h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

I have to say that, sad as it is, I do believe the Moon shots were faked.
It is not something I want to be true, but huge amounts of doubt arise from the TV documentaries recently reshown (a few months ago anyway here in the UK).
For me the most compelling argument is the radiation factor. Regardless of how quickly the space craft was moving, the time apparently spent withing the Radiation Belts would have been sufficient to cause severe radiation poisoning and to have destroyed the films on board. And don't forget it wasn't just on the way out but the return journey as well that gave them a rad dose.
All the other doubting evidence adds to this one argument, but personally this is the clincher.
Lack of radiation shielding on the moon craft really makes me believe they were all faked.
Bob_Long

Hi there, I'd have to disagree.
I assume that the program to which you refer was the infamous Fox Production, 'Did We Really go to the Moon' shown a year or so ago in the UK. None of the evidence given in the program stands up to scrutiny and their arguments concerning 'Radiation' is really a non starter trading on the fear and misunderstanding of what radiation is. Hence no doubt, their inappropriate use of old WW2 footage of Hiroshima/Nagasaki casualties and its association with atomic weapons.
Hoax proponents consistently exaggerate the amount and the effects of radiation in space and their argument relies on it being taken to be an insurmountable barrier to space flight.
NASA was rightly concerned about the amount of radiation that would be experienced by their Astronauts but they didn't see it as an insurmountable problem. They discovered the Van Allen belts, they quantified the amount and type of radiation and they took precautions against it, including providing shielding through the construction of the spacecraft, which didn't have to be a couple of meters of lead, so beloved of hoax proponents.
The radiation dosage was minimal for the time spent within the Van Allen belts, which was about four hours either way and amounted to personal dosages of about 2 Rem. Each of the Astronauts was supplied with a personal dosimeter and a regular read out was kept.
A.M.

Thanks for the reply.
Yes I was referring to the TV documentary you mentioned.
But this is something which was extant long before that programme.
The one thing I would love to do is find some sort of reliable source of information quantifying the levels and types of radiation in the Van Allen belts. And not just some tables issued by NASA in support of their moonshot claims!
Some sort of independant verification, if you like.
I am just naturally suspicious and the current world space programme, to me, is indicative of a failure to pursue the goals, which is so very "human" and "political" at the same time. It is suspicious because it seems to provide backing to the thought that it is too dangerous to really send astronauts out there, and so the programme was closed down to prevent the truth from being discovered.
Sorry if I am rehashing things again, but I am a great sci-fi believer and would dearly LOVE to believe we did get there (the moon!) but because we've got no further, find it hard to believe we got that first great step.
Bob Long

Yep, I enjoy some sci-fi too, but I prefer sci-fact, which I find more believable

I don't know of any currently available source of the independent information you seek that doesn't have its origins within NASA/USA. but you could do worse than here: http://www.clavius.org/

There are a few things that you may wish to consider though.

The USSR were quite capable of tracking the Apollo spacecraft, as indeed were other nations. They knew where they were and how they got there and also had their own data on the prevailing radiation conditions. They had, after all, sent the first living organisms to the moon (Zond 5) and retrieved them without any ill effects. Given the political climate of the time, the Soviets would certainly have welcomed a chance to embarrass the Americans if they thought that they were claiming to have carried out an impossible feat. They did no such thing, In fact they congratulated the USA when the first moon landing was accomplished.

The information provided by NASA, which is the world-wide standard, has/is used by commercial satellite manufacturers to 'harden' the protection against radiation provided in the manufacture of their equipment. Satellites currently flying within the radiation belts would fail as electronic equipment is also subject to damage by radiation. If that information was deliberately downgraded or erroneous, and equipment worth billions of dollars, with expected lifespans of years, continually failed in months, then I suspect that some very pertinent questions would be asked by those manufacturers and their insurance companies.

The fact that there has been no further manned landing attempts since Apollo doesn't indicate that Apollo was faked. Apollo proved a political point, and when it was made there was no further need or the political will to spend the prodigious amounts of money to keep on making that point. The USSR also had their manned lunar program and didn't see radiation as a show stopper. Their problems revolved around their inability to produce a reliable launch vehicle and that once the USA had beaten them to the first landing, any attempts by them would only be regarded as a second place. Nevertheless they were still launching their N1 booster up to the early 1970s.

All the best
A.M.