Slashdot Mirror


Has Anyone Seen the Moon Pictures?

NASA has received a lot of bad press in the last few years. Now in a stunning move to prove how much they have learned from past mistakes, it appears they have lost the magnetic tapes that recorded the first moon walk. They also seem to have misplaced the original recordings of the other five Apollo moon landings. Hopefully nobody has taped an episode of "The OC" over them yet.

61 of 474 comments (clear)

  1. Dupe? by trawg · · Score: 4, Informative

    Don't have time to double check but at first glance this appears to be a dupe:

    http://science.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=06/07/1 3/1654200

    1. Re:Dupe? by Quaoar · · Score: 5, Funny

      Don't you get it? Slashdot is backing up this story so such a disaster can never happen to them.

      --
      I'll form my OWN solar system! With blackjack! And hookers!
  2. oh no! by drDugan · · Score: 5, Funny

    I can see it coming now... a tinfoil hat brigade shouting,
    "that's because we never WENT to the moon!" and
    "The original tapes would have proved it!"

    1. Re:oh no! by mwvdlee · · Score: 5, Funny

      Not to worry, they can probably re-cut the film from the raw takes if MGM still has those.

      --
      Slashdot social media options: AIM, ICQ, Yahoo, Jabber and Mobile Text. Why no MySpace?
    2. Re:oh no! by binary+paladin · · Score: 3, Funny

      Perhaps they can also digitally enhance them and release a "special edition" as per NASA's "original vision." Heh. It's time someone from the previous generation how their childhood retroactively destroyed.

    3. Re:oh no! by AKAImBatman · · Score: 5, Funny
      Not to worry, they can probably re-cut the film from the raw takes if MGM still has those.
      Neil Armstrong shot first!
    4. Re:oh no! by Lumpy · · Score: 3, Funny

      I work at NASA and we tried that. Problem is that George Lucas "remastered" them and now we have the moon looking like a death star and Neil Armstrong looks like a storm trooper.

      I tell you, trying to get anything faked anymore in hollywood is damned impossible, they want explosions and Gobs of CG and other artistic crap.

      Look at the last shuttle launch! you can see on camera 4's view the Polygons breaking up of the CG earth.

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
  3. My my my. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    How convenient, almost as if we never landed on the moon at all.

  4. If they did really land on the moon... by Ichigo+Kurosaki · · Score: 4, Funny

    they are doing a horrible job of silencing the conspiracy theories.

  5. No backup?! by Enselic · · Score: 5, Funny

    "Ok, I have this original video with the first man on the moon, should I make some backups? Nah... Is it important that I remember where I put it? Nah..."

    1. Re:No backup?! by Nefarious+Wheel · · Score: 5, Informative
      Ok, I have this original video with the first man on the moon, should I make some backups? Nah...

      Old technology sucks. I know, because I'm an old technologist.

      The year was 1969, peeps, 37 years ago.

      Magnetic tape degrades. For the 7 track stuff used back then you were lucky to get 7 years out of a tape -- that's why the IRS required only 7 years backup of data, they couldn't reliably ask for more. 9 track wasn't substantially better. Look up "print-through" (you may have to resort to paper sources for that).

      Disk space was expensive and hard to get too -- 55mb IBM 2370 disk pack cost about $1K each or worse in old money iirc. People weren't even aware of the need to make backups yet, and that was for data only -- the idea of storing video in digital form didn't happen until the late 70's when JPL trialled storage of images as well as image catalogues (don't ask about JPLOS -- please. Or Mark IV.).

      Film degrades too. We've lost a lot of original movies and animation because of the chemically active film substrata.

      I wouldn't be surprised if they "lost" it because the media simply degraded to the point of unusability. When was the last time you wrote your congresscritter to have NASA data archives funded properly? They're mostly living from grant to grant there and conserving this fantastically important data won't happen without a push. So push!

      Mmmm. Lost a planet Obi-Wan did. Embarrassing!

      --
      Do not mock my vision of impractical footwear
    2. Re:No backup?! by m0rph3us0 · · Score: 5, Informative

      Umm... the 7 year thing comes from the Mosaic code, not magnetic backup media. Something about all debts being forgiven after 7 years. It has nothing to do with magnetic storage and has been part of British Common law for centuries.

    3. Re:No backup?! by Don+Beasley · · Score: 3, Informative

      Dude, have you heard the Jimi Hendrix remasters?

      I spent two years playing thirty-year-old 3/4" video tapes direct to air about a year ago. The labels were falling off but the tapes were fine - less foulups than the newer 1990s format we also used. I'm sure NASA's climate-controlled environment is better than ours.

      Yer absolutely right, though, that we should ensure adequate funding for NASA's data archives.

