14-11-2010, 01:10 AM
(This post was last modified: 14-11-2010, 02:07 AM by James H. Fetzer.)
Revisiting the forum just now, I have discovered they are still there as posts #571 and #572. So either Duane was mistaken when he told me they had been deleted or else Evan Burton reposted them. I am the least bit puzzled by Charles' remark, which has the flavor of "Either you are with us or your are against us!" I began on the EF and have only gradually become aware of the virtues of the DPF, which I am coming to appreciate more and more with each absurdity.
After I posted two emails from Duane Daman, Evan Burton deleted them, once again displaying the extent of his abuse of position and dereliction of duty. In case there is a question here, I have engaged it and in the process exposed it -- rather like keeping your friends close but your enemies closer! In any case, I think this exercise has exposed profound corruption by Evan Burton and the Education Forum:
The Education Forum: (Merged) Fetzer / Burton Apollo Hoax debate thread
#571 James H. Fetzer
Posted Today, 04:51 PM
Duane Daman seems to me to have captured the spirit of your enterprise exactly in
this message he sent me, where his competence seems to greatly exceed your own:
Jim,
I see that Greer is still harping on the SUITS, JIM, THE SUITS!!!
And of course Burton has now brought something you posted on another forum about
radiation, to continue his ridicule of you... The RADIATION, JIM, THE RADIATION!!!
The problem with his "expert" source for radiation, is that he's also a NASA shill just
parroting typical NASA disinformation about how "safe" the Apollo astronauts were ...
NASA's story is that the Apollo astronauts "raced through the Van Allen belts", so they
had very little radiation exposure... It's the same script on every NASA site and on every
forum where Apollo is defended... Well, not always the same script.. When NASA's shills
started defending Apollo, the alleged time for the "race through the belts" was around
4 hours... That time later morophed into about 30 minutes, and now the claim is down
to just a few minutes... Plus, if you read the letter Burton posted, it's obvious that this
guy's only real "expertise" concerns Skylab, which is located in low earth orbit.
These shills are relentless when it comes to defending the Apollo fraud... What they all
really fail to address though, is the fact that radiation beyond the magnetosphere is
much more dangerous than it is in earth orbit.
Duane
Evan Burton, on 13 November 2010 - 05:06 AM, said:
I'm going to refer to this post of Jims from another forum:
http://www.deeppolit...55&postcount=14
A forum member raises the issue of a radiation paper, and Jim attempts to dismiss the paper because he couldn't find the credentials of an author, J. Vernon Bailey. In a prior post he asks that Dr John Costella comment on the paper. Since Dr Costella is a member of this forum, I would welcome his comments on the report, BIOMEDICAL RESULTS OF APOLLO (NASA SP-368, NASA Science and Technical Information Office, 1975), specifically section II chapter 3: Radiation Protection and Instrumentation, which was authored by J. Vernon Bailey.
As always (it would seem), Jim doesn't give you all the facts (lest you be informed). He fails to mention that all material for the publication was reviewed by an editorial board. Who was on that board?
editorial board.jpg
Not only was he qualified enough to be on the editorial board, he was in good company.
So, who was J. Vernon Bailey? Well, he was the Chief of the Environmental Health Branch at the Johnson Space Center, Houston.
http://ieeexplore.ie...rnumber=4328485
He co-authored NASA papers like:
APOLLO EXPERIENCE REPORT – PROTECTION AGAINST RADIATION (NASA Technical Note D-7080, March 1973)
THERMOLUMINESCENT DOSIMETRY FOR THE APOLLO 16 MICROBIAL RESPONSE TO SPACE ENVIRONMENT EXPERIMENT (M191) (Johnson Space Center, May 1973)
VISUAL LIGHT FLASH OBSERVATIONS ON SKYLAB 4 (Johnson Space Center, January 1977)
RADIOLOGICAL PROTECTION AND MEDICAL DOSIMETRY FOR THE SKYLAB CREWMEN (Johnson Space Center, January 1977)
Mn CARBONATES IN THE MARTIAN METEORITE NAKHLA: POSSIBLE EVIDENCE OF BRINE EVAPORATION (Johnson Space Center, 2003)
PHYSICAL DOSIMETRIC EVALUATIONS IN THE APOLLO 16 MICROBIAL RESPONSE EXPERIMENT (Johnson Space Center, January 1975)
APOLLO LIGHT FLASH INVESTIGATIONS (Johnson Space Center, July 1975)
HEAVY COSMIC-RAY EXPOSURE OF APOLLO ASTRONAUTS (Johnson Space Center, January 1975)
RADIATION PROTECTION AND INSTRUMENTATION (Johnson Space Center, July 1975)
FLUX OF HIGH-LET COSMIC-RAY PARTICLES IN MANNED SPACE FLIGHT (Johnson Space Center, January 1975)
DOSIMETRY DURING SPACE MISSIONS (Johnson Space Center, August 1976)
In addition, we find during the 98th Annual Meeting of the American Public Health Association and Meetings of Related Organizations (26-30 October 1970, Convention and Exhibit Hall, Civic Center Houston, Texas), there is a presenter:
Radiation Exposure of American Astronauts. J. Vernon Bailey, Ph.D.
http://www.ncbi.nlm....00037-0001a.pdf
So, just what are your qualifications, Jim, with respect to the biomedical effects of radiation and radiation shielding effectiveness for space travel? I'll save you the trouble: NONE. Once more, you arrogantly assume you know more than others because it suits your ego.
Of course, you are going to ask my qualifications in this area; I have NONE also…. but I did contact those people who did have the qualifications and expertise, and sought guidance from them. In January 2007, I contacted Dr Richard Setlow. Dr Setlow is Senior Biophysicist Emeritus at the Brookhaven National Laboratory and a Member of the National Academy of Sciences. He is an expert in the effects of radiation on cells, and has co-authored numerous papers on space radiation. He was recently honoured for his life work:
http://www.bnl.gov/t...sp?ITEM_NO=1435
I asked:
Dear Sir,
I refer to a report which you chaired in 1996, Radiation Hazards to Crews of Interplanetary Missions. Firstly, some quick background. I am one of the many people who, on what seems like a daily basis, try to rebut arguments put forward by people who claim that the Apollo missions were faked by NASA. I have an aviation background, not physics or biological sciences.
The above report is being discussed on a forum which (despite its name) tries to dispel the myth that Apollo was somehow faked. The link to the relevant section (a discussion on space radiation) is: http://apollohoax.pr...4878798&page=12
To cut a long story short, could I ask two brief questions:
1. Was radiation / exposure data from Apollo considered (amongst other sources) when making the report's determinations?
2. Do the report's findings (in any way) support the proposition that radiation should have killed (or at least seriously harmed) astronauts on a typical 14-day Apollo lunar landing mission?
I would also ask permission to post your reply to the thread linked above.
Thank you for your time.
He replied to me:
Dear Evan,
The Committee considered all sources of radations in Space. We concluded that Solar Particle Events (SPE) would be the major source of radiation exposures supplemented by the cosmic ray background composed of many types of particles including heavy nuclei. To the best of my knowledge, all space missions carry devices to measure the radiation doses. Astronauts should not be outside of a space craft if there were an SPE. They should be shielded inside the space craft. Hence, radiation exposures for Apollo missions would be very small. Hence, I believe that radiation exposures from Apollo missions were very small, unless astronauts stayed outside during an SPE about which they would have been informed.
You could get simple, short descriptions of what is known from 2 summaries that I wrote: (1) " The U.S National Research Council's views of the radiation hazards in space" Mutation Research (1999) 430, 169-175 and (2) " The hazards of space travel" EMBO Reports (2003) 4, 1013-1016. Radiation is only one of the hazards. Microgravity is another.
Sincerely yours,
Richard Setlow
People far more qualified than you have looked at these areas, and know they are not faked.
Reply
______________________________________________________________
#572 James H. Fetzer
Posted Today, 04:57 PM
Here's another example of Duane's competence. I am a philosopher, not a psychologist,
but he has correctly observed that the astronauts do not act as though they are actually
deserving of the accolades that have been bestowed upon them. This is a nice example.
Jim,
I believe part of your expertise is in psychology... Have you ever seen this Neil Armstrong interview?
Check out his awkward, nervous behavior when questioned about how many people walked
on the Moon and his choice of words to describe his "greatest achievement".
Neil replies... " No, I just don't deserve it" ... "Circumstance put me that particular ROLE".
Also notice the way he squirms, scratches his neck, scratches his ear and clicks his throat
while answering.. As you know, these are all mannerisms of a guilty person who's not being
truthful.
