![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
mcityhttp://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread566601/pg5
Joe: The moon landings could not have happened because the astronauts would've been killed by high neutron radiation.
Logical People: Here are some random calculations based on our current knowledge of lunar radiation. I've exaggerated it several times over, and it's still not a fatal dose.
Joe: They didn't have the shielding.
Logical People: Yes they did, and here's a source from NASA saying that the amount of exposure wouldn't fatal over the short term.
Joe: That source was from 1998, which proves that they couldn't have known about it back in 1969. The Van Allen belt would've killed them.
LP: They had a pretty good idea, and it turned out they had actually overestimated.
Joe: That's circular reasoning.
LP: Astronauts on the ISS get much more rads than the Apollo astronauts would've gotten.
Joe: Circular reasoning. There are radiation pockets on the moon.
LP: You're using the fact that we didn't get clear numbers on radiation until 1998, which is from NASA, to disprove that NASA went to the moon. In fact, you're saying our sources are wrong, but yours is right. Either NASA is a reliable source or it's not. Do you have any corroberation on the radiation being "deadly"?
Joe: Circular reasoning.
LP: Yes, that's exactly our point. Why are you not giving any concrete numbers, which we have done, regarding the exact amount of radiation that the lunar astronauts would've been killed by?
Joe: Circular reasoning.
LP: About those "pockets"; they don't actually seem to exist.
Joe: Circular reasoning.
LP: Here's a paper about said radiation from 1968, which indicates NASA knew about it.
Joe: Circular reasoning.
And then I opened http://www.livejournal.com/update.bml in a new tab.
If you look at page 15, you'll see him say he's "standing up for himself" against the people who say they don't like him. It's like he's a child. That's not his only claim, just the most persistent. Then again, that entire site is just conspiracy nutjob central.
Joe: The moon landings could not have happened because the astronauts would've been killed by high neutron radiation.
Logical People: Here are some random calculations based on our current knowledge of lunar radiation. I've exaggerated it several times over, and it's still not a fatal dose.
Joe: They didn't have the shielding.
Logical People: Yes they did, and here's a source from NASA saying that the amount of exposure wouldn't fatal over the short term.
Joe: That source was from 1998, which proves that they couldn't have known about it back in 1969. The Van Allen belt would've killed them.
LP: They had a pretty good idea, and it turned out they had actually overestimated.
Joe: That's circular reasoning.
LP: Astronauts on the ISS get much more rads than the Apollo astronauts would've gotten.
Joe: Circular reasoning. There are radiation pockets on the moon.
LP: You're using the fact that we didn't get clear numbers on radiation until 1998, which is from NASA, to disprove that NASA went to the moon. In fact, you're saying our sources are wrong, but yours is right. Either NASA is a reliable source or it's not. Do you have any corroberation on the radiation being "deadly"?
Joe: Circular reasoning.
LP: Yes, that's exactly our point. Why are you not giving any concrete numbers, which we have done, regarding the exact amount of radiation that the lunar astronauts would've been killed by?
Joe: Circular reasoning.
LP: About those "pockets"; they don't actually seem to exist.
Joe: Circular reasoning.
LP: Here's a paper about said radiation from 1968, which indicates NASA knew about it.
Joe: Circular reasoning.
And then I opened http://www.livejournal.com/update.bml in a new tab.
If you look at page 15, you'll see him say he's "standing up for himself" against the people who say they don't like him. It's like he's a child. That's not his only claim, just the most persistent. Then again, that entire site is just conspiracy nutjob central.
