If we landed on the moon due to the radiation how are the astronauts still alive?

Question

The suits were only an inch or so thick and scientists reckon you would need a suit 6 feet deep of lead to stop the radiation or you would be killed, yet the astronauts are still fine today. And this was all achieved in the sixties but we have never gone back nor are there any plans to. Surely this is just another government lie?

Its just that i watched a TV programme on the whole conspiracy thing and it brought up lots of contradictory evidence, and all this was explained in detail by scientists then these questions were put to a number of NASA scientists and they couldn't answer these questions, they just said 'we did land on the moon' repeatedly to me it was pretty clear that they were lying. The radiation is so dangerous that they would be dead long ago, but there not. The radiation im talkin about is cosmic rays and solar flares,

Answer 1

>>The suits were only an inch or so thick and scientists reckon you would need a suit 6 feet deep of lead to stop the radiation or you would be killed<<

Which scientists would these be? I'm a scientist, and I don't share that reckoning.

Radiation in space is something that has been studied in depth by many agencies, not just NASA. In fact, a number of private commercial enterprises, such as the communications business, require that information to guarantee their billions of dolars of profitable business sending satellites into space. If the information about space radiation said it was too dangerous for Apollo to have happened as advertised someone outside NASA would know and be able to prove it because their sensitive electronic satellites would be unable to survive out there.

Not one sensible scientist reckons six feet of lead is needed to shield radiation in space. The Russians didn't design their lunar spacecraft with that mush shielding. In fact, the Russians were the first to send live specimens round the Moon. Look up Zond 5 and see how much shielding that had.

Answer 2

Scientists also "reckon" that the astronauts were not exposed to any dangerous levels of radiation on their trip. The worst part was in the Van Allen belts and they spent no more than 30 to 60 minutes in those, and the exposure was similar to what we get here on Earth in one day.

We went 6 times before we decided continued missions were far too expensive, considering we had already accomplished the main goal of getting there first. Since then NASA has had a much smaller budget.

And you really need to do your research before you make assumptions. We do have plans to go back. The Orion Crew Exploration Vehicle that's being created to replace the shuttle as the US's manned spacecraft will also take a crew of 4 to the moon to land in around 2020, and we will be building permanent bases there in order to maintain a permanent or semi-permanent presence similar to what we are doing with the ISS.

EDIT: Any scientist who thinks that the radiation would have been unbearable is not a real scientist. Any real scientist that is at all respected in the community knows that while the astronauts did experience a larger amount of radiation while they were out there, it was far from dangerous. A solar flare would have been dangerous but none were thrown toward Earth during the time that the astronauts were out there.

Conspiracy theory videos are always very "convincing" if you don't think about them too hard. They are designed that way. They are fighting an uphill battle trying to prove something that isn't true, so they are hardly going to attempt a fair and even-handed approach. Interviews are conducted specifically to make the interviewee look like an idiot. They are really good at doing that. They also get to edit and cut the interview any way they see fit, it's easy to move things out of context that way.

If we faked the landing on the moon why the hell would we fake it 6 times? We did land 6 times you know. We didn't have the technology back then to create a good enough fake that would stand up to scrutiny for so long. There's no way you're going to keep the thousands of people who worked on the project quiet about it either.

Answer 3

The radiation on the Moon and in the space between Earth and the Moon is not that strong, as long as there are no flares taking place on the Sun. Apollo was lucky that no major flares occurred during a mission, but they had plans as to what to do if there were flares, which involved things like not landing or if they were on the ground taking off ASAP and getting back in the Command Module and pointing the tail of the space craft toward the Sun so that the whole mass of the heat shield and the engine and fuel tanks of the Service Module were blocking solar radiation.

