1. Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Man-kind never set foot on the planetary body known as the 'moon', acc to Bible (KJB), Hist. & Sci.

Discussion in 'Other Christian Denominations' started by Alofa Atu, Jul 25, 2021.

  1. Alcott

    Alcott Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2002
    Messages:
    9,252
    Likes Received:
    334
    Faith:
    Baptist
    They went there. And they were fortunate the Master Cylinder gave then a brake, or they would never have gotten back.
     
  2. Van

    Van Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2011
    Messages:
    19,478
    Likes Received:
    634
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Many years ago, while hunting in the off limits area near Chernobyl, I came across a blind white tailed deer, and I shouted to my companion, "I have no eyed deer" [and if you believe that, there is the bridge in Brooklyn].
     
    • Like Like x 1
  3. RighteousnessTemperance&

    RighteousnessTemperance& Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2017
    Messages:
    5,893
    Likes Received:
    1,148
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Thanks for putting that raw footage of a directed “interview” first. Quite compelling, obviating the need to watch the others. Posting a fake interview alleging a fake moon landing really takes the cake. :Thumbsup

    From moonwalk to cakewalk. And the light side/dark side of the moon face shot is a nice touch, “Tom.” :Wink
     
    • Winner Winner x 1
  4. Humble Disciple

    Humble Disciple Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2021
    Messages:
    745
    Likes Received:
    35
    Faith:
    Baptist
    I really hope that, when I start threads, I don't come off like a crazy person like this.
     
  5. JonC

    JonC Moderator
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2001
    Messages:
    23,648
    Likes Received:
    2,569
    Faith:
    Baptist
    It is kinda difficult for people to defend the idea we never set foot on the moon when the civilian sector uses man-made equipment that is on the moon. :rolleyes:
     
  6. Alofa Atu

    Alofa Atu Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 7, 2019
    Messages:
    2,063
    Likes Received:
    81
    Faith:
    Non Baptist Christian
  7. JonC

    JonC Moderator
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2001
    Messages:
    23,648
    Likes Received:
    2,569
    Faith:
    Baptist

    I may can help.

    No radiation suit can protect from photons (gamma and x-ray waves). Most of the radioactive particles are alpha radiation (from helium nucli).

    The most biologically dangerous particles is alpha. The space suits would easily protect from alpha (a piece of paper blocks alpha). The suits would also easily block beta (foil blocks beta).

    So you are left with gamma and x-ray photons (which cannot be blocked by space suits).

    For a 6 month stay in space astronauts could be exposed to a dose of 50 mSv to 2,000 mSv (well below a lethal limit).

    Now, if they could try to breathe space air and had an uptake of alpha....then there would be an issue.

    BTW, Union Station gives a .06 mRem/ dose. Just a fun fact.
     
  8. Alofa Atu

    Alofa Atu Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 7, 2019
    Messages:
    2,063
    Likes Received:
    81
    Faith:
    Non Baptist Christian
    Help? Are you serious? You obviously have no idea what you are referring to, and just cited some quick yahoo answers baloney or a quick google search.

    Alpha particles cannot be blocked by "a piece of paper".

    According to several scientific (not yahoo answers) papers, by NASA and others, Alpha particles can be blocked, but it matters in "density" and also "thickness", but they speak about low level density radiation, and not high density and intensity radiation:

    From Lance Industries:

    "... In the case of radiation shielding, we aim to attenuate the particles that would otherwise have the ability to interact with cellular material and destroy healthy DNA.
    • Charged particles: These are usually de-energized by barriers that contain electrons. The charged particles lose energy to the electrons in the barrier and are no longer threatening.
    • Neutrons: When we use a combination of elastic and inelastic scattering, we reduce the potential harm of neutrons.
    • X-Rays and Gamma Rays: These are attenuated in three ways – photoemission (the process of exposing certain metals to light in order to release electrons), scattering (using a material that causes the particles to scatter, significantly diminishing their trajectory and concentration) and pair production.
    Depending on the scenario, your place of business might opt for one shielding material over another, depending on considerations such as:
    • Effectiveness
    • Resistance to damage in a particular environment/setting
    • Strength
    • Thermal properties
    • Financial efficiency
    Gamma and X-Ray Shielding
    When it comes to attenuating gamma and x-rays, density matters. This is one of the reasons why lead aprons and blankets are the most common shielding products wherever gamma-rays or x-rays are used. If you may recall from earth science or chemistry, lead (Pb) had a very high number or protons in each atom – 82, to be exact, along with a corresponding number of electrons. This makes it a very dense metal shield. The thickness of the shielding is adjustable according to the degree of protection required.

    Even so, a small number of particles can still make it through so this needs to be taken into consideration is routine exposure is potential.

    Alpha and Beta Shielding
    In the case of alpha and beta shielding, we still place an emphasis on density but thickness is not as much of a concern as it is with x-rays and gamma rays. Alpha particles can be blocked by something as simple as a centimeter of plastic or an inch of paper. Since lead doesn’t always stop beta particles, we prefer to use plastic to block these particles as well, which is efficient in terms of economics as well as maneuverability.

    Neutron Shielding
    Neutrons have no charge, and so they can pass through dense materials – like lead – as quick as they please. Thus, we need elements with a low atomic number to stop neutron radiation. Hydrogen, the very lightest of the elements – becomes an ideal choice. When neutron radiation passes through the very un-dense hydrogen-based materials (water being a prime example) the low-density material forms a barrier, preventing neutron particles from passing through.

    That being said, the act of blocking the neutrons can cause low-density materials to emit gamma-rays when blocking neutrons, so we typically combine both low- and high-density materials. The low-density materials create the elastic scattering of the neutrons, and then the high-density material blocks the resulting gamma rays via in-elastic scattering. ..." - What Blocks Radiation? Materials Used in Radiation Shielding

    Ah, an "inch pf paper", that is packed "dense[ly]". How thick were the Apollo space suits?

    "Approximately 3/16" thick, 11 layers of materials." - https://sma.nasa.gov/SignificantIncidentsEVA2018/assets/space_suit_evolution.pdf
    Hmmm, they recommend "lead", or in some low level radiation instances (not like Van Allen belts, Cosmic (GCR's), Neutron, Gamma, X-Rays, Radio waves, Ultraviolet, Solar burst (SPE) or events (which were recorded during 'Apollo flight times') in space and beyond LEO, etc) "inch of paper" (at a minimum) and the spacesuits were 3/16 inch thick (that's 13/16 inch too small, and not dense at all), and not made of paper. The suits were made by a bra company that used rubber ["neoprene rubber and metalized polyester films ... Beta cloth, made of Teflon-coated glass microfibers, used for the suit’s outermost layer ... neoprene reinforced with nylon tricot ..." - Neil Armstrong’s Spacesuit Was Made by a Bra Manufacturer | History | Smithsonian Magazine ].

    That type of material (Beta) was to stop fire, or be flame retardant and to be flexible (you know for supporting "boobs" (Astronots). It had nothing to do with radiation shielding.

    NASA to this day warns about "dangerous radiation" just at the Van Allen belts, not to mention the rest beyond that:



    There is even previously "previously undetected" radiation:



    If you think a 'piece of paper' is going to block even the alpha radiation, I don't want to be standing next to you when you try it. I want to be behind some lead shielding, about 4 rooms away with water between. Let's even allow for a half inch stack of paper (that's still 5/16 inch short of 8/16 in regards the 3/16 space suit thickness, and that accounts for the total of the materials of the suit, not the 'paper' diaper):

    "... Alpha and Beta Particles: Alpha particles are positively charged helium nuclei, and are relatively easy to block, while beta particles are negatively charged electrons that are more difficult to shield against.

