Russia & India to send joint manned mission to Moon

"Pete" wrote in message news:Lydtb.7118 ok...I'll play..

8. Analysis of the radiation aspect, and why shielding could or could not
have mattered, and why or why not the Apollo craft could not have been
shielded enough to ensure survival. (Simply saying "the technology wasn't
good enough" is not enough. Rad levels aloft, time, then-current material
science all must be included in this analysis).

Before we even go there, we have to answer why there was a moon race
in the first place if radiation were an insurmountable obstacle. Both
the US and the Soviet Union launched numerous interplanetary and lunar
probes long before any manned lunar launchs evertook place. Many of
the US probe experiments were run by university researchers, IIRC.
These people would be fully cognizant of the
interplanetary environment.

The Soviets would know based on the data from their activities and
would not have participated in the moon race. They launched probes
specifically to investigate the lunar radiation environment, including
(but not limited to):

LUNA 1 ('59) - Carried geiger counter, scintillation counter
LUNA 2 {'59) - Carried geiger counter, scintillation counter
LUNA 3 ('59) - Carried cosmic ray detector
ZOND 3 ('65) - Carried gas-discharge & scintillation detectors
LUNA 10 ('66) - Carried gamma ray spectrometer
LUNA 11 ('66) - Measured hard particulate radiation near moon
LUNA 12 ('66) - Measured hard particulate radiation near moon
LUNA 13 ('66) - Measured cosmic ray reflectivity of surface
LUNA 14 ('68) - Measured solar charged particles & cosmic radiation
ZOND 5 ('68) - Flyby carrying turtles, flies, worms, seeds, bacteria
ZOND 6 {'68} - Carried cosmic ray detectors, biological payload
ZOND 7 ('69)
ZOND 8 ('70)
LUNA 16 ('70) - Returned soil samples, carried radiation instruments
LUNA 20 ('72) - Returned soil samples
LUNA 24 ('76) - Returned soil samples

Many more lunar & planetary probes were launched, but I'm only
including the ones I found immediately that discuss measuring the
radiation environment. In fact, not only was the lunar radiation
environment well known in the early
60's , it was known well enough early enough for both sides to have
avoided ever having a moon race in the first place. Be rather
impossible for Zond 5 to have flown biologicals if the radiation level
were too high, eh?

By this we can infer one of two possibilities:
1. Either both the Soviets and the Americans were in on a deception
(unlikely)
2. The lunar radiation environment was not a significant impediment
to a manned lunar landing (likely)

The theory that the US would be pull over a hoax on the Soviets on
this is falsifiable on this issue.

John Beadles wrote:
The trend is that
they are willing to disregard or misrepresent the available evidence
in favor of the landings, but are totally unable to present ANY
evidence supporting their own theories. A moon hoax proponent with a
valid argument should be able to show positive proof showing how the
hoax was executed. I was curious to see if you were going to have
anything original, but no, no luck.

In any case, this particular example is directly falsifiable
....snipped...

John -

You're missing the point.

The problem with Michael and all the other crypto-conspiracists is
nothing they present is subject to being falsifiable; they don't use the
rules of scientific evidence and logic.

They are right. Everyone else is wrong. If you try and demonstrate they
are wrong by bringing up "falsifiable", they will either ignore your
facts and evidence, claim it's not true, or claim you're part of the
cover-up.

They're not working on a logical level, and nothing you can ever so or
do will convince them otherwise.

If you want proof, just ask Michael (or any other person of his type)
exactly what evidence, if presented, they would accept as proof they
were wrong. See what response you get. And even if on the off chance
they do provide such a list, and you demonstrate anything on the list to
them, they will then recant and find a reason to not accept that, either.

Just view it as the Internet equivalent of tilting at windmills.

A Reformed Tilter

"John Beadles" wrote in message
om...
"Pete" wrote in message news:Lydtb.7118 ok...I'll
play..

8. Analysis of the radiation aspect, and why shielding could or could
not
have mattered, and why or why not the Apollo craft could not have been
shielded enough to ensure survival. (Simply saying "the technology
wasn't
good enough" is not enough. Rad levels aloft, time, then-current
material
science all must be included in this analysis).

Before we even go there, we have to answer why there was a moon race
in the first place if radiation were an insurmountable obstacle. Both
the US and the Soviet Union launched numerous interplanetary and lunar
probes long before any manned lunar launchs evertook place. Many of
the US probe experiments were run by university researchers, IIRC.
These people would be fully cognizant of the
interplanetary environment.

