Clavius is a Spook Site

Home page on Clavius.org

Clavis, known as Moon Base Clavius  from the moon base on them movie 2001, is a debunking web site for the critics and theorists of the Apollo moon landings. As it states on the home page, “Moon Base Clavius is an organization of amateurs and professionals devoted to the Apollo program and its manned exploration of the moon. Our special mission is to debunk the so-called conspiracy theories that state such a landing may never have occurred.”

While it is loaded with useful information regarding the landings, technologies used and so forth, I felt something was slightly off with Clavious when I first starting checking it out.  Digging deeper I found this web site to be a total mystery as who created it and maintains it. The site does list a webmaster, Jay Windley, who claims to have training in engineering but never worked for NASA.  His bio does not state he authored any of the articles on Clavious nor is he listed as the owner of the web site.  The articles, while well written, do not feature any author names or copyrights.  There are no external links to sources used. There is no advertising, so no visible means of financial support.  Also, a Whois search has the ULR ownership unlisted.  Very odd, particularly if you want interested readers to take your seriously.

These are all the hallmarks of a intelligence agency operation. There are no authors, no sources, no copyrights and no monetization.  Why all the mystery?  Why no transparency as to who they are?  

Clavius reminds me of Snopes.  Snopes, supposedly a site for debunking urban myths, gives enough data to prove their point and ignores the difficult details that do not.  For example on Clavius, the Radiation Primer page has very useful information regarding radiation energies and effects.  It lists materials that are radiation blocking and some that are not.  However, it ignores the fact that those shielding materials are not present in the construction of the Apollo Command Module and the Lunar Landing Module.  Both are largely constructed of aluminum, a very poor radiation blocker.  But the reader is never informed of this.

Another radiation issue, the Van Allen radiation belts, the dangers are dealt with in typical fashion.  As stated, “And the Apollo navigators plotted a course through the thinnest parts of the belts and arranged for the spacecraft to pass through them quickly, limiting the exposure.”  

Apparently the anonymous author didn’t read Apollo 8 commander Frank Borman’s book, “Countdown” where on pages 203-204, he states they went through the thickest parts of the belts and only got the equivalent exposure of a chest x-ray.  No fancy flying here!  They just went head-on through the belts with little trouble.  Borman goes on to add, “So much for the dire predictions some scientists had made about harmful, perhaps fatal, exposure to the belt.”  Borman is dismissing the radiation hazard as being an over rated threat.

So who is lying here, Frank Borman or the anonymous writers at Clavius?

Likewise, there is no mention of plotting trajectories to avoid the harmful parts of the Van Allen belts in any NASA tech docs that I have read, nor is it ever mentioned in the transcripts of astronaut conversations.  They did a 5 minute burn for a “free return trajectory” to escape earth’s gravitational field and other than some minor course corrections, they sped on to enter the moon’s gravitational field.  No warping thru radiation densities as Frank Borman states in his book or in his follow-up book Apollo 8, co-written with 

The treatment of critics of the Apollo moon program are abysmal.  They are always referred to as “conspiracy theorists,” a term invented as a talking point by the CIA to discredit the critics of the Kennedy assassination investigation in press reports. Now it is used to attack critics of official Government accounts of everything from JFK to the 911 attacks. The anonymous writers at Clavius use this term repeatedly, implying there are no anomalies in the Apollo program, just a bunch of know-nothing conspiracy kooks.  That of course is not true.  Aulis.com has articles written by scientists and engineers who question effectively, many elements of the Apollo moon program.

So reader beware.  

Of Spacesuits and Helmets

Neil Armstrongs's alleged spacesuit. Note the blue overboots.  They are gray in the moon images.

NASA documentation shows that Apollo spacesuits offered little to no radiation protection.