    4. Re:No backup?! by leenks · · Score: 5, Informative

      Perhaps those tapes were on stock not vulnerable to the binder degrading over time causing the oxide to literally fall off the backing, or that has a problem often known as "vinegar syndrome" where the binder reacts with the backing producing a sticky residue (I believe certain Ampex tapes from the 70's/80's are good examples of this). Many recording studios have been stung by these problems, particularly the residue one, to the point that specialist companies have sprung up to deal with the problems. One solution is to cool or bake the tapes respectively, but it doesn't always work.

      One large classical music label in the UK (sadly now dead) had major issues with these problems in the early 90's, and decided to take action before it was too late. They played all of their tapes through a specially modified deck which I believe had basically huge swabs to catch the residue before the tape passed any of the mechanism. The audio was then recorded onto modern DAT tape. Those master tapes were all almost certainly ruined in the process, but at least there is a backup on modern DAT using tape which is supposedly not susceptible to the problem.

      More information at http://palimpsest.stanford.edu/byauth/st-laurent/c are.html and http://www.tiguersound.com/Studio_Information/Tape Bake.html

  6. Not alone by 15Bit · · Score: 5, Insightful
    The BBC does exactly the same. They've lost vast numbers of TV programmes over the years. Every so often an episode of Dr Who, Hancock's Half Hour or Steptoe and Son turns up in the basement of some guy who used to work there.

    I guess the difference is that the Beeb never really thought these things were historically important, and hence had poor archiving rules. You'd hope that this was not the case at NASA.

  7. Conversion by x2A · · Score: 4, Funny

    Nah you know what NASA folks are like with forgetting to convert things... it's actually sitting in a box on betamax, nobody wants to admit it.

    --
    The revolution will not be televised... but it will have a page on Wikipedia
  8. Remakes? by BACPro · · Score: 5, Funny

    With remakes being the rage in Hollywood, this shouldn't be a problem at all...

  9. Hoboy. by Soko · · Score: 5, Funny

    "Houston, we have a problem..."

    Soko

    --
    "Depression is merely anger without enthusiasm." - Anonymous
  10. Re:"lost moon pictures" by kfg · · Score: 5, Funny

    What we actually did was build studio on Mars, where it was easier to fake lunar conditions. I'm sure the original tapes would have shown this clearly.

    KFG

  11. 100 year format by ccady · · Score: 4, Interesting

    What technology should I use if I want to make sure my video and photos of today is around for my great-grandchildren? (Assuming they care...) Is there a service that will keep them continually updated in a lossless digital format? How would they get paid?

    --
    J'aime mieux les méchants que les imbéciles, parce qu'ils se reposent. -- Alexandre Dumas
    1. Re:100 year format by henriquemaia · · Score: 5, Funny

      Don't worry too much about that - geeks don't even get laid, so there's no point of talking about your great-grandchildren.

    2. Re:100 year format by mlush · · Score: 3, Informative

      Just buy a network storage device with a RAID

      Fire, Flood, Theft, Hardware faulure (esp the RAID controller) RAID IS NOT BACKUP!

      Copying it to newer media when hard drives are obsolted is an excellent suggestion but if your serious about photos lasting 100 years removable media is needed (preferably two copys one kept offsite). Unfortunatly there are no good domestic backup options, DVD degrate, HDD can fail (even when powered down), tapes are way too expensive. The Iomega Rev drive looks interesting but (click) is untested

      Perhaps the best suggestion I've seen is effectivly doing a DVD RAID and make a parity disk here and here for details, I only have one reservation about the suggestion in thoes posts. They propose burning the PAR2 files onto the same DVD I'd be inclined to burn it to a seperate disk but leave the outer sectors of the data disk blank as the outer edge is often the first part to fail (as the plastic splits apart). for extra peace of mind reburn (or at least test) the backups every couple of years.

    3. Re:100 year format by Ihlosi · · Score: 3, Funny
      Encode the really important stuff as DNA and add it to the genome of various critters (preferably some ubiquitous bacteria among them). Let reproductive behavior do the rest.



      Of course, we need to make sure that the really important stuff does not contain an 'eradicate humanity' sequence by accident.

  12. no by Madcapjack · · Score: 3, Funny
    What? I never got an overdue notice from them. Damn, their server must be jammed again.

  13. ARRGH! -The greatest human accomplishment lost?! by spineboy · · Score: 3, Interesting

    How could this be misplaced! This is arguably one of the greatest human accomplishments ever!

    P.S. Let the flame wars begin!
    PPS The Armstong moon walk is proably my earliet memory,and I remember watching it with my great Grandma who was born before the first auto and airplane.

