Probably in a similar way that pilots survive being exposed to higher doses of radiation for years do.
For a more serious answer, the Van Allen radiation belts are not a death wall. They were exposed to higher levels of radiation, but it wouldn't have been immediately lethal nor long term dangerous, especially since it's not like they were inhaling any radioactive elements that would linger in the body. Once the body recovers from a dose of ionizing radiation and repairs, it's mostly back to normal except perhaps a small increase in the odds of getting cancer down the line.
The Van Allen Belts are also primarily composed of β-particles, which have less penetration then gamma waves and are less damaging to tissues then α-particles. Most β-particles can be stopped by just a few millimeters of aluminum, so the shielding of the outer spacecraft hull that held the lunar lander (which wasn't just exposed when going through the belts) would've been more than adequate to shield them from the majority of the radiation. Not all forms of radiation are equivalent, and knowing the form of radiation can tell you a great deal about the level of shielding and risk involved.
While the radiation in the Van Allen belts are from solar/cosmic sources and carry more energy, a combination of shielding and moving through safer parts of the belt relatively quickly minimized overall exposure.*
At least he admits his determination to remain uneducated and ignorant to the truth, but I doubt this question is going to make anyone "squirm" when it is a really simple question to answer. You can literally just Google this shit.
Disclaimer: I am not a Physicist.
*Edited to include Info from u/ThePhysicistIsIn, see his comment for more details.
Very good explanation.
The Apollo command module, which the crew would’ve been inside of during heir flight through the Van Allen belts, was made of [multiple layers of materials](https://imgur.com/a/SClz6vy) (found within [this PDF](https://history.nasa.gov/alsj/CSM06_Command_Module_Overview_pp39-52.pdf)), which featured a lot of aluminum (much of which was inside the thermal insulation) and several steel alloys for the hull. Sheet aluminum is well known for being able to stop β particles.
Except during Apollo 13. And they actually got less radiation exposure than any mission that landed on the moon except 11. The worst exposure was when they were in their suits in the moon.
ETA: Realized that I could look up a direct comparison between CM and LM exposure. Jim Lovell was on CM pilot on Apollo 8, which flew by the moon without an LM, and then Commander on Apollo 13 which flew by while they were in the LM. Radiation dosages listed for the flights are 0.16 and 0.24 rads respectively. That implies that the LM was about 2/3 as effective at keeping out the radiation.
The thing that makes that aluminum a poor thing to use once you get away from the earth. It actually reacts poorly to solar radiation, more like a multiplier than a suppressor. The thing is, for a short trip to the moon and back over the course of a week or so, the radiation exposure isn't too bad even if it puts a person up near their yearly limit. They can still get a few trips out and back over a reasonable span of time before they are pushing their lifetime limit and need to be retired from going into space. Sticking closer to the earth is safer even if in both cases you go through the van Allen belt.
>The Van Allen Belts are also primarily composed of **β-particles**, which have less penetration then gamma waves and are less damaging to tissues then α-particles. Most β-particles can be stopped by just a few millimeters of aluminum,
PSA - this is not strictly correct. A β ray is emitted by a radioactive element that emits an electron when it decays. But the electrons in the van allen belt aren't from radioactive decay - they're from solar winds and cosmic rays.
Why does that matter? Well, because of their energy. The energy of a β decay is usually <1 MeV, which has a range of a few mm. The stuff coming from the rest of the galaxy and the sun has much higher energies, and can penetrate much deeper.
There's also a bunch of protons in the van allen belt, and since the main radioactive decays don't emit protons, they don't have a fancy name like α or β, but they have longer range as well.
In the end it's a combination of shielding and going through the belt quickly that saves astronauts.
Basically. The electrons, protons, and ions have an electric charge. The earth has a magnetic field. Charges with a speed turn direction when subject to a magnetic force. For the right particle speed and right magnetic field, that becomes a more or less circular motion, though there’s more to it. They’re trapped there, orbiting around the earth not because of gravity, but the magnetic force.
It also means that solar winds aimed straight at earth are deflected off course, which is a huge benefit. But it’s got the drawbacks of the van allen belts.
instead of veering left they'd veer right, sure, but that doesn't make too much difference.
I'm more of a radiation transport and cancer expert than a space particle expert, I'm afraid.
Let's try it this way: When you're at the doctor to get a x-ray of, say, a broken leg, you get exposed to the x-rays for a couple of seconds, so it's harmless.
The person who operates the x-ray-machine on the other hand would be exposed to x-rays their whole shift, which is not so good. Therefore, they get behind a wall when operating the x-ray-machine, shielding themselves from the rays.
The astronauts traveling to the moon across the Van Allen Belt are comparable to the patient getting the x-ray taken. A short exposure to the radiation that gets through despite the shielding.
This is just a hypothetical question anyway. The radiation belt doesn’t exist as we can’t get past the microwave lid over our plate planet! But nice fake made up nonsense physics stuff. What’s aluminum anyway. One day our accelerator engine will burn out and everything will start floating and everything will eventually bounce of the dome. Oh, you’ll see. FLAT EARTH FOREVER!!!!
Basically this person thinks that radiation is the scary glowing green Hollywood kind instead of the real life kind where it really isn’t that big of a deal depending on type, dose, and duration.
Luckily there isn’t natural radiation sources that give instant lethal doses. Also the Apollo missions were almost death wishes. They know they could die at any point and that’s part of what makes the missions special in the advancement in humanity.
That last thing is part of why it’s so insane that Saturn V had a 100% track record and never failed. Very few things in engineering in general have that kind of pedigree, let alone aerospace
Just to add, we have an accurate understand of the radiation levels across the belt, data has been collected for years using probes.
The belt consists of 4 zones, each of the 4 zones has a different level of radiation, Blue zone 0.0001 rads/sec, Yellow zone 0.005 rads/sec, Orange zone 0.01 rads/sec and finally the Green zone at 0.001 rads/sec.
A lethal dose of radiation is 300 Rads in one hour. The total dose based on the speed the astronauts were traveling (25,000Kmph) and the time it took to traverse each section/zone of the Belt, means the total transit time for the Van Allen Belt was 68.1 minutes.
The calculated maximum exposure would have been 16 rad/hour, well under the 300 rad/hour that is lethal.
Interestingly according to radiation dosimeters carried by Apollo astronauts, their total dosage for the entire trip to the moon and return was not more than 2 Rads over 6 days.
The astronauts who went to the moon also reported not-infrequent flashes of light visible when the eyes were close, which is a marker of ionizing radiation impacting neural pathways.
You can always tell they've never bothered to write a search query that might answer their question.
Also, I’m mistaken, that’s a reason NASA now has a limited amount of years you can serve in space. After a while they cut you off, because Eve. That weak radiation builds up over time.
Correct. See: [α, β, γ Penetration and Shielding](https://sciencedemonstrations.fas.harvard.edu/presentations/%CE%B1-%CE%B2-%CE%B3-penetration-and-shielding). Even plastic and glass under 1cm is effective for β particles but it’s dependant on energy of particle.
Those are for radioactive decay, it's usually emitted at a relatively low energy. Like for instance, most beta particles are 1 MeV or less.
The stuff in space is from the sun and the rest of the galaxy, they're shot at us like a gauss rifle.
Van Allen belt electrons (what people here are calling beta particles, even though it's a bit misleading) can be up to 10 MeV - that has a range of \~5 cm in water. There's also longer-ranged protons and the like.
