Thats called avoidance or in your case maybe just dense but here you go <iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/NlXG0REiVzE" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>Leaving aside the impracticality of large amounts of lead shielding on a spacecraft it would actually be more dangerous because of Brehmsstrahlung - if you don't know what that is google it but if you did know you would never have made the comment about lead shielding in the first place, "bless". Give me a direct link to the NASA comment you keep referring to because I really can't be arsed going through those vids looking for it.
Lead can be necessary to protect against extremely intense bursts of radiation - e.g.an atomic explosion OR an intense solar flare event which I mentioned in my initial post and as I explained there NASA decided to take the risk and do without additional shielding against such high-intensity but rare bursts of radiation. In the case of high-intensity radiation the Brehmsstrahlung effect from using lead or another material with a high atomic number is less dangerous than the high-intensity radiation itself. The Van Allen belts do not contain high-intensity bursts of radiation, they are largely composed of streams of high-energy protons and electrons, the majority of which can be stopped with relatively light shielding - yes, fibre insulation and aluminium sheeting to name two. Sure, some particles will get through but by passing quickly through the parts of the belt where the radiation levels are lower the danger to the astronauts was minimised.
Escape velocity lol here is a question for you how does a "space rocket thrust engine work in the vacume of space with nothing to thrust against??!! come on boys and girls is this all you have?
I take it you dont have any evidence, proof or facts either, no of course you dont none of you do, ball lickers are pretty dumb but i guess you have to be.I must congratulate you on getting this thread up to 17 pages by getting people to respond to absolute drivel. Top wumming.
Yes you are.He's convinced me...........
thick as fuck
Scientific theory (noun)you can think you come from mud if you like but you do know it called The theory of evolution and i think you need some help with definitions
theorynoun [C or U]
uk /ˈθɪə.ri/ us /ˈθɪr.i/
B2 a formal statement of the rules on which a subject of study is based or of ideas that are suggested to explain a fact or event or, more generally, an opinion or explanation:
Ahh, very interesting thoeryDon't be silly, it was actually the daylight zone, they just shot it with a twilight lens and the Nazis and Americans covered it all up.
18 pages and counting. Keep up the good work. I don't think you're as thick as your postings suggest because that would be impossible.I take it you dont have any evidence, proof or facts either, no of course you dont none of you do, ball lickers are pretty dumb but i guess you have to be.
I'm dense? Did you actually watch that vid or just read the headline title? It says nothing about what type of shielding is needed and as I have already pointed out the Apollo craft did have shielding but you choose to ignore that.Thats called avoidance or in your case maybe just dense but here you go <iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/NlXG0REiVzE" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
Halfwit you forgot to mention "OBSERVATION" Let me tell you how it works and I will take it slow for youScientific theory (noun)
a coherent group of propositionsformulated to explain a group of facts orphenomena in the natural world andrepeatedly confirmed throughexperiment or observation:
the scientific theory of evolution.
Fucking idiot. At least do some reading about evolution.
Thats twice you have said that Appolo had shielding where is your evidence or proof FFS, you bring a claim you bring the proof you have nothing, if you have it show me!I'm dense? Did you actually watch that vid or just read the headline title? It says nothing about what type of shielding is needed and as I have already pointed out the Apollo craft did have shielding but you choose to ignore that.
Also why are you and your fellow believers using accepted science to try an prove a theory that is predicated on that science being at best flawed and at worst complete bollocks? There's an illogicality in there if you look hard enough.