    When it comes to protecting against radiation, the basic radiation protection principals or radiation safety tips involve time, distance, and shielding. Time, in this case, means to limit exposure to the minimum amount possible. Distance means staying as far from radiation sources as possible as a best practice. The intensity of radiation generally follows the inverse square law, meaning that it falls off with the square of the distance from the source. Moving twice the distance away from a source of radiation reduces the intensity of exposure by a factor of 1/22 or one fourth the value. Beyond time and distance, making use of effective shielding is the other approach to managing exposure to radiation.

    But what materials protect against radiation? The most common ones used include lead, concrete, and water - or a combination of these. Below ... In some cases, lead is ineffective in stopping beta particles because they can produce secondary radiation when passing through elements with a high atomic number and density. ..." - Radiation Shielding Materials - A Guide
     
    #28 Alofa Atu, Aug 1, 2021
    Last edited: Aug 1, 2021
    • Winner Winner x 1
  9. Alofa Atu

    Alofa Atu Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 7, 2019
    Messages:
    2,063
    Likes Received:
    81
    Faith:
    Non Baptist Christian
    According to those in the actual "know" of radiometrics and particle physics, a mere "2,000 mSv (2 Sv)" can be fatal:

    You said, "For a 6 month stay in space astronauts could be exposed to a dose of 50 mSv to 2,000 mSv (well below a lethal limit). ..."

    You don't know what you're talking about, as according to standard government radiation dose limit charts, the following is the set norm (note: mSv is milliSievert, and Sv is Sievert):

    "... Radiation worker one-year dose limit (50 mSv)

    Lowest one-year dose clearly linked to increased cancer risk (100 mSv)

    Dose causing symptoms of radiation poisoning if received in a short time (400 mSv, but varies)

    Sever radiation poisoning, in some cases fatal (2000 mSv, 2Sv)

    Extremely sever radiation poisoning. Survival sometimes possible with prompt treatment (4 Sv)

    Fatal dose, even with treatment (8 Sv) ..." - How much radiation is too much? A handy guide - Need to Know | PBS
    Did you see the "one-year" (that's 6 more months (180 days) than you gave) limit of "50mSv"? And that is the low end. That is not what is just in high earth atmosphere, neither the Van Allen Radiation belt 1 or 2, neither that which exists between the belts and beyond the belts, where electrons are at super high speeds (mostly blocked by the Van Allen). So, it becomes more serious even beyond the Van Allen. The Van Allen may be a high level area of radiation, but it is actually a protective layer (layers) to keep out high velocity electrons streaming inward or towards us as a world (and that doesn't even take into account the electrons still present below that (within that) from Operation Starfish Prime, [July 9, 1962], whose "... intensity of these electrons is decreasing quite slowly, and some of them will be present for years. ...", along with other high altitude detonation of nuclear materials (pg 23) - https://ntrs.nasa.gov/api/citations/19650019895/downloads/19650019895.pdf ).

    [​IMG]

    "... The Van Allen belts were the first discovery of the space age, measured with the launch of a US satellite, Explorer 1, in 1958. In the decades since, scientists have learned that the size of the two belts can change – or merge, or even separate into three belts occasionally. But generally the inner belt stretches from 400 to 6,000 miles above Earth's surface and the outer belt stretches from 8,400 to 36,000 miles above Earth's surface. ...

    ... The International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP) has recommended that exposure of galactic cosmic rays to aircrew be considered an occupational exposure. The value of 50 mSv in a year was recommended by the Health Physics Society (HPS) in a 2010 position paper. And they further recommend a dose of 100 mSv accumulated over a lifetime. Many other countries have adopted the limits posed by the International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP) 2007 report recommendations of 20 mSv per year for occupational effective dose limit with allowances to go as high as 50 mSv per year so long as the average annual dose over five years does not exceed 20 mSv . ...

