0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
"Personally I don’t believe we are capable of landing people on the moon today without radiation causing serious health problems, but there you go"Yes, but you have a reputation for putting forward odd ideas that don't tally with reallity (like the idea that FMD is widespread, but unrecognised in the UK).Also you say "is very easy to prove or disprove what one sees on the television. " which I find optimistic.The courts would love to be able to distinguish a real image from a photoshopped one.
A really poor 'conspiracy:Quote“Weapons of Mass Destruction” Or was that last word Distraction? Used to launch a war on a country that did not have an air force or even an effective army. Yet two of the world’s most successful aggressors were able to launch an assault on a relatively unarmed country killing and maiming innocent men women and children with their own weapons of mass destruction and at the same time convincing the rest of the world that their war is a just one.So let us at least dismiss the arguments that deception on a huge scale is not possible.How may people did it fool and for how long? Even during the situation it was not believed by many people - even the UN observers.If radiation would have prevented the moonshots then how have people survived in the space stations for so long? The 'inadequate cameras' used in the space shot were very expensive, studio quality models which could produce Vogue-quality pictures when the lighting was suitable. There was no shortage of lighting - 120th at f8 would have been about right for a subject in full sunlight - as on Earth. Where is the surprise that there were some excellent shots?AND, what anomalies? That is to say which ones have still not been explained to all but the loony few? (Don't list them - just read the last few hundred posts for an answer)
“Weapons of Mass Destruction” Or was that last word Distraction? Used to launch a war on a country that did not have an air force or even an effective army. Yet two of the world’s most successful aggressors were able to launch an assault on a relatively unarmed country killing and maiming innocent men women and children with their own weapons of mass destruction and at the same time convincing the rest of the world that their war is a just one.So let us at least dismiss the arguments that deception on a huge scale is not possible.
The point that Governments are capable of fraud and deception is proven by those immortal words! You can paint whatever picture you want around it, it does not alter the fact that they did deceive and conspire!Quote from: sophiecentaur on 05/12/2008 19:26:45A really poor 'conspiracy:Quote“Weapons of Mass Destruction” Or was that last word Distraction? Used to launch a war on a country that did not have an air force or even an effective army. Yet two of the world’s most successful aggressors were able to launch an assault on a relatively unarmed country killing and maiming innocent men women and children with their own weapons of mass destruction and at the same time convincing the rest of the world that their war is a just one.So let us at least dismiss the arguments that deception on a huge scale is not possible.How may people did it fool and for how long? Even during the situation it was not believed by many people - even the UN observers.If radiation would have prevented the moonshots then how have people survived in the space stations for so long? The 'inadequate cameras' used in the space shot were very expensive, studio quality models which could produce Vogue-quality pictures when the lighting was suitable. There was no shortage of lighting - 120th at f8 would have been about right for a subject in full sunlight - as on Earth. Where is the surprise that there were some excellent shots?AND, what anomalies? That is to say which ones have still not been explained to all but the loony few? (Don't list them - just read the last few hundred posts for an answer)
Arrogance and ignorance also appear to correspond to the level of science knowledge. There is a similar relationship involving an un-questioning adherence to accepted literature.
What exactly is odd about tallying foot and mouth disease outbreaks with prolonged wet weather lowering the body temperature and circulation in an animal exposed to the elements which leaves them susceptible to infection, when removing the same infected animals to warm dry laboratory conditions cures the disease? It does not flitter away, the animals defences deal with it. This is my point and the fact that veterinary surgeons are knee deep in a quagmire of animal excrement as animals are confined to conditions that would bring down the most healthy of humans to their knees as illustrated in every single outbreak in the UK and many other countries.You state the disease was successfully eradicated and the UK is disease free, yet farm animals were exposed to the wildlife including the native and imported deer populations. These animals have never been vaccinated. We know they are susceptible to foot and mouth disease and blue tongue. So how did they get rid of the foot and mouth virus? Did they simply avoid the quagmires and kept themselves warm and dry? Just like the laboratory infected farm animals recovered from F&M?Quote from: Bored chemist on 06/12/2008 02:06:39"Personally I don’t believe we are capable of landing people on the moon today without radiation causing serious health problems, but there you go"Yes, but you have a reputation for putting forward odd ideas that don't tally with reallity (like the idea that FMD is widespread, but unrecognised in the UK).Also you say "is very easy to prove or disprove what one sees on the television. " which I find optimistic.The courts would love to be able to distinguish a real image from a photoshopped one.
Apparently, The Van-Allen belt is a huge problem. Manned space flight at low orbit is also a huge problem with radiation passing through the crafts, space suits and bodies of the astronauts.
Problems Involving Radiations of Manmade OriginProtection against manmade sources of radiation is a ground support function concerned mainly with the protection of the ground personnel, the general public, and the environment against detrimental effects of radiation. Much of this effort involved routine health-physics procedures governed by U.S. Atomic Energy Commission regulations (Title 10, Code of Federal Regulations, 1971) and U.S. Department of Labor Standards (Title 29, Code of Federal Regulations, 1971). However, certain problems concerning spacecraft radioluminescent sources were peculiar to the Apollo Program. The chief problems were leakage of radioactive material from radioluminescent switch tips, and emission of excess soft X-ray radiation from radioluminescent panels. Both of these problems were solved.
They spent a few hours within the Van Allen belts and estimates of the total exposure during their entire flights were about 2 rems (the equivalent of about 100 chest x-rays or about 40% of the maximum permissible dose of radiation according to OSHA standards).