Apollo whistleblower revealed at last!

[Dave Greer]

Do you have anything to back up your claims about radiation being an Apollo show-stopper, other than articles which talk in very general terms about the potential hazard of space radiation?

Not yet .

Can you please provide the source again for the chart you posted above , which allegedly shows the empirical radiation doses for the lunar surface ?

The link shows up as this .

Your search - cache:NmXd4r9IDpMJ:villaolmo.mib.infn.it/ICATPP10th_2007/SW%20Applications/HayatsuK.pdf gamma ray moon mSv - did not match any documents.

Suggestions:

Make sure all words are spelled correctly.

Try different keywords.

Try more general keywords.

Try fewer keywords.

My mistook. I didn't copy the whole link, sorry about that. That one pointed to a cached copy in Google anyway: the link to the PDF appears to be working OK now.

http://villaolmo.mib.infn.it/ICATPP10th_20...ns/HayatsuK.pdf

Should work OK.

[Duane Daman]

Thanks for the link... and it's not a NASA site ! ... How about that.

So far it looks as though the Van Allen belts aren't at all dangerous to human life and that the radioactive lunar surface is even safer .

So I guess Dr. Van Allen's ( among several other scientists) findings were completely incorrect and that NASA's lunar regolith evidence has proven that there is absolutely no danger to astronauts traveling to and walking on the Moon .

That certainly is good news, but it makes me wonder why NASA will have to " invent new shielding from scratch" to protect their astronauts and wait until 2020 to make those very important "return to the Moon" trips .... NASA spokesmen have even admitted that China and Japan will most likely get to the Moon first in the new space race ... and that seems like a real shame considering how safe the trip really is .

You would think with there being absolutely no radiation danger in deep space or on the Moon that they could get there today, wouldn't you ?

Edited February 11, 2008 by Duane Daman

[Peter McKenna]

Thanks for the link... and it's not a NASA site ! ... How about that.

So far it looks as though the Van Allen belts aren't at all dangerous to human life and that the radioactive lunar surface is even safer .

So I guess Dr. Van Allen's ( among several other scientists) findings were completely incorrect and that NASA's lunar regolith evidence has proven that there is absolutely no danger to astronauts traveling to and walking on the Moon .

That certainly is good news, but it makes me wonder why NASA will have to " invent new shielding from scratch" to protect their astronauts and wait until 2020 to make those very important "return to the Moon" trips .... NASA spokesmen have even admitted that China and Japan will most likely get to the Moon first in the new space race ... and that seems like a real shame considering how safe the trip really is .

You would think with there being absolutely no radiation danger in deep space or on the Moon that they could get there today, wouldn't you ?

Read this:

http://www.thespacereview.com/article/602/1

[Dave Greer]

Thanks for the link... and it's not a NASA site ! ... How about that.

So far it looks as though the Van Allen belts aren't at all dangerous to human life and that the radioactive lunar surface is even safer .

So I guess Dr. Van Allen's ( among several other scientists) findings were completely incorrect and that NASA's lunar regolith evidence has proven that there is absolutely no danger to astronauts traveling to and walking on the Moon .

That certainly is good news, but it makes me wonder why NASA will have to " invent new shielding from scratch" to protect their astronauts and wait until 2020 to make those very important "return to the Moon" trips .... NASA spokesmen have even admitted that China and Japan will most likely get to the Moon first in the new space race ... and that seems like a real shame considering how safe the trip really is .

You would think with there being absolutely no radiation danger in deep space or on the Moon that they could get there today, wouldn't you ?

I totally disagree that there is "absolutely no radiation danger in deep space or the moon". That is not, and never has been, my contention.

You made the claim that radiation in space/moon/Van Allen belts was an Apollo showstopper, which it clearly isn't. Empirical evidence has been provided to support that. That doesn't mean that there is absolutely no threat whatsoever to astronauts from space radiation. It just means that space radiation isn't an insurmountable barrier to short, manned missions beyond the Van Allen belts, for example trips of two weeks to the Moon.

Have a read of the illuminating article linked to in Peter's post, especially the section on radiation.

[Evan Burton]

Yet I'm suppossed to know if the report had been submitted when APPARENTLY NASA doesn't even know if it was or not ? ... This discussion, as most of the discussions with Craig and the rest of you , has now become a ridiculous waste of my time.

Here's the bottom line .... Tom Baron wrote a 55 page report condeming NASA'S incompetence concering the Apollo Program ... He either submitted a 500 page report , or he didn't ( depending on which NASA source you read ) and after he and his family "committed suicide" by being run over by a train, his 500 PAGE REPORT MAGICALLY DISAPPEARED AND WAS NEVER TO BE SEEN AGAIN .

Whether it had been submitted or whether he was still in the process of writing it is hardly the point ! ... The point is the FACT that is was never seen after he was so convienantly killed one week after he testified in front of the commitee that Apollo was in such a shambles that NASA would never safely get a manned craft to the Moon in the near future .

I have often seen things quoted by a department which was totally at odds with what another department said.

Okay, because I do not have concrete evidence of the report being submitted, I am prepared to say this is a point of contention.

Since you are a US citizen, why don't you contact the government and confirm whether or not the report was actually lodged? It is a lot easier for you to do so than me.

Now - he did, however, testify before the committee. He contradicted himself when he said that they could go to the moon, and they couldn't go to the moon. You, yourself, in your quote above brought up the operative word: SAFELY. Perhaps at the time they could NOT have done it without loss of life. They certainly had to spend time & resources redesigning the CM, many of the changes brought about because of what Mr Baron revealed.

So again - what was so crippling? If the programme was being "faked", why didn't he say so IN FRONT OF THE COMMITTEE, where it would have been recorded, thereby ensuring his safety as a witness?

You'd have us believe that he wrote a report detailing all the faults of the system, and then added at the end "oh, by the way, the whole thing is being faked"?

[Duane Daman]

So again - what was so crippling? If the programme was being "faked", why didn't he say so IN FRONT OF THE COMMITTEE, where it would have been recorded, thereby ensuring his safety as a witness?

You'd have us believe that he wrote a report detailing all the faults of the system, and then added at the end "oh, by the way, the whole thing is being faked"?

Where did Baron ever say it was faked ? .... and where did I ever say that he said that or even implied that ? ...You certainly do have a real talent for twisting other people's words around .

What Baron claimed quite clearly was that the Apollo program was in such a shambles that he didn't believe that NASA would be able to develope a craft that would have the ability to safely land a manned mission on the Moon in the near future ... When the committe pressed him about this, they asked him if they would EVER have a shot of landing men on the Moon and he said yes, he thought so, but not in the near future with the type of equipment they were developing at that time.

Edited February 12, 2008 by Duane Daman

[Evan Burton]

Mr. TEAGUE: Mr. Baron, if things were really as bad as you pictured them by the things that, you have said to this committee in your report, do you believe we would ever have gotten a shot off to the moon? Do you think we ever would have had one successful shot?

Mr. BARON: Certainly, sir.

Mr. TEAGUE: With the conditions you pictured here, do you think we could be successful in any of our shots?

Mr. BARON: No, sir. No, sir. I don't think so.

He clearly contradicts himself.

So if Baron was not saying the thing was faked, he had at least one report submitted, he testified before the panel, and action was taken on most of the claims... why would anyone want him dead? There is no reason. It's totally illogical.

[Duane Daman]

He clearly contradicts himself.

He only contradicted himself when the committee kept pushing him for a different answer and asked him if he thought that they would ever have a shot of going to the Moon and he said "certainly, sir" ..... As for them getting there soon, using the type of technology they were develping at that time, he clearly said no.

So if Baron was not saying the thing was faked, he had at least one report submitted, he testified before the panel, and action was taken on most of the claims... why would anyone want him dead? There is no reason. It's totally illogical.

Why would they want him dead ? .... I do believe you have already answered that question in your quote above.

Mr. TEAGUE: With the conditions you pictured here, do you think we could be successful in any of our shots?

Mr. BARON: No, sir. No, sir. I don't think so.

[Evan Burton]

Yes Duane. Whatever you say.

[Duane Daman]

Yes Duane. Whatever you say.

Yes .... This one is a tad difficult to "debunk" isn't it ? ... I'm happy to see that you finally agree with me about something though ... Or is your reason for dropping this subject maybe the hope that this thread will disappear to the back pages and be forgotten ?

Out of sight, out of mind ... That tactic seems to work well on most discussion forums .

[Dave Greer]

Yes Duane. Whatever you say.

Yes .... This one is a tad difficult to "debunk" isn't it ? ... I'm happy to see that you finally agree with me about something though ... Or is your reason for dropping this subject maybe the hope that this thread will disappear to the back pages and be forgotten ?

Out of sight, out of mind ... That tactic seems to work well on most discussion forums .

As you have a bee on your bonnet about this, how about stumping up some empirical evidence to support your claims re radiation, namely (1) the Van Allen belts being impassable to humans in an Apollo CM, (2) gamma radiation on the lunar surface being so strong that it would preclude astronaut EVAs, and (3) Galactic Cosmic Radiation being too high for a 2 week mission to the moon.

[Duane Daman]

As you have a bee on your bonnet about this, how about stumping up some empirical evidence to support your claims re radiation,

As you can see from my reply to Evan , that the "bee up my bonnet" ( cute expression ) is not the radiation issue, which NASA appears to have covered very nicely on almost every web site on the internet ( or as Bush calls them , "the internets ") but rather the subject of Whistle-Blower Tom Baron's highly suspicious and untimely death, one week after testifying before NASA's commitee that the Apollo Program didn't have a snowballs chance in hell of ever safely landing a manned lunar module on the Moon .

[Dave Greer]

As you have a bee on your bonnet about this, how about stumping up some empirical evidence to support your claims re radiation,

As you can see from my reply to Evan , that the "bee up my bonnet" ( cute expression ) is not the radiation issue, which NASA appears to have covered very nicely on almost every web site on the internet ( or as Bush calls them , "the internets ") but rather the subject of Whistle-Blower Tom Baron's highly suspicious and untimely death, one week after testifying before NASA's commitee that the Apollo Program didn't have a snowballs chance in hell of ever safely landing a manned lunar module on the Moon .

I spelt it wrong - it should have been "bee in your bonnet".

Can I take it that since you don't have any evidence to back up your claims about the radiation issue, you withdraw the claim about radiation being an Apollo showstopper? Or was I right in my assumption that you need to believe radiation is a showstopper in order to prop up the hoax theory?

[Duane Daman]

I thought the expression was "Bee up your bonnet" ... Maybe it's different in the UK from the States .... Either way, you did misquote that cute cliche'.

Can I take it that since you don't have any evidence to back up your claims about the radiation issue, you withdraw the claim about radiation being an Apollo showstopper? Or was I right in my assumption that you need to believe radiation is a showstopper in order to prop up the hoax theory?

No, I haven't withdraw the claim ... I just haven't been able to find any "empirical " figures yet that show how dangerous the belts really are ... And in trying to do so, I managed to open up a few web sites promising to supply that evidence, which sent some pretty nasty viruses into my PC .... 18 of them to be exact, and my virus protection server still can't figure out how to delete the remaining high alert trojan ... Those NASA boys sure do play rough, don't they ?

But even if I never find the empirical evidence on the internet, about the dangers of the Van Allen belts, the subject of the intense dangers of deep space radiation is not needed to "prop up the hoax theory" ... The " hoax theory" is doing just fine with all of the other evidence that has been discovered and uncovered ... Some of it uncovered very recently, in fact .

The radiation showstopper will be quite evident with the planned future manned missions, unless NASA can figure out a way to develope the proper shielding to go "back to the Moon" by 2020.

[Evan Burton]

Gee - how about that. Ask to provide evidence to support claims, and the old "dog at my homework" trick comes up.