MSNBC Debates Moon Landing Hoax (2002)
**COPYRIGHT ©2002, MSNBC, Inc.**
Conspiracy theorist Bart Sibrel and astronomer Phil Plait debate whether the moon landing were faked on MSNBC’s “The Abrams Report.” This was broadcast in November 2002.
This video is copyrighted material and the copyright owner is not affilated with me in anyway. No challenge for copyright is intended. If the copyright holder does not want this video on YouTube, please let me know by sending me a message using the link below and I will gladly remove it. http://www.youtube.com/outbox?to_user=ConspiracyWorld
Duration : 0:5:48
[youtube SabtlXmCDdM]
Millions of people …
Millions of people are so gullible.
Just another Hoax by the same U.S. government that brought you the Gulf of Tonkin Hoax that actually never happened.
@AstroClownBuster
…
@AstroClownBuster
Now we cant help but notice that you couldnt answer any question either.
WHAT ARE the rad levels on the moon?
And why do hoax morons bring that up if they dont know?
@AstroClownBuster
…
@AstroClownBuster
“solar max”
Except 2/3rds of the evil and heartless “solar max” is alpha and beta radiation, which can be blocked by plastic. Ask any professional radiologist. Like me.
@AstroClownBuster
…
@AstroClownBuster
The difference between me and hoaxtards is that yes, I CAN answer my questions. Unlike them, who cut and paste big words they hear on TV and hope no one ever exposes how phony they are.
About “How much radiation is fatal?” funny you should ask. I made a WHOLE MOVIE about it. Its uploaded right now and gives every answer.
See, I actually work in this for a living.
And there’s nothing you can bluff or fake in any fairy tale thats as legitimate as my actual life.
HOAX OF THE CENTURY …
HOAX OF THE CENTURY
Nasa are Liars
Nasa Astronauts are Traitors
Apollo 17 astronaut Gene Cernan said they had to shut the LM engine down before they faked the moon landing
Apollo 11 astronauts said they never shut the LM engine down
In 1969 Nasa did not know that the internet was coming to expose the Nasa Hoax
All NASA Fake footage was actually filmed off TV screens at Houston Mission Control for the TV coverage… No one in the media was given the raw footage
It is all a …
It is all a Contrived Piss-Poor Hoax.
@krisdevalle
I …
@krisdevalle
I don’t need to prove it.
@AstroClownBuster …
@AstroClownBuster Prove it.
@krisdevalle
…
@krisdevalle
Yes they are connected in some way, and when they are not at all connected (just in case) they simply don’t feel the urge to stop that 40 year old momentum lie alone, and for no gain other than the huge risk of being ostracized by their ‘peer’
Ok i find back what …
Ok i find back what i was searching in my (messy) archives
on the moon surface (apparently in solar quiet years, which mean more GCR and less solar event) the GCR component of the dose is : .71 mSv/day unshielded and .55 mSv/day under 10g/cm² shielding, notice there is not much of a reduction becauyse GCR are highly penetrating. That is not extreme,but again, this is ONLY the GCR component.
Calculation of Radiation
Exposure on the Moon Surface
by using PHITS
page 13
@AstroClownBuster …
@AstroClownBuster So every single rocket scientist, astrophysicist, astronomer, in every single country, worldwide, is connected to the US in some way, and won’t back you up on your claims of deadly solar maximum, because they’ll lose their job.
I find this to be about a plausible as the idea of a hoax.
@krisdevalle
…
@krisdevalle
Their is various level of dependency, it is not always direct. Example china is exporting enormously over USA and have no reason embarass them over a 40 y old fraud that could only affect their relationship negatively, you think too small and not deep enough, that is a classical thing amongst apollo fanboys.
@AstroClownBuster …
@AstroClownBuster So you’re saying an astrophysicist working for China’s space program, who are planning to go to the moon; that their job is dependent on NASA for some reason, which is why they’re not denouncing the Apollo moon landings, because they might get fired from the Chinese Space Agency.
What a crock of shit.
It’s actually because YOU think it’s too dangerous, not anyone who knows what they’re talking about.
@krisdevalle
…
@krisdevalle
It’s not funny and it is perfectly understandable, it is a 40 y old fraud, those that want to work in these fields are more or less dependant of peoples related to this fraud, and no one believe that they would gain anything in being alone in front of the apollo moon landing fraud train, more risk than gain (basically the idea is : Why should I care, ME, if no one else care?) that don’t mean they don’t perfectly know that it was a fraud; they don’t want being ostracized.
@AstroClownBuster …
@AstroClownBuster Funny how we never see any scientist, from any country, yelling about how this should have stopped them from going. Just you.
knowing that you …
knowing that you got much more solar event (unpredictable) in solar maximum years than in solar quiet years, and that apollo mission allegedly went in solar maximum years…
@krisdevalle
…
@krisdevalle
The base radiation is roughly 10 times the amount you got in GCR from LEO (ISS or shuttle orbit) this is for GCR only component, and don’t include any secondary radiation or anything. But the total amount you could get is different, because it will fluctuate greatly depending on solar event you got (can be skyrocketing)
@AstroClownBuster …
@AstroClownBuster So, what are the radiation levels on the moon then?
@SpreadingtheMuse …
@SpreadingtheMuse
What about you answer your own question spreadingthesnake? Let’s show to us how much of a freshman you are.
@krisdevalle
…
@krisdevalle
You are so wrong… Astronauts in EVA in LEO are NOT subject to ‘virtually the same’ condition, since they are still protected by our magnetosphere (powerfull shield that divide GCR radiation alone by 10 for example and even more for solar radiation)
@ …
@AnonymousWhitePerson
Please enlighten us, what the “level” of radiation on the moon is.
I want to know the precise dose rate there, down to the exact mrem.
See, you’re not the first hoax phony to try to bluff about radiation. I always ask detailed follow-up questions, and the hoax phonys always bomb. You’ll be no different.
Could you answer ANY technical question?
How much radiation is fatal?
How to block the 3 major kinds?
Those are freshman level remedial questions, and easy.
@ …
@AnonymousWhitePerson
If radiation is “poorly understood” then you have no business saying its fatal, now do you?
But you’re simply wrong. Radiation has been classified into Alpha Beta Gamma etc for decades. We know how dangerous each type is, we know how much the sun generates. I have a feeling you never bothered to ask a real radiologist before bringing any of this up.
Well good news, you’re talking to one now.
And I know whatever you read on a dork webpage was abject manure.
@ …
@AnonymousWhitePerson
Aldrin wont swear because its a corny act of postering for a phony “journalist” who has neither the qualification nor credibility to use a Bible with any authority whatsoever. Aldrin recognizes it as a shallow publicity stunt for Sibrels self-aggrandizement.
Its called “dignity.” Aldrin doesnt have to cowtow to every freeloader who begs for attention.
@ …
@AnonymousWhitePerson And yet other astronauts have, such as Gene Cernan. Swearing on the bible doesn’t really trump the agreement of scientists internationally, or the large amount of third-party evidence that confirms manned moon landings. The bible is a book – swearing is no proof of anything, really. Could you at least use some scientific evidence suggesting this was a hoax, not religion.
Buzz Aldrin himself …
Buzz Aldrin himself will not swear on the Bible that he actually landed on the Moon.
Very nice!…
Wow you are very very talented!! keep up the awesome work. You are very talented & I only wish I could write as good as you do
…