How do the Van Allen belts exist if the earth is flat?

And how does Mr Allen know they exist if he hasnt been there?

The Sun is not a relatively small light source, though. It is almost 1.4million km in diameter) compared to the Moon's tiny 3,476 km.

Due to the large distance between Sun and Moon, it is close enough for basic purposes to assume that the incoming light rays are parallel, although obviously the "speedlite" of the distant Sun is still actually far bigger than the object Moon, so even at sun-moon distance the rays from the "top" and "bottom" of the light source (the real Sun) are actually still slightly converging. Not a "small" light source.

So your basic premise is false, because you don't understand simple geometry. Your "experiment" confuses actual size with apparent size.

they dont look too depressed or upset of either of these.

=#800000@Starbug.
Do your own research. And you'll easily find out.

I have, no reference to a flat planet, so you havent an argument,

WRONG !!! you do know that in a full body CAT scan or any CAT scan for that matter the actual scanning is over and done in a couple of minuets max the rest of the time is spent checking and rechecking the images to make sure they are of the correct quality exposing you to minimum radiation.
Yet NASA claims it takes around 1 1/2 hours to pass through the belts each way that is 3 hours of high intensity radiation with no side effects to ANY astronaut that ever supposedly went on an Apollo mission.
OK



Nope, RIGHT !!! The cumulative dose was what it was. The total dose = level of radiation x time of exposure. Just like sunbathing, taking images, or grilling a pork chop.

Already gave the simple answer to that one, Stan. Do keep up. Now, what do you say about all them pesky satellites that you can see with your own eyes?

Hello again butcher alias. Please stop trying to derail the thread. Thanks.

Stan? Satellites? Cat got yer tongue?

Aslo on the subject of the images of the astronauts in the decontamination pod they do look happy to be back in those photos, so would i if i had been orbiting the earth for 3 days knowing i could die on reentry in the early days of space, still pretty dangerous now even with all the knowledge they now posses on the subject.
It is at the presser that i think it is obvious they never went to the moon with all the figiting twiddling of fingers and just looking very unconformable under the pressure of the world media.
I mean if you had been to the moon and came back alive surely you would be ecstatic and dying to tell of everything you saw and your experience but to me they seemed very muted and not really forthcoming with their answers.

[iWrong. Again why do you keep making habit of it. Here's [url=https://youtu.be/NlXG0REiVzEOne of your own.[/url explaining it can't be done.


If it can't be done that means nothing has ever gone past the Van Allen belt[/i.

Thanks for that. It's actually a fantastic example of a scientifically ignorant person such as you, trying to put scientific 2+2 together and not unexpectedly arriving at 47.

You obviously don't actually know anything at all about the Van Allen belts.

You obviosuly don't understand what the challenge was for the Apollo moon missions.

You obviously therefore don't understand that this is NOT at all the same as for the proposed Orion missions.

In short - you don't know what you're talking about. You've seized on a video presentation (which, btw, doesn't actually say any such thing as its sensationalist title risibly claims) and as usual, because you like the general drift, you link to it uncritically.

If you were to take a few minutes to at least research the basics, you would at least learn the general shape and layout of the Van Allen belts. Clue: It isn't a homogenous "shell" all around the Earth)

The issue for Apollo was that the direct route they had to take to the Moon passed through the Van Allen belts, but not through the most hazardous part. The part of the belt was a comparatively narrow section, and their trajectory was a steep curve as the craft accelerated away from Earth towards the Moon, so basically in and out of it.

The Orion missions are not slated to fly in and out in this very limited way, and so you're comparing chalk and cheese. Which you could have easily discovered, but you prefer to jump to asinine conclusions.



The guy is 100% on the money. No astronaut has ever been exposed to anything like the sort of potential Van Allen belts radiation and as ever scientists have done the numbers theorized what will likely happen and what they need, and planned to experiment and test the theories before sending astronauts up. Kind of what I'd expect, really.

So, the NASA guy made no such blooper as your hoax nut buddies claim - but you just did: the only way there could actually be Van Allen belts around the Earth is if the Earth is a globe. So you revel in the claim NASA "can't send a man through the Van Allen belts" - while elsewhere your position is that there ARE no fscking Van Allen belts, there can't be, as the Earth is flat!

Busted yet again Stan! You're too easy these days.

But perhaps we could reasonably leave the last word to the discoverer of said belts:


Now I have again shown up your ramblings for unscientific nonsense, are you ready to come up with your mad explanation why all those satellites you can see with your own eyes orbiting the globe aren't real?