Modern communication technologies, led by His Majesty the Internet, have made us believe in the illusion of an "open information space". Often we do not even realize how naively trusting our mind is at the moment when we are reading a newspaper, watching TV or hovering over the expanses of the global network. Judge for yourself.
Fact #1. Good joke
In 1848, the tradesman Nikifor Nikitin "for seditious speeches about flying to the moon" was exiled not just anywhere, but to the distant settlement of Baikonur! There are coincidences in life.
This funny legend looks very plausible and sets in a sarcastic way. It was first published in 1974 in the Dnepr Evening newspaper. The author of the note is V. Pimenov, a researcher at the Dnepropetrovsk Historical Museum. This "gelerter" claimed that the museum's library had preserved an issue of the Moscow Gubernskie Vedomosti newspaper for 1848, which mentions the fact of the tradesman Nikitin. After some time, some enterprising reader reported this article to the Izvestia newspaper, and off and on
rode ... The story of the unlucky tradesman spread throughout the Union.
But there were meticulous people who did not believe a word and decided to find the original source in the archives - the same issue of the newspaper "Moscow Gubernskiye Vedomosti". It soon became clear that there was no mention of the tradesman Nikitin, and Pimenov himself later admitted that he simply invented this story and did not at all expect that a few lines in a provincial newspaper could cause such a stir.
It is good that the deception was revealed rather quickly, because the habit of inventing facts could come to the taste of the museum employee. The history of journalism knows many resourceful authors who over the years have managed to describe in their articles what happened, as they say, on Russian Bairam and Turkish Easter.
Fact number 2. Good luck, Mr. Gorsky!
When American astronaut Neil Armstrong stepped on the surface of the moon, the first thing he said was: "I wish you success, Mr. Gorsky!" As a child, Armstrong accidentally overheard a neighbors quarrel - a married couple named Gorsky. Mrs. Gorsky scolded her husband: “It’s more likely that a neighbor’s boy flies to the moon than you satisfy a woman!”
The whole story about the unlucky neighbor of "America's greatest hero" is nothing more than an indecent stand-up comedy joke. Neil Armstrong himself first heard it in 1994, performed by comedian Buddy Hackett, which he later wrote about. Apparently, he liked the joke, because in 1995, during the famous press conference in Florida, he retold it live on national radio.
It is this interview that is still considered proof that Armstrong actually said this phrase when he set foot on the moon. But he just voiced a well-known anecdote, nothing more. Particularly convinced supporters of this legend can find on the Internet a recording of Armstrong's conversations with NASA employees during the landing and see for themselves that they do not contain a single word about the unfortunate Mr. Gorski. It's a pity.
Facts #3, 4, 5. Book of Wonders
Residents of a Scottish village watched the film "Around the World in 80 Days" at the local cinema. At the moment when the movie characters got into the basket of the balloon and chopped off the rope, a strange crack was heard. It turned out that a balloon fell on the roof of the cinema ... the same as in the cinema! (1965)
When the Titanic hit an iceberg in a TV movie, an icy meteorite crashed into an English family's home - a rare occurrence in itself.
In 1944, the Daily Telegraph printed a crossword puzzle containing all the code names for the covert Allied landings in Normandy. Intelligence rushed to investigate the "information leak". But the compiler of the crossword puzzle turned out to be an old school teacher, puzzled by such an incredible coincidence no less than military personnel.
The primary source of all three stories is the popular collection of J. Michell and R. Rickard "The Phenomena of the Book of Wonders", published in the UK in 1977. Its authors are professional, very famous collectors of mysterious and enigmatic stories. John Michell became famous for his books on Atlantis, megaliths, astroarchaeology and sacred geometry. It's funny that Michell and Ricard's book, which describes crying icons, luminous people, ghosts and frogs falling from the sky, was published in the Soviet Union in 1988 by the publishing house of political literature. True, she was accompanied by scientific comments in the spirit of Soviet materialism, which in itself looks quite funny. But that's not the point.
We have no reason not to trust Messrs. Michell and Ricard, but it is worth noting that they themselves do not claim to be 100% accurate in all the stories told in their books. They are rather collectors than researchers, and therefore do not always indicate the source of this or that “fact”. Like, for example, in the story about an icy meteorite that fell on the house of a pious English family while watching a movie about the Titanic.