The Soviets would know based on the data from their activities and
would not have participated in the moon race. They launched probes
specifically to investigate the lunar radiation environment, including
(but not limited to):

LUNA 1 ('59) - Carried geiger counter, scintillation counter
LUNA 2 {'59) - Carried geiger counter, scintillation counter
LUNA 3 ('59) - Carried cosmic ray detector
ZOND 3 ('65) - Carried gas-discharge & scintillation detectors
LUNA 10 ('66) - Carried gamma ray spectrometer
LUNA 11 ('66) - Measured hard particulate radiation near moon
LUNA 12 ('66) - Measured hard particulate radiation near moon
LUNA 13 ('66) - Measured cosmic ray reflectivity of surface
LUNA 14 ('68) - Measured solar charged particles & cosmic radiation
ZOND 5 ('68) - Flyby carrying turtles, flies, worms, seeds, bacteria
ZOND 6 {'68} - Carried cosmic ray detectors, biological payload
ZOND 7 ('69)
ZOND 8 ('70)
LUNA 16 ('70) - Returned soil samples, carried radiation instruments
LUNA 20 ('72) - Returned soil samples
LUNA 24 ('76) - Returned soil samples

Many more lunar & planetary probes were launched, but I'm only
including the ones I found immediately that discuss measuring the
radiation environment. In fact, not only was the lunar radiation
environment well known in the early
60's , it was known well enough early enough for both sides to have
avoided ever having a moon race in the first place. Be rather
impossible for Zond 5 to have flown biologicals if the radiation level
were too high, eh?

By this we can infer one of two possibilities:
1. Either both the Soviets and the Americans were in on a deception
(unlikely)
2. The lunar radiation environment was not a significant impediment
to a manned lunar landing (likely)

The theory that the US would be pull over a hoax on the Soviets on
this is falsifiable on this issue.

Curiously, you find this argument, that the technology
of the time wasn't advanced enough to make the flight,
but you never hear the even more obvious counter
argument that the audio-visual technology of the time
wasn't good enough to fake it, and didn't become so
until the last five to eight years.
--
Jack

(John Beadles) wrote in message . com...
(Michael Petukhov) wrote in message . com...
(John Beadles) wrote in message . com...
...skipped

I hope you can forgive me for skipping lots of nonrelated crap above

When was
it launched?

A good question. I do not know. There were several official NASA
automatic and "manned" Moon missions. In fact one successful
landing of automatic probe with rebroadcaster was enough to
for the Appolo program. BTW this explains rate of success for Appolo
missions. Given Appolo 13 was a sort intertaining TV program
the rate of success was 100%. If they had to land rebroadcaster
every time there would be much less than that.

Yes, there were several such missions, but I fail to see how one such
successful one would have sufficed to fake the rest. How could this be
done? Please give me some detail so we can look for fingerprints of it
actually happening.

Kidding? How I can give you details? I can give you a prompt only.

I would send Radio/TV signal in the way:

Huston - Studio in Nevada - Moon rebroadcaster - Huston

The funny side that even time delays would be just fine
not to speak that the signal does come from the moon.
The later is for radio enthusiasts all over the world.

Hm... tell me the tue. this is what you wanted to ambush
me on? Right? Little naive boy...


Ambush you? Not at all.

Hm. little lie create big distrust.

Rather, it's part of a pet project of mine.
I've been reviewing the arguments of the "Moon landings were a hoax"
proponents and have identified a general trend. The trend is that
they are willing to disregard or misrepresent the available evidence
in favor of the landings, but are totally unable to present ANY
evidence supporting their own theories. A moon hoax proponent with a
valid argument should be able to show positive proof showing how the
hoax was executed. I was curious to see if you were going to have
anything original, but no, no luck.

I disagree. of course they cannot. Have you seen Copperfield
who has stolen a train. Can you present exactly how he did all
that in complete details? But we know it was a trick. The same
with NASA moon landing. Ask yourself why do you believe NASA
could land man on the moon? Two reasons mainly 1) NASA, a big
government organization told you that. 2) you have seen some
movies on TV. That's all basis for that believe. If you stop
blind believing in NASA words and start asking your own
questions (about space radiation protection for beginning)
you may immideately find your own contra argument.

Also if you are a fair thinker you must agree dispite of
all NASA "evidences" only one credible evidence that it was
indeed faked will crash all the NASA system of Moon landing
arguments. Only one is enough to crash all this mountings of
lie.


In any case, this particular example is directly falsifiable in that
forign nationals were able to track the spacecraft in flight, and
signals heard from the vicinity of the moon were doppler shifted, not
possible with a stationary transmitter. A previously landed moon
probe would not have been sufficient.