    --
    ..........FULL STOP.
  14. For those who take too much "Focusin" by Cherita+Chen · · Score: 3, Informative

    Bottom line is this, we went to the Moon! If you truly believe that it was a hoax, please read this - and then for the love of FSM, get off the ADD drugs and re-evaluate...

    --
    I'm not fat, just big boned...
  15. Checklist by quokkapox · · Score: 4, Funny

    Your post advocates a conspiracy theory which is

    ( ) paranoid
    ( ) delusional
    (x) impossible to confirm
    (x) impossible to refute

    Specifically, your theory fails to account for

    ( ) Stupidity of the general population
    ( ) Stupidity of the politicians
    (x) Lack of supporting evidence
    (x) Plenty of contradictory evidence
    (x) Lack of a centrally controlling authority for conspiracies
    (x) The facts can be explained without need for real conspiracy
    (x) Scientists generally don't participate in conspiracies
    (x) Failure to mention the Illuminati

    and the following philosophical objections may also apply:

    ( ) Ideas similar to yours are easy to come up with, yet none have ever been proven
    (x) That's what they WANT us to think

    Furthermore, this is what I think about you:

    ( ) Sorry dude, you're batshit crazy
    (x) This is a stupid idea, and you're a stupid person for suggesting it.
    ( ) Nice try, assh0le! I'm going to find out where you live and burn your house down!

    --
    it's a blue bright blue Saturday hey hey
    1. Re:Checklist by kfg · · Score: 4, Funny

      ( ) paranoid
      ( ) delusional
      (x) impossible to confirm
      (x) impossible to refute


      I am insulted that you do not consider me paranoid and delusional. In fact, I consider this is a libel. You'll be hearing from my Somoan lawyer, as soon as he actually exists.

      KFG

    2. Re:Checklist by quokkapox · · Score: 4, Funny

      Go ahead and track me down, I use AOL SO I AM SAFE!!!1

      --
      it's a blue bright blue Saturday hey hey
    3. Re:Checklist by Schraegstrichpunkt · · Score: 3, Funny
      (x) impossible to confirm
      (x) impossible to refute

      [snip]

      (x) Plenty of contradictory evidence

      (x) The items you hage checked contradict each other.

    4. Re:Checklist by meatflower · · Score: 5, Funny

      If you really used AOL that would have been all in caps, not just the last part.

    5. Re:Checklist by quokkapox · · Score: 4, Funny

      I swear to god I tried, the lameness filter prevented me from posting in all caps.

      --
      it's a blue bright blue Saturday hey hey
  16. I found it! by soft_guy · · Score: 5, Funny

    I found it. NASA can thank me later.

    --
    Avoid Missing Ball for High Score
    1. Re:I found it! by Tablizer · · Score: 5, Funny

      Here's the real one. A little too real.

  17. Yeah, right... by Ninwa · · Score: 4, Insightful

    FTA: "But the searchers may be running out of time. The only known equipment on which the original analogue tapes can be decoded is at a Goddard centre set to close in October, raising fears that even if they are found before they deteriorate, copying them may be impossible."

    Is the article honestly trying to suggest that NASA couldn't reverse engineer a format and design a player for it if the original player was lost? I personally find that a little hard to believe. It just sounds like a convenience excuse to create a "give-up searching" date. In my oppinion these tapes are very important to our country's history. It's almost shameful to me to think they could have lost them so easily.

    Go America!

    1. Re:Yeah, right... by Aufero · · Score: 5, Funny

      "Is the article honestly trying to suggest that NASA couldn't reverse engineer a format and design a player for it if the original player was lost? I personally find that a little hard to believe." I don't. If NASA did it, it would require five years, fifteen administrators, and fifty million dollars. The quarterly funding reviews alone (much less the reviews of the reviews) would take up more time than the project, and the funding would be proxmired halfway through to pay for a bridge to an island owned by a friend of some congressman. If they ever find the tapes they should hand them over to the Smithsonian National Air and Space Museum, which would probably have them transferred to more durable media in six months at a cost of $30,000.

    2. Re:Yeah, right... by Detritus · · Score: 4, Insightful
      The format isn't a big mystery, it's IRIG 106 if anyone cares. The problem is that as part of the continuing budget crunch at NASA, made worse by the need to scrounge money from the existing budget for new tasks like a Shuttle replacement and going to Mars, many activities and facilities are being cut or eliminated. The lab that can handle these old tapes, the Data Evaluation Lab at Goddard, has lost its funding. That means that it will be closed at the end of this fiscal year. The equipment goes into storage or is surplused. The people have to find other jobs or be laid off or retire.

      Building a recorder from scratch would be insanely expensive. These recorders cost anywhere from $50-100K when they were new and being manufactured in quantity.