    ...The NAS recommended a reference risk of 4 Sv for a career and NASA adopted this as their dose limit thru 1989. It was in this year that the National Council on Radiation Protection (NCRP) issued Report 98, which provided updated recommendations that were dependent on both age and gender. These limits only applied to low earth orbits (LEO)." - https://www.nasa.gov/content/goddard/van-allen-probes-spot-impenetrable-barrier-in-space

    "... The problem of protection against the natural radiations of the Van Allen belts was recognized before the advent of manned space flight. The simplified solution is to remain under the belts (below an altitude of approximately 300 nautical miles [LEO]) when in earth orbit and to traverse the belt rapidly on the way to outer space. In reality, the problem is somewhat more complex. ..." (Project Against Radiation, page 3) - https://ntrs.nasa.gov/api/citations/19730010172/downloads/19730010172.pdf

    That is just dealing with external radiation, and doesn't even include the radiation coming from the internal mechanics and materials of the 'craft' themselves.

    "... 1 Gray = 100 R
    1 Sievert (S) = 100 rad => 100 rem
    10 mGy = 1 Roentgent
    10 mSv = 1 rad => 1 rem

    The whole-body exposure threshold for acute hematopoietic syndrome or "radiation sickness" is 500 mGy. A dose of ~3,000 mGy produces an acute gastrointestinal syndrome that can be fatal with major medical intervention, and a dose of ~ 5,000 mGy is considered the human LD 50 / 30, that is, the lethal dose for 50% of the population in 30 days, even with treatment. ...

    ... "Radiation doses that exceed a minimum (threshold) level can cause undesirable effects such as depression of the blood cell-forming process (threshold dose = 500 mSv, 50 rem) or cataracts (threshold dose = 5,000 mSv, 500 rem)*. The scope and severity of these effects increases as the dose increases above the corresponding threshold. Radiation also can cause an increase in the incidence, but not the severity, of malignant disease (e.g. cancer). ..." - Radiation dosimetry: mSv & mGy

    According to several sources, Astronots, were allowed 25,000 millirems, annually [that's 12 mos, or 365 days] (25,000 millirems = 250 mSv - Millirem to Millisievert ).

    "... What is a lethal dose from a single instance of radiation? According to studies made after the atomic bomb explosions in 1945 at Hiroshima and Nagasaki, half of the people died whose entire bodies were exposed to 450,000 millirems [4,500 mSv] of radiation from the atomic bomb. All persons died whose bodies were exposed to 600,000 millirems [6,000 mSv] of radiation.

    Millirems above natural background levels (average 300) and medical radiation:

    25,000-Astronauts, per Space Shuttle mission. This also was the annual occupational limit for adults from World War II through 1950. ..." - Radiation, how much is considered safe for humans?
    Presently:

    "... European Space Agency, Russian Space Agency and Canadian Space Agency limit is 1000 mSv; NASA limits are between 600-1200mSv, depending on sex and age (1). ..." - How much radiation will the settlers be exposed to? - Health and Ethics - Mars One

    "... Spaceflights above 300 nautical miles enter the Van Allen belts and have a dramatic increase in radiation levels. An astronaut in the Van Allen belt without shielding could be exposed to over 500 ųSv/Hr. (FAA.doc) ... Missions on the ISS [LEO] or Russian Mir space station [LEO] have registered exposures greater than 100 mSv to some astronauts. And long-term future missions to Mars estimate exposures exceeding 1,000 mSv. ..." - GO FLIGHT MEDICINE - Cosmic Radiation

    Did you catch that? LEO persons experience registered exposures of greater than 100 mSv. That is below Van Allen belts, and not counting between and beyond them in the high electron fields. Some have stated that cancer can be forming at low as 20 mSv and death scenarios at just below 1 Gy and above and between 2 Gy- Radiation Hazard Scale | CDC

    "... The EPA sets regulatory limits and recommends emergency response guidelines well below 100 millisieverts (10 rem) to protect the U.S. population, including sensitive groups such as children, from increased cancer risks from accumulated radiation dose over a lifetime. ..." - Radiation Health Effects | US EPA

    Frankly, anyone who says that it is not "dangerous radiation" (thus deadly) in the Van Allen, doesn't represent accurate science:



    See also - Apollo Investigation, Spaceflight. Orion, the Van Allen Belts and Space Radiation Challenges by Mary Bennett. AULIS Online – Different Thinking

    Hey, I read, why don't you.
     
