The debate "Is nasa trustworthy" was started by
Ematio on
March 1, 2017, 2:05 am.
By the way, Ematio is disagreeing with this statement.
15 people are on the agree side of this discussion, while 10 people are on the disagree side.
People are starting to choose their side.
It looks like most of the people in this community are on the agreeing side of this statement.
Blu_Ray posted 11 arguments, TheExistentialist posted 2 arguments, PsychDave posted 6 arguments to the agreers part.
UnderdogMike posted 7 arguments, Ematio posted 13 arguments to the disagreers part.
Blu_Ray, TheExistentialist, redstar, sabrina, PsychDave, Yanksxx21, Diogenes_of_Sinope and 8 visitors agree.
Ematio, UnderdogMike, Najam1, Nemiroff, human and 5 visitors disagree.
No worries. The debate can wait. Have a good night and a safe flight.
If you want another analysis of the radiation dose and how it was managed, here is another.
http://www.braeunig.us/apollo/VABraddose.htm
dude, I'm in bed. lol. maybe next week I'll have more time. got a plane in 8 hours.
Do you see the problem with ignoring evidence simply because it conflicts with your opinion?
If you don't like the evidence, do some research and post what you find. How much radiation would the astronauts be exposed to, and how much would be lethal? If people have proven it would be lethal, it shouldn't be hard to provide that proof.
oh... NASA math.
do you see no problem in blindly accepting everything a GOVERNMENT RUN institution tells you?
Have you actually done the math for how much radiation they would actually have been exposed to, or did you just trust other people who claimed it would be lethal?
https://www.google.ca/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://spacemath.gsfc.nasa.gov/earth/3Page7.pdf&ved=0ahUKEwjWhdORrLfSAhXly4MKHcV8AtcQFggyMAI&usg=AFQjCNFg5rSdL6l_L1ezB4DfoLYi5Gdb9A&sig2=zZ3VgkZKJf7oeBq1uCyfMQ
the capsules were not lined either.
please try not to be so obtuse.
would they ride out most of the trip in a "lander"? I'm pretty sure that was just for the "lunar landing" and the moon doesn't have radiation belts of any significance. if at all.
I think he means the people inside of it would be dead or at least horribly irradiated
"quick question : if NASA says that the van allen belts will kill anything and anyone flying through them if they don't have at least a quarter inch of lead shielding...
and NASA says the moon landers had zero lead shielding...
who do you believe, NASA or NASA?"
I'm confused by this comment. are the lunar landers alive? did anyone say that the Allen belts will destroy all equipment that isn't protected by thick lead?
I don't see any part of this that is contradictory. if you feel you are in the right, using such weak, illogical arguments will only hurt your case.
I'm curious, do you believe all of the space program is fake? I ask because there are satellites in orbit, so how would they get there if it is fake?
I would say the easiest thing is to make wild accusations with absolutely no proof and claim that any proof must be fake because it disagrees with you.
what is easier to pull off, faking a space program, or faking a person's history on the internet?
come on.
It should be easy for you to prove the snopes article wrong. Simply explain how there are records of the people who are supposedly the astronauts having different lives and Jone's before the accident. One was a former air force pilot in training with NASA, while apparently also the CEO of a company. Just explain how he could simultaneously do both.
sure, but that nonsense source you provided has absolutely no credibility.
The source you provided is widely discredited. Dr. Eowyn who is the main author of this page is actually maria hsia chang. So you provided a source with zero reputation by an author who uses a fake name (which is not information provided on the website) and then try to say snopes is not credible. Talk about double standards.
The burden of proof also lies with you as we all know "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence."
Snopes isn't always right
Snopes completely went past the fact that the guys who claim to be twin brothers are recorded to be single births
quick question : if NASA says that the van allen belts will kill anything and anyone flying through them if they don't have at least a quarter inch of lead shielding...
and NASA says the moon landers had zero lead shielding...
who do you believe, NASA or NASA?
are you from US?
snopes... lol
@ematio
you should really do more research before posting this nonsense. It took literally 20 seconds to fact check the article you posted
http://www.snopes.com/politics/conspiracy/challenger.asp
got it. unbelievable. But the truth is, iam one of them.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/fellowshipoftheminds.com/2015/04/30/are-the-crew-members-of-1986-space-shuttle-challenger-still-alive/amp/
wait. can you provide me a link?
Some of the survivors are still using their real names, and 2 of them claim that they're identical twins, even though their birth record states they were single births
wait a minute checking the net
Just look it up
evidence?
how?
Look it up
They're alive
yes. why? they all died in an accident
Yes. Do you know who the challenger crew were?
Dont you know about curiosity?
Of what?
We have footages and evidences
Like how do you know they're not lying?
what type of queations?
Or do you just take their word for it?
Okay, do you ever question NASA?
NASA has sent people to moon. It has satellites. People are on ISS. We have all sorts of information on mars. It has collaborated with RSC ( russian nasa) to know more about space and a joint effort reduces the cost. So isnt nasa trust worthy? you decide
nope