"One small step . . . "

[quade 4]

Software finds missing 'a' in Armstrong's moon quote
STORY

Ok, so I did my own analysis and after listening to the Original Recording I could swear that if you listen really closely you'll hear him say;

"That's one small step for man . . . (barely audible 'Shit! Did I just screw that up?')
One . . . (barely audible 'FUCK!') . . . giant leap for mankind."

Now before anybody has a hissy fit, lemme just say that Armstrong is a genuine hero to me and I certainly respect everything he's ever done, but this entire non-sense of the "a"? . . . give it a rest guys.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[Ron 10]

Quote

Ok, so I did my own analysis and after listening to the Original Recording I could swear that if you listen really closely you'll hear him say;

"That's one small step for man . . . (barely audible 'Shit! Did I just screw that up?')
One . . . (barely audible 'FUCK!') . . . giant leap for mankind."

Funny, I always thought I heard, "That's one small step for man....(Laughing) One....(more laughing) Giant leap for mankind (slight chuckle)."

I thought it was due to him laughing about being on a soundstage in Hollywood

Actually, I think we went to the moon.....But just a random question for the space nuts. If we did land on the moon, would the rover and the landers should be able to be seen with a really good telescope? (I mean REALLY good, like observatory style)

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

[quade 4]

Quote

If we did land on the moon, would the rover and the landers should be able to be seen with a really good telescope? (I mean REALLY good, like observatory style)

No. Certainly not an Earth based one.

Perhaps a space based one such as Keyhole, but even then I do not believe that the resolution is good enough. Hubble, which is essentially the same "basic" design couldn't because it's set up for too wide a field of view and designed to look at faint objects rather than bright objects at high resolution.

That said, it's certainly possible to bounce lasers off the experimental packages left behind and get a return from them.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[Ron 10]

Quote

No. Certainly not an Earth based one.

OK...any reason? Just too small?

Quote

That said, it's certainly possible to bounce lasers off the experimental packages left behind and get a return from them.

Has that happend?

Just wondering....I love to hear people claim we never went, and I always thought that a nice pic would shut them up quick. I do not know enough to know why we could not, so just trying to understand the problem.

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

[freeflir29 0]

Quote

Has that happend?

Yes..........and for $5 more they can photoshop a pic of you standing next to it.



Quade...............yes..............that's RATHER rediculous.

[billvon 3,107]

>I always thought that a nice pic would shut them up quick.

There are plenty of pictures; lunar-landing-hoax conspiracy fans claim they are all doctored. I would imagine they'd do the same with any picture from an orbital telescope (or even a large earth based one.)

[quade 4]

Quote

Quote

Quote

No. Certainly not an Earth based one.

OK...any reason? Just too small?

Yep. I dunno if you've ever seen how large these objects are, but only a few meters across. That's FAR too small to begin with and the atmosphere would blur the images even if it wasn't.

Quote

Quote

That said, it's certainly possible to bounce lasers off the experimental packages left behind and get a return from them.

Has that happend?

[shermanator 4]

hmmm, reminds me of the time i met mr. armstrong.. stupid me didnt realize who i was shaving a conversation with until after the fact, someone came up to me and said "you know who you were just talking to, right?"

CLICK HERE! new blog posted 9/21/08
CSA #720

[jumper03 0]

Think about this though -
The russians were first in space, first to orbit the Earth, first to put a man in space....do you see them claiming we didn't go so they can claim the title of first to the moon???

Scars remind us that the past is real

[Jayruss 0]

no if you listen its

"one small step for a man"

err Neil lets try that take again, say the "a" a little softer so that it sounds as if you were in space.

"One small step for man" . . .

__________________________________________________
"Beware how you take away hope from another human being."
-Oliver Wendell Holmes

[Douva 0]

Click on "MPEG."

I don't have an M.D. or a law degree. I have bachelor's in kicking ass and taking names.

[Guest]

Nice to see the First Man finally get his due.

mh

"The mouse does not know life until it is in the mouth of the cat."

[CSpenceFLY 1]

Has anyone ever heard the story of young Neal and his neighbor Manny Koin(sp)


.

[quade 4]

Quote

Has anyone ever heard the story of young Neal and his neighbor Manny Koin(sp)


.

Urban Legend . . . never happened.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[popsjumper 2]

Quote

...I always thought that a nice pic would shut them up quick...