      It's easy to say that "they" should keep and maintain the hardware, catalog and store the tapes in climate controlled warehouses, and do all the other things needed to preserve the data for future generations. That doesn't pay the bills. Just storing a tape can cost a dollar or more a year. That doesn't sound too bad until you realize that a single spacecraft can easily generate tens of thousands of tapes. Another problem is that at $100-200 for a new reel of tape, there has always been a large incentive to recycle and reuse tapes for current missions.

      --
      Mea navis aericumbens anguillis abundat
  18. Re:ARRGH! -The greatest human accomplishment lost? by Jugalator · · Score: 3, Informative

    You can still watch it and the material is everywhere, the problem is just that the original tapes were lost, which is a bummer, but not a huge bummer to me. It would've been nice to see some higher res footage of it than what we have now.

    --
    Beware: In C++, your friends can see your privates!
  19. the NLM and really long term storage by drDugan · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I was recently at a meeting in Bethesda at the NIH and heard Don Lindberg, the director of the national library of medicine talk about long term information storage.

    After going through all the normal stuff about media degrading and backups, etc -- he made a really interesting point: The only way to really ensure REALLY LONG storage - like tens of thousands of years is to keep having people accessing information. The point he made is that all the storage technology will continue to evolve, and it's only the information we stop accessing that will fall into danger of getting lost.

    I thought it was a good point.

    Why on earth do we not have access to the original data from the Moon landings? If we did, lots of people would have a copy around. Silly secretive state.

    1. Re:the NLM and really long term storage by kfg · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I focused on the Time Capsule seminar. I'm getting sick and tired of historians telling me I shouldn't be using my things, because it will destory their future historical value when:

      a)The stuff only exists to be used in the first place. Don't use stuff and there won't be any stuff to preserve.
      b)Much of the value in historical artifacts comes from examining their wear patterns. Used stuff is usually more historically valuable. Unused stuff simply commands a higher price from collectors, which usually has the side effect of making the artifacts . . .less available to historians.

      KFG

    2. Re:the NLM and really long term storage by kfg · · Score: 3, Interesting

      He who dies having spent the most time playing with his toys wins.

      KFG

  20. Neil's gettin old by Tablizer · · Score: 3, Insightful

    We better hurry and send him back up to redo it.

  21. Should have been in the library of congress by hrvatska · · Score: 4, Insightful

    NASA isn't an archival institution, so it's not surprising that something like this would happen. If tapes are found, they should be turned over to an organization for which the archiving of printed and recorded material is one of its central missions.

  22. What about the copies? by Bushido+Hacks · · Score: 3, Funny
    Surely, ABC, CBS, and NBC must have copies of this event. What about the reporters who covered the event? Certainly, Walter Cronkite must have a copy of the event that night. I mean, he WAS their.

    On the other hand, I am so tired of all these so-called "conspiracy theorists" who are making a conspiracy out of things that were NOT a conspiracy. I mean, look at what these poser conspiracy theorists are making conspiracies out of.

    The poser conspiracy theorists will give you a bullsh*t conspiracy to keep you occupied from the real conspiracies that are occuring. Here is just some of the events they are sensationalizing into false conspiracies.
    • The moon landing
    • 9/11 (for pete sake! It was only five years ago!
    • The Davinci Code
    Now here is a list of unsolved mysteries and nefarious plots that are true conspiracies becausse no one wants to admit that they are occuring.
    • Peak Oil and Gas Prices (This one needs the most attention right now.)
    • Big Brother and soulserveilance
    • Corporate backrubs for governments/New World Order/World Trade Organization
    • Suppressed technology and cures. (Marajuana does not count!)
    • Subliminal Advertising. (for example: "Head on! Apply Directy to the Forehead" x3)
    • Extraterrestrial Life (SETI needs your help BTW! The government is cutting their funding again.)
    • The Kenedey Assassination
    • Where's Jimmy Hoffa?
    • Protecting the Earth from ourselves. (Bibles and Bombs do not mix!)
    • Occult and paranorma phenomenon
    I would recommend that the world spend a little more time tending to the second list and not the first list. But hey, people are stupid. They'd rather watch TV and let TV dictate what they should think. (I'm talking to you, Mr. I-watch-Fox-news-four-six-hours-in-the-evening.)

    Everyone else needs to put their glasses on and see the truth.
    --
    The Rapture is NOT an exit strategy.
  23. Parent post is moronic. by bmo · · Score: 3, Insightful

    "And I say that with zero emotional attachment. Not believing that we went to the moon doesn't give me a membership in a tinfoil-hat brigade."

    Maybe not a tinfoil hat wearer (signifying paranoia, really) but you're a card-carrying member of the club of crazies like Erich Von Daniken, scientologists, Richard Hoagland, and creationists.

    Why do supposedly smart people believe such stