http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-22718672
240 miles there and back to the space station is a bit different than a trip to the moon or mars for humans ..or am I missing something like nasa is telling the truth !!
Deliverance
Favorite Answer
the hoax theory will be around until homemade rockets are cheap enough to send one to the moon and beam back your own pictures to see what's up there.
Jason T
What you are missing is the same thing everyone who uses this radiation claim to say the Apollo missions were faked misses: a basic understanding of radiation. Radiation is not instant death if it's there. Radiation comes in many types, intensities, flux densities, and these all have different effects. The most critical point in this case, and why your suggestion that the fact that radiation poses a problem for Mars missions suggests no-one could go to the Moon either, is duration. Apollo missions to the Moon lasted two weeks. Missions to mars will last a minimum of two years. Over fifty times longer.
The human body is self repairing. If you go to the hospital and have an X-ray, part of your body will be subjected to a very short, very intense burst of radiation. The odds are that this will cause no problem at all and that any minor issues can be corrected by your own body's systems during the subsequent period in an x-ray free environment. On the other hand, if you sit in a room constantly under x-rays less than 1% as intense as those in your hospital x-ray for a month you will most likely get sick and die in that period. The longer you'r in it the more chance of cell damage, and the constant exposure means as fast as your body tries to repair one bit of damage another occurs elesewhere.
So, the fact that a couple of years' exposure to the radiation in space and on Mars will be a health problem for astronauts that must be solved before any manned Mars mission can occur has no bearing on the fact that in the 1960s and 70s 24 men were able to spend two weeks on lunar missions.
Warren
Of course the landings were real, all six of them! The article you referenced deals with the hazards of a trip to Mars, which would probably be two to three years long, as opposed to a one to two week trip to the moon. Radiation damage is cumulative, meaning that it is proportional to the duration of the exposure. There will be problems that will need to be dealt with for Mars, but not for the short trips to the moon. Nothing in the article said ANYTHING about short lunar missions.
The "we never landed on the moon" wackos are the ones perpetuating the biggest hoax ever, based on the complete ignorance of the facts by conspiracy theory wackos, out to prove just how totally ignorant they really are.
I do not believe we landed on the moon, I KNOW we did. Moon landing hoax wackos merely regurgitate the same old tired lies, most of them originally put forward by the profoundly ignorant Bill Kaysing in a book and a horrible TV program on Fox TV in 2001. I am including links to a number of sites with the truth about these claims.
The moon landing hoax believers are just plain delusional and beyond all human help. As I have also said, I find it amusing, in a kind of sad way, that the same people who think that the most thoroughly documented voyage of exploration in history was a hoax are willing to believe any wacko conspiracy theory or doomsday prophecy. No critical reasoning skills people?
In addition to the sites already mentioned, which have actual FACTS to refute the myths and lies put forward by the lunar landing deniers, some of us actually have personal observations to prove that the missions DID occur. I was a member of an amateur radio/amateur astronomy group at the time the Apollo missions were flown, and among other things we distributed tracking information that allowed many of us to point our telescopes at the spacecraft on the way to the moon. Can any of the wackos explain to me what I was seeing at the expected coordinates, if it was NOT the Apollo spacecraft on the way to the moon????
I still like the admonition from Carl Sagan: Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.
I repeat, anyone still claiming that the lunar landings were a hoax is a complete, raving,lunatic. (Pun VERY much intended!)
Joseph
Read the article carefully.
It states in part: "It is not just the dose rate that is the problem; it is the number of days that one accumulates that dose that drives the total towards or beyond the career limits."
There is big difference between a week to ten day round trip to the Moon and a 6 month long one way trnasit to Mars.
birchardvilleobservatory
Me.
Notice there is a lot of difference between being exposed to radiation outside the Earth's atmosphere for a week or so (as in the Apollo flights to the Moon) and a year or more on a round trip flight to Mars. Nothing in the new report applies to the Apollo program, but you should know the Earth's Van Allen radiation belts (discovered in the late 1960s and carefully mapped before the US Manned Spaceflight program began launching astronauts into Earth orbit) were considered and the launches of the Apollo missions were devised so their trajectories avoided the heaviest part of the Van Allen belts, and also minimized the exposure time to just a few hours.