As for the balloon that hit the movie theater, in Michell and Rickard's original version, the balloon tried to land near the village and hit the wires, causing the lights in the movie theater to go out. Here the authors indicate the source - the Weekly News weekly of April 12, 1975. I don't know if you trust the weeklies... Personally, as a professional journalist, I don't.
But the story about the unlucky school teacher, apparently, is true. With only one significant clarification: the code words did not appear simultaneously in one crossword puzzle, but appeared one at a time in a whole series of crossword puzzles over several months. A biography of a wonderful teacher named Leonard Dawe, who was a regular crossword writer for The Daily Telegraph, can be easily found on the Internet. An amateur footballer, participant in the First World War and part-time crossword compiler Leonard Dow devoted no less than thirty-eight years to this cause.
Fact #6. Twin Brothers
Two foster families who adopted twins, not knowing about each other's plans, named the boys - James. The brothers grew up unaware of the existence of each other, both received a law degree, married women named Linda, both had sons. They learned about each other only at the age of forty.
This story, which happened in reality, became public thanks to psychology professor Thomas Bouchard (Thomas J. Bouchard, Jr.). Buchard's fascination with twins is no coincidence; he is the director of the Center for the Study and Adoption of Twins at the University of Minnesota. A favorite case study that made him famous involves twins named Jim Springer and Jim Lewis.
The brothers first met at the age of thirty-nine. It turned out that their fates surprisingly coincide. Both married girls named Linda, divorced, remarried women named Betty, both named their sons James Alan and their dogs Toy. Professor Buchard, thanks to the Jim twins, received a grant to study the influence of genes on the medical and psychological performance of people. In fact, specialists have long known the fact that some twins often have "similar" fates, and that they are able to "feel" each other, even being on opposite sides of the Earth.
Fact #7
In 1920, three Englishmen traveled on a train in the same compartment. In the process of meeting, it turned out: the name of one of them was Binkham, the second - Powell, and the third - Binkham-Powell. None of them were related to the other.
The story about namesakes was published in 1989 in the book “Mysteries of the Unknown”, published by Reader's Digest. By the way, this book has no authors, only the editor is indicated. And in it the story about English namesakes does not unfold in 1920- m year, and already in 1950, and in Peru. Should I trust the editors of Reader's Digest? You decide.
Fact number 8. A miracle from childhood
In 1920, the American writer Ann Parrish came across her favorite children's book in a second-hand bookstore. When she opened the book at home, she found on the title page the inscription: "Anne Parrish, 209H Webber Street, Colorado Springs." It was her own children's book.
The source of this legend is trustworthy. For the first time, this interesting fact was mentioned by Ann Parrish's contemporary - American writer, critic and journalist Alexander Woolcott in his book "While Rome Burns". It was published in 1934, and in 1954 was named by critics as one of the best books of the twentieth century.
Fact number 9. Pregnant cashiers
In one of the supermarkets in the English county of Cheshire, as soon as a cashier sits at the cashier at number fifteen, she becomes pregnant in a few weeks. The result is twenty-four pregnant women and thirty children born.
After a long search, we managed to find out the source of this piquant story - this is the Vechernyaya Moskva newspaper dated July 7, 1992. It seems that this article, reminiscent of a joke about Mr. Gorsky, was published in the newspaper according to the principle “at the end, readers need to be given something funny and sharp." And if we consider that from the actual data we have only the name of a county in distant Great Britain, it becomes clear that it is not difficult to invent something like that.
Fact number 10. Unsinkable Hugh
On December 5, 1664, a passenger ship sank off the coast of Wales. All crew members and passengers were killed, except for one. The lucky one was named Hugh Williams. More than a century later, on December 5, 1785, another ship was wrecked in the same place. And once again, a single person named... Hugh Williams was saved. In 1860, again on the fifth of December, a fishing schooner sank here. Only one fisherman survived. And his name was Hugh Williams!
Many articles have been written about unsinkable lucky men named Hugh Williams. This story is quite famous. For the first time, Hugh Williams is mentioned in the book by Charles Frederick Cliff "The Book of North Wales" in 1851 ("The book of North Wales", Charles Frederick Cliffe), dedicated to landscapes, monuments, rivers and other attractions of Wales. In it, the story of Hugh Williams is given as a footnote.
In fact, there is documentary evidence only in the case of the flood in 1785. And in general, the whole story as a whole only at first glance seems incredible. I think if you say that in the 18th, 19th and 20th centuries a man named Ivan Ivanovich drowned in the Moscow River, you will not be mistaken. The story about Hugh Williams is from the same series, because this name was very common in those places. And there were a lot of shipwrecks on the coast of Wales over the course of three centuries.
So trust but verify!
Naked Science February 2013
"Do you want oral sex? This caress
Taste with a vengeance? I'll give you slack
When the kid, what's behind the stupid ball
He climbed into our garden, flies to the moon! "-
Shouted and cursed Mrs. Gorsky,
And Mr. Gorsky was mumbling something.
Under the windows, listening to the echoes,
The kid was hiding, as if he was not breathing.
Let someone say that we are not gods,
But that boy still stepped
To the moon ball. The earth groans in alarm, -
"Answer me boy, we love you, Neal!"
He breathed happiness, - passed the highest "level".
Awesome! .. in this dream, the mind floated ...
Though the skeptic will throw, - "He was not there at all!",
But damn it, he was just there!
Let there be no water, only thimbles can be
In seas frozen between moon rocks.
He remembered the house ... and simply, without acting, -
"Good luck, Mr. Gorsky!" - suddenly said.
Level - (English) level.
In the photo to the verse - the footprint of a man on the moon.
On July 20, 1969, Apollo 11 lunar module commander Neil Armstrong became the first person to walk on the moon.
After that, he uttered his famous words: "This is a small step for man and a huge leap for mankind."
There is a legend that before returning to the lander, Armstrong dropped the cryptic phrase: "Good luck to you, Mr. Gorski!"
Armstrong was asked what this phrase meant, but he only smiled in response.
On July 5, 1995, at a press conference in Tampa Bay, Florida, a reporter asked Armstrong a 26-year-old question. This time he answered because by this time Mr. Gorsky had already died.
In 1938, when Armstrong was still a child, he played baseball behind the house with a friend. By chance, a baseball flew into a neighboring yard and fell near the bedroom windows.
Armstrong's neighbors were Mr. and Mrs. Gorsky. As little Neal leaned over to pick up the ball, he heard Mrs. Gorsky arguing with her husband, “Do you want oral sex? Do you want oral sex? You'll get it when the boy next door walks on the moon!"
The conclusion is simple. Sometimes the most impossible becomes reality.
Alexander Tulbu, 08.08.2013
Reviews
Great!!!
Although, the beginning looks a bit harsh, but I won’t recommend changing “oral sex” to something else (as the previous reader advised, see for yourself ...), but it wouldn’t hurt to put the first quatrain in quotation marks.
I heard this story, I believe, it is unlikely that Neil would be ashamed of such a lie (and even with an intrigue lasting 26 years).
And the verse itself is very good! (Just don’t take it as tediousness, in the line “Let there be no water, but there may be thimbles”, logically, instead of “but”, “only” is more suitable, I hope I did not offend these remarks).
But in fact, the event is historical, think about it people - this is the first family scandal that has gone beyond the planet Earth !!!
Thanks for the verse!
The daily audience of the Proza.ru portal is about 100 thousand visitors, who in total view more than half a million pages according to the traffic counter, which is located to the right of this text. Each column contains two numbers: the number of views and the number of visitors.
By the way, this nuance was played up in the recent blockbuster "Watchmen" - I saw the director's cut with subtitles the other day, great thing! A small quote from "Battle for the Moon":
On July 21, 1969, at 2:57 GMT, 109 hours and 24 minutes after launch from the earth's surface, Neil Armstrong said, "That one small step for man is one giant leap for mankind."
Interestingly, this first phrase of a man on the moon has long been the subject of heated debate. In the original, it sounds like this: “That"s one small step for man, one giant leap for mankind", but it would be more correct to write and say: "That"s one small step for a man", however, the article "a" on the record transmitted from "Apollo 11" is not audible. What does it change? Just the meaning of the message. Due to the vagaries of English grammar, it actually came out that Armstrong said "One small step for mankind, one giant leap for mankind", since in the spoken phrase the words "for man" instead of "for a man" mean "for the human race" rather than for "man" (in the sense, "for me, Armstrong").
The Americans started talking about this mistake of the first man on the moon immediately after the flight. Over time, it turned into one of the so-called "urban legends", the meaning of which boils down to the following: "Do you know that poor Neal was so worried that he inadvertently made a grammatical mistake?"
Armstrong himself always assured that he said everything correctly, and the ill-fated article "a" was probably drowned out by statistical interference during radio transmission.
Australian programmer Peter Shann Ford became interested in this old story. He took a recording of Armstrong's phrase, processed it using a special program and found a clear trace of the pronounced "a" - thus, the astronaut was proven right, which greatly pleased the latter.
However, there are people who are sure that the first phrase that Neil Armstrong uttered when he set foot on the moon was not a small speech about the “first step”, but a cryptic wish: “Good luck to you, Mr. Kampinski!” (English: "Good luck, Mr. Kumpinski!"). Proponents of this "urban legend" claim that as a child, young Neil accidentally overheard a quarrel between his neighbors, Mr. and Mrs. Kampinski. And allegedly, Mrs. Kampinski, in the heat of the moment, shouted at her husband: “I hate you, freak! I'll take it in your mouth only if the neighbor boy takes a walk on the moon!
The legend looks more than doubtful, because, firstly, it is too literary; secondly, it is known that Armstrong, even compared to other NASA astronauts, was always more balanced and laconic, and therefore carefully monitored what he said and how; thirdly, those who like to retell this legend cannot agree on what the name of Armstrong's neighbor was - Kampinski, Gorski, Gurski, Brown, or even Marriot? ..
Sincerely,
Anton Pervushin
The first decade of the new century gave birth to what was figuratively called the "Asian space race", in memory of the glorious days of the 60s of the last century. At that time, progress in space exploration was so rapid that it seemed a little more, and there would be permanent bases on the Moon, and a person would walk around Mars, marking out plots for apple orchards. The reality turned out to be quite different. Both space powers retreated and limited themselves to the development of near-Earth space. The retreat of the USSR from the moon was more like a stampede. In the rearguard battles, heavy space equipment was thrown. A fully equipped and ready to fly space tank of the 3rd modification - Lunokhod-3 was never sent to the moon.
Almost 40 years have passed since then. During this time, the USSR and later Russia did not send anything to the moon! Today, scientists say: "The moon has again become interesting to us." I do not remember a period when the Moon was not of interest to Earth scientists. As it turned out, there are so many new and unexpected things on the Moon that it seems that 40 years ago it was a completely different planet. For example, who would have thought that there is a lot of water on the Moon, just seas of icy water!? Do amazing discoveries and unexpected revelations await us on the Moon, even greater than we might expect?
Following the general trend of "revival of interest in the lunar topic", I propose to read the translation of an article by Clyde Lewis, which was written and published on the 30th anniversary of the first landing on the moon. Author, Clyde Lewis is an actor, creator and host of the radio show "Ground Zero" about paranormal and political topics.
Good luck Mr Gorsky
and other lies about the moon
Thirty years ago, people gathered around their televisions to witness one of the most remarkable feats of the millennium. While Walter Cronkite held back his tears, the nation learned that a man had landed on the moon. They knew it because they saw it. They knew it because the government said it happened. They knew it because... just because. That's all the evidence they needed. It's 1999 now, and where is the evidence?
History buffs will remember that Neil Armstrong, the first astronaut to walk on the moon, made a mistake when he delivered his famous "one small step" speech. He should have said, "One small step for man, but one giant leap for all mankind." These words went down in history, but the words he said after that were cut out. You probably never hear or see them in movie bloopers and pranks, but the story goes that he made a few remarks after both of his feet touched the moon sand. NASA lore says that Armstrong said, "Good luck, Mr. Gorsky."
Many at NASA thought it was a casual remark about Russia. That perhaps one of the cosmonauts named Gorsky was a rival of Armstrong, and that it was a low blow from Russia's failed attempt to land on the moon. However, after checking, it turned out that Gorsky was not in either the Russian or American space programs. Who is this Gorsky? Whenever people asked Armstrong about Gorsky, Neil blushed and smiled, but he never talked about it.
Recently at a press conference in Florida, a reporter spoke to Armstrong about the enigmatic Gorski. He asked the question that many journalists tried to ask and never got an answer: "Who the hell is this Gorsky guy you were talking about on the moon?" For 26 years, he avoided the question because he didn't want to embarrass Mr. Gorsky. But this time it was a journalist's lucky day, and Armstrong finally answered. Mr. Gorsky was dead, and Neal felt that answering the question wouldn't hurt anyone.
Armstrong told a story that when he was a child, he played baseball with a friend. Armstrong filed, and his friend volleyed the ball, which landed in front of the neighbor's bedroom window. Mr and Mrs Gorsky lived next door. Neal ran after the ball, and as he bent down to pick it up, he overheard Mrs. Gorsky yelling at Mr. Gorsky. She screamed at the top of her lungs, "Oral sex! Do you want oral sex? You'll get it when the neighbor's kid walks on the moon!"
Isn't this a wonderful story? She didn't exist - it's just one of those urban legends that everyone loves to tell.
Professor Jan Harold Brunvand once said, "The truth should never get in the way of a good story." No matter how many times this story is told, it always rings true because it is such a wonderful story. It got into the papers and, who knows, one day it may take on the status of a genuine event, even if it is a white lie.
There is also an old saying: "The more cynical the lie, the easier it is to convince others that it is the truth 2 ".
July 20, 1969 Man landed on the moon. A remarkable achievement considering it was a direct hit on the first try. And the entire space program went almost without a hitch, and not a single person died on the moon. We had problems and setbacks before the moon launches, but, miraculously, not a single death during the Big Show. It was a miracle that we flew through the radiation belts. Oh yeah, when the rocket took off, we forgot about James Van Allen. You may have heard of him, he was the guy who discovered the dangerous radiation belts that surround the Earth to altitudes of 40-60 thousand km.
The Van Allen Belt spews out enough deadly radiation to kill anyone who dares to enter it unprotected. Scientific experiments conducted by Van Allen and the military proved that the belt was so deadly that no human could survive in it. The capsule must be lined with 4 feet of lead to protect the astronauts. She was protected by aluminum.
We forgot about it. Because it was shown on TV. We were children. We dreamed and believed in dreams.
The television broadcast blurry images from the moon, and we were amazed. We were so surprised that we forgot to look at the stars in the sky above the lunar landscape. But don't worry, they weren't there. It seemed strange for a place where there is no atmosphere, and there is nothing to obscure the light of the stars. And you could see myriads of bright lights. None were seen.
And it also means that during the day the sunlight will be dazzling. Not soft. How can scattered light exist on the moon? Diffused lighting is used in television studios and film pavilions. Maybe that explains why the photos adorning our history books looked so amazing. Wait a minute! TV images were blurry, photos were soft and well-composed so that they looked captivating in the Viewmaster's stereo glasses. The moon landings were so amazing back then to think of light manifesting itself in the same way without an atmosphere as it does in an atmosphere. And that these breathtaking photographs can be taken at 120 degrees Celsius, when most films melt at 65 degrees. John Carter of Mars had a ray gun, Buck Rogers had anti-gravity boots, and our astronauts had heat-resistant film.
We saw footprints in the moon sand. Footprints left in the dry lunar soil. It reminded me of when I was on the beaches of the Great Salt Lake and how the sand couldn't even keep my footprints intact. Later, I realized that there must be moisture in the soil to keep the track. That's why, when the water receded, I saw footprints in the sand. I learned in school that there is no water on the moon. Besides, I bet it would be hard to keep things damp in that heat, even if there was some moisture on the moon.
You can be proud to be an American when the small steps of a man have left an even deeper imprint than a 1400-kilogram lunar lander. It was reassuring to see that the rocket thrust had not dug a crater in what Armstrong described as a surface like loose powder. It was so nice to see a clean lander without a speck of dust on it, and you were proud of the neat astronauts. I mean, in zero gravity, perhaps some of this fine dust will end up in the area of \u200b\u200bthe legs of the lunar module, not to mention the possible phenomena of static or magnetization. When we were kids, we believed everything.
I am no longer a child.
The very idea of doubting the moon landings is heresy. I can understand if you think I'm crazy. I'm not alone. The number of those who begin to doubt is growing every day. You see, people do not understand that there are no independent witnesses of the events that took place on the Moon.
We take it for granted that the evidence is actually genuine, honestly shown and responsibly reported. In fact, humanity has no evidence at all that we have ever set foot on the moon, other than the photographs that NASA has chosen for publication.
As you can tell, there are a lot of things that sound so weird and stupid that it's hard to believe how we could fall for all of this. The power of television kept the burning dream alive, and the threat of war and the challenge of a young and energetic leader who was killed in the prime of his life kept us from cynicism for a while. It brought us together for a moment before we realized that yes, there was a nasty war going on, and perhaps our former leader had fallen victim to a government coup.
We needed heroes. It took 30 billion dollars to create them. Heroes fighting in Vietnam were not enough. We needed glam boys jumping up and down in the movie theater. Anything to show our superiority.
People have forgotten who was ahead of us in the space race. Evil Russians. Yes, they were evil back then. However, there is no doubt that they knew how to organize a space program. At the initial stage of the space race, the USSR had an advantage over the USA thanks to the Vostok and Voskhod spacecraft, which were technologically superior to the American spacecraft of the time. The Russians were the first to send an animal and a man into space. And then, one fine day, they wake up and hear that we have landed on the moon. And they throw in the towel in the ring. Why did they give up? They could outdo us by landing a ship on the moon capable of building a space station. It's been 30 years since we landed on the moon. 30 years ago we penetrated 400,000 km into deep space. In that space program, launches to the moon were almost flawless. Even during a tragedy such as Apollo 13, the astronauts returned and everything ended happily. It's been 30 years since the moon landings.
We're launching shuttles. Shuttles that rise into space only 400 km. We're building orbital space stations, and we lost seven astronauts in the Challenger crash. Is this progress? Why don't we fly shuttles to the moon? Why don't we build space stations and holiday homes on the moon? Why are we sending robots to the moon to explore ice formations? And finally, why didn't we succumb to nostalgia send a couple of astronauts to the moon to freshen up the experience?
Everything is very simple. We have never been there.
You can argue that the secret must have been known to about 35,000 NASA employees and about 200,000 contractors who worked on the Apollo project. Then are you ready to claim that in your office, no matter where you work, every department knows what the other departments are doing?
And here the art of fragmentation is used to its fullest. This happened with the Manhattan Project and a number of other projects. Secrets can be kept. Money and the threat of death are the main levers of secrecy. Patriotism is also a factor. The very fact of suggesting that we did not fly to the moon in some circles paints me as an extremely strange eccentric. Imagine now what happens if someone opens their mouth.
People also claim that the technology was not available to fake such a mission. Simulating one-sixth of Earth's gravity would be easy with movie magic. Hydraulics, wire and filming of some underwater scenes in the aquarium. Nobody knows for sure. Technologies are said to be developed 20 years before they hit the market, which suggests that in 1969 both battlefield simulation programs and planetary landscape programs could be used with something as simple as a blue rear screen. .
We saw a raw version in Stanley Kubrick's 2001: A Space Odyssey. It has even been suggested that Kubrick was chosen to direct (a la "The Tail Wags the Dog") the moon landings. And he will never get the recognition he deserves for his direction. C.Powers wrote:
It is said that in early 1968 Kubrick was secretly interviewed by NASA officials who made him a lucrative offer to "direct" the first three moon landings.
At first, Kubrick refused, as 2001: A Space Odyssey was on the editing table at the time, but NASA threatened to make public the greater involvement of Stanley's younger brother, Raul, in the activities of the American Communist Party. It would be an unbearable embarrassment for Mr. Kubrick, especially after the release of Dr. Strangelove. Kubrick finally relented, and for sixteen months he and a special effects team led by Douglas Trumbull worked in a purpose-built movie theater in Huntsville, Alabama, "creating" the first and second moon landings. These efforts have resulted in hundreds of hours of 35mm film and video footage of the Apollo 11 and 12 moon missions.
The fictitious Apollo 11 mission was masterfully staged in July 1969. A Saturn V rocket carrying astronauts Armstrong, Aldrin and Collins was launched into low Earth orbit, remaining there while NASA discreetly released Kubrick's studio footage to the press. After an impressive "lunar landing" and "return to Earth", the astronauts returned to the Earth's atmosphere and made a perfect splashdown in the Pacific Ocean, right on schedule. A few months later, the Apollo 12 mission was successfully faked in a similar manner.
However, Mr. Kubrick turned down directing the Apollo 13 mission because NASA rejected his scenario in which the Apollo 13 mission failed. Kubrick insisted that the dramatic failed mission, from which the astronauts returned safely to Earth, would ultimately prove to be NASA's "finest hour".
NASA was of the opinion that a failed mission would unnecessarily jeopardize the agency's image, so Kubrick withdrew from the project. Ironically, NASA later decided to use the script for the failed mission, which was recruited to direct by the obscure but highly respected British director Randall Cunningham.
Kubrick's relentless perfectionism is evident throughout the filming of Apollo, from the chilling "1201 exception" during the last seconds of the Eagle's descent to the lunar surface, all the way to the lunar dust covering the astronauts' spacesuits.
It all seems a bit hypothetical...or does it? Powers also states:
You see, people make up stories to suggest that maybe all is not well in the Sea of Tranquility.
If you feel confused, you are not alone. The bottom line is that there are two obvious scenarios. First, we have never gone to the moon and have been deceived for 30 years. Or the photographs and film were for propaganda purposes, and the film footage was filmed in a studio. Three astronauts participated in the moon landing, and I find it strange that we were able to film the landing itself without a large film crew and technical director, so everything looked great on the TV screen.
How difficult is it to understand the feasibility of a three-day orbital flight and splashdown with dummy astronauts playing in a makeshift sandbox in a film studio? Simple, right? It's annoying, but it's easy to imagine.
Is it hard to imagine cash rewards and veiled threats for those who know what really happened during the moon landing to keep their mouths shut? Is it any wonder that Neil Armstrong keeps quiet about the first moon landing? And that he rarely talks to the press? It is equally embarrassing that while we praise John Glenn for his nostalgic shuttle flight to commemorate his orbital flight on Friendship 7, we recall the moon landing in passing.
The whole event took place 30 years ago, and to this day the moon landing seems artificial and heavily guarded. The moon landing itself seems so indifferent and devoid of emotion. The dialogue was like a carefully written script, read without emotion. What emotions would you experience if you knew that you were stepping on extraterrestrial soil? Here, it seemed, there were no tears, no fear. Just an ordinary giant leap for all mankind.
The moon landings were my kindergarten memories. Was it just a paper moon hanging on a cardboard stage? If there was an opportune moment to forge such an enterprise, then 1969 was the time. We lived in the misery of the Cold War. In order to allay fears of Russian superiority in space, we could easily devise a plan to use lunar propaganda to lure the Soviets into wasting valuable resources in the "space race" while we were spending relatively little money fabricating our achievements in it. competition. Remember? They were far ahead of us and gave up as soon as the Eagle landed.
We have sold our soul to the Lunar Conspiracy - those involved can hardly back down. Just think of the scandal that the misuse of taxpayer money will lead to when the public discovers it! We are doomed to keep lying. Money bought silence. Fear keeps astronauts in line. You may be asking yourself, "Fear of what?" According to Bill Kaysing, who previously participated in the program on "Ground Zero", this is a fear for his life.
Kaysing claims that some astronauts were ready to sound the alarm about the deplorable state of the space program. He claimed that Tom Baron complained to Congress about the unsafety of the Apollo program after his careful study of the aerospace program. He was killed 4 days after testifying. And, of course, Gus Grissom died on the launch pad in 1967 when a fire burned out his capsule after he openly disagreed about Apollo safety issues. This incident was used to demonstrate what awaits anyone who dares to open his mouth about the Lunar Conspiracy.
If the moon landing was a hoax, then that is only part of the lie. It has already been said that this was our finest hour, the crowning achievement of NASA. But we never returned.
Many uneducated people think that the space shuttle is a wonderful invention. Remarkable only because we admire its mediocrity.
We were on the moon! At least that's what NASA is telling you. We delivered a large payload to the Moon, at a distance of 400 thousand km, and not a single astronaut died. However, our Space Shuttles fly only 400 km above the Earth. Seven astronauts died trying to get through only a fraction of what the Apollo astronauts achieved effortlessly.