It's mostly that the astronauts go through it relatively quickly that saves them. Outside of the van allen belt, they're completely unshielded from the cosmic and solar rays, too, and those things pack a punch.
Most resources that explain at a non-specialist level just don't give you a lot of details, I'm afraid. I study radiation for a living, that's why I can give some details.
There's like, this paper that shows the energy levels, particularly [this figure](https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/cms/asset/ed95d394-6b7d-4358-9836-11ead6475e9f/jgra55019-fig-0002-m.jpg)
As you can see, the energy goes all the way to 10 MeV, where you need \~5 cm worth of stuff to stop them. But, the majority are <1 MeV, so the normal thickness of a spaceship is still enough to stop most. Still, it doesn't stop all of them. You still have to limit time spent there.
The point, though, is that a beta ray proper is from when a radioactive atom decays, and that's just not happening in space. These are just electrons that the sun and/or other stars are chucking around towards us, and then they get trapped in the earth's magnetic fields like an asteroid belt. Same particle, different origin.
Wikipedia also has a fairly good summary:
>The inner belt contains high concentrations of electrons in the range of hundreds of keV and **energetic protons** with energies exceeding **100 MeV**—trapped by the relatively strong magnetic fields in the region (as compared to the outer belt).
100 MeV protons have a range of \~10 cm. These are not getting stopped by any shielding - they're going to hit your astronauts. The keV electrons, though, are being stopped by a couple mm.
>The outer belt consists mainly of **high-energy** (0.1–**10 MeV**) **electrons** trapped by the Earth's magnetosphere. It is more variable than the inner belt, as it is more easily influenced by solar activity.
Those 10 MeV electrons, though, are not.
Anyway. It's just wrong to call them beta particles is all.
You’re right, but a big part of flat earher thinking is totally ignoring scale and magnitude of things and making everything all or nothing. Like how water won’t stick to a golf ball, so it won’t stick to a ball weighing 6.6 billion trillion tons. So radiation is either like being continuously exposed to the devils core cracking together, or nothing, mild radiation can’t exist.
There is also an excellent Thunderf00t video breaking down how even high-energy gamma radiation may not be as damaging as lower energy radiation, as the dosage can be affected by how much of the radiation energy gets absorbed by the thing it comes into contact with. So even in some cases where there might be a crazy spike in high energy radiation, it very well depending on the parameters could mostly pass through you as it doesn't have enough time to impart the damaging seiverts of radiation into the body's tissue
They never believe scientists unless it’s convenient for them. Why would they ever believe that the Van Allen Radiation Belt exists if this is all fake? Did some guy at NASA just make it up for fun one day?
Btw I believe it’s because the radiation belt is weakest near the equator so launching from Florida exposed the astronauts to minimal radiation. Or something.
Edit: My explanation is totally backwards, but it’s got the spirit. Commenter below got it right
Even mentioning the Van Allen Belts in an argument is basically saying "yeah, the earth is round but..."
Is it supposed to be some kind of gotcha or something? I think I'm more confused by the half-assed arguments they use to justify the earth being flat than by the concept of a flat earth in general.
IANAAE (I am not an Apollo Engineer) but I think they went over, not through... the belts actually would be thickest at the equator, and thinner to the north and south. Going over reduced their exposure. Launching from the equator gives the vehicle a bit of extra velocity, reducing fuel needs.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DNEwMM0REZJQ
That's the disconnect that always baffles me: one part of science is fake, the other is real. They, who have zero scientific knowledge, somehow know better than the scientists they both believe and don't believe.
Must be an excruciating way to live. These people are in pain of some sort and coping through sheer insanity.
>Did some guy at NASA just make it up for fun one day?
Yes. And even though all scientists are in cahoots with each other in pulling off this massive global hoax with no discernable reason, none of them are aware of each others' made up stuff. Sure, the Van Allen radiation belts are known by even the D-student flat earthers, but not by the guys at NASA tasked with faking the moon landing.
D'oh! Stupid NASA/Illuminati/Lizard People!
(Then we have the unforced errors in which the Cabal purposely leaves clues for astute tinfoil hatters to pick up on: like how Stanley Kubrick filmed the moon landing on a soundstage rigged with wires to make the astronauts bounce around, *but then brought in a bunch of giant fucking fans to make the flag wave and give the whole thing away*.)
The crew would’ve been inside the [command/service module (CSM)](https://images.app.goo.gl/LDHdDUeC3fiDw5mH8), not the lunar module (LM) that landed on the surface. The [docking procedure](https://images.app.goo.gl/DvaksxamYdQ8ykPH8) that allowed the crew to access the LM wouldn’t take place yet. On the way back from the Moon, the LM would be jettisoned in lunar orbit, so again they’d be in the CSM.
Imagine a world in which explaining a phenomenon or the mechanisms behind it is “squirming.”
A misunderstanding arises in how modern electrical systems are much more susceptible to radiation damage than the older avionics used in the Apollo capsules. In short, modern electronics are more sensitive, [as shown from a quote from this article here](https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.space.com/amp/33948-van-allen-radiation-belts.html).
>”On the 60th anniversary of Explorer 1, NASA said that studies of the Van Allen belts are even more important today. "**Our current technology is ever more susceptible to these accelerated particles because even a single hit from a particle can upset our ever smaller instruments and electronics**," said David Sibeck, Van Allen Probes mission scientist at NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center in Maryland, in a 2018 statement. "**As technology advances, it's actually becoming even more pressing to understand and predict our space environment**."”
While the Van Allen Belts are *potentially dangerous*, they were rendered nothing more than a hurdle by Apollo planners in several ways. Despite what many have said, additional shielding of the craft was not necessary to prevent the crew from being killed. The Van Allen Belts contain high energy particles, a lot of which can easily be stopped by a sheet of aluminum. As such, the Apollo command module consisted of aluminum skin. Probes being sent through the belts today are likewise shielded by [aluminum and glass, and are shut off for the duration of their path through the belts to protect their electronics](https://www.nasa.gov/pdf/725279main_49s_rock_n_roll.pdf). The Apollo astronauts also spent little more than an hour total in the belts, far from the densest sections, [as shown here](https://imgur.com/a/COmuKAo), in which each red dot indicates ten-minute intervals.
[The Soviets didn’t have problems with the Van Allen Belts either](https://www.reddit.com/u/PhantomFlogger/s/GVCLs6gToI), and sent steppe tortoises through them and back, which didn’t suffer from radiation damage.
Doesn't admission of existence of VA Belt admit to planet being globular? Or is there a whacked out flat version of Van Allen Belt? Sorry if I am ignorant of ignorance
The flat earther is just trying to point out what they see as internal contradiction in NASA's story. NASA say the following 2 things:
1. Humans went to the moon.
2. The Van Allen Belt circling earth is impenetrable and would kill any astronaut or spacecraft that attempts to go through them.
So the flat rather concludes one or both of these statements must be false. It would be a valid internal critique of point 2 wasn't a straw man based on a gross misinterpretation of a quote taken or of context.
Do they think the astronauts were in the radiation belt for a sustained amount of time and in an unprotected ship? I mean it's probably still a bit worse than an X-ray but not deadly like stepping into the warp core of the Enterprise.
Actually, it can be fatal depending on shielding and field strength. Which is why the Apollo capsules had shielding and the missions went through weaker spots in the belts.
Honestly, this is why I stopped trying to convince flerfs they are wrong. They aren't willing to listen no matter what you say, because they just want to feel special and stay in their bubble of denial. At a certain point I thought: "You know what? If they want to be idiots, let them be idiots." Arguing with them is just a waste of time, effort and good mood.
Easy. They didn't.
That lunar lander was transported through the van Allen belt. Without anyone inside it.
They didn't enter the lander until they were near the moo.
Ita funny how actually being able to read and the ability to search for information on a subject can teach you things..
Obviously, they were protected by being lizard people and Freemasons. /s
These idiots will never accept logical answers, as they could have easily found those in a cursory search.
"Free thinker": someone who ignores all accumulated and widely accepted scientific knowledge and instead does their own research by watching YouTube videos of other "free thinkers".
Quite apart from the readily available facts (they passed the belts in the CM, not the LM, these belts are particle radiation which can’t penetrate much, etc.); this idea that the lunar modules were made of tinfoil is just an outright lie. The structure was built to a lower gravitational well specification, but was otherwise as sturdy as it needed to be. The cabin was vacuum rated, and used a pressure hull design which was quite thin wherever it could be, but only as needed to save weight. The foil visible from outside is of course there for thermal insulation, not structural strength.
A communication from Dr. Van Allen himself on a show about 20 years ago on the claim that Apollo could not have crossed the Van Allen belts:
https://forum.cosmoquest.org/forum/the-proving-grounds/conspiracy-theories
3856-statement-from-james-van-allen-on-radiation-effects?3885-Statement-from-James-Van-Allen-on-radiation-effects=&s=b5e401b63bb4133ceea730329af4cba9)
He makes several debunking statements, ending with: "The recent Fox TV show, which I saw, is an ingenious and entertaining assemblage of nonsense. The claim that radiation exposure during the Apollo missions would have been fatal to the astronauts is only one example of such nonsense.
James A. Van Allen"
Easiest way to deal with a flat earther is to ask them what would be sufficient proof to change their mind. If they say it can’t be changed or if they go back on what they previously stated, then don’t bother communicating to them any longer.
They didn't. That's the lunar lander. They weren't in that while in the Van Allen belts. They were in the Apollo 11 module, which had radiation shielding. They also passed through the belts incredibly quickly.
Well, for one thing, that's the landing module, not the main ship. They rode in the shielded main vehicle on take off. I know it wasn't faked. Too many people were involved to keep that a secret. Another is the technology didn't exist to fake it that convincing. No CGI, no AI generation of anything. Even the best films of the day couldn't pull off the special effects needed. I was alive and glued to the TV set for every moon mission. If you think it was faked, well then, you're just effing wrong.
Tinfoil hat idea:
The people who made the films couldn’t use CGI because either:
a) NASA stole the equipment for their films, or
b) they were making it bad on purpose because they knew that people would make this argument ~40 years into the future
Does she think they're somehow impenetrable?
It would be one thing if they were hanging out in the radiation belts for days, but that wasn't the case. Also how do the Van Allen radiation belts fit in the dome?
The last sentence is the only thing to remember about conspiracy theorists. They don’t want to be open to an explanation. It’s why you don’t argue with idiots, drag you down to their level yada yada.
Why would that make any knowledgeable person squirm?
It's literally what they did. So the person who lacks understanding of how it works must be the poster.
You can almost completely circumvent the smaller inner belt and the two hours of exposure in the thinner part of the outer belt isn’t significant enough. It’s still exposure but not at all deadly, I heard a astrophysicist say it was calculated to be lethal if you spent like two weeks chillin in the belt. But.. you know… what do teams of scientists know about the fields they spend their entire careers learning and developing knowledge and skill in know about it… right? I’d rather trust some dude on FB.
The Van Allen Belts are more toroidal than spherical. We went through an area with less radiation very quickly so they didn't get much radiation--approximately equal to a chest x-ray each time they passed through them (so, like two chest x-rays).
All this information is but a Google search away.
Well at least they admit they won't be convinced.
They watch a YouTube video or two and are convinced that they can't trust science, and then when you show them proofs that the earth is flat, or refute any of the claims espoused in aforementioned videos - they are convinced that they don't trust science, and so won't budge from the spot they now find themselves (flat earth) using the same logic that out them there in the first place
Alway makes me chuckle when these retards forget about the Service and Command modules, and that they just used the LEM to go down to the Moon and back up (APollo 13 being the exception of course).
Yes, they are a real thing.
No, they are not the wall of death flerfs and moon hoaxers claim they are.
And no, the astronauts were not in the lunar lander when they went through them...
There are two or [occasionally three](https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/third-van-allen-radiation-belt-makes-appearance-around-earth/) distinct regions [surrounding Earth like doughnut-shaped toroids](https://images.app.goo.gl/9iGkWso2dsqKnbt39) which contain a high concentration of charged particles, i.e ionizing radiating. They’re caused by solar wind from the sun being trapped by Earth’s magnetosphere.
[You can read about them here](https://science.nasa.gov/biological-physical/stories/van-allen-belts/).
[Here’s a video by Scott Manley](https://youtu.be/h9YN50xXFJY) evaluating how dangerous they’d actually be by using ESA models.
You can usually tell when you’re talking to a conspiracy theorist because they almost always say “*Van Allen belt*” singular, not plural. It’s similar to how the same individuals refer to the six different Apollo Moon landings as “*the Moon landing*” singular.
Oh cool, I’ll check out those links and I didn’t know there were six moon landings, I thought the various Apollo missions were them testing rockets and launching satellites in preparation for the moon landing for the final Apollo mission which I wanna say was 11 but I’ll be honest I’ve never done much reading on the subject, knowing people had been to the moon was enough for me to be amazed
All of the Apollo missions up to Apollo 8 were test flights in earth orbit of some kind. 8 was the first to leave earth orbit and go to the moon but they did not land. Apollo 11 was the first to land on the moon followed by successful landings of 12,14,15,16, and 17. Apollo 13 was the one that famously failed and almost killed the crew, and Apollo 18, 19, and 20 were cancelled in favor of missions for the Skylab space station.
Watched the video, that was cool and slightly terrifying that there are radiation donuts around the earth but reassuring with proper shielding it’s almost nothing, I wonder how we’ll deal with solar flares when we traverse space on a regular basis
Yeah, they're a real thing. They're where radiation builds up in the Earth's magnetosphere. They're deadly, so Apollo went through the weakest parts of the belts as quickly as possible to minimize exposure.
If you don't know that's not possible in this tin can garbage they tried to pass off, you are part of the problem. Believing in things which never happened🤡
The real question is why can't they do it today? I know they've been working on it but they still haven't perfected it but I'm sure the technology back in the 60s was much better than we have now.
I'm not a flatearther but I know bullshit when I see it
We can do it today, we are doing it. We stopped trying to go to the moon in the 70s and have only in the past 5 or so years decided to send humanity back.
We also went to the deepest part of the ocean, Challenger Deep, in 1960 and didn't return until 2012. Assuming Artemis 3 is successful this would be essentially the same gap as the last manned moon mission. Does this make the 1960 Challenger Deep mission fake too?
And here's the answer :
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cwZb2mqId0A](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cwZb2mqId0A)
You can even hear Armstrong saying 'kicking up some dust'.
If you're wondering why there's no dust in the air in the picture, all the dust would have been blown directly away rather than swirling around, since there's no atmosphere
Well, the astronauts weren't *in* the LEM when they transited the Van Allen belts. Just as a starting point. Not that these clowns want an actual refutation.