All of Armstrong's public behavior reeks of guilt, but none quite so obvious as in this interview.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iqzbnSymE2w
Duane
6 User(s) are reading this topic
2 members, 4 guests, 0 anonymous users
James H. Fetzer, Dave Greer
Time Now: Nov 13 2010 04:59 PM
After I posted two emails from Duane Daman, Evan Burton deleted them, once again displaying the extent of his abuse of position and dereliction of duty. In case there is a question here, I have engaged it and in the process exposed it -- rather like keeping your friends close but your enemies closer! In any case, I think this exercise has exposed profound corruption by Evan Burton and the Education Forum:
The Education Forum: (Merged) Fetzer / Burton Apollo Hoax debate thread
#571 James H. Fetzer
Posted Today, 04:51 PM
Duane Daman seems to me to have captured the spirit of your enterprise exactly in
this message he sent me, where his competence seems to greatly exceed your own:
Jim,
I see that Greer is still harping on the SUITS, JIM, THE SUITS!!!
And of course Burton has now brought something you posted on another forum about
radiation, to continue his ridicule of you... The RADIATION, JIM, THE RADIATION!!!
The problem with his "expert" source for radiation, is that he's also a NASA shill just
parroting typical NASA disinformation about how "safe" the Apollo astronauts were ...
NASA's story is that the Apollo astronauts "raced through the Van Allen belts", so they
had very little radiation exposure... It's the same script on every NASA site and on every
forum where Apollo is defended... Well, not always the same script.. When NASA's shills
started defending Apollo, the alleged time for the "race through the belts" was around
4 hours... That time later morophed into about 30 minutes, and now the claim is down
to just a few minutes... Plus, if you read the letter Burton posted, it's obvious that this
guy's only real "expertise" concerns Skylab, which is located in low earth orbit.
These shills are relentless when it comes to defending the Apollo fraud... What they all
really fail to address though, is the fact that radiation beyond the magnetosphere is
much more dangerous than it is in earth orbit.
Duane
Evan Burton, on 13 November 2010 - 05:06 AM, said:
I'm going to refer to this post of Jims from another forum:
http://www.deeppolit...55&postcount=14
A forum member raises the issue of a radiation paper, and Jim attempts to dismiss the paper because he couldn't find the credentials of an author, J. Vernon Bailey. In a prior post he asks that Dr John Costella comment on the paper. Since Dr Costella is a member of this forum, I would welcome his comments on the report, BIOMEDICAL RESULTS OF APOLLO (NASA SP-368, NASA Science and Technical Information Office, 1975), specifically section II chapter 3: Radiation Protection and Instrumentation, which was authored by J. Vernon Bailey.
As always (it would seem), Jim doesn't give you all the facts (lest you be informed). He fails to mention that all material for the publication was reviewed by an editorial board. Who was on that board?
editorial board.jpg
Not only was he qualified enough to be on the editorial board, he was in good company.
So, who was J. Vernon Bailey? Well, he was the Chief of the Environmental Health Branch at the Johnson Space Center, Houston.
http://ieeexplore.ie...rnumber=4328485
He co-authored NASA papers like:
APOLLO EXPERIENCE REPORT – PROTECTION AGAINST RADIATION (NASA Technical Note D-7080, March 1973)
THERMOLUMINESCENT DOSIMETRY FOR THE APOLLO 16 MICROBIAL RESPONSE TO SPACE ENVIRONMENT EXPERIMENT (M191) (Johnson Space Center, May 1973)
VISUAL LIGHT FLASH OBSERVATIONS ON SKYLAB 4 (Johnson Space Center, January 1977)
RADIOLOGICAL PROTECTION AND MEDICAL DOSIMETRY FOR THE SKYLAB CREWMEN (Johnson Space Center, January 1977)
Mn CARBONATES IN THE MARTIAN METEORITE NAKHLA: POSSIBLE EVIDENCE OF BRINE EVAPORATION (Johnson Space Center, 2003)
PHYSICAL DOSIMETRIC EVALUATIONS IN THE APOLLO 16 MICROBIAL RESPONSE EXPERIMENT (Johnson Space Center, January 1975)
APOLLO LIGHT FLASH INVESTIGATIONS (Johnson Space Center, July 1975)
HEAVY COSMIC-RAY EXPOSURE OF APOLLO ASTRONAUTS (Johnson Space Center, January 1975)
RADIATION PROTECTION AND INSTRUMENTATION (Johnson Space Center, July 1975)
FLUX OF HIGH-LET COSMIC-RAY PARTICLES IN MANNED SPACE FLIGHT (Johnson Space Center, January 1975)
DOSIMETRY DURING SPACE MISSIONS (Johnson Space Center, August 1976)
In addition, we find during the 98th Annual Meeting of the American Public Health Association and Meetings of Related Organizations (26-30 October 1970, Convention and Exhibit Hall, Civic Center Houston, Texas), there is a presenter:
Radiation Exposure of American Astronauts. J. Vernon Bailey, Ph.D.
http://www.ncbi.nlm....00037-0001a.pdf
So, just what are your qualifications, Jim, with respect to the biomedical effects of radiation and radiation shielding effectiveness for space travel? I'll save you the trouble: NONE. Once more, you arrogantly assume you know more than others because it suits your ego.
Of course, you are going to ask my qualifications in this area; I have NONE also…. but I did contact those people who did have the qualifications and expertise, and sought guidance from them. In January 2007, I contacted Dr Richard Setlow. Dr Setlow is Senior Biophysicist Emeritus at the Brookhaven National Laboratory and a Member of the National Academy of Sciences. He is an expert in the effects of radiation on cells, and has co-authored numerous papers on space radiation. He was recently honoured for his life work:
http://www.bnl.gov/t...sp?ITEM_NO=1435
I asked:
Dear Sir,
I refer to a report which you chaired in 1996, Radiation Hazards to Crews of Interplanetary Missions. Firstly, some quick background. I am one of the many people who, on what seems like a daily basis, try to rebut arguments put forward by people who claim that the Apollo missions were faked by NASA. I have an aviation background, not physics or biological sciences.
The above report is being discussed on a forum which (despite its name) tries to dispel the myth that Apollo was somehow faked. The link to the relevant section (a discussion on space radiation) is: http://apollohoax.pr...4878798&page=12
To cut a long story short, could I ask two brief questions:
1. Was radiation / exposure data from Apollo considered (amongst other sources) when making the report's determinations?
2. Do the report's findings (in any way) support the proposition that radiation should have killed (or at least seriously harmed) astronauts on a typical 14-day Apollo lunar landing mission?
I would also ask permission to post your reply to the thread linked above.
Thank you for your time.
He replied to me:
Dear Evan,
The Committee considered all sources of radations in Space. We concluded that Solar Particle Events (SPE) would be the major source of radiation exposures supplemented by the cosmic ray background composed of many types of particles including heavy nuclei. To the best of my knowledge, all space missions carry devices to measure the radiation doses. Astronauts should not be outside of a space craft if there were an SPE. They should be shielded inside the space craft. Hence, radiation exposures for Apollo missions would be very small. Hence, I believe that radiation exposures from Apollo missions were very small, unless astronauts stayed outside during an SPE about which they would have been informed.
You could get simple, short descriptions of what is known from 2 summaries that I wrote: (1) " The U.S National Research Council's views of the radiation hazards in space" Mutation Research (1999) 430, 169-175 and (2) " The hazards of space travel" EMBO Reports (2003) 4, 1013-1016. Radiation is only one of the hazards. Microgravity is another.
Sincerely yours,
Richard Setlow
People far more qualified than you have looked at these areas, and know they are not faked.
Reply
______________________________________________________________
#572 James H. Fetzer
Posted Today, 04:57 PM
Here's another example of Duane's competence. I am a philosopher, not a psychologist,
but he has correctly observed that the astronauts do not act as though they are actually
deserving of the accolades that have been bestowed upon them. This is a nice example.
Jim,
I believe part of your expertise is in psychology... Have you ever seen this Neil Armstrong interview?
Check out his awkward, nervous behavior when questioned about how many people walked
on the Moon and his choice of words to describe his "greatest achievement".
Neil replies... " No, I just don't deserve it" ... "Circumstance put me that particular ROLE".
Also notice the way he squirms, scratches his neck, scratches his ear and clicks his throat
while answering.. As you know, these are all mannerisms of a guilty person who's not being
truthful.
All of Armstrong's public behavior reeks of guilt, but none quite so obvious as in this interview.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iqzbnSymE2w
Duane
6 User(s) are reading this topic
2 members, 4 guests, 0 anonymous users
James H. Fetzer, Dave Greer
Time Now: Nov 13 2010 04:59 PM