Neil Armstrong RIP

Posted by: Reginald Halliday on 25 August 2012

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-19381098

Posted on: 31 August 2012 by DrMark

There was a web site I ran across years ago that had all the "back live" telegrams between Khrushchev & Kennedy during that Cuban Missile Crisis - fascinating reading the give and take of 2 powerful men arguing their positions to each other and the veiled and not so veiled threats of what might happen in various scenarios playing out.  Both were right, and both were wrong.

Posted on: 31 August 2012 by Komet

Cuban crisis was 1962, JFK's offer was 1963. As a young schoolboy I could never understand in the 70's why people  always seemed to protest outside American Embassies, air bases, etc for peace, rather than the Russian. Maybe because they could?

Posted on: 01 September 2012 by Mike Hughes
Surprised that no-one has quoted from the NASA site itself which provides several excellent articles about exactly what we got out of the Apollo programme and specifically the moon landing itself. I'll trust everyone here is intelligent enough to go read for themselves and draw their own conclusions but a few small points bear repetition. 1 - cost. The programme cost considerably less than the US food stamp programme of the time. 2 - mapping the planet. Much of what we know of and know about the changes to our planet is derived from technology originating in the Apollo programme. 3 - politics - NASA are upfront about the political impetus behind a moon landing. Refreshingly so, but they also detail that there was so much more to it and strongly suggest that whilst political will was critical there was a good chance it would have happened anyway given the other circumstances coming together at that time. 4 - it is very easy to forget that the first loud calls for the democratisation of the USSR from within the country that echoed around the world were derived from Russians looking upon the US moon Lansing as proof that democracy was simply better. Much as Paul Simon didn't cause the downfall of apartheid there is much to argue each way but little doubt there was a significant contribution. 5 - it is also easy to forget that it was technology from the first moon landing that eventually joined up with Russian kit in space and moved further down the road described in 4 above. I'm not sure I would label the earlier post that of a philistine much as I would never hide behind a bit of name calling as an excuse to not change my mind. On this occasion I would say that a rather limited and absolutely incomplete perspective has taken centre stage at a time when many would wish to celebrate one of the few people worthy of hyperbole regardless of context. Anyone here fancy travelling to the moon and back on kit powered by less than the tech in a Nokia non-smartphone? Thought not! George has provided some context for his take on these events. I feel that once you look at that context it cannot be taken as anything but incomplete and a great man and a great achievement are needlessly demeaned. There are few things modern human beings should be proud of. This is certainly one of them.
Posted on: 01 September 2012 by DrMark
Originally Posted by Komet:

Cuban crisis was 1962, JFK's offer was 1963. As a young schoolboy I could never understand in the 70's why people  always seemed to protest outside American Embassies, air bases, etc for peace, rather than the Russian. Maybe because they could?

Maybe it's because the Russians were pretty up front about what they were and who they were - no "warm, fuzzy" bullsh*t like the USA puts out.  Like Hillary calling Putin corrupt after the last Russian election - no doubt he is, but talk about the pot calling the kettle black.  America is just as corrupt, we're just better at pretending we're not...we use a better grade of whitewash.

 

Which is probably OK, because if Russia ever got her sh*t together, I believe they would easily be the strongest nation - they haven't even begun to tap their natural resources, and the largest country in the world is very well represented in every column of the periodic table.  But their infrastructure and culture (as well as latitude/weather and geographic size) won't permit them to take full advantage.

Posted on: 01 September 2012 by Komet

 "There are few things modern human beings should be proud of. This is certainly one of them."

 

It certainly was. I remember watching grainy black and white footage of the landings on a 14" TV at primary school, not appreciating what it had taken to get there or the risks involved. Still have a scrapbook full of newspaper clippings. Sad to see all the internet rumours it had been faked. Didn't Armstrong hit somebody that kept on asking him about it?

Posted on: 01 September 2012 by winkyincanada
Originally Posted by Komet:

Didn't Armstrong hit somebody that kept on asking him about it?

I think that was Aldrin.

Posted on: 01 September 2012 by DrMark

 

Buzz proves himself an American hero too, and this guy is such a tool...

Posted on: 04 September 2012 by Jasonf
Yes there are benefits.

Personally, I would be much happier if there were some kind og global clean up pact between all the interested nations. This pact would be written in to any space exploration/ partnership and it would be based on ability to clean up after them.

It's absolutely unacceptable to start polluting our stratosphere after the glabal constination On global waste and recycling issues expressed here on earth. And this littering or 'space junk' as its called, is being done without our consent. It's bad enough having a refuse dump the size of California floating around the pacific, we are also going to have floating debri above our heads, what a disgrace.

It just requires some straight forward, joined-up thinking. There are very rarely just benefits and we need to think things through properly to attain true holistic outcomes. Now that we know the problems lets act on the solutions.

However, I am still a space positivist.