Studying the Apollo moon landings is about like studying the JFK assassination.  Down one rabbit trail after the other.  A very contradicting trail.  Some of the official statements and published documents that describe how the feat of building complicated space craft to land men on the moon in just 8 years, comes off as a poorly written science fiction drama where the author cannot keep his plot threads from conflicting.  In other instances, no explanation is available at all.  This not only includes NASA at the time of the Apollo program, but years later when the goal shifts back to returning to the moon with the Orion program.  

Spacesuits And Radiation

Radiation is probably one of the most hazardous conditions affecting manned space flight.  The fist hurdle is the Van Allen Radiation belts, the earth’s donut shaped force field.  It traps numerous particles and blocks the solar wind.  It is widely known that the belts are a great hazard and hence, impediment to manned space flight.  Dr. Van Allen stressed this fact in science articles in the late 1950’s.  Ironically, none of the astronauts in their books have an issue with these radiation belts, passing thru them, to and fro, with no harm.  Frank Borman commander of Apollo 8 stated in his book Countdown, that they traveled thru the thickest part of the Van Allen belts and the radiation exposure was the equivalent of a chest x-ray.  Even before Apollo, in 1966 Gemini flight 11 reached a record altitude of 875 miles above earth which would place them in the first of the two belts.  Once again, no harm was reported.

Once past that, the moon presents a toxic hazmat zone filled with an unrelenting flow of radiative particles such cosmic radiation, gamma rays, microwaves, x-rays and on on.  Even the ground soil is radiated.  A study of the Apollo spacesuit and its development and use, not much is said regarding the radiation shielding in the suit.  In NASA’s spacesuit manual, they list numerous layers of aluminized mylar film used in the suit interior to protect the astronaut.  The manual specifically makes note that multiple layers of aluminized mylar were used for the protection of thermal radiation.  Thermal is heat.  You can experience that on a sunny day at the beach.  But that is not nuclear radiation.  In this case, NASA is defining the suit as protecting the astronaut from environmental conditions which is needed with the moon surface temperature in direct sunlight ranging form 260 to 280 degrees Fahrenheit (123-137 C). 

The only other radiation listed in the manual is ultraviolet radiation which can damage the astronaut’s eyes, solved by the use of the gold visor.  

Nuclear radiation hazards are never mentioned or addressed for the safety of the astronaut wearing the suit.

Even TV documentaries are silent about this issue, such as the episode of Moon Machines on the SCI Channel discussing the development of the Apollo spacesuit.  It never mentioned radiation shielding in the resulting design.  One would think this would be an important feature to develop for the safety of the astronauts.  But once again, it is never mentioned. 

Researcher Marcus Allen, a believer in the moon hoax theory, said he contacted a contractor building spacesuits and inquired about the radiation shielding used in the suit.  They told him to contact NASA as they didn’t build shielding in the suits they constructed for use by the astronauts. 

The moon itself is radioactive.  NASA’s science site (see link below) states that gamma rays cause nuclear reactions in the soil making it radioactive.  Astronauts said the moon dirt got all over their suits and gear, with one astronaut stating that some got in his mouth.  Yet, none of them ever got radiation sickness or resulting health issues from exposure to moon dirt. 

How do the “experts” deal with these conflicting issues?  They simply state that the astronauts were not in the intense radiation zones (Van Allen belts, cislunar space, the moon) long enough to experience any serious effects from life threatening radiation.  Which is nonsense.  Russian scientists about in the 1960’s concluded that the radiation was severe enough to require 4 feet of lead shielding which is utterly impractical.  It is hard to understand how the astronauts could have survived in such a toxic environment regardless of how long they were there in EVA on the moon and not suffer serious consequences.  The proper shielding is not there as stated in NASA documents.  None of the Apollo astronauts who were alleged to have flown to, or landed on the moon, were ever effected by radiation sickness during, or after, the missions.  And all of this with spacesuits, as stated above in multiple NASA technical reports, that did not have proper radiation shielding!  These suits could not be used for Hazmat work on earth during a nuclear power plant emergency, so why would they be any good for use in the most dangerous radiation zone of them all—the surface of the moon?