My mistake, I forgot about those. Ok I cancel my claim that only one
transmitter would be enough to fake all Apollo missions. Two transmitters
per mission was necessary. Are you satisfied?

See
http://www.svengrahn.pp.se/trackind/...7/APOLLO17.htm for an
example.

It is also easy to show that the responses between the flight crew and
ground control did not show the time delay that would be present if
there was a voice relay from the ground to the moon and back.

Easy? Show please. It is easy to show the opposite.
it did, using of course the scheme presented.

If the
signal were the result of a recording from a lunar bound lander, the
ground controllers would have had to have previously prepared scripts,
therefor all the ground controllers would have had to be in on it.

Who said it was "recording from a lunar bound lander". Are you prefer
to dispute with your own false arguments, as many NASA defenders like
so much? Frankly I think than many so called moon hoax sites
in internet full of false arguments are sponsored by NASA. It is easy
to fight with their own false claims and sink the grains of true
in the seas of false claims and contra claims.

As for communications I think it was life between studio and mainly
unaware personnel in Huston control center but the signal went via
lunar trasmitters (including one installed in Apollo return module).
That's scheme correctly reproduce all variable delay times, doppler
shifts, indepedent tracking and so on and so far.

Michael

"Pete" wrote in message ...
"Michael Petukhov" wrote

You asked the question wrong.
Of course he has 'evidence'.

It should have been asked:
"Do you have any *credible* evidence at all that the U.S. did not in
fact
land men on the moon?"..."

Pete

No, it should have been asked:
"Do you have any *credible for Pete* evidence at all that the U.S.
did not in fact land men on the moon?"..."

The answer is no nobody can have it. Right? Tell us what kind
of hypotetical evidence you would accept as credible enough.
Just curiosity.

ok...I'll play..
Just a few, in no particular order:

1. Memos outlining (or even hinting at) the coverup.

Hinting? nice crediable evidence! I can predict what
would happend with Neal if he starts hinting he did not
went on the moon. He would be declared as mad person.

2. Unambiguous pictures (and location) of the 'fake moon' soundstage.

Anyone can do it. Not a crediable evidence.

3. Timed telemetry data, outlining a non-delay in signal.

The scheme with moon radio trasmitter produces aboslutely
correct delays.

4. Verified (lie detector?) interviews with 1 member of this coverup.

What?

5. Analysis of the 'fake moon rocks', showing they are not of lunar origin.

What if it is of lunar origin meteorites.

6. Location of (pictures would help) the mythical alternate Saturn V launch
site you mention.

Nobody suggested including me an alternate Saturn V launch site. All can be
launched in official one in official times.


7. Why the fUSSR did not (has not) brought this coverup into the fore.

Why it should? In any case is not a credible evidence.

8. Analysis of the radiation aspect, and why shielding could or could not
have mattered, and why or why not the Apollo craft could not have been
shielded enough to ensure survival. (Simply saying "the technology wasn't
good enough" is not enough. Rad levels aloft, time, then-current material
science all must be included in this analysis).

I agree. That's a good point. Why would not you do that kind of analysis
for yourself. It is not so difficult and I can point you to a basic data
if you want. The funny side is that NASA claimed that such protection
was not necessary.


9. Finally, a detailed analysis of why it *could not* have been done with
the technology of the era. Please include all aspects of the flight. More
detail is better.

Do you really hope get all this from me? No. you have to find out all
this stuff on your own.


Things along that line. Easy stuff. You'll have at least a couple of those
right away, correct?

I have many things on that matters (two big files already) but I do not
want to repeat it over and over again. All that was in my view
serious enough was discussed in this NG. So you can easily find out
with Google search engine if you want.

I would suggest also to look very carefully at NASA official moon
movies. Particualrly ones with rover driving. in many there
are dust clouds clearly indicating presence of an atmosphere.
sometimes it is also very visible when astranauts do very
energetic moves. although it does not mean that atmosphere was
always present.

Michael

Pete

(George William Herbert) wrote in message ...
Michael Petukhov wrote:
[...]
The funny side that even time delays would be just fine
not to speak that the signal does come from the moon.
The later is for radio enthusiasts all over the world.

Hm... tell me the tue. this is what you wanted to ambush
me on? Right? Little naive boy...

So, would you mind explaining from the start for those of
us who missed your earlier postings, what makes you think
that this was faked at all?


