Moon Landings Prog Tonight
Posted by: J.N. on 01 June 2004
The Truth Behind the Moon Landings: Stranger than Fiction (Documentary)
Time - 21:00 - 22:00 (1 hour long)
When - Wednesday 2nd June on five
Documentary examining the conspiracy theory that the moon landing was faked in a Hollywood studio. Experts, including Jay Windley, refute these claims by presenting evidence to prove that America really did win the space race. Are the theories just myth-making?
(Subtitles, Stereo)
I've seen other progs about this 'conspiracy theory' and have a fascinating book on the subject called 'Dark Moon'.
Should be interesting.
Time - 21:00 - 22:00 (1 hour long)
When - Wednesday 2nd June on five
Documentary examining the conspiracy theory that the moon landing was faked in a Hollywood studio. Experts, including Jay Windley, refute these claims by presenting evidence to prove that America really did win the space race. Are the theories just myth-making?
(Subtitles, Stereo)
I've seen other progs about this 'conspiracy theory' and have a fascinating book on the subject called 'Dark Moon'.
Should be interesting.
Posted on: 04 June 2004 by Steve G
joe90 = mug
Posted on: 04 June 2004 by Paul Ranson
quote:
Watch the tape. His head moved backwards. Therefore he had to have been shot from in front. Action. reaction.
Head goes forward, then backwards. Brain matter exits forwards. Entry wound on the back, exit wound on the front right. All evidence of LHO from the book depository. Where's your evidence to the contrary?
Paul
Posted on: 04 June 2004 by domfjbrown
The flag also flutters because the pole was flexed while being inserted into the lunar soil.
Tell you what - why don't you non-believers club together and fund your own mission and prove us all wrong...
The only things that I find odd about the lunar missions are:
Why did the US develop a biro that works in space, when the USSR found pencils did the job and didn't cost squillions to develop?
Why did the US use O2-rich atmosphere in their cabins (until Apollo 1 of course!) when the USSR were using O2/nitrogen mixture from day 1?
Why did the US launch Challenger on a very cold day, when in similar conditions a year before, the rubber O-rings on the SFBRs had nearly failed in identical fasion?
And the biggest one - how the hell did the Russians get away with using CLOCKWORK "conputers" on their Soyuz craft, while the US used TTL computers (which were worth diddly squat for most of Apollo 13)????
__________________________
Don't wanna be cremated or buried in a grave
Just dump me in a plastic bag and leave me on the pavement
A tribute to your modern world, your great society
I'm just another victim of your highrise fantasy!
Tell you what - why don't you non-believers club together and fund your own mission and prove us all wrong...
The only things that I find odd about the lunar missions are:
Why did the US develop a biro that works in space, when the USSR found pencils did the job and didn't cost squillions to develop?
Why did the US use O2-rich atmosphere in their cabins (until Apollo 1 of course!) when the USSR were using O2/nitrogen mixture from day 1?
Why did the US launch Challenger on a very cold day, when in similar conditions a year before, the rubber O-rings on the SFBRs had nearly failed in identical fasion?
And the biggest one - how the hell did the Russians get away with using CLOCKWORK "conputers" on their Soyuz craft, while the US used TTL computers (which were worth diddly squat for most of Apollo 13)????
__________________________
Don't wanna be cremated or buried in a grave
Just dump me in a plastic bag and leave me on the pavement
A tribute to your modern world, your great society
I'm just another victim of your highrise fantasy!
Posted on: 04 June 2004 by HTK
quote:
Originally posted by DAVOhorn:
When we crossed the atlantic we were able to colonise the country.
We have not managed this with space exploration yet.
That's because there's no indigenous population to slaughter. If there were little green people to welcome Apollo 11, we'd own the moon we'de have them on reservations by now.
Cheers
Harry
Posted on: 04 June 2004 by TomK
quote:
Originally posted by HTK:quote:
Originally posted by DAVOhorn:
When we crossed the atlantic we were able to colonise the country.
We have not managed this with space exploration yet.
That's because there's no indigenous population to slaughter. If there were little green people to welcome Apollo 11, we'd own the moon we'de have them on reservations by now.
Cheers
Harry
They'd doubtless also owe us billions of space dollars by this time.
Posted on: 04 June 2004 by Chris Metcalfe
The thing that's always irritated me about the moon landing is that Neil Armstrong fluffed the most quoted television line in history. He said 'That's one small step for Man, one giant leap for Mankind' - which is nonsense, since 'Man' is synonymous with 'Mankind'. What he meant to say, or was supposed to say, was 'That's one small step for A man....' which of course it was.
Other than that, I remember looking up at the moon in July 1969 and there was definitely a man in it.
Other than that, I remember looking up at the moon in July 1969 and there was definitely a man in it.
Posted on: 04 June 2004 by rodwsmith
Neil Armstrong's words (and their slight error) when landing on the moon are well recorded, "that's one small step for man, one giant leap for mankind". However what he said immediately afterwards, although broadcast at the time, has become somewhat lost because of the enigma it contained.
He then went on to say: "And good luck, Mr Gorski" with no further elaboration.
Of course NASA in Houston metaphorically, and perhaps literally, scratched their heads and searched their records for a Russian astronaut called Gorski. No such was forthcoming and they asked wider, even Mrs Armstrong, to no avail. No-one, it seemed, except Armstrong himself knew of this "Mr Gorski".
