[Firestarter]

Another huge fail in the official science fiction story on the moon landing, is radiation. NASA hasn´t even tried to give a plausible explanations for how this was coped with.
There´s the Van Allen radiation belts for which NASA has almost admitted that a human mission can´t pass it and the huge temparature in space before reaching the moon and on the moon in the sunlight.


In 1958, Professor James van Allen discovered a huge amount of radiation surrounding the earth. Van Allen asked the US military to send a Geiger counter into space to measure the intensity of the radiation.
The Geiger counter confirmed that the region above the earth was cooking with deadly radiation. The Van Allen radiation belts (as they were later called) appeared to surround the entire earth; it starts 400 miles and extends out some 65,000 miles above the earth’s surface.
There was an inner belt and an outer radiation belt. The inner belt went from 40 degrees north and south of the Equator and was basically a doughnut surrounding the earth. The outer belt was separated from the inner belt by an area of lesser radiation. Many years later a third radiation belt “the storage ring” between the inner and outer belt was discovered.
Scientific experiments conducted by Van Allen and the military showed that both belts separately were deadly to humans without additional shielding. Van Allen stated that even if you raced quickly through the radiation belts, you would still need additional shielding.

In 1959, Van Allen delivered his conclusion in a speech to the Academy of Science “All manned space flight attempts must steer clear of these two belts of radiation until adequate means of safeguarding the astronauts has been developed”.
According to Van Allen the space ship’s exterior made of aluminium could not protect the astronauts against the deadly radiation.

The National Committee on Radiation Protection (NCRP) and the International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP) had established “permissible doses” of radiation at levels that were consistent with living on earth. This would require additional shielding of lead or another substance and would add weight, making the astronauts on the moon impossible.
In order to go through Van Allen’s belt, in 1965 NASA simply requested that the regulatory groups “modify” the standards for space flight (allowing the astronauts to receive much more radiation).
Then NASA could announce that a simple aluminium skin on the command module was enough to protect astronauts from the allowable doses of radiation.

Years later Van Allen explained that he still “stands by” his conclusions of 1959-1961. But Van Allen also “stands by” NASA’s point of view that even aluminium, without extra shielding, was enough to protect the astronauts from the radiation he called deadly.
Van Allen labelled his original findings merely “popular science” and “a sloppy statement”: https://alixus.wordpress.com/the-van-allen-enigma/
(archived here: http://archive.is/ajLcS)


Because there is no atmosphere the effects (of the heat) of the sun are much larger than on earth. Vacuum is an almost perfect insulator, which means that those poor astronuts couldn´t get rid of the heat from the sunlight.
On earth when the sun is at a low angle (for example in the morning), the intensity of the sunlight falling on earth becomes much less because the sunlight travels a longer distance through the atmosphere. The atmosphere “dims” the sunlight that warms the atmosphere.

There is another effect of the angle at which the sun shines on the moon that is explained in the following picture.
When the sun shines at an angle of 60 degrees from shining “straight down”; the sun becomes 50% less intense as the same (amount of) sunlight heats an area twice as large…


Following through on this “effect”, the part of a hill in the sunlight on the moon would heat up much faster than the surrounding ground area. The “dark side” of a hill would hardly heat up at all in the early “morning” of the lunar day.
The Apollo moon “movies” were mostly staged on the “sunny” side of hills on the moon, where the heat, during the lunar “morning”, would be even more intense.

The astronauts (in their “magical” space suits) stand or walk (vertically) on the moon. Because of this same “effect”, during the lunar “morning” they would (theoretically) heat up even faster than when the sun would be shining straight down (a couple of earth days later)…
The lunar module would also receive relatively more sunlight during the lunar “morning” than the surrounding surface.
The rocket ship travelling towards the moon (and back) would also be in the full burning sunlight…


The following 2 images come from an interesting article on the amounts of “soft” X-ray radiation the astronauts were exposed to on their trip to the moon. This includes “high energy” X-rays of an intensity of > 10 ^ -4 W/m2: http://adsabs.harvard.edu/full/1996CoSka..26...98A


For what it’s worth: according to NASA the T in the following table indicates the total intensity of the flares in July 1969 (left side of the table; the right side is June/July 1970).



In the following picture once again the part of the astronut in the shadow looks in the light…



See the following photo (2:24) from the documentary "IN HIS OWN WORDS: BUZZ ALDRIN 40 YEARS LATER": https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1j9Fo7XayCg
The flag and pole are the only things in colour.
Notice the flag waving in the wind…


See the blow up of the bottom of the flag pole.
The pole has NO shadow.
The bottom of the pole is perfectly straight, looks like it’s floating instead of inserted into the lunar surface.



Following is the $350 million Apollo 16 Lunar Module in action (over $25 billion corrected for inflation)...
Pay special attention to the buckled thermal panels!


Here’s the Apollo 16 Lunar Module supposedly after it had landed on the moon. See all the gold foil, with some black fabric draped sort of around at some spots. The top looks like cardboard with holes in between!
This should be robust enough to protect the astronuts from the vacuum, the radiation and could withstand the landing (without wheels!).