    #29 Alofa Atu, Aug 1, 2021
    Last edited: Aug 1, 2021
  10. JonC

    JonC Moderator
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2001
    Messages:
    23,648
    Likes Received:
    2,569
    Faith:
    Baptist
    You do not know what you are talking about.

    No. I did not cite yahoo. I am a radcon inspector.

    An apha particle is essentially a helium nuclei. It has a large mass (relatively speaking).

    Alpha particles can be blocked by a piece of paper, a thin sheet of plastic, or a layer of dead skin. Alpha articles are not considered an internal hazard (unless inhaled).

    When we look at samples we can use a sheet of paper to shield out alpha (we can take a reading, then cover the probe with a piece of paper and take another). The first reading is the total regardless of type. The second is gamma/ x-ray and Beta if you have beta in the area. The difference between the two is alpha.

    The RO20 instrument we use has a built in shield to block out beta. It is a thin shield (it blocks beta and alpha, however the instrument is a beta/gamma instrument). With the shield open we read beta gamma. With it closed we read gamma (and of course x-ray).

    Beta particles have mass, but less than alpha. A beta particles is ether a b- (a negatron) or a b+ (a positron)...one being the anti-matter of the other. They can be blocked by a thin sheet of metal or by plastic.

    X-rays and gamma are photons. They have no mass and are more difficult to shield (you monitor x-ray and gamma exposure to stay within safe limits...shield what you can in the work environment but suits do not shild).

    Neutron radiation can be shilded by water (which is why the rods are....wait for it....kept under water) and hydrogenated plastic. The human body would shield neutron radiation....if you and I were ever in a nuclear situation together.
     
    • Informative Informative x 1
    • Useful Useful x 1
  11. Alofa Atu

    Alofa Atu Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 7, 2019
    Messages:
    2,063
    Likes Received:
    81
    Faith:
    Non Baptist Christian
    Must be nice to cite 'you' as authority.
     
  12. JonC

    JonC Moderator
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2001
    Messages:
    23,648
    Likes Received:
    2,569
    Faith:
    Baptist
    I do not need to surf the web and read. This is my job.

    You are confusing dose rates (general vs occupational) and biolohical exposures.

    The DOE limits for occupational exposure is 5 rem/yr/whole body; 50 mrem/yr/ skin ; 15 mrem/ yr/ eyes ; and 50 mrem/yr/extremities. The DOE public exposure control limit is 100 mrem/ yr.

    My reference is the DOE guidance for occupational exposure and is found in 5Q1.1 (I'm sure you can Google it).
     
    • Useful Useful x 1
  13. JonC

    JonC Moderator
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2001
    Messages:
    23,648
    Likes Received:
    2,569
    Faith:
    Baptist
    No, I'm not citing me. I'm citing 5Q1.1 (and a little in 5Q1.2). Look it up yourself.

    Actually, I think the alpha info may even be in most charts of nuclides (get one of those....they are probably avaliable in an online format).

    This may help you (just the 1st thing that popped up when I googled).

    Protecting Against Exposure - ANS
     
    • Winner Winner x 1
  14. JonC

    JonC Moderator
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2001
    Messages:
    23,648
    Likes Received:
    2,569
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Shielding: As ionizing radiation passes through matter, the intensity of the radiation is diminished. Shielding is the placement of an “absorber” between you and the radiation source. An absorber is a material that reduces radiation from the radiation source to you. Alpha, beta, or gamma radiation can all be stopped by different thicknesses of absorbers.

    Shielding material can include barrels, boards, vehicles, buildings, gravel, water, lead or whatever else is immediately available.