Go ahead and tell them to STFU...I saw a pic of the moon showing Jay Leno standing next to a low-rider.

My reality and yours are quite different.
I think we're all Bozos on this bus.
Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239

[CSpenceFLY 1]

I didn't ask if it happened...I asked if anyone had heard it.Your one of those trouble makers aren't you.


.

[quade 4]

Quote

I didn't ask if it happened...I asked if anyone had heard it.Your one of those trouble makers aren't you.

However my responce does, in fact, confirm that I had heard of it, otherwise how would I know it never happened? (That's just plain logic my dear boy!)

And yes, I AM a troublemaker.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[Ron 10]

Quote

There are plenty of pictures; lunar-landing-hoax conspiracy fans claim they are all doctored. I would imagine they'd do the same with any picture from an orbital telescope (or even a large earth based one.)

What if...And know I know it does not seem possible, that a telescope other than NASA could do it....That was my point. The crazy's would ignore it anyway.

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

[Butters 0]

You can watch people get into a shuttle. You can watch a shuttle launch. You can watch a shuttle land. So you know that people are going into space.

The scientists and engineers that work for NASA are extremely intelligent. We know that they have sent people into space, what makes you think they couldn't land on the moon?

"That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch

[quade 4]

Quote

The scientists and engineers that work for NASA are extremely intelligent. We know that they have sent people into space, what makes you think they couldn't land on the moon?

[hippy conspiracy voice]

Don't ya see MAN . . . THAT'S what they WANT you to believe.

Sure we COULD have gone to the Moon, but the military industrial complex run that runs the government was able to pull off the tv show for a few million and they pocketed BILLIONS. THAT'S how they're funding the Illuminati!

Same deal with the Space Shuttle man!

WE don't even see the astronauts getting on the rocket. WE see a TV show man. A TV SHOW!

THEY launch a craptastic MODEL over the ocean and where does it go man? WHERE? YOU DON'T KNOW DO YA?

You can only SEE a freekin' smoke trail. It's ALL just a TV SHOW ... MAN!

The one that "comes back" is just a hollow shell . . . man . . . a hollow freekin' glider.

[/hippy conspiracy voice]

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[Ron 10]

Quote

You can watch people get into a shuttle. You can watch a shuttle launch. You can watch a shuttle land. So you know that people are going into space.

Space is different than landing on the moon. BIG difference.

Quote

The scientists and engineers that work for NASA are extremely intelligent. We know that they have sent people into space, what makes you think they couldn't land on the moon?

Oh, *I* think we did. I just thought it would be cool if possible to actually SEE the landers we left behind. And if we could get pics of the landers then the folks that do not believe would just kinda sit there and stutter.

But lets be honest, given the scope of the missions.....That is some amazing stuff, and I can understand how some people find it hard to grasp. We were able to go to the moon in the late 60's, but decades latter we finally went to the bottom of the ocean.

Also remember that we had two shuttles explode and "all" they had to do was circle the globe, not travel to the moon, land and come back.

I think we did it...But it amazes me still.

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

[turtlespeed 226]

Sattellites can take pictures of a pack of cigs in a gus pocket and tell you what brand they are from space - but can't see the landing area of the lunar module?

I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun

[popsjumper 2]

Quote

...Oh, *I* think we did. I just thought it would be cool if possible to actually SEE the landers we left behind. And if we could get pics of the landers then the folks that do not believe would just kinda sit there and stutter.

Yeah! Right ON!
What we'd probably see is the lander's freeze plugs laying on the ground in a puddle of oil telling us it needs an oil change.

My reality and yours are quite different.
I think we're all Bozos on this bus.
Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239

[Icon134 0]

Quote

Sattellites can take pictures of a pack of cigs in a gus pocket and tell you what brand they are from space - but can't see the landing area of the lunar module?

The distances involved in taking a picture of the earth from space are substantially smaller then those required to take a picture of the moon.

some of the surveillance satellite systems are at approximately 800 kms from earth. Compared that to the distance the earth is from the moon (385,000 km) and the lunar lander becomes much smaller then a pack of cigarettes (from an angular perspective that is...)

Livin' on the Edge... sleeping with my rigger's wife...

[turtlespeed 226]

true - but the media in which you have to look through - i.e. atmosphere - is not there to impede your "vision"

I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun