Did man land on the moon?

There is a space program and you bet NASA and the government sees this as critical, but that is for satellites, communications, spying, cameras, etc. JFK bought into the idea of going to the moon and so hyped this to the "moon". That got the money flowing, but no one should think that a president is smart enough to know whether or not it is possible to go to the moon.

There is a lot of radiation in a low earth orbit, certainly more than airline pilots get, but it is small compared to what flying through the belts of radiation that have accumulated due to the Earth's magnetic field. The problem they have is not just the amount of radiation an astronaut would receive, especially once they leave the space craft, but going through that belt can totally disrupt electronics of the spaceship. If you had a small satellite that was "hurled" into space you could shield the electronics. But once you have a capsule that three astronauts are in, the amount of lead needed becomes much, much greater.

Once again, I don't know enough to know whether they were able to work around this problem. But it is a problem that many have raised and NASA should respond to it rather than saying we are nutty for asking because you saw the moon landing on TV.

You see, even if they could overcome the weight issue flying from the Earth to the moon, you still need the lander to be fully shielded and then with all that extra weight to be able to take off from the moon. That in turn means they will need that much more fuel, etc.

The astronauts where lucky to survive radiation on the moon that's for sure.

But I think you should take some things into account first.

1 they where probably not out of there ship to long.

2 scientists would have monitored space weather to see the best time to walk on the moon.

3 radiation is not as bad when touch down is in a valley where there is no sun hitting.

4 simply put when the sun is on the service of the moon and you stand behind a rock the temperatures can fluctuate dramatically between high and low.

If you touch down on a part of the moon that isn't seeing direct sun because of rotational orbit, and Light and space weather predictions are taken into account and not as severe, then there is your lucky chance.

here ya go,

Weather on the moon 🙂
What I've been saying for the last 6 posts.

Search NASA.gov

• NASA TV

MORE STORIES

Earth's Moon
Jan 18, 2023
Is There Weather on the Moon? We Asked a NASA Scientist: Episode 34
Is there weather on the Moon?




Well, because the Moon doesn't have a significant atmosphere like Earth, it does not experience weather, like wind or atmospheric temperature or precipitation like rain and snow. However, the Moon does experience what we refer to as space weather. Space weather loosely refers to how changing conditions throughout the solar system, like the varying solar wind, which is composed of charged particles from the Sun, and meteoroid streams, affect planetary surfaces and volatile cycles.

So at the Moon, the solar wind and meteoroids have direct access to the surface and they continuously alter the lunar soil. These same processes can eject gases from the lunar soil and form a very tenuous lunar atmosphere, which we refer to as an exosphere.

At Earth, our atmosphere and magnetosphere largely protect us from space weather. However, in the uppermost regions of Earth's atmosphere, it can be a problem for satellite technologies.

So is there weather on the Moon? The Moon does not experience weather like on Earth related to the atmosphere. However, it does experience space weather and that will be very important to forecast as humans return to the moon.

So he agrees with me, the moon does not have wind that would move the flag and cause it to flap in the wind. Thanks for posting this.

no he said the moon experiences space weather from electro charged particles from the sun. Plus dust and gasses always in motion

Which could move a flag.

Also there is a tiny atmosphere known as an exosphere. Which includes dust and gasses always in motion

Bro, let it go LOL. ZNP's our conspiracy-theorist-in-chief. Sometimes he's got smart stuff to say, but at some point, you cannot take him seriously.

There's a lot to be learned from conspiring lol, I would never of learned that all the world leaders are laboratory artificial clones 🙂

Imagine for a moment you're in charge of NASA. Billions of dollars in taxpayer funding. You legitimately get three men all the way to the moon. They take a few pictures, but none of any stars? Pretty poor, in my opinion, without a watertight excuse. They don't have one. With all else considered, NASA lacks the extraordinary evidence required to support its extraordinary claim that it made it to the moon.

I don't know about you, but when I'm in a new place, I make a point of looking at the night sky, and trying to see the stars. They are very different, even if you can't see them all. These NASA people are not me - they're supposed to be the leading military scientists and explorers of America, on a budget of billions of dollars of other peoples' money. How much more should they have been doing this and taking the evidence for it? The excuses given are non-credible to any fair-minded person. If I claimed to have done what NASA have done with its evidence, you would laugh. The only reason you don't laugh at NASA is that it was given billions of dollars, and the government has given its program respectability by acknowledging it.

I disagree with these points, but it seems your mind is already made up.

This is the genetic logical fallacy. It doesn't really matter what my bias is, the arguments stand or fall on their own merits.

However, I figured out the moon-landing hoax many years before I became a flat-Earther. Flat-Earth is a harder truth to grasp, because there are so many more people fooled by the lie. To get away with the NASA lie, what do you need? Probably 3 astro-nots, a manager and a cameraman. A relatively easy deception to pull-off; not many to keep the secret. Especially if you have all manner of excuses about why you couldn't take many photographs, why the shadows don't line up, why there were no stars, why the flag is moving etc. And not even the actor-naughts kept the secrets, let alone the producer (Stanley Kubrick).

Why? Why do you think Freemasons wouldn't lie? Do you believe Freemason actor-naughts can also be Christian? Who is their highest allegiance to - Jesus or Lucifer? Can one man serve two masters? Are even regular Christians unable to lie (i.e. those Christians who do not have the added inhibition of divided loyalty between God and Satan)? Do you see the logical fallacy in your belief that purported-Christians cannot lie?

my view is my own reasoning as to some nights I can see stars on a clear night at the same time, but other nights I don't.

Its solely dependent on how light reflects from star to planet at anyone time.

Or Its how light reflects of planets at any one time.
Due to increased tensity of solar flares from the sun.

I would say how the light reflects of the moon from our sun plays a big part in how well we see the stars at night to.

If we then go on to make a huge conspiracy over this, it's foundation is flawed.

The fact that nasa may not have taken as many pictures of what you've found in one video proofs nothing to.

Did nasa go to to the moon on the intension they had to proove it wasn't a fake ?.

I can't see any reason NASA went to all the trouble to make a fake look real, such as building the rocket and launching it. Not to mention the years of paper work.

It would be far easier to just go to the moon.

I don't believe we can get to the moon anymore than we can get to the sun. If true, it would be far easier to fake the moon landing than achieve the impossible. This is the only explanation that makes sense of NASA's lies, deceit and lack of transparency.

true. i believe we are trapped here. i don't think any of us can leave this realm alive anyway. Enoch and Elijah are the only two that have.

With the same reasoning you could probably think they faked it to justify the taxpayers expense, because they couldn't get that far after years of research, I think this is where your reading into it.

But again this would be an idea that hasn't been proven 😉

Despite all this do you believe any craft has left the the earth's atmosphere

We come back to burden of proof. It's not on me to disprove NASA's extraordinary claims of going to the moon. It's on NASA to prove where the billions of taxpayer dollars went (and that it got to the moon, given the moon-landing claim it has already made). And given there's insufficient evidence NASA ever got to the moon, there are plenty of people who should be investigated for fraud, in my humble opinion.

No. I believe there is a firmament which separates the waters above from the waters below, and that any attempt to get to the moon would involve impacting on the firmament.

with the same reasoning then if nothing could leave, you could say nothing could enter, and we know that's not the case, such as meteors.

Why the astronauts never suffered severe radiation,

They landed in a valley on the moon deeper than the grand canyon.

Check it out your self 3 mins 10 in.

My fingernails grow a lot faster than one and a half inches per year .

Those are nails that can reach into the 5th dimension.