Statements regarding never having left low earth orbit.

[JStewy]

I'm trying to find information to answer whether or not we have been outside of low earth orbit. I have searched as many key words as I can think of and no luck. There are many videos of astronauts talking about future technology showing us to venture past low earth orbit. I have read a couple of threads about the lunar landing missions in the conspiracy section. If it's true then why are we taking about not being able to leave low earth orbit?

[Noclevername]

I'm trying to find information to answer whether or not we have been outside of low earth orbit. I have searched as many key words as I can think of and no luck. There are many videos of astronauts talking about future technology showing us to venture past low earth orbit. I have read a couple of threads about the lunar landing missions in the conspiracy section. If it's true then why are we taking about not being able to leave low earth orbit?

We've been out past the Moon, as far as you can get and still be in High Earth Orbit. But humans have never left the Earth/Moon System in person, only sent robots.

[Van Rijn]

I'm trying to find information to answer whether or not we have been outside of low earth orbit. I have searched as many key words as I can think of and no luck.

Hello JStewy, welcome to the board.

I assume you’re specifically looking for missions where astronauts left LEO and not the many robotic spacecraft that have gone beyond LEO?

If you type “low earth orbit” in Google or Bing and pick the Wikipedia link, you will see a definition of LEO and some discussion of missions beyond it.

And if you enter “Apollo missions” you can find information on crewed missions beyond LEO. Apollo 8, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, and 17 went beyond LEO.

There are many videos of astronauts talking about future technology showing us to venture past low earth orbit. I have read a couple of threads about the lunar landing missions in the conspiracy section. If it's true then why are we taking about not being able to leave low earth orbit?

Who is talking about not being able to leave LEO and in what context? There generally isn’t much point in sending humans to higher orbit unless there is a destination, like the moon. That significantly increases complexity and cost, so space agencies haven’t been quick to continue on after Apollo, though the general technology to reach the moon obviously exists. Going to Mars, on the other hand, with the much extended flight time, would be more difficult.

All that said, NASA is developing new hardware to take people to the moon, and this time seems to be serious about it (these things are often set back by changing budget priorities in different administrations). NASA could be back sometime in the 2020s. Then there is SpaceX, a company independently developing its own capability, and China seems to be getting serious too. I think there is a very good chance someone will be back to the moon within a decade.

[JStewy]

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=DpPMoI...ature=youtu.be This video will explain the question I'm trying to answer. Given there is no citation or any information on the clips used in the video I'm guessing someone will have an explanation. Something along the lines of not being able to orbit at a higher altitude or something of the like.

[Van Rijn]

That is a moon hoax video with long debunked claims. I really dislike watching nonsense videos, especially when they go over claims I've seen many times before, and where the presenter takes forever to reach a point, so I skipped through most of the video.

I'll comment on two egregious arguments that I noticed:

(1) He claimed that the high temperature of the thermosphere would melt spacecraft. He ignores the fact that the thermosphere is an excellent vacuum - there simply isn't enough matter in the thermosphere to transfer significant heat to a spacecraft.

(2) He also made nonsense claims about radiation, with the old "six feet of lead" silliness, while taking statements by astronauts and NASA out of context.

The Apollo missions were short duration missions where minimizing radiation exposure was one of the mission objectives. For instance, the trajectories were configured to minimize time in the Van Allen belts, and the trajectory took them through low radiation regions of the belts. The Van Allen belts were a concern, and were accounted for, but they weren't the boogeyman that hoaxers claim.

The radiation environment is very well understood by many different space agencies and private organizations. If the radiation environment were so extreme as the hoaxers claim, do you really believe there could be a successful conspiracy among all of relevant organizations to keep it quiet?

Also, he has comments by NASA talking about issues with long duration missions (as would happen with missions to Mars) where the astronauts would spend many months, rather than days, in space and applies this to the Apollo missions. The reality is that the effects of radiation exposure accumulate, so long duration missions would require more extensive shielding for astronauts than short duration missions, like the Apollo flights. Just because NASA identifies an issue for long duration Mars missions does *NOT* mean that the same issue applies to short duration Moon missions.

Anyway, those are the key items I noticed, but I had enough of the video after that. If you have specific questions about the claims, you might want to bring them up in thread. However, while I can't speak for the moderators, I will note that these kinds of threads usually should be in the "Conspiracy Theory" section, especially if you plan on arguing for the moon hoax claims, and are not just asking about how the hoax claims are in error.