Thirty years after the moon landing, I can't even get Windows 98 to run smoothly, and we can effortlessly send a man to the moon and bring him back. I can't even talk to Juneau, Alaska, from Portland, Oregon without a 2-second delay, but in 1969, astronauts could respond very quickly from 400,000 km without a problem. Not to mention the clarity of astronaut voices in 1969. Thirty years later, you hit the blind spot and your cell phone dies at rush hour.
Can you still believe the Moon landings when they say that the computers used on missions back then were no more complicated than a computer in a microwave toaster? I know that many people laugh at the fact that someone says that we did not land on the moon. People will always say, "Look how far we've come."
After landing on the moon, the sea was knee-deep to us. At least we thought so. Now we are limited to orbiting space stations and shuttles that regularly take off and orbit 400 km.
We decided to go to the moon, we decided to go to the moon 30 years ago. We decided so because the dream was alive. The dream was of a civilization that would resolve disputes on the moon. But the hidden thought was about superiority. If we took possession of the moon, then we could impose our will on governments and populations. This is still a dream.
When the moon landing took place in 1969, a 5-year-old child watched it and dreamed that one day he would live on the moon.
He dreamed that he would pack his things and buy a ticket for this trip that would lift him above the Earth.
How was I to know that even the tickets of the first astronauts were fake?
I would like to believe that we have landed on the moon. So I still think about it, smile discreetly and hope no one guessed that I lost my faith.
It's the same wary smile at Christmas when a child opens a present from Santa Claus. After all, truth should never get in the way of a good story.
The moon landing will always be a good story, huh, Mr. Gorski?
1 Walter Leland Cronkite, Jr. (1916 - 2009) was a legendary American television journalist and CBS broadcaster. Reported to the Americans news about the Apollo flights.
2 Inaccurate retelling by the author of the statement of Dr. Goebbels, the most frequent translation of which into Russian is: "The more cynical the lie, the sooner it will be believed."
Heroes of space epics,
Resolute guys.
Seated in a thin shell
Penetrating into the porthole -
And no change of suits, of course,
Worn out from long wear;
Neighbor boy runs on the moon:
Heroes of space disasters,
Star Wars Rescuers
They will write a dozen lines on the Earth,
(routine, almost like a train).
And they are not expected there: the wife does not care -
The traitor asks for a rod:
Good luck, Mr Gorski.
Good luck, Mr Gorski.
Heroes of space troubles
They sit on the moonstone.
And who stumbled - he himself is a fool,
Here you need to control your feet.
Then we'll get drunk - there's no reason
Being sober, dumb and flat:
Neighbor boy runs on the moon -
Good luck, Mr Gorski.
Good luck, Mr Gorski.
Heroes of space turmoil
Return to Earth with honor
We are fiery sons of the motherland,
Let's celebrate us now.
I don't know about everyone else, but I
On different boards of honor -
Under the inscription "He went to the moon" -
"Good luck, Mr. Gorsky."
Good luck, Mr Gorski.
DESPERADO
Fight - so fight, lightly and furiously,
Death laugh in a grin
Even though we are not Clints or even Eastwoods,
What's whistling at the temple?
There were no rights - we will earn the right,
The right to eternal rest.
God made different, Colt made equal -
Cope only with the hand.
Desperado, keep quiet, verbosity is certain death.
Your calibrated steel friend speaks for you.
Mexican, decide, it's a choice of "either" and "either",
And, of course, get involved, get involved in the game as soon as possible.
The best place for large-caliber
Guns - guitar case.
To be, scoundrels, you cannon liver -
More, sorry, nothing.
Alone, maybe in pairs
Threes - a seal on their foreheads:
It is worth sparing only bartenders,
If they keep silent.
Desperado, play hot revolver triggers
Desperado, come on, you got a lot of clips,
Mexican, look, do not betray your new faith,
And, of course, join the fight at the right time.
If the enemies have become red blots,
If silence comes
Remember that there is no more beautiful Carolina,
There is only one in the world.
The starless dome on a silver night above
We lay down the canopy...
Unfortunately, filming is over.
You are not a hero, but an actor.
Arise, Desperado, Eos rises above the mountains,
Look at her, kiss her goodbye and go.
Mexican, forget that in life you are just Banderas,
Don't forget about the gun in the guitar case...
And about the bartender with a nasty grin, look, don't forget
About the knife thrower too, look, don't forget
Don't forget about the chief of police too.