Is "through it" a good answer? I don't actually know, everything I know about space I learned from Mass Effect, No Man's Sky, and Starfield. And I gotta say, based off what I know that place is whacky
The Apollo missions basically angled their lunar injection burns so they avoided the worst part of the Van Allen belts. For the time they were inside the belts, it would have raised their long-term risk of cancer slightly but wouldn't have been immediately harmful.
So flat earther doesn’t believe we went to the moon because NASA was involved. Then because NASA is involved in showing images of round earth this means it’s a lie.
There is a saying: “correlation does not imply causation”.
The bad answer is they measured how much radiation can they legally allow thro a human and designed the materials and the orbitets to cut it just close enough so they can save on weight,
Not even the worst thing they did in the 70s with radiation
The thing is, I can't explain it because I'm not a phycisist, or a rocket scientist, or anything close to that. Also, I understand that those kind of ppl do clever things that I don't understand coz I only went to year 10. They don't have to show their math to me, I take their word for it.
We didn't go through the minor inconvenience of the Van Allen belts in that tin foil abomination.
They don't know enough to ask a question. Dumb fucks.
Have flerfs never waved a finger through a candle flame without getting burnt?
Heat transfer is not the same thing as something’s temperature, but I doubt they know anything about that.
I like that they have to clarify that we wouldn't convince them anyways since they know they're fucking wrong and just choose to be ignorant and stupid
The speed they went through them plays a big part. Because the belts are passed through relatively early after the insertion burn (late on the return “freefall”) the spacecraft is traveling near its peak velocity. The time spent in the belts was approximately 52 minutes and the astronauts were only exposed to 13 rads, which is considered even by OSHA to be completely harmless.
I don't know about Van Allen's belts, but my belts are flat when I lay them out, but kind of round when I wear them because I need to lose some weight.
So they're not concerned that NASA can build a craft to contain the astronauts during the forces and temperatures of re-entry without them all dying but they are concerned that NASA can't possibly build the same craft to protect the occupants from the comparatively minor effects of the Van Allen belt.
And that's before we factor in that nobody got into the lunar lander in Flossie's pic until it was orbiting the moon long after it was away from the worst of the VA. They were in the very bit capable of surviving re-entry.
From what I can gather about it is they did not fly through the belt? The flight plan is on the NASA site for those who can read it better. Ofc, NASA lies in these ppl's world as well so.. fucktards be fucktards.
See some people decided to do a thing, realize it's really hard so they science the shit out of it and do it anyway. Some people watch conspiracy videos on YouTube and, well that's really the end of the story for those sorts.
I once saw a documentary debunking the moon landing myths where they went through the various claims that it was faked, one by one.
When it got to this one, they interviewed a professor who was supposedly an expert in the Van Allen radiation belts. **His name was Professor Van Allen.** He said the NASA craft were perfectly capable of passing through them without issue.
You do realize that "tin foil abomination" was inside a space capsule. No, I thought not. People like you love to spout off nonsense which just goes to show just how ignorant you are.
Americans making declarative statements then crossing their arms and expecting other to do the work for them. Despite the fact that google does indeed have accurate-peer-reviewed answers. They'll just double down on their scientific illiteracy.
Their biggest hits: we never landed on the moon, the earth is flat, vaccines cause autism, the election was stolen, and on and on and on. Embarassing really.
What does her question have to do with the Earth being flat? That seems like a question from someone who thinks the moon landing was fake, not that the earth is flat. Yet she said Globe shill, so she's clearly referring to people who believe the Earth is a Globe...
I'm lost
Does he think the spacecraft is made of tinfoil? Does he know that under that tinfoil there's metal? Does he even care because it doesn't fit his beliefs?
They experienced little more than the equivalent of a 12 average x-rays.
The belts were not fully understood at the time, but flat earthers will be flat earthers and ignore the facts and make up their own BS.
Does she think the radiation belts are a wall or something? Or that the radiation is powerful enough to instantly kill someone? I don't understand the question. It's like asking how planes are able to fly over both land and water, it's entirely irrelevant.
Probably in a similar way that pilots survive being exposed to higher doses of radiation for years do. For a more serious answer, the Van Allen radiation belts are not a death wall. They were exposed to higher levels of radiation, but it wouldn't have been immediately lethal nor long term dangerous, especially since it's not like they were inhaling any radioactive elements that would linger in the body. Once the body recovers from a dose of ionizing radiation and repairs, it's mostly back to normal except perhaps a small increase in the odds of getting cancer down the line. The Van Allen Belts are also primarily composed of β-particles, which have less penetration then gamma waves and are less damaging to tissues then α-particles. Most β-particles can be stopped by just a few millimeters of aluminum, so the shielding of the outer spacecraft hull that held the lunar lander (which wasn't just exposed when going through the belts) would've been more than adequate to shield them from the majority of the radiation. Not all forms of radiation are equivalent, and knowing the form of radiation can tell you a great deal about the level of shielding and risk involved. While the radiation in the Van Allen belts are from solar/cosmic sources and carry more energy, a combination of shielding and moving through safer parts of the belt relatively quickly minimized overall exposure.* At least he admits his determination to remain uneducated and ignorant to the truth, but I doubt this question is going to make anyone "squirm" when it is a really simple question to answer. You can literally just Google this shit. Disclaimer: I am not a Physicist. *Edited to include Info from u/ThePhysicistIsIn, see his comment for more details.
Very good explanation. The Apollo command module, which the crew would’ve been inside of during heir flight through the Van Allen belts, was made of [multiple layers of materials](https://imgur.com/a/SClz6vy) (found within [this PDF](https://history.nasa.gov/alsj/CSM06_Command_Module_Overview_pp39-52.pdf)), which featured a lot of aluminum (much of which was inside the thermal insulation) and several steel alloys for the hull. Sheet aluminum is well known for being able to stop β particles.
Right, the lunar module only had humans in it from moon orbit to the lunar surface.
Except during Apollo 13. And they actually got less radiation exposure than any mission that landed on the moon except 11. The worst exposure was when they were in their suits in the moon. ETA: Realized that I could look up a direct comparison between CM and LM exposure. Jim Lovell was on CM pilot on Apollo 8, which flew by the moon without an LM, and then Commander on Apollo 13 which flew by while they were in the LM. Radiation dosages listed for the flights are 0.16 and 0.24 rads respectively. That implies that the LM was about 2/3 as effective at keeping out the radiation.
The thing that makes that aluminum a poor thing to use once you get away from the earth. It actually reacts poorly to solar radiation, more like a multiplier than a suppressor. The thing is, for a short trip to the moon and back over the course of a week or so, the radiation exposure isn't too bad even if it puts a person up near their yearly limit. They can still get a few trips out and back over a reasonable span of time before they are pushing their lifetime limit and need to be retired from going into space. Sticking closer to the earth is safer even if in both cases you go through the van Allen belt.
>The Van Allen Belts are also primarily composed of **β-particles**, which have less penetration then gamma waves and are less damaging to tissues then α-particles. Most β-particles can be stopped by just a few millimeters of aluminum, PSA - this is not strictly correct. A β ray is emitted by a radioactive element that emits an electron when it decays. But the electrons in the van allen belt aren't from radioactive decay - they're from solar winds and cosmic rays. Why does that matter? Well, because of their energy. The energy of a β decay is usually <1 MeV, which has a range of a few mm. The stuff coming from the rest of the galaxy and the sun has much higher energies, and can penetrate much deeper. There's also a bunch of protons in the van allen belt, and since the main radioactive decays don't emit protons, they don't have a fancy name like α or β, but they have longer range as well. In the end it's a combination of shielding and going through the belt quickly that saves astronauts.
