Hot take: The Moon landing faking theory doesn't even make sense with basic physics

I was watching a YouTube video last night from a guy who breaks down orbital mechanics and he showed that the Apollo trajectories actually line up perfectly with known physics from the 1960s. He pointed out that the Van Allen belts would have exposed astronauts to way less radiation than people claim because they passed through the thinnest parts in under 4 hours. Something like 0.1% of the total radiation they'd get from a chest X-ray. I looked up the radiation data from NASA's own Apollo dosimetry reports and it matches what he said. Has anyone else actually checked the numbers or do people just repeat the same talking points?

2 comments

2 Comments

olivia_bailey18d ago

I saw that same breakdown and it completely changed how I look at the whole moon landing thing because 0.1% of a chest X-ray is basically nothing when you think about it.

margaret_jackson7318d ago

You really have to wonder why the government waited until 1969 to pretend to go to the moon when they could have faked it ten years earlier with way less radiation and no pesky astronauts to keep quiet. That whole timing thing never adds up for me. Plus, if the radiation was so low, why did the Apollo guys need those heavy suits and special shielding in the first place? Seems like they were over-prepared for a trip that was supposed to be safe. Something just doesn't click with the whole story.