Comments by "MRA" (@yassassin6425) on "Voice of America" channel.

  1. Firstly, the shuttle was a totally different programme to Apollo and did not even enter the Van Allen Belts. Secondly, the temperatures that you refer to are merely an indication of how excited molecules are in a given state. Since the thermosphere is essentially the vacuum of space there is no air temperature. As explained, temperature is essentially a measurement of how excited air molecules are. The higher the temperature, the more frenzied molecules become and the more they bounce off each other-and this interaction between particles is what creates heat. Cislunar space is virtually a vacuum. There are very few particles, and what particles are present are spaced far apart. This is why the temperature that you identify is irrelevant here. Not sure why it is necessary to explain this - it's such basic and fundamental high school physics. Regarding the radiation of the Van Allen Belts, if you have a shred of honesty, introspection and integrity, ask yourself the following questions: 1/ How much do I genuinely know about the Van Allen Belts? - their shape extent and distribution? Energies and intensity? Type of radiation? 2/ What do I actually understand by alpha and beta particle radiation and shielding against it? 3/ What have I understood about the actual structure of the Command Module and the materials that it was fashioned from? 4/ What have I learnt about the trajectories flown by each of the Apollo missions and their passage through the belts? 5/ What do I know about what James Van Allen himself have to say about the belts and the Apollo missions? 6/ What have I done to challenge my preconceptions and the claims made by online conspiracy theorists in relation to the VABs? If the answer to these questions is nothing, then obtaining the answers will prevent you from posting such ignorant questions on a public comments section with no actual prior knowledge about the subject.
    18
  2. 11
  3. 9
  4. 9
  5. 8
  6. 5
  7. 5
  8. 5
  9. 4
  10. 4
  11. 4
  12. 4
  13. 4
  14. 4
  15. 4
  16. 3
  17. "It's a shame that all world leaders are in cahoots." Are they? Tell that to Volodymyr Zelenskyy and Vladimir Putin, or Benjamin Netanyahu and Ali Khamenei. "The people with critical thinking know full well we've never been to the moon." Whilst entire scientific disciplines; physics, mathematics, geology, branches of science such as astrophysics, astronomy, related specialist fields including rocketry, aerospace engineering, orbital mechanics and petrology - in short, all comprising highly skilled expertise, knowledge and individuals substantially more informed, accomplished and clever than a random conspiracy believer on the comments section of You Tube, do not? Ok then. Incidentally, watching crap online conspiracy videos is the diametric opposite of 'critical thinking'. "I've not mentioned this before" Do you really think that you're that important or that the rational world gives two shits about your personal incredulity? You're nothing more that an insignificant self-aggrandising nobody on the comments section of a video entertainment platform afflicted by gross illusory superiority and a chronic case of Dunning Kruger syndrome. "but that moon dust must be super heavy, while the astro nots were falling around and jumping and bouncing around they kicked up dust or sand that was not affected by the lower gravitation, it fell like sand at the beach while the astro nots were 'seemingly' relatively weightless" Of course it was affected by the lunar gravitation, which is why it fell back to the surface. On the moon, the dust is just like a projectile motion. It goes up and it comes right down which is why there are no dust trails left by the lunar rover. It fell at the same rate of any other object but not necessarily at the same trajectory of the astronauts. Apollo 15's Dave Scott demonstrated that in the absence of air resistance a feather fell at the same rate as his geology hammer, as Galileo had concluded hundreds of years before - all objects released together fall at the same rate regardless of mass. This is precisely what we observe in the footage. "what is probably the funniest part of this whole thing is people still believing anyone ever went to the moon" Incorrect. What is "the funniest part of this whole thing" is people with zero knowledge about the topic gullibly consuming and regurgitating junk online conspiracy theory in the belief that they are informed and clever whilst deriding experts that are infinitely more accomplished than themselves. Stick to making your crap comedy skits son.
    3
  18. 3
  19. 3
  20. 3
  21. 3
  22. 2
  23. 2
  24. 2
  25. 2
  26. 2
  27. 2
  28. 2
  29. 2
  30. 2
  31. 2
  32. 2
  33. 2
  34. 2
  35. 2
  36. 2
  37. 2
  38. 2
  39. 2
  40. 2
  41. 2
  42. 2
  43. 2
  44. 1
  45. 1
  46. 1
  47. 1
  48. 1
  49. "I think their problem is they can’t figure out how we went through the van Allen belt" Firstly, there are two belts, with a third that is transitory. You need to understand that these are toroidal diffuse volumes around the Earth's equator within which radiation levels are elevated by the planet's magnetic field trapping charged particles from the sun. The inner torus is populated by energetic protons which they passed through in mere minutes and against which the hull of the CM was an effective shield. The hull of an Apollo command module rated 7 to 8 g/cm2. The Apollo craft took an hour and a half to traverse the more extensive outer torus but this region has mainly low energy electrons and so was less of a concern to mission planners. Also the inclination of the trajectory being in the plane of the Moon's orbit avoided the strongest regions of the belts near the equator. When NASA commenced its lunar spaceflight program, its scientists already knew about the belts and their spatial and energy distribution. Electrons below about 1 MeV were unlikely to be dangerous, as were protons below 10 MeV. For example, a proton with an energy of 3 MeV could penetrate about 6 mm of aluminium (a typical spacecraft material) whereas one of 100 MeV could penetrate up to 40 mm. So engineers fashioned shielding that consisted of a spacecraft hull and all the instrumentation lining the walls. Further, knowing the belts’ absence above the poles, the altitude of the lower edge of the inner belt being 600 km (well above the LEO) and the location of the South Atlantic anomaly, where doses are at a high 40 mrads/day at an altitude of 210 km allowed NASA to design the Apollo translunar injection (TLI) orbit in a way that the spacecraft would avoid the belts’ most dangerous parts. This was all understood in the early 1960s. To quote James Van Allen directly: "The outbound and inbound trajectories of the Apollo spacecraft cut through the outer portions of the inner belt and because of their high speed spent only about 15 minutes in traversing the region and less than 2 hours in traversing the much less penetrating radiation in the outer radiation belt. The resulting radiation exposure for the round trip was less than 1% of a fatal dosage – a very minor risk among the far greater other risks of such flights. I made such estimates in the early 1960s and so informed NASA engineers who were planning the Apollo flights. These estimates are still reliable." "nasa’s space station astronauts keep saying they are trying to figure out how to get through the dangerous radiation without damaging equipment or killing them but will have the answer soon." No 'space station astronaut' has said anything of the sort. Terry Virts and Don Pettit discussed the loss of a heavy lift capability following the cancellation of Apollo. Also, in 2014, prior to the test flight of the (then) new Orion capsule, engineer Kelly Smith in a video called 'Orion: Trial by Fire" discussed the challenges posed by radiation to the sensitive electronics and systems that are used in spacecraft today in comparison to the radiation hard Apollo spacecraft. Stop listening to junk online conspiracy theorists and
    1
  50. 1