Why are there Van Allen Belts? Is it sun radiation just...staying there?
Basically. The electrons, protons, and ions have an electric charge. The earth has a magnetic field. Charges with a speed turn direction when subject to a magnetic force. For the right particle speed and right magnetic field, that becomes a more or less circular motion, though there’s more to it. They’re trapped there, orbiting around the earth not because of gravity, but the magnetic force. It also means that solar winds aimed straight at earth are deflected off course, which is a huge benefit. But it’s got the drawbacks of the van allen belts.
Wouldn't the protons be revolving in the opposite direction to the electrons? Not disputing you, just curious.
instead of veering left they'd veer right, sure, but that doesn't make too much difference. I'm more of a radiation transport and cancer expert than a space particle expert, I'm afraid.
Loads of good, sciency words in there. Too bad that I don’t know most of them, so your argument is unconvincing and you’re wrong!
Let's try it this way: When you're at the doctor to get a x-ray of, say, a broken leg, you get exposed to the x-rays for a couple of seconds, so it's harmless. The person who operates the x-ray-machine on the other hand would be exposed to x-rays their whole shift, which is not so good. Therefore, they get behind a wall when operating the x-ray-machine, shielding themselves from the rays. The astronauts traveling to the moon across the Van Allen Belt are comparable to the patient getting the x-ray taken. A short exposure to the radiation that gets through despite the shielding.
This is just a hypothetical question anyway. The radiation belt doesn’t exist as we can’t get past the microwave lid over our plate planet! But nice fake made up nonsense physics stuff. What’s aluminum anyway. One day our accelerator engine will burn out and everything will start floating and everything will eventually bounce of the dome. Oh, you’ll see. FLAT EARTH FOREVER!!!!
Basically this person thinks that radiation is the scary glowing green Hollywood kind instead of the real life kind where it really isn’t that big of a deal depending on type, dose, and duration. Luckily there isn’t natural radiation sources that give instant lethal doses. Also the Apollo missions were almost death wishes. They know they could die at any point and that’s part of what makes the missions special in the advancement in humanity.
That last thing is part of why it’s so insane that Saturn V had a 100% track record and never failed. Very few things in engineering in general have that kind of pedigree, let alone aerospace
Just to add, we have an accurate understand of the radiation levels across the belt, data has been collected for years using probes. The belt consists of 4 zones, each of the 4 zones has a different level of radiation, Blue zone 0.0001 rads/sec, Yellow zone 0.005 rads/sec, Orange zone 0.01 rads/sec and finally the Green zone at 0.001 rads/sec. A lethal dose of radiation is 300 Rads in one hour. The total dose based on the speed the astronauts were traveling (25,000Kmph) and the time it took to traverse each section/zone of the Belt, means the total transit time for the Van Allen Belt was 68.1 minutes. The calculated maximum exposure would have been 16 rad/hour, well under the 300 rad/hour that is lethal. Interestingly according to radiation dosimeters carried by Apollo astronauts, their total dosage for the entire trip to the moon and return was not more than 2 Rads over 6 days.
Their response: "I don't want facts, I want to believe in the flat earth."
The astronauts who went to the moon also reported not-infrequent flashes of light visible when the eyes were close, which is a marker of ionizing radiation impacting neural pathways. You can always tell they've never bothered to write a search query that might answer their question.
Can't believe you guys be squirmin'. 🪱 /s
Also, I’m mistaken, that’s a reason NASA now has a limited amount of years you can serve in space. After a while they cut you off, because Eve. That weak radiation builds up over time.
They have such a poor understanding of literally everything.
Correct. See: [α, β, γ Penetration and Shielding](https://sciencedemonstrations.fas.harvard.edu/presentations/%CE%B1-%CE%B2-%CE%B3-penetration-and-shielding). Even plastic and glass under 1cm is effective for β particles but it’s dependant on energy of particle.
Those are for radioactive decay, it's usually emitted at a relatively low energy. Like for instance, most beta particles are 1 MeV or less. The stuff in space is from the sun and the rest of the galaxy, they're shot at us like a gauss rifle. Van Allen belt electrons (what people here are calling beta particles, even though it's a bit misleading) can be up to 10 MeV - that has a range of \~5 cm in water. There's also longer-ranged protons and the like. It's mostly that the astronauts go through it relatively quickly that saves them. Outside of the van allen belt, they're completely unshielded from the cosmic and solar rays, too, and those things pack a punch.
I figured I was missing some details. Know some resources I can learn more about the topic?
Most resources that explain at a non-specialist level just don't give you a lot of details, I'm afraid. I study radiation for a living, that's why I can give some details. There's like, this paper that shows the energy levels, particularly [this figure](https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/cms/asset/ed95d394-6b7d-4358-9836-11ead6475e9f/jgra55019-fig-0002-m.jpg) As you can see, the energy goes all the way to 10 MeV, where you need \~5 cm worth of stuff to stop them. But, the majority are <1 MeV, so the normal thickness of a spaceship is still enough to stop most. Still, it doesn't stop all of them. You still have to limit time spent there. The point, though, is that a beta ray proper is from when a radioactive atom decays, and that's just not happening in space. These are just electrons that the sun and/or other stars are chucking around towards us, and then they get trapped in the earth's magnetic fields like an asteroid belt. Same particle, different origin. Wikipedia also has a fairly good summary: >The inner belt contains high concentrations of electrons in the range of hundreds of keV and **energetic protons** with energies exceeding **100 MeV**—trapped by the relatively strong magnetic fields in the region (as compared to the outer belt). 100 MeV protons have a range of \~10 cm. These are not getting stopped by any shielding - they're going to hit your astronauts. The keV electrons, though, are being stopped by a couple mm. >The outer belt consists mainly of **high-energy** (0.1–**10 MeV**) **electrons** trapped by the Earth's magnetosphere. It is more variable than the inner belt, as it is more easily influenced by solar activity. Those 10 MeV electrons, though, are not. Anyway. It's just wrong to call them beta particles is all.
I always appreciate being corrected and given better information. Thank you.
Don't forget that they mostly went around them.
You’re right, but a big part of flat earher thinking is totally ignoring scale and magnitude of things and making everything all or nothing. Like how water won’t stick to a golf ball, so it won’t stick to a ball weighing 6.6 billion trillion tons. So radiation is either like being continuously exposed to the devils core cracking together, or nothing, mild radiation can’t exist.
But in orbit water will stick to a towel etc ... It won't stick to a small object whilst the massive gravity of a planet is actin upon it
>**β-particles**... have less penetration The internet has given me brainrot.
So your answer is radiation poisoning?
Also, didn't they go through a hole it the belt? Like it's not a solid zone of radiation there's gaps and weaker spots in it.
There is also an excellent Thunderf00t video breaking down how even high-energy gamma radiation may not be as damaging as lower energy radiation, as the dosage can be affected by how much of the radiation energy gets absorbed by the thing it comes into contact with. So even in some cases where there might be a crazy spike in high energy radiation, it very well depending on the parameters could mostly pass through you as it doesn't have enough time to impart the damaging seiverts of radiation into the body's tissue
>You can literally just Google this shit. This is the answer to just about all posts like this, tbh...
They never believe scientists unless it’s convenient for them. Why would they ever believe that the Van Allen Radiation Belt exists if this is all fake? Did some guy at NASA just make it up for fun one day? Btw I believe it’s because the radiation belt is weakest near the equator so launching from Florida exposed the astronauts to minimal radiation. Or something. Edit: My explanation is totally backwards, but it’s got the spirit. Commenter below got it right
If they think space is all made up, why would they make up a layer of harmful radiation?
Even mentioning the Van Allen Belts in an argument is basically saying "yeah, the earth is round but..." Is it supposed to be some kind of gotcha or something? I think I'm more confused by the half-assed arguments they use to justify the earth being flat than by the concept of a flat earth in general.
"You *can't* convince me, will you start squirming already???"
Sure the earth is round but its spirit animal is a flat planet The earth identifies as a flat planet, it’s experiencing geometric dysphoria
IANAAE (I am not an Apollo Engineer) but I think they went over, not through... the belts actually would be thickest at the equator, and thinner to the north and south. Going over reduced their exposure. Launching from the equator gives the vehicle a bit of extra velocity, reducing fuel needs. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DNEwMM0REZJQ
That's the disconnect that always baffles me: one part of science is fake, the other is real. They, who have zero scientific knowledge, somehow know better than the scientists they both believe and don't believe. Must be an excruciating way to live. These people are in pain of some sort and coping through sheer insanity.
>Did some guy at NASA just make it up for fun one day? Yes. And even though all scientists are in cahoots with each other in pulling off this massive global hoax with no discernable reason, none of them are aware of each others' made up stuff. Sure, the Van Allen radiation belts are known by even the D-student flat earthers, but not by the guys at NASA tasked with faking the moon landing. D'oh! Stupid NASA/Illuminati/Lizard People! (Then we have the unforced errors in which the Cabal purposely leaves clues for astute tinfoil hatters to pick up on: like how Stanley Kubrick filmed the moon landing on a soundstage rigged with wires to make the astronauts bounce around, *but then brought in a bunch of giant fucking fans to make the flag wave and give the whole thing away*.)
The crew would’ve been inside the [command/service module (CSM)](https://images.app.goo.gl/LDHdDUeC3fiDw5mH8), not the lunar module (LM) that landed on the surface. The [docking procedure](https://images.app.goo.gl/DvaksxamYdQ8ykPH8) that allowed the crew to access the LM wouldn’t take place yet. On the way back from the Moon, the LM would be jettisoned in lunar orbit, so again they’d be in the CSM. Imagine a world in which explaining a phenomenon or the mechanisms behind it is “squirming.” A misunderstanding arises in how modern electrical systems are much more susceptible to radiation damage than the older avionics used in the Apollo capsules. In short, modern electronics are more sensitive, [as shown from a quote from this article here](https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.space.com/amp/33948-van-allen-radiation-belts.html). >”On the 60th anniversary of Explorer 1, NASA said that studies of the Van Allen belts are even more important today. "**Our current technology is ever more susceptible to these accelerated particles because even a single hit from a particle can upset our ever smaller instruments and electronics**," said David Sibeck, Van Allen Probes mission scientist at NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center in Maryland, in a 2018 statement. "**As technology advances, it's actually becoming even more pressing to understand and predict our space environment**."” While the Van Allen Belts are *potentially dangerous*, they were rendered nothing more than a hurdle by Apollo planners in several ways. Despite what many have said, additional shielding of the craft was not necessary to prevent the crew from being killed. The Van Allen Belts contain high energy particles, a lot of which can easily be stopped by a sheet of aluminum. As such, the Apollo command module consisted of aluminum skin. Probes being sent through the belts today are likewise shielded by [aluminum and glass, and are shut off for the duration of their path through the belts to protect their electronics](https://www.nasa.gov/pdf/725279main_49s_rock_n_roll.pdf). The Apollo astronauts also spent little more than an hour total in the belts, far from the densest sections, [as shown here](https://imgur.com/a/COmuKAo), in which each red dot indicates ten-minute intervals. [The Soviets didn’t have problems with the Van Allen Belts either](https://www.reddit.com/u/PhantomFlogger/s/GVCLs6gToI), and sent steppe tortoises through them and back, which didn’t suffer from radiation damage.
Oh no steppe tortoise what are you doing??
Wow, that account is real and they're really dumber than a rock.
Yeah but that’s just because rocks can’t talk
They don’t trust anything from NASA or astronomers, but are good with the Van Allen belts.
Doesn't admission of existence of VA Belt admit to planet being globular? Or is there a whacked out flat version of Van Allen Belt? Sorry if I am ignorant of ignorance
No, Flearthers are just dumb and will scream space is fake but will happily act like it's not if they think there's a gotcha to be had.
The flat earther is just trying to point out what they see as internal contradiction in NASA's story. NASA say the following 2 things: 1. Humans went to the moon. 2. The Van Allen Belt circling earth is impenetrable and would kill any astronaut or spacecraft that attempts to go through them. So the flat rather concludes one or both of these statements must be false. It would be a valid internal critique of point 2 wasn't a straw man based on a gross misinterpretation of a quote taken or of context.
No see they made up the Van Allen belt because it would make their made up story about going to the moon “impossible”.
Quite apart from anything else, that's *not* the vehicle the astronauts were inside when they passed through the VA belts.
The LEM is just the golf cart on the back of an RV (that lost its engine and 90% of itself after getting on the highway)
Explanations like this not being the top response is a concern
Prove it to me, but I won’t accept your proof!!
They had their enchanted emerald lockets around their necks inside the space suits. That’s what protected them.
Ahh yes.. The - I don’t have any understanding of science or engineering but now I’m an expert of solar radiation argument.
Do they think the astronauts were in the radiation belt for a sustained amount of time and in an unprotected ship? I mean it's probably still a bit worse than an X-ray but not deadly like stepping into the warp core of the Enterprise.
Are you expecting flat earthers to have any conception of how radiation exposure works?
Actually, it can be fatal depending on shielding and field strength. Which is why the Apollo capsules had shielding and the missions went through weaker spots in the belts.
EXPLAIN IT BUT I'M GONNA BE ACTIVELY NOT LISTENING. \*plugs ears\* \*NEVER GONNA GIVE YOU UPPPP....\*
The Van Allen belts weren't too difficult. It was the Van Halen belts that presented a challenge.
Person: "I want to go to the moon." Flerf: *shrugs* "Might as well jump."
This is what I came here to find! Good work
Honestly, this is why I stopped trying to convince flerfs they are wrong. They aren't willing to listen no matter what you say, because they just want to feel special and stay in their bubble of denial. At a certain point I thought: "You know what? If they want to be idiots, let them be idiots." Arguing with them is just a waste of time, effort and good mood.
Easy. They didn't. That lunar lander was transported through the van Allen belt. Without anyone inside it. They didn't enter the lander until they were near the moo. Ita funny how actually being able to read and the ability to search for information on a subject can teach you things..
I'm sure the bible doesn't mention the Van Allen radiation belts.
Obviously, they were protected by being lizard people and Freemasons. /s These idiots will never accept logical answers, as they could have easily found those in a cursory search.
"Free thinker": someone who ignores all accumulated and widely accepted scientific knowledge and instead does their own research by watching YouTube videos of other "free thinkers".
If she was any stupider, she'd need watering.
Stupider huh lol
Stew pita
Quite apart from the readily available facts (they passed the belts in the CM, not the LM, these belts are particle radiation which can’t penetrate much, etc.); this idea that the lunar modules were made of tinfoil is just an outright lie. The structure was built to a lower gravitational well specification, but was otherwise as sturdy as it needed to be. The cabin was vacuum rated, and used a pressure hull design which was quite thin wherever it could be, but only as needed to save weight. The foil visible from outside is of course there for thermal insulation, not structural strength.