    ALPHA – can be stopped after traveling through about 1.2 inches of air, about 0.008 inches of water, or a piece of paper or skin. A thin piece of paper, or even the dead cells in the outer layer of human skin, provides adequate shielding because alpha particles can’t penetrate it. However, living tissue inside the body offers no protection against inhaled or ingested alpha emitters.

    BETA – can only be stopped after traveling through about 10 feet of air, less than 2 inches of water, or a thin layer of glass or metal. Additional covering, for example heavy clothing, is necessary to protect against beta-emitters. Some beta particles can penetrate and burn the skin.

    γ GAMMA: To reduce typical gamma rays by a factor of a billion, thicknesses of shield need to be about 13.8 feet of water, about 6.6 feet of concrete, or about 1.3 feet of lead. Thick, dense shielding is necessary to protect against gamma rays. The higher the energy of the gamma ray, the thicker the shield must be. X-rays pose a similar challenge. This is why x-ray technicians often give patients receiving medical or dental X-rays a lead apron to cover other parts of their body.

    (Source provided in last post)

    Our average annual exposure here on earth is 620 mrem/ yr. That's from living, not working. (It was about half decades ago).
     
    • Winner Winner x 1
    • Informative Informative x 1
  15. robycop3

    robycop3 Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2000
    Messages:
    13,411
    Likes Received:
    559
    Faith:
    Baptist
    What other goofy stuff is this gent gonna hatch next? That the universe revolves around the earth? Being KJVO, he's subject to many other false doctrines.

    I was in Nam when the 1st moon landing occurred. And not once, in the remaining year I was in the USN, did I hear any credible source suggesting it was a fake. And, being a corpsman, I was around quite a bit of brass.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  16. JonC

    JonC Moderator
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2001
    Messages:
    23,648
    Likes Received:
    2,569
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Another cool thing is bremsstrahlung. Decades ago techs would build lead shielding around beta contaminated areas. The problem is this increases x-ray exposure (the beta particles lost energy and changed direction, but the energy lost was gained in the form of x-ray photons- making the matter worse.
     
  17. Alofa Atu

    Alofa Atu Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 7, 2019
    Messages:
    2,063
    Likes Received:
    81
    Faith:
    Non Baptist Christian
    There is a difference between "I don't know what 'you' are talking about", and "I don't know what 'I' am talking about."

    I personally think it is just a matter of difference in what we are speaking about in matters location, intensity, etc. In other words, talking past one another.

    I cited my sources and provided the sampling data, and suit materials and the location of the measured rates (ie, Val Allen, LEO, etc in the upper atmosphere (where 'air' is extremely 'thin', or in the 'vacuum' (a strange word since it is filled with all kinds of things, electrically charged particles, etc) of 'space'). When you speak of 'samples' you didn't provide the data of those examples of 'alpha' (etc) (what was their intensity, kinetic energy in MeV. You are most likely referring to (I assume here) standard earth atmosphere or basic 'air' environment between sea level and a few miles up, since you stated you are a RadCon inspector (where specifically please) and for what materials/locations?
     
  18. Alofa Atu

    Alofa Atu Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 7, 2019
    Messages:
    2,063
    Likes Received:
    81
    Faith:
    Non Baptist Christian
    What in the world does that have to do with the OP and subsequent posts by myself?
     
  19. Alofa Atu

    Alofa Atu Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 7, 2019
    Messages:
    2,063
    Likes Received:
    81
    Faith:
    Non Baptist Christian
    The definition you provided shows where the bias lies and why you did not "hear" about the fakery.
     
  20. Alofa Atu

    Alofa Atu Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 7, 2019
    Messages:
    2,063
    Likes Received:
    81
    Faith:
    Non Baptist Christian
    Again, read the OP and subsequent posts. I am not speaking about "here on earth". I gave specific locations, LEO (high upper atmosphere), Van Allen belts, and beyond. Let's not confuse the two things as if they are the same thing, or have the same effects. Did you read the last link I provided?
     
Loading...