Published: March 26, 2008 in design » graphics by Thomas Baekdal
Back in 2002 Motorola commissioned this poster of the full transcript of the Apollo moon landing. I find it oddly interesting, and it gives you a nice look into an important event in our history.
Apart from the famous "that's one small step for man, one giant leap for mankind" (marked with red in the poster), I also found a number of other interesting quotes telling the story of lunar-stress, camping on the moon, trying to read that damn manual and just having fun in space.
You can download the poster here (PDF). It is in vector format, so you can zoom in as much as you want (or print it yourself if you like).
Also take a look at the official video
Loading Video
(Note: You need Flash 9+ to watch these videos)
(via Information Aesthetics, video via NASA)
Too bad the moon landing was faked...
Writer, Project Manager and Interaction Designer
follow me on Facebook, Twitter, Flickr, or visit my website
If this was faked I am seriously impressed with their acting skills :)
In any case, I do not believe in the conspiracy.
Try hard as might, I still have reservations of moon landing being fake. :)
Only idiots think this was faked.
Sorry, I'm not one to play nice with people because of their belifes when they're wrong
*beliefs
seriously, if you think that the moon landing was faked, you are deeply disturbed. please consider the facts before jumping to conclusions next time
seriously, if you think that the moon landing was faked, you are deeply disturbed. please consider the facts before jumping to conclusions next time...
nothing more to say :)
To say that the moon landings were fake is an insult to the technical achievement of thousands of people and to the bravery and skill of the astronauts. It's what I would expect from buffoons whose only achievement will be to make stupid comments on other peoples blogs.
Seriously. The Discovery Channel, of all sources, put this conspiracy garbage to rest; and there's way more extensive proof out there proving these theories to be groundless - from there being no stars in the background, to the flag waving, all perfectly explainable by camera contrast and low gravity environments. People need to learn to investigate things and hear both sides of a story before jumping to some ridiculous conclusion.
By the way - Nasa conducts routine laser communication with an outpost placed on the moon during the landing. Take a visit to this place one day and learn something.
Even ignoring all the technical stuff and insults, Do you have any idea how many people would have to have been paid off not to talk? And given the enormity of the event it would take a lot of money to silence one person, let alone the 10,000 odd people involved, directly and indirectly with the moon landing. We are talking about the entire national spending of America since the moon landing!
Didn't they recently find that the quote "that's one small step for man, one giant leap for mankind" was wrong?
Instead Niel Armstrong said "that's one small step for a man, one giant leap for mankind" (notice the added "a") - http://www.snopes.com/quotes/onesmall.asp
A strong argument is apparent regarding the still photos that were taken on the moon. The cameras were chest mounted, had no view finder, and I don't remember anything about film or lens modification for the cameras to accommodate radiation. If the mods were made, I would expect the quality of the shots to have paid for it. This was an experiment.
By the way, who set up the camera for Neil Armstrong's 'step"onto the moon. It was a stationary camera, the lighting was amazing, and the image was framed very nicely.
These are only questions to which I have heard no answers, and I personally do not have enough direct experience to answer them myself.
One other point...We were in a cold war with a country that already put the first satellite in orbit around earth. Our Hollywould technology could have been used by select few, transmitted to those not in the know who would pass it on to the media. Even if we cannot aim the Hubble at the moon, we could easily have put a satellite in orbit around the moon to transmit details of the surface, including the devices and outpost left behind.
Thank you for both sides, and, how can this all be resolved?
Interesting points made so far. May I say, All people live in there own reality. Some peoples' reality is based on facts and evidence. Others reality, are based on fantasy and imagination. Sadly, the majority of us fit somewhere in between in varying degrees. Hence the source of many of our problems, like now. #1; Not to upset the uneducated or fanciful, the evidence supports mankind endeavor was successful, at landing on the moon. #2; Thomas Watson posted ,,,"Didn't they recently find that the quote ""that's one small step for man, one giant leap for mankind"" was wrong?". For me, the first words that the first man ( Neil Armstrong ) spoke after stepping onto the moon can be heard clearly in the recording presented. I heard no "a". The recording is clear enough, there is no room for confusion. His first words, are His first words, and I hear "for man" not "for a man". What He planned to say, or wanted to say was prior the event. What He said, was said. I'm happy after that first step, He didn't pass gas! There is a vacuum out there after all. Reality is never what it is supposed to be, reality is. People who cannot accept reality differ. I thanks to Thomas Baekdal for his posts.
Well, even today after so much experience in space exploration we have such a hard time putting a team into orbit just to asemble the ISS, and we failed a couple of times, While taking off. How is it that 40 years ago a much more complicated mission succeded: take off from Earth, going into Orbit around earth and then slingshoting acros space to the Moon and then synchronizing with the moons orbit and deploing a landing craft, landing the vehicle on an unknow surface and then takeing off the surface succeded flawlessly... Oh, wait they had the enviormental controls problem ok... Whatever.
I want to see a Moon landing happen soon I'm sure there will be more problems then from the original Hollywood production. Oh and what about Van Allens Radiation belt? The inner radiation belt extends from about 400 km above the Earth to 12,000 km. The outer radiation belt extends from about 12,000 km to 60,000 km above the Earth. And the moon is 382500 km away, hmm so the Astronauts harmlessly passed through a radiation belt in a craft thats shilding is very thin, almost like a flying tin can.
I seriously think Umesh Prabhu was faked.
that's true - the moon landing was fake. it was staged.
I read about it.
He's actually saying "One small step for A man, one giant leap for mankind." The connection of the transmission drops right when he says "a". The joke has always been with grammar fanatics that his quote was redundant (ie leaving out the "A" before man makes the definition of man, mankind. So it reads one small step for mankind, one giant leap for mankind...funny...that's all.
People who think this was fake and propage the idea are trying to erase from history what little we got to see of the moon. That is the farthest away an actual living human has ever gone thus far. As the history and the people die who knew first hand and were there, the real truth is buried with them. All we can hope for is that people can stop doing this and instead learn. It takes great guts to put a man on the moon. It takes great guts to be the man who steps on the moon. It took countless years of all sorts of engineering. All that so that some idiot who has not a clue how a rocket works not even why you would need a computer up there, can just tell my kids that we never made it there. I know from second hand, from videos and from two astronauts that this is true. We fly the shuttles into space and we were at the moon. An you have a fucking cell phone because of the courage of the astronauts and the smarts of the engineering teams. Go to school and get your self some education so that we can surpass the old farts and get to mars. lets see how you feel when you scared shitless step on the surface of a planet and some kid says your clothes are not moving right so it is fake.
We CAN aim the Hubble Space telescope at the moon, just the landing site is too small even to be seen by the space telescope
I understand that we haven't been back to the moon recently, and that we have had problems with the space program. This may cause people to believe that the moon landing was faked. However, has anybody considered that the JFK administration gave much more money to NASA than any administration since? They are doing much more up there now than they used to, they just don't go to the moon. And they are doing it on a smaller budget.
nice, just on someone making a comment about there being laser pings going on between nasa and the moon during the mission...Well heres a question to consider, dont you think if we did land somewhere like that that we would leave a machine there to ping for different observances, or a telescope or something, even if we didnt have solar technology to charge it then (??) something could have been left incase of future technology? Just something to consider.
Theres no doubt that the moon landing was faked, or to put it in more respectable terms, it was a masterpiece of hollywood. How else do my esteemed opposition explain the "fluttering flag". had the almighty arranged for a divine breeze to blow for our "brave" actors....err astronauts. This is ridiculous, even a kid could see through it were his eyes open and not blocked by the will to prove something which was never achieved.
Had it been me, the first words spoken from the surface of the moon would have been something like ... Gawd damn it MOVED!!! Or ... Who's that over there? ... It IS green cheese ...
Otherwise half of you don't know your ass from a hole in the ground ... #24 .. quit using the likes of Art Bell as your historical sources
Oh btw ... what was the FIRST word spoken on the moon, i.e. after the lander had set down? "Houston" the second word was "uh" .. the eagle has landed ... usually on clips showing the landing the "houston, uh, " is edited out for some reason ... guess self-centered inbreed yankees can't stand the idea a southern city would hold this distinction.
Guys, regardless of the video... look at the initial information of the blog. I don't know about all you non-believers, but that is a crapload of "fake" conversation that went on between the astronauts and home. Do you really think that all of this was staged?