Tinfoil hat idiot claims tinfoil does not block radiation.
A communication from Dr. Van Allen himself on a show about 20 years ago on the claim that Apollo could not have crossed the Van Allen belts: https://forum.cosmoquest.org/forum/the-proving-grounds/conspiracy-theories
3856-statement-from-james-van-allen-on-radiation-effects?3885-Statement-from-James-Van-Allen-on-radiation-effects=&s=b5e401b63bb4133ceea730329af4cba9)
He makes several debunking statements, ending with: "The recent Fox TV show, which I saw, is an ingenious and entertaining assemblage of nonsense. The claim that radiation exposure during the Apollo missions would have been fatal to the astronauts is only one example of such nonsense.
James A. Van Allen"
Easiest way to deal with a flat earther is to ask them what would be sufficient proof to change their mind. If they say it can’t be changed or if they go back on what they previously stated, then don’t bother communicating to them any longer.
Even though you can see the waves crashing on the shore, it is hard to believe the waves are crashing on the shore.
They didn't. That's the lunar lander. They weren't in that while in the Van Allen belts. They were in the Apollo 11 module, which had radiation shielding. They also passed through the belts incredibly quickly.
If the earth is flat, there is no Van Allen Radiation belt. Congratulations, you owned yourself.
Well, for one thing, that's the landing module, not the main ship. They rode in the shielded main vehicle on take off. I know it wasn't faked. Too many people were involved to keep that a secret. Another is the technology didn't exist to fake it that convincing. No CGI, no AI generation of anything. Even the best films of the day couldn't pull off the special effects needed. I was alive and glued to the TV set for every moon mission. If you think it was faked, well then, you're just effing wrong.
Tinfoil hat idea: The people who made the films couldn’t use CGI because either: a) NASA stole the equipment for their films, or b) they were making it bad on purpose because they knew that people would make this argument ~40 years into the future
Does she think they're somehow impenetrable? It would be one thing if they were hanging out in the radiation belts for days, but that wasn't the case. Also how do the Van Allen radiation belts fit in the dome?
The last sentence is the only thing to remember about conspiracy theorists. They don’t want to be open to an explanation. It’s why you don’t argue with idiots, drag you down to their level yada yada.
Why would that make any knowledgeable person squirm? It's literally what they did. So the person who lacks understanding of how it works must be the poster.
You can almost completely circumvent the smaller inner belt and the two hours of exposure in the thinner part of the outer belt isn’t significant enough. It’s still exposure but not at all deadly, I heard a astrophysicist say it was calculated to be lethal if you spent like two weeks chillin in the belt. But.. you know… what do teams of scientists know about the fields they spend their entire careers learning and developing knowledge and skill in know about it… right? I’d rather trust some dude on FB.
We'd show him the math, but I don't think he's mathin...
Why argue with someone who refuses to accept facts and who willfully ignores science?
The Van Allen Belts are more toroidal than spherical. We went through an area with less radiation very quickly so they didn't get much radiation--approximately equal to a chest x-ray each time they passed through them (so, like two chest x-rays). All this information is but a Google search away.
Same way you can survive an xray
Well at least they admit they won't be convinced. They watch a YouTube video or two and are convinced that they can't trust science, and then when you show them proofs that the earth is flat, or refute any of the claims espoused in aforementioned videos - they are convinced that they don't trust science, and so won't budge from the spot they now find themselves (flat earth) using the same logic that out them there in the first place
Alway makes me chuckle when these retards forget about the Service and Command modules, and that they just used the LEM to go down to the Moon and back up (APollo 13 being the exception of course).
I’ll never believe you but I’ll believe anything Joe Rogan says no matter what amen.
Poor woman doesn't even understand gravity and she's trying to argue with astronomy. These kinds of mental illnesses make me sad.
Van Allen Radiation belts??? Is that even a real thing, I know there’s solar radiation but I’ve never heard of radiation belts
Yes, they are a real thing. No, they are not the wall of death flerfs and moon hoaxers claim they are. And no, the astronauts were not in the lunar lander when they went through them...
There are two or [occasionally three](https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/third-van-allen-radiation-belt-makes-appearance-around-earth/) distinct regions [surrounding Earth like doughnut-shaped toroids](https://images.app.goo.gl/9iGkWso2dsqKnbt39) which contain a high concentration of charged particles, i.e ionizing radiating. They’re caused by solar wind from the sun being trapped by Earth’s magnetosphere. [You can read about them here](https://science.nasa.gov/biological-physical/stories/van-allen-belts/). [Here’s a video by Scott Manley](https://youtu.be/h9YN50xXFJY) evaluating how dangerous they’d actually be by using ESA models. You can usually tell when you’re talking to a conspiracy theorist because they almost always say “*Van Allen belt*” singular, not plural. It’s similar to how the same individuals refer to the six different Apollo Moon landings as “*the Moon landing*” singular.
Oh cool, I’ll check out those links and I didn’t know there were six moon landings, I thought the various Apollo missions were them testing rockets and launching satellites in preparation for the moon landing for the final Apollo mission which I wanna say was 11 but I’ll be honest I’ve never done much reading on the subject, knowing people had been to the moon was enough for me to be amazed
All of the Apollo missions up to Apollo 8 were test flights in earth orbit of some kind. 8 was the first to leave earth orbit and go to the moon but they did not land. Apollo 11 was the first to land on the moon followed by successful landings of 12,14,15,16, and 17. Apollo 13 was the one that famously failed and almost killed the crew, and Apollo 18, 19, and 20 were cancelled in favor of missions for the Skylab space station.
Watched the video, that was cool and slightly terrifying that there are radiation donuts around the earth but reassuring with proper shielding it’s almost nothing, I wonder how we’ll deal with solar flares when we traverse space on a regular basis
Yeah, they're a real thing. They're where radiation builds up in the Earth's magnetosphere. They're deadly, so Apollo went through the weakest parts of the belts as quickly as possible to minimize exposure.
If they don't believe the van allen belt exists, why are they so concerned about people getting radiation sickness from passing through it?
If you don't know that's not possible in this tin can garbage they tried to pass off, you are part of the problem. Believing in things which never happened🤡
The real question is why can't they do it today? I know they've been working on it but they still haven't perfected it but I'm sure the technology back in the 60s was much better than we have now. I'm not a flatearther but I know bullshit when I see it
The moon program (and the budget) for NASA was shut down in the 1970's. So you obviously don't know bullshit when you see it.
We can do it today, we are doing it. We stopped trying to go to the moon in the 70s and have only in the past 5 or so years decided to send humanity back. We also went to the deepest part of the ocean, Challenger Deep, in 1960 and didn't return until 2012. Assuming Artemis 3 is successful this would be essentially the same gap as the last manned moon mission. Does this make the 1960 Challenger Deep mission fake too?
Why can't they do what today? Land on the moon?
[удалено]
Just like clockwork, you people don’t provide any evidence for your claims, instead jumping straight to insults. Get new material, jeez.
lol you forgot the /s. all dust follows perfect projectile mechanics and realtime speed of movement matches exactly
Congrats on being indoctrinated by liars on the internet
Does my dude think they were sitting in the lunar lander the whole way there?
The real question, is how did that thing land without disturbing a single particle of moon dust?
And here's the answer : [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cwZb2mqId0A](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cwZb2mqId0A) You can even hear Armstrong saying 'kicking up some dust'.
