Neil Armstrong- The Awful Truth

31-08-2003, 12:48

In 1969, Neil Armstrong made history by becoming the first man to walk on the moon, uttering the immortal phrase, "One small step for man, one giant leap for mankind." Or did he? Previously suppressed footage discovered by blogjam shows that Armstrong's reaction was a great deal more uninhibited than history suggests, and that a hasty editing job was needed to prepare the astronaut's moment of glory for broadcast.

So here, for the first time, is the unedited NASA film from the triumphant Apollo 11 mission.

admin edit - the footage contains some offensive language

A blogjam production. Audio stolen from The Onion via The ECC. Leave a comment.

Chimaera · 31-08-2003, 13:09

rofpml!!!

Lord Nikon · 31-08-2003, 13:39

Quote:

Originally posted by Chimaera
rofpml!!!

you said it

MadGamer · 06-09-2003, 16:50

Poor picture quality

Tricky · 06-09-2003, 17:34

Quote:

Originally posted by WNA
Poor picture quality

What do you expect from July, 69 - Digitial Images DVD quality?

MadGamer · 06-09-2003, 19:50

Quote:

Originally posted by Tricky
What do you expect from July, 69 - Digitial Images DVD quality?

But you would think that the website would do a bit of work to improve it

**Stuart C** · 06-09-2003, 20:17

Quote:

Originally posted by WNA
But you would think that the website would do a bit of work to improve it

how? The original footage is bad quality.

You can not improve the quality of footage. If it starts bad, it will stay bad.

06-09-2003, 20:19

Even though some peope like myself believe the original was filmed in the desert somewhere

Lord Nikon · 06-09-2003, 20:23

whichever way though defiant....
If it was done on the moon, then a com system run by something with less processing power than a commodore 64 sent a video and sound transmission from the sea of tranquility to the planet earth using 1960s camera & sound equipt which had withstood a rocket take off. If however it was done in a desert then what makes you think that in the 1960s they could make cameras work properly in the desert? After all, the UK military, even with the help of H&K can't make the SA-80 work properly in the desert in 2003

Its like the concept that John Major's son would keep his hands off emma noble for an hour, much less 7 months

In other words... ludicrous.

06-09-2003, 20:28

let not forget though the yanks were allot more advanced than us back then when it came to tv. When did they have colour late 40's, early 50's!

**Stuart C** · 06-09-2003, 21:51

Quote:

Originally posted by Lord Nikon
whichever way though defiant....
If it was done on the moon, then a com system run by something with less processing power than a commodore 64 sent a video and sound transmission from the sea of tranquility to the planet earth using 1960s camera & sound equipt which had withstood a rocket take off. If however it was done in a desert then what makes you think that in the 1960s they could make cameras work properly in the desert? After all, the UK military, even with the help of H&K can't make the SA-80 work properly in the desert in 2003

Its like the concept that John Major's son would keep his hands off emma noble for an hour, much less 7 months

In other words... ludicrous.

Not to mention they had somewhat less than 13 amps current to power the entire Lander (so no high powered transmitters then).

Tricky · 06-09-2003, 22:33

Quote:

Originally posted by Defiant
Even though some peope like myself believe the original was filmed in the desert somewhere

I saw a remake of this at Kennedy space centre (florida) perhaps if I recorded it we could have made our own HIGH quality version.

How many people used this information to answer a question on test the nation tonight then?

06-09-2003, 22:44

You know it doe's seem strange that their supposed to have gone to the moon in the 60's but have never been back with all the technology they have today. Even the Russians could do it with sponsors no doubt. Think of all those flyers on the moon shown on tv's lol

**Chris** · 06-09-2003, 22:51

Quote:

Originally posted by Defiant
You know it doe's seem strange that their supposed to have gone to the moon in the 60's but have never been back with all the technology they have today. Even the Russians could do it with sponsors no doubt. Think of all those flyers on the moon shown on tv's lol

We find it hard to believe they did it because we have so much hi-tech stuff cushioning our lives today, we can't conceive of life without it. I've done some reading up on the moon landing fake theories, and frankly they don't hold water. I am in no doubt they did land on the moon.

The reasons they went when they did were political. The technological race with the Soviet Union made it imperative. But it cost an absolute fortune to do it. Any modern Government, lacking such a strong politial motivation, would find it nigh on impossible to justify spending that sort of money now. Besides, robots are infinitely more sophisticated than they were and can take man's place in many situations where only a human could be effective previously.

Funny film, btw!

07-09-2003, 01:37

Ahhh but theres the old question,
If Neil Armstrong was the first man on the moon, who was holding the camera on the moons surface, as Armstrong stepped off the ladder?

I'm Certain they did go to the moon but not certain that Neil Armstrong was indeed there when they did.
I s'pose theres a chance that one was faked, but unlikely.