Accordingly in the future press conferences and press releases they brushed over it, suggesting something personal and slightly admitting to their ignorance. The media, similarly unable to find anything more, followed suit.
When Armstrong returned to Earth, as part of his de-briefing, naturally was asked to whom the comments referred and why he had made them during the, until then, most widely listened to live broadcast in history. He wouldn't say, just suggesting it was personal and he had promised himself he would.
And so it continued, in every interview (in themselves rare) that Armstrong gave, if the "Gorski" question arose, he would simply brush it off.
Until two years ago.
During a television interview, the questioner, slightly resignedly asked again:
"So, Neil, when are you ever going to tell everyone exactly what this comment about Mr Gorski was about?"
To the interviewer's surprise and patent delight, Armstrong replied:
"Well, actually, I heard last week that the person concerned had died, so I can tell you..."
"Please, go on" said the near-salivating interviewer.
"When I was a small boy, maybe about seven years old, we lived in a house next to a couple called the Gorskis. One day, I was playing ball in the back yard, and the ball sailed over the fence and into the Gorski's garden. This wasn't the first time this had happened, so I crept round to get the ball back without disturbing them. Just as I got to the ball, I heard voices coming from the upstairs window of the Gorski's house - their bedroom I think. Being young and naturally nosey, I listened in."
"And what did you hear?" asked the interviewer.
"Well, I'm not sure this is quite suitable for prime time television."
"No please go on..." the interviewer implored, visibly agitated.
"O.K. I heard Mrs Gorski say to Mr Gorski: 'Oral Sex? ORAL SEX? The day you'll get oral sex will be the day that little brat next door sets foot on the moon'"
He then went on to say: "And good luck, Mr Gorski" with no further elaboration.
Of course NASA in Houston metaphorically, and perhaps literally, scratched their heads and searched their records for a Russian astronaut called Gorski. No such was forthcoming and they asked wider, even Mrs Armstrong, to no avail. No-one, it seemed, except Armstrong himself knew of this "Mr Gorski".
Accordingly in the future press conferences and press releases they brushed over it, suggesting something personal and slightly admitting to their ignorance. The media, similarly unable to find anything more, followed suit.
When Armstrong returned to Earth, as part of his de-briefing, naturally was asked to whom the comments referred and why he had made them during the, until then, most widely listened to live broadcast in history. He wouldn't say, just suggesting it was personal and he had promised himself he would.
And so it continued, in every interview (in themselves rare) that Armstrong gave, if the "Gorski" question arose, he would simply brush it off.
Until two years ago.
During a television interview, the questioner, slightly resignedly asked again:
"So, Neil, when are you ever going to tell everyone exactly what this comment about Mr Gorski was about?"
To the interviewer's surprise and patent delight, Armstrong replied:
"Well, actually, I heard last week that the person concerned had died, so I can tell you..."
"Please, go on" said the near-salivating interviewer.
"When I was a small boy, maybe about seven years old, we lived in a house next to a couple called the Gorskis. One day, I was playing ball in the back yard, and the ball sailed over the fence and into the Gorski's garden. This wasn't the first time this had happened, so I crept round to get the ball back without disturbing them. Just as I got to the ball, I heard voices coming from the upstairs window of the Gorski's house - their bedroom I think. Being young and naturally nosey, I listened in."
"And what did you hear?" asked the interviewer.
"Well, I'm not sure this is quite suitable for prime time television."
"No please go on..." the interviewer implored, visibly agitated.
"O.K. I heard Mrs Gorski say to Mr Gorski: 'Oral Sex? ORAL SEX? The day you'll get oral sex will be the day that little brat next door sets foot on the moon'"
Posted on: 04 June 2004 by Steve B
Brilliant! (If it's true).
Steve B
Steve B
Posted on: 04 June 2004 by seagull
But how do you know its not true?
Posted on: 04 June 2004 by TomK
Hate to be a spoilsport but it's not true. What a pity though.
Posted on: 04 June 2004 by TomK
He may have had a neighbour called Gorski who was on a promise if Armstrong got to the moon. I don't know about that but he never said those words as the NASA transcripts show.
Posted on: 04 June 2004 by Tim Jones
Tom's right. I've heard it before, but it's turned out to be one of those internet-generated myths. He never said it....
Tim
Tim
Posted on: 04 June 2004 by Paul Hutchings
always find the conspiracy theories about this sort of thing amusing.. the thing that always sticks in my mind, ignoring photo's and anything vaguely technical is something i've heard many times before and something they quoted on the show -
at the time of the moon landing NASA employed/contracted/whatever approx 400,000 people.. you'd think they'd have found one by now who'd talk??
Paul
at the time of the moon landing NASA employed/contracted/whatever approx 400,000 people.. you'd think they'd have found one by now who'd talk??
Paul
Posted on: 04 June 2004 by rodwsmith
Tim, Tom,
I never claimed veracity. It damn well should be true though. If you can carry it off in front of people in the pub you can get a very good reception.
I did hear that Armstrong himself is aware of the urban myth and said that he wished he'd thought of it himself as it would be better than going down in history as having fluffed his lines..!
All the best
Rod
I never claimed veracity. It damn well should be true though. If you can carry it off in front of people in the pub you can get a very good reception.
I did hear that Armstrong himself is aware of the urban myth and said that he wished he'd thought of it himself as it would be better than going down in history as having fluffed his lines..!
All the best
Rod