Apollo 8 astronaut Bill Anders.  Note the lack of shielding or insulation in his plastic helmet.

The Helmet

Besides the lack of radiation shielding from the suit, it should be noted that the spacesuit helmet, crafted from Lexan polycarbonate (i.e., plastic), has no shielding from either thermal or nuclear based radiation, nor insulated from conditions of extreme heat or cold.  The only safeguard is the gold visor for the afore mentioned ultraviolet radiation, which is the only type of radiation protection, besides thermal, which is heat, listed in NASA’s documentation.  The polycarbonate material is rated to handle temperatures up to 297 degrees Fahrenheit, safe enough for surface temperatures on the moon, although it will deform at above 240 degrees Fahrenheit (something never seen or documented by NASA).  There is no data on this form of plastic in conjunction with below freezing temperatures.

Underneath the suit the astronauts wear a liquid cooling garment (LCG) featuring water filled tubes for keeping the astronaut cool. (It is unknown how this cooling system turned warm for the severely cold shadow areas on the moon.) It fully covers the body and is used in spacesuits to this day.  However, while the tubing extends to the feet, it does not cover the head or the hands. As already stated, there is no thermal insulation in the helmet but the outside is covered in beta cloth which is flame resistant, but it is not explained how this protects the person inside from the severe extremes of temperature and radiation on the moon’s surface.  It seems unlikely that the astronaut’s hands would be safe in the temperature extremes with the type of insolation protection the suit’s gloves provided.  

The end result is a helmet that offers little way of protect from the moon’s extreme environmental conditions.  Even NASA’s gamma ray experiments on the helmet showed no protection at all, with the gamma rays easily passing through the thin polycarbonate structure.  

In Summary

There is a disturbing lack of concern for the hazards astronauts encounter in space and on the moon. Astronauts in their interviews and written accounts say precious little regarding this mortal danger. And no proper explanation is coming forth form NASA as their documentation is sorely lacking in solving this issue.  Basically, the spacesuit’s purpose is to offer protection from extremes of heat and cold, micrometers, vacuum of space, low gravity and visual protection.  One will never read about protection from x-rays, gamma rays, ionized protons or any other types of radiation that will be present on the moon’s surface.  It is as if radiation hazards do not exist at all!

If NASA put men on the moon they were using classified technology to accomplish the mission.  There is apparently no radiation protection in their suits.  Or else, they didn’t go at all and the moon landings were one big charade on the American tax payers and the world.  Or, the true nature of space and it’s properties and hazards has not been explained to us at all.

If people don’t believe that man landed on the moon it is NASA’s fault.  Go to their web site and do some research and you will see why.

Sources

Spacesuit manual

https://www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/alsj-EMU1.pdf

Space Helmet

https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19710005127.pdf

Lexan Polycarbonate

https://www.acplasticsinc.com/informationcenter/r/what-is-lexan

Moon Soil Radioactive

https://science.nasa.gov/science-news/science-at-nasa/2005/08sep_radioactivemoon

NASA Technical Docs Site

https://ntrs.nasa.gov

Aluminum Shielding

https://inis.iaea.org/collection/NCLCollectionStore/_Public/43/107/43107414.pdf

Aluminum not a good block for Gama rays

https://www.quora.com/How-does-aluminum-block-radiation

NASA Document Implies No Go To Moon

The curious chart found on the NASA Technical Report Server.

(Updated at:  https://georgebailey.substack.com/p/nasa-document-implies-no-go-to-moon)

A curious chart found on the NASA Technical Report Server.

NASA’s server for technical reports sounds intimidating for us non astrophysics types but it really is not.  Many documents are plans, projections, histories and so on.  There are of course, the heavy mathematical documents but one can skim thru them to understand the overall concepts being presented.  Well, what you suss out what the acronyms all mean.  If you are a space flight researcher, it is a site to visit often.  Surprises abound.