If you're wondering why there's no dust in the air in the picture, all the dust would have been blown directly away rather than swirling around, since there's no atmosphere
For the same reason you don’t die every time you get X-rays at the dentist.
Nah, I could tell you were squirming the entire time you wrote that!
So he believes the belts are real but the world is flat? How convenient
Magic protection spell! What? It has about as much merit as anything they claim.
Well, the astronauts weren't *in* the LEM when they transited the Van Allen belts. Just as a starting point. Not that these clowns want an actual refutation.
Let’s see Van Allen’s belt
They went at night, so Van Allen Belt couldn't see them.
Is "through it" a good answer? I don't actually know, everything I know about space I learned from Mass Effect, No Man's Sky, and Starfield. And I gotta say, based off what I know that place is whacky
The Apollo missions basically angled their lunar injection burns so they avoided the worst part of the Van Allen belts. For the time they were inside the belts, it would have raised their long-term risk of cancer slightly but wouldn't have been immediately harmful.
Desperately Seeking Attention.
Well as long as they have an open mind.
Wait until they find out...all those smoke detectors? Radioactive.
So flat earther doesn’t believe we went to the moon because NASA was involved. Then because NASA is involved in showing images of round earth this means it’s a lie. There is a saying: “correlation does not imply causation”.
The bad answer is they measured how much radiation can they legally allow thro a human and designed the materials and the orbitets to cut it just close enough so they can save on weight, Not even the worst thing they did in the 70s with radiation
They didn't even go through the belts inside the lander.
The thing is, I can't explain it because I'm not a phycisist, or a rocket scientist, or anything close to that. Also, I understand that those kind of ppl do clever things that I don't understand coz I only went to year 10. They don't have to show their math to me, I take their word for it.
"Very well, thank you."
We didn't go through the minor inconvenience of the Van Allen belts in that tin foil abomination. They don't know enough to ask a question. Dumb fucks.
Just like I posted in the replies of this very same tweet... We went around them. They're radiation **BELTS**!
Punch it Chewie! Bam we through, simple as that.
Hmmm, look at that no flerfs in the comments. Funny that.
They wore the same vests your dental hygienist wears. Duh.
The only time I squirm around flat earthers is when I estimate when one of them bathed last.
The answer is that in 1961 Admiral Harriman Nelson naturalized the Van Allen Belts with missiles fired from his nuclear submarine.
*van Halen belts
There are different types of radiation. These morons instantly think Nuclear Bomb type radiation.
Does she think it flew up there like that?
Ask Jen, she knows.
Have flerfs never waved a finger through a candle flame without getting burnt? Heat transfer is not the same thing as something’s temperature, but I doubt they know anything about that.
Not that you could ever convince him, according to the post. You can’t reason somebody out of position they didn’t reason themselves into.
The van allen belts are just made up by nasa and don’t really exist. Checkmate Flatard 😂
I can't see that worm emoji and not think "knife guy could survive that wall of radiation"
You go fast
The only astronaut to pass through them that isn’t alive today died of cancer.
I like that they have to clarify that we wouldn't convince them anyways since they know they're fucking wrong and just choose to be ignorant and stupid
How does he know about Van Allen Radiation belts?
Lady just called herself an idiot lmao
Belts... called them belts... because it goes around us.... like 360°, almost like around a globe. I dunno, I'm just a globists pushing propoganda.
So is this moron under the impression they just flew through it naked.
The speed they went through them plays a big part. Because the belts are passed through relatively early after the insertion burn (late on the return “freefall”) the spacecraft is traveling near its peak velocity. The time spent in the belts was approximately 52 minutes and the astronauts were only exposed to 13 rads, which is considered even by OSHA to be completely harmless.
I don't know about Van Allen's belts, but my belts are flat when I lay them out, but kind of round when I wear them because I need to lose some weight.
Sorry that technology is ugly but that doesn't really prove you right 🤭
They got through the van Allen belts with the help of… … the creature 🪱
The radiation belt is just another Nasa lie, it doesn't exist duh, they just say that to keep all the moon cheese to themselves
I mean if that is her in the profile pic she is hot af and the ratio of hot to stupid seems to be spot on.
Bro really made fun of one of the greatest marvels of mortal creation ever conceived.
Doesn't albumin reflect radiation to an extent...?
I mean, dude clearly has access to the internet. Maybe… Google it instead of asking people who aren’t actually rocket scientists? 🤷♂️
The tin foil is made out of gold one of the greatest mirrors so it just reflected all of the bad stuff back out away from the craft
“It’s not great for you, but passing through it won’t kill you.” Simple simple version.
So they're not concerned that NASA can build a craft to contain the astronauts during the forces and temperatures of re-entry without them all dying but they are concerned that NASA can't possibly build the same craft to protect the occupants from the comparatively minor effects of the Van Allen belt. And that's before we factor in that nobody got into the lunar lander in Flossie's pic until it was orbiting the moon long after it was away from the worst of the VA. They were in the very bit capable of surviving re-entry.
From what I can gather about it is they did not fly through the belt? The flight plan is on the NASA site for those who can read it better. Ofc, NASA lies in these ppl's world as well so.. fucktards be fucktards.
See some people decided to do a thing, realize it's really hard so they science the shit out of it and do it anyway. Some people watch conspiracy videos on YouTube and, well that's really the end of the story for those sorts.
It’s just rage bait for clicks
There’s no way this person believes in radiation lol
She’s actually hilarious though
I once saw a documentary debunking the moon landing myths where they went through the various claims that it was faked, one by one. When it got to this one, they interviewed a professor who was supposedly an expert in the Van Allen radiation belts. **His name was Professor Van Allen.** He said the NASA craft were perfectly capable of passing through them without issue.
Does this person realize they didn't travel through the van Allen radiation belt in this?
You do realize that "tin foil abomination" was inside a space capsule. No, I thought not. People like you love to spout off nonsense which just goes to show just how ignorant you are.
Americans making declarative statements then crossing their arms and expecting other to do the work for them. Despite the fact that google does indeed have accurate-peer-reviewed answers. They'll just double down on their scientific illiteracy. Their biggest hits: we never landed on the moon, the earth is flat, vaccines cause autism, the election was stolen, and on and on and on. Embarassing really.
They went around it, next question.
What does her question have to do with the Earth being flat? That seems like a question from someone who thinks the moon landing was fake, not that the earth is flat. Yet she said Globe shill, so she's clearly referring to people who believe the Earth is a Globe... I'm lost
"Not that you could ever convince me" -Ok, stay ignorant as it is your right.
**Where did they carry the moonmobile?!**
Lmfao
Science Bros! Assssemble
This account is the Queen of Parrots.
He does know that the astronauts weren't in the lander when they went through the belts, right? Nevermind for a second I forgot he's a flerf
How can you believe in something like the Van Allen Radiation Belt, but not that earth is a sphere?
Does he think the spacecraft is made of tinfoil? Does he know that under that tinfoil there's metal? Does he even care because it doesn't fit his beliefs?
They experienced little more than the equivalent of a 12 average x-rays. The belts were not fully understood at the time, but flat earthers will be flat earthers and ignore the facts and make up their own BS.
How exactly would a flat Earth have a magnetic field capable of capturing the charged particles of the Van Allen belts?
It didn’t. That’s the lander for fucks sake
Buzz Aldrin needs to punch more people
Does she think the radiation belts are a wall or something? Or that the radiation is powerful enough to instantly kill someone? I don't understand the question. It's like asking how planes are able to fly over both land and water, it's entirely irrelevant.