Answer 4

guy, it quite is utter bulls***. For one factor there is not any thank you to "blast a hollow" in the van allen belt. Exploding a nuclear bomb might upload radiation, which they in certainty did do, not take it away. in basic terms a fool might think of that it ought to blast a hollow in the belt. The U.S. did not have too undesirable many fools working of their nuclear or area courses back then. So no person might have proposed this test to objective to try this. The intense altitude nuclear tests had not something to do with blasting a hollow in the belt. i've got heard a great style of the nutjob "theories" related to the Moon, yet in no way heard the theory those nuclear tests have been approximately blasting a hollow in the van allen belt. this is a sparkling point of stupidity. The van allen belt isn't uniform. this is thicker in some aspects than in others. The trajectories of the Apollo flights have been chosen quite to shrink their exposure to the 4 hours (total, coming and going) which you point out. And particular, aluminum blocks lots of the radiation. 10cm might block notably much all of it. yet a bite of aluminum foil might block a great style of it. The astronauts have been uncovered to approximately as plenty photograph voltaic radiation in the 4 hours they spent in the belt that a individual may well be uncovered to at sea point in the international over a 2 year era. for sure survivable... lots of the astronauts who made the journeys did strengthen cataracts however. And no, Russia in no way landed a module on the Moon. They landed some unmanned probes there, yet they in no way landed, nor even despatched, an unmanned lunar module on the Moon.

Answer 5

The suits worn by the Astronauts had reflective outer coatings which reflected 99 percent of the radiation
hitting them during their space walk on the surface of
the Moon. They were also very cautious to only stay
exposed to the direct sunlight for very brief periods.
In fact none of the radiation from the Sun was allowed
to strike the Astronauts direct as in 12:00 Noon on
the Earth. All exposure was at a time which was
equivalent to late in the day when the rays came in at
a relatively low angle.

The combination of short exposure and late in the Lunar
Day resulted in very low exposure to X ray and Gamma
Ray radiation from the Sun.

Your information is correct for long periods of Continuous Exposure in the Lunar environment. It is not applicable
to short exposures such as those committed to in the
Lunar Landing. Haven't you ever wondered why the
Space Suit Helmets had mirrored face plates? To
reflect Solar Radiation...

Answer 6

The amount of radiation you get from spending a hour in space in about what you get from a day on the Earth. Unless you do get hit by a solar flare, you're fine to spend months there, radiation-wise. And we see solar flares coming days ahead of time, plenty of time to warn astronauts to get back inside the shelter.

I don't know where they got the 6 feet number from, but it's simply not true. Believe me, this was studied for many years before we sent people up. We had satellites to measure the background radiation. NASA is not that careless.

Answer 7

NASA no longer wastes any time answering the allegations of a moon landing hoax. When questioned in this way, any PR representative from will only say "We did land on the Moon."

This is not because they're lying. It is because they have already answered these questions thousands of times over the last four decades. Most of the "evidence" regurgitated by the various conspiracy theorists stems from their lack of understanding of several simple scientific principles. With all the budget cuts, NASA's PR department has better things to do than play junior high school physics teacher to these ill-informed people.

Answer 8

The astronauts did, in fact, receive more radiation than average here on Earth. But it wasn't lethal, and their suits kept the astronauts safe on the moon (and in the space walks done on the way home.)

As far as "they're fine today".... a number of the Apollo moon walkers have died, along with some Apollo veterans who didn't walk on the moon.

We've never gone back due to Congress' cutting of the budget. Our government lies enough as it is - don't give them more credit than they're due.

Answer 9

They got a dose of radiation, to be sure, but it wasn't nearly enough to kill them, or even harm them.

It's like cancer patients going in for radiation treatment. They get a big dose of radiation -- more than the astronauts did while spending week away from the earth, and on the moon -- but they don't die from it; sick, yes; but not dead. And it's the same kind of radiation for cancer patients as the astronauts got while at the moon.

Just because you get irradiated, doesn't necessarly mean you will die. It depends on the dose and the time.

.

Answer 10

ok first of all we did not land on the moon due to radiation, we landed on the moon in spite of the radiation.

the radiation that the astronauts dealt with was about the same amount that you'd get if you got a full body x-ray. that's it. the van allen belts, solar flares... not as deadly as the conspiracy quacks would lead you to believe.

go to www.badastronomy.com to see all of those conspiracy claims debunked.