This is very big field full of false claims and contra claims.
I cannot give you a complete list but in my view there
are lots of very strange things in NASA official pictures
and particualrly in movies (wrong shadows, untouched dust
directly under LM engine, clouds of dust from under rover
wheels etc.), strange elements of LM design like
inward opening hatch, space and van-allen belts radiation
which was largerly ignored etc.

On radiation you can start with:

http://guthvenus.tripod.com/space-radiation.htm

it has references on valid nasa documents and measuremrnts.

As for the pictures there are many sites on internet.
Try "moon hoax" you would have tons of that with pictures
refernces etc. Both pro and contra, false and true.
So be careful you can be mislead.

Michael


-george william herbert

(John Beadles) wrote in message . com...
"Pete" wrote in message news:Lydtb.7118 ok...I'll play..

8. Analysis of the radiation aspect, and why shielding could or could not
have mattered, and why or why not the Apollo craft could not have been
shielded enough to ensure survival. (Simply saying "the technology wasn't
good enough" is not enough. Rad levels aloft, time, then-current material
science all must be included in this analysis).

Before we even go there, we have to answer why there was a moon race
in the first place if radiation were an insurmountable obstacle. Both
the US and the Soviet Union launched numerous interplanetary and lunar
probes long before any manned lunar launchs evertook place. Many of
the US probe experiments were run by university researchers, IIRC.
These people would be fully cognizant of the
interplanetary environment.

I do not think there were really complete data on that matters by 61
when US president declared moon landing goals. By 69 there were certainly
lots of valid data particularly on van-allen belts. But by that time
it seems for so many in US it was already too late to say "sorry it was
my mistake".



The Soviets would know based on the data from their activities and
would not have participated in the moon race. They launched probes
specifically to investigate the lunar radiation environment, including
(but not limited to):

LUNA 1 ('59) - Carried geiger counter, scintillation counter
LUNA 2 {'59) - Carried geiger counter, scintillation counter
LUNA 3 ('59) - Carried cosmic ray detector
ZOND 3 ('65) - Carried gas-discharge & scintillation detectors
LUNA 10 ('66) - Carried gamma ray spectrometer
LUNA 11 ('66) - Measured hard particulate radiation near moon
LUNA 12 ('66) - Measured hard particulate radiation near moon
LUNA 13 ('66) - Measured cosmic ray reflectivity of surface
LUNA 14 ('68) - Measured solar charged particles & cosmic radiation
ZOND 5 ('68) - Flyby carrying turtles, flies, worms, seeds, bacteria
ZOND 6 {'68} - Carried cosmic ray detectors, biological payload
ZOND 7 ('69)
ZOND 8 ('70)
LUNA 16 ('70) - Returned soil samples, carried radiation instruments
LUNA 20 ('72) - Returned soil samples
LUNA 24 ('76) - Returned soil samples

Many more lunar & planetary probes were launched, but I'm only
including the ones I found immediately that discuss measuring the
radiation environment. In fact, not only was the lunar radiation
environment well known in the early
60's , it was known well enough early enough for both sides to have
avoided ever having a moon race in the first place. Be rather
impossible for Zond 5 to have flown biologicals if the radiation level
were too high, eh?

As for moon race with USSR. There was very similar manned
moon program in USSR officially opened until 72-73 I think.
however it was never a priority in USSR. Mainly it was Korolev
personal business. It was receiving some very limited funding only
when he was alive in 64-66. Automatic and H1 booster is a different
story. it was priority. korolev did plan to use H1 for the manned
moon flight, but officially H1 was intented to launch heavy
military station in LEO.

However I have to admit designs (unfinished thought) for CM/LM in
USSR were pretty ideologically similar to that in US. It is puzzle
to me why they could believe that **** can be used to fly to moon
and return. The guys here involved in it still hesitate to tell us
how and why in full details.



By this we can infer one of two possibilities:
1. Either both the Soviets and the Americans were in on a deception
(unlikely)

Impossible.

2. The lunar radiation environment was not a significant impediment
to a manned lunar landing (likely)

This is what NASA official position. However today there are
many crediable data including from NASA itself that this is not the case.
See for instance:

http://guthvenus.tripod.com/space-radiation.htm

and referencies in it.


The theory that the US would be pull over a hoax on the Soviets on
this is falsifiable on this issue.

In my taste this theory is better grounded than theory that
NASA landed on the moon. However practice will show who
was right and wrong.

Michael

"J.T. McDaniel" wrote in message ink.net...
"John Beadles" wrote in message
om...
"Pete" wrote in message news:Lydtb.7118 ok...I'll
play..

8. Analysis of the radiation aspect, and why shielding could or could
not
have mattered, and why or why not the Apollo craft could not have been
shielded enough to ensure survival. (Simply saying "the technology
wasn't
good enough" is not enough. Rad levels aloft, time, then-current
material
science all must be included in this analysis).

Before we even go there, we have to answer why there was a moon race
in the first place if radiation were an insurmountable obstacle. Both
the US and the Soviet Union launched numerous interplanetary and lunar
probes long before any manned lunar launchs evertook place. Many of
the US probe experiments were run by university researchers, IIRC.
These people would be fully cognizant of the
interplanetary environment.

The Soviets would know based on the data from their activities and
would not have participated in the moon race. They launched probes
specifically to investigate the lunar radiation environment, including
(but not limited to):

LUNA 1 ('59) - Carried geiger counter, scintillation counter
LUNA 2 {'59) - Carried geiger counter, scintillation counter
LUNA 3 ('59) - Carried cosmic ray detector
ZOND 3 ('65) - Carried gas-discharge & scintillation detectors
LUNA 10 ('66) - Carried gamma ray spectrometer
LUNA 11 ('66) - Measured hard particulate radiation near moon
LUNA 12 ('66) - Measured hard particulate radiation near moon
LUNA 13 ('66) - Measured cosmic ray reflectivity of surface
LUNA 14 ('68) - Measured solar charged particles & cosmic radiation
ZOND 5 ('68) - Flyby carrying turtles, flies, worms, seeds, bacteria
ZOND 6 {'68} - Carried cosmic ray detectors, biological payload
ZOND 7 ('69)
ZOND 8 ('70)
LUNA 16 ('70) - Returned soil samples, carried radiation instruments
LUNA 20 ('72) - Returned soil samples
LUNA 24 ('76) - Returned soil samples

Many more lunar & planetary probes were launched, but I'm only
including the ones I found immediately that discuss measuring the
radiation environment. In fact, not only was the lunar radiation
environment well known in the early
60's , it was known well enough early enough for both sides to have
avoided ever having a moon race in the first place. Be rather
impossible for Zond 5 to have flown biologicals if the radiation level
were too high, eh?

By this we can infer one of two possibilities:
1. Either both the Soviets and the Americans were in on a deception
(unlikely)
2. The lunar radiation environment was not a significant impediment
to a manned lunar landing (likely)

The theory that the US would be pull over a hoax on the Soviets on
this is falsifiable on this issue.

Curiously, you find this argument, that the technology
of the time wasn't advanced enough to make the flight,
but you never hear the even more obvious counter
argument that the audio-visual technology of the time
wasn't good enough to fake it, and didn't become so
until the last five to eight years.

Exactly! That's why it is so easy to find anomalies
in almost all NASA moon video and photo materials.

Michael

"Michael Petukhov" wrote in message
m...
(John Beadles) wrote in message
. com...
"Pete" wrote in message news:Lydtb.7118 ok...I'll
play..


As for moon race with USSR. There was very similar manned
moon program in USSR officially opened until 72-73 I think.
however it was never a priority in USSR. Mainly it was Korolev
personal business. It was receiving some very limited funding only
when he was alive in 64-66. Automatic and H1 booster is a different
story. it was priority. korolev did plan to use H1 for the manned
moon flight, but officially H1 was intented to launch heavy
military station in LEO.


Why would he do so if radiation made such a flight impossible ?

Why would the Soviet Academy of Sciences back his mission ?

Why did the efforts continue for several years after the death
of Korolev ?

However I have to admit designs (unfinished thought) for CM/LM in
USSR were pretty ideologically similar to that in US. It is puzzle
to me why they could believe that **** can be used to fly to moon
and return. The guys here involved in it still hesitate to tell us
how and why in full details.


Well Korolev is dead which would make his testifying
rather difficult but plenty but Vasili Mishin, gave a long interview to
Spaceflight vol.32p.104-106 (1990) and Alexander Yasinsky
wrote an article entitled "The N-1 Rocket Programme."

There's also a nice article in Pravda available on line in English
and Russian at

http://english.pravda.ru/main/18/90/363/10188_moon.html

Keith

"Michael Petukhov" wrote in message
om...
"Pete" wrote in message
...
"Michael Petukhov" wrote


Hinting? nice crediable evidence! I can predict what
would happend with Neal if he starts hinting he did not
went on the moon. He would be declared as mad person.


Not really, he could do so from anywhere on the planet and
make a fortune selling his story.

Keith