"The flag was waving" because the moon is not made of spongecake. Have you ever tried to push something into the ground from the side. It is not easy especially when you have lower gravity. As someone stated, it would take the national budget of the entire country for the decades since this occurred to keep the so-called "conspiracy" quite. Not to mention no conspiracy has survived time. When more than one person is involved in hiding the truth from others, there must be cooperation amongst those involved. Any crook will tell you that maintaining that level of complicity is impossible for any length of time.
fake or not, the whole thing seams cool either way :)
.
.
-although, for those who think its fake, you should watch the movie "Capricorn one" , it will add to your viewpoint.
.
.
Peace, Yo! From:JJdaCool
I think all the conspiracy talk about going to the moon can be put to rest very very very simply.
If we faked the moon landing; why did we fake it 9 times?
Oh you conspiracy kids, next thing you'll be wondering what the hell the rockets being blasted into space are for.
I, too, fake moon landings. Behold my trillions of USD in disposable madman income.
Surely it would have been very easy to take a folded flag or something that could be unwrapped and left to be seen from earth.
That would be proof enough - but they didn't go.
So the best proof you nuts can come up with is a waving flag , no stars and a bit of radiation ?
Seriously if you can manage to write a comment why the fuck cant you just google these simple things ?
It has been explained so many times how these things can be explained away.
It is an insult to the men and women who gave they're lives (Apollo 1 ) for man kinds quest for knowledge.
The conspiracy theory is so far out there it would be harder to pull off than an actual moon landing !
OK let's put this straight right now.
1: Restating an earlier point to pay off those in a moon launch would be crippling to the government. This is following a theory the landing failed and so it was staged.
2: The transcript (also stated earlier) shows a lot of detail that would have been tough to fake. Also early NASA computers contain records of these conversations and also retain the broadcast info.
3: The Camera. A lot of people seem to believe the camera is proof it was staged. However it has been revealed the camera was mounted on the leg of the lander and was carefully placed to ensure that it would show optimum coverage. Some of the test tapes where they check it will be correctly positioned are still around. This camera is also shown on the specific lander blueprints.
4: The flag. Multiple sources have stated that it is there belief and this is supported by the computer log. That the breeze of the flag was caused by air release from the lander. If this film was made in a hollywood basement then why was there a breeze at all? and why wasn't it edited?
5: The samples taken on this landing have been meticulously analysed over the years. Scientists are at least some of them moral people and I'm sure one of them would have noticed his moon rock was a pebble from the beach down the road.
Finally. Do you really think that the US Government who between the years of 81 - 87 spent over a Trillion Dollars mostly on nuclear research couldn't afford to fake a moon landing that avoids strange breezes and other phenomenon?
Reaper,
No one can seriously believe that the lunar landings were faked. In the age of information we live in, everything can be checked then verified so anyone commenting as such is probably just messing around.
Although a point that is kind of interesting is that every lunar landing was done during Nixon's administration. If you guys want to use that while your messing with people, you can try to tie it to Watergate and approval ratings during the Vietnam War.
Only one word describes those who believe the moon landing was faked. Simpletons
if the moon was made of blue cheese, would you eat it?
im pretty sure "simpletons" would be better used to describe the people that believe anything they see on tv.
I'm sorry if I was unclear Squid I was stating points pointing out that the Lunar Landings were not faked
Well, if its any consolation, the camera that photographed neil descending from the LEM was located on one of the LEM legs. The flag waving seems to be a combination of being grabbed by the astronauts as well as being placed into the ground. Why would it make sense that the flag would move as a frozen sheet as opposed to waving anyway. Just because there is a comparable lack of gas in space does not mean that objects cease to move normally. Also, to this day, the pieces of the LEM that were left on the moon can be seen from earth with a telescope.
Neil Armstrong has said in interviews that he prepared in advance what he was going to say when he stepped on the moon but misspoke when the time came... he omitted the 'a' from his statement when the time came to say it. It's that simple.
i dnt know what is truth but i wat to know what is the truth
so if anybody has good details please forward then to my email kamal31791@gmail.com.
you shall be appreciated
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7n79Vl7_MtU&NR=1
The conspiracy theorists all seem to forget one simple thing: the moon landings took place at the height of the Cold War - in an era when the USSR had already been the first to get a satellite into space and the first to get a man into space. Competition in the Space Race was immense and politically sensitive.
Thus when JFK spoke of "landing a man on the Moon and returning him back safely to the earth" you can bet that the Soviets subjected the whole endeavour to immense scrutiny - after all, there was an immense amount of national pride to be lost if the Americans succeeded.
The Soviets would have tracked Apollo 11 from the launch-pad to the moon and back. They would have undoubtedly had spies inside NASA and its sub-contractors. They would have listened in on every second of radio transmission and analysed, frame-by-frame, every scrap of footage. And, of course, every photograph that they could get their hands on would have been subjected to meticulous analysis.
Yet not once, not even once, did the Soviet government ever suggest that the moon landings were faked - despite the fact that they would have been falling over themselves to do so, despite the fact that such a scandal would have kept them ahead in the Space Race (they never recovered their lead after Apollo 11) - despite the national prestige that they lost to the Americans.
Do you still believe the landings were faked?
They went to the moon 9 times. Why would they fake it 9 times?
heres one for you. if neil was the first man on the moon, then who the hell put the camera there to film it???????
now say its not faked.
the moon hoaxers are among the highest order of stupid that humanity has ever produced. now, i honestly don't know if man walked on the moon because i wasn't there to witness it. however, if man did not, in fact, land on the moon, there still does not exist a single valid argument which dispenses the truth.
every single argument that hoaxers have put forth have been demonstrated through logic, evidence, and experiment, to be fallacious.
if you believe the hoaxers and wish to be viewed by truly intelligent people as something other than a complete moron, then you owe it to yourself to become educated as to why the hoax theorists cannot be correct.
go here to learn each argument's speciousness:
http://www.badastronomy.com/bad/tv/foxapollo.html
I'm still not sure where I stand on this issue, somewhere in the the middle. As in response to Jonathan Hollin saying the Soviets never tried to call the U.S. on B.S. that's not true.
To this day, it is still taught in Russian schools that Americans did NOT land on the moon.
But who knows, those crazy reds put a flag on the North Pole and said that Georgia attacking them in a plot to make sure Obama isn't elected.... so who knows.
Ok, so the landing was faked, ok... Tell me how the heck do you deceive scientists from ALL THE WORLD that has studied moon rocks and can see the microcraters? that was completely unknown before landing on the moon... and also explain how do we know that moondust smell like powder if we didn't get there? but my favorite: Was it necessary to fake SIX missions? and even fake one almost failed one (13)? ohh, come on...men... if nasa only wanted to win the race they only needed to fake ONE landig.....Think before you speak and stop with that stupid conspiracy theory once at all...
I myself do believe that man has gone to the moon, however the videos might not be the real deal.
It would be no different to say that the moon landings were faked, or that Bush faked the moon landings.
Both are false and are directed at the US by a bunch of losers who haven't archived anything, either individually or as a nation.
Too bad the entire thing was documented by thousands of independent observers from around the globe.
But, oh yea, we faked 9/11 also...
Get a life losers.
Last line is '124.31.07 Evans: Cut! That's a wrap!'
@53 - LMAO
As they say in the brilliant documentary In The Shadow of the Moon, "why fake it 9 times?".
I have always believed that the moon landing was faked (staged), but now, i am pretty certain that the Americans DID land on the moon BUT the live tv broadcast that millions watched was a stage mock up of actors pretending to be landing on the moon. the reason for this being because in the real landing on the moon, they found UFO and Alien activity and the government, etc. are not aloud to broadcast such a thing as this. therefore having to change stations. and therefore the mission transcripts that are in the posters at the top of the page are the ones from the mock up of the event.
All is explained in what is written here....
Photo descriptions that somebody was able to get a look at.
A boulder that seemed to have been rolled uphill, leaving its tracks in the side of the hill; obvious machinery on the surface, showing bolted sections; three dilapidated "bridges" crossing a chasm that looked like the Grand Canyon; pipe fittings that looked like four-way Ts (or Xs) that could be seen in every photo, some with their ends turned up or down as they hung over the edge of a crater; three surprising pyramids that prompted later to closely study the Egyptian Giza pyramid complex; apparent pipelines criss-crossing the surface, running to and from craters; a UFO rising from the surface and photographed directly above a crater; and perhaps the most memorable, the unmistakable figure of a rectangular structure placed squarely in the biggest crater pictured- the structure looked either very old or under construction, but the crater had to be miles wide, and the camera angle gave a perfect three-dimensional view.
Mission Transcripts for the first Lunar Landing
"Houston, we've got a bogey at two o'clock."
"Roger that, Apollo. Switching to alpha. Roll eight degrees and begin sequence... "
"Roger, Mission Control. Confirming alpha."
Other Transcripts, Still possibly connected to the original ^^^
"Mission Control, we've got Santa Claus coming over the hill...."
"Roger, Apollo. Hold your fix. Switching bravo. Do you copy?"
"Roger, Houston. Bravo link...."
They were reporting UFO activity. Nobody could hear this during the live TV broadcasts of Lunar missions '69 and '70.
The space program had developed many technologies which at the time had not been declassified or adapted for commercial use. One of these new developments-unknown to the general public-was instant replay video, which would become common later. But in 1969 and 70, only a handful of people were aware of it. Thus, NASA could switch the Mission Control picture to a live broadcast of a news reporter standing next to a full-scale mockup, and while a viewer's attention was diverted, the real stuff was happening behind the scenes.
code words like "alpha" and "bravo' referred to special switching stations around the country that "switch" broadcast reception away from Houston and Mission Control directly to CIA headquarters in Langley.
The document was dated 1972 or `73 and concluded that moon colonization using giant plastic air bubbles was unrealistic and that we would need to transport air from the earth. The congressional report concluded that there was plenty of oxygen on the moon trapped in the rocks. The recommend solution: pulverize the rocks on a large scale with major excavations. The liberated oxygen would be stored in underground caverns and tunnel systems and the debris from these pulverized rocks dumped into the existing craters. Naturally, the craters would eventually disappear, an observation made by astronomers long before the first moon landings and, ironically, one that had initially prompted Leonard and other scientists of the 1950s to analyze early moon photos.
Think what you wish to think, but this is the most authentic information i have ever found regarding UFO's, Alien's and the first Lunar Landing. this is not all the info that i read, only a little bit of it...
Your choice what you think!!!
After what V3L0C1TY said check out the ?s:
http://www.google.com/moon/
Also check out the video of the 3 astronauts press conference. It was chilling for me to see:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-RcKLAo62Ro
I am not saying they didn't go there. I am only saying there is something fishy with their body language in the press conference.
They are supposed to have done something legendary, why the hell were they behaving like this?
OK let's put this straight right now.
1: Restating an earlier point to pay off those in a moon launch would be crippling to the government. This is following a theory the landing failed and so it was staged.
2: The transcript (also stated earlier) shows a lot of detail that would have been tough to fake. Also early NASA computers contain records of these conversations and also retain the broadcast info.
3: The Camera. A lot of people seem to believe the camera is proof it was staged. However it has been revealed the camera was mounted on the leg of the lander and was carefully placed to ensure that it would show optimum coverage. Some of the test tapes where they check it will be correctly positioned are still around. This camera is also shown on the specific lander blueprints.
4: The flag. Multiple sources have stated that it is there belief and this is supported by the computer log. That the breeze of the flag was caused by air release from the lander. If this film was made in a hollywood basement then why was there a breeze at all? and why wasn't it edited?
5: The samples taken on this landing have been meticulously analysed over the years. Scientists are at least some of them moral people and I'm sure one of them would have noticed his moon rock was a pebble from the beach down the road.
Finally. Do you really think that the US Government who between the years of 81 - 87 spent over a Trillion Dollars mostly on nuclear research couldn't afford to fake a moon landing that avoids strange breezes and other phenomenon?
Reposted because you obviously didn't take the time to read the above statements.
Baekdal.com is (nearly) everywhere. Check out our social profiles:
FaceBook
Twitter
LinkedIn
YouTube
FriendFeed
Delicious
Mar 26
2008
Fredrik Andersson
visit my website
Really nice. Thanks.
Your blog posts are always interesting.. :)