Space exploration has always been dogged by one major restraint—radiation.  Radiation makes all of space a giant toxic zone that goes on forever.  Even the crew of the International Space Station (ISS) has to work around the dangers of radiation in low earth orbit (LEO) when they have laptops that need to be rebooted and cameras that fail from radiation damage.

But even the radiation experienced in LEO aboard the ISS is low compared to venturing farther out in space.  The first hurdle for traveling to the moon is the Van Allen radiation belts, discovered by Dr. James Van Allen in 1958, is the earth’s force field from the incoming toxic soup of charged particles and trapped within the donut shape of the field.  The two belts start at about 400 miles from the earth and extend to over 36,000 miles.  Most science sites, such as Popular Science and others, state that to pass through this hazardous zone the Apollo spacecrafts used a trajectory that allowed them to pass thru the thinner parts of the belts.  Sort of an arch instead of a straight line.  That method is not mentioned in any of the astronaut’s books and certainly was not a viable action for Apollo 13 in its crisis situation with its limited fuel.   

The trajectories from the earth and to the moon are called “free return trajectories” and also known as a “slingshot.”   They use the gravitational field and a burn to slingshot to the target, in this case the moon and vise-versa. The limited fuel capacity is not there for any fancy maneuvering.  

Mission Dose Chart

While researching radiation exposure in space and the lunar voyages I came across the, “Space Radiation Cancer Risk Projections and Uncertainties – 2010,” found on the NASA Technical Report Server.  It features a large amount of data on how radiation effects internal organs, cancer risks, male and female dose variations and so on.  Important information to know for future space missions.

On page 28 one can see the chart posted above.  It charts the amount of radiation exposure for all of NASA’s manned missions from  Mercury to the ISS.  Notice where Apollo is placed—right beside the Space Shuttle in the middle of the chart!  It is well known that the highest radiation levels are passing thru the Van Allen radiation belts, solar radiation in cislunar space and lastly, the nuclear hazard zone of the moon.  The Shuttle never left low earth orbit.  If Apollo traveled to and landed on the moon, it should be listed at the top of the chart.  Instead, the International Space Station, the  Russian Mir and Skylab are.  They are equating the sum of Apollo’s moon journeys to only the radiation exposure one would experience in low earth orbit.  How can this be?

Or rather, how could NASA allow these learned authors of this report,  publish something like this?

In Closing

The Apollo moon missions traveled the farthest out.  They went beyond the earth’s protective magnetosphere where the deadliest radiation from cosmic rays, gamma rays, x-rays and so forth exist.  If they completed the moon missions then their radiation protection in the space crafts to the space suits, with this low of an exposure rate, must have been constructed of some classified technology never shared with the public.  Or else, they did not complete the missions as presented to the public.

Once again, NASA is making the impossible, seem possible.  And that is what wizards do.

Addendum, 9-5-18

Actually, the flights of Gemini should have been higher on the chart as well.  According to Micheal Collins in is book, Catching The Fire, page 261, Gemini flight 11 reached a record altitude of 875 miles above earth in 1966.  Collins, along with John Young in their Gemini 10 flight, set the previous record of 475 miles.  Which would place both missions in the lower rung of the Van Allen belts.  There is no report of radiation sickness at these altitudes despite being in the belts.  The highest Space Shuttle flight occurred in 1990, STS-31 at an altitude of 380 nautical miles.  There are stories of the crew getting mild radiation sickness but have not been able to verify this event.

Addendum, 8-15-18

Researcher Randy Walsh in his book The Apollo Moon Missions, on page 144 states that astronaut dosimeter readings are averages, with the specific readings classified. Maybe because they never went into cislunar space?  (Please note the author does not source this allegation.)

Sources

https://ntrs.nasa.gov/

Space Radiation Cancer Risk Projections and Uncertainties – 2010

https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/20130001648.pdf