ionizing radiations (The radiation that damages cells the most, as opposed to non-ionizing radiation) affect living cells differently, and some require more Rads than others to do possible (not guaranteed) damage to a person. The effects might even take up to 70 years to show if that sort of damage is done.

The Van Allen belts change their amount of radioactivity and their size and shape based on solar activity. The more active the sun, the bigger and stronger the belts. They've even expanded into the range of the path of the ISS at times, but those astronauts didn't die.

So their argument about us not having the shielding to even survive the Van Allen radiation belts is ridiculous. And because different types of ionizing radiation have different strengths and effects on DNA, of course a spacesuit that might offer a tiny bit of protection from radiation in space would do nothing near Fukushima.

I skipped through the video here and there to hear some of their "evidence" that it was faked. Maybe it was, maybe it wasn't, but their argument about the radiation just isn't scientifically accurate. If they're that mistaken about even that one argument, it's kind of hard not to question their arguments for other parts of it. Obviously they did little to no research.

People have to understand when they look at stuff like this that fringe theories are fringe for a reason. Its entertainment more than it is information.

A good example is Brandenburg's Martian Holocaust theory. Its wild and its interesting. May even be true. He constructs it based on his work as a nuclear physicist. But guess what Im not. A nuclear physicist. Nor much do I understand nuclear. So I dont have the understanding of the subject matter to take what he says as truth. Its still interesting. And with what we know about Mar's past likely being able to sustain life, its relatively plausible. However, as far as I am concerned its just an entertaining theory. One that as far as I know, no other credible source is the field of nuclear physics has backed

 

[nobody]

Watch the entire video. Good luck debunking all their evidence.

"Evidence" I don't need to debunk it. They have no substantial, tangible proof and the burden of proof is on the accuser.

 

[Oz-of-Cowboy-Country]

The HIV virus comes from primates they let play with the Moon rock in Africa and Brazil. So yeah, they went there and inadvertently stared the Aids epidemic.

 

[nobody]

 

[nobody]

 

[Runwildboys]

No, no, no....This guy's a lemming, who'll believe anything the U.S. government tells him........um....or the Russian government.....or Japan...or China....or any country technologically capable of tracking the Apollo crafts or taking current photos of the equipment left behind.

 

[timb2]

 

[nobody]

Then why did other countries, who have independently photographed the landing sights and would love nothing more than to embarass the U.S., release photographs showing the proof that we landed on the moon?

Why did multiple third parties publish evidence if it was faked?

How did the thousands of people that had to be involved in some conspiracy keep quiet all these years? Surely someone would eventually spill the beans or publish true proof.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third-party_evidence_for_Apollo_Moon_landings


It's just silly at this point.

 

[Runwildboys]

Then why did other countries, who have independently photographed the landing sights and would love nothing more than to embarass the U.S., release photographs showing the proof that we landed on the moon?

Why did multiple third parties publish evidence if it was faked?

How did the thousands of people that had to be involved in some conspiracy keep quiet all these years? Surely someone would eventually spill the beans or publish true proof.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third-party_evidence_for_Apollo_Moon_landings


It's just silly at this point.

Hey, if there are people stupid enough to actually believe the Earth is flat........

 

[Melonfeud]

Man! Where the hell is @maxdogg ?,,,he'd posted up something similar, yet of superlative supersedance as compared to the O.P'S inquiry into the deviceve battlelines of beliefs a season or so back,as I recall, & he seemingly held fast in the trenches of the Hoax forces

 

[Melonfeud]

I got to the international space station part about 20 minutes in but that's it.

The DRUDGE had a space station header yesterday morning where it was something about for 35k you too, could spend the night in a room with an earth's eye view,,,,er,,,I failed to "hit the click" though,due to the zero impetus of inner interest

 

[paladin]

It's just silly at this point.

To me, it's beyond silly.
The Three Stooges were silly
This is more akin to insistent, intentional ignorance.

 

[timb2]

Why in the video I posted above are the astronauts pretending to be in the window filming,when they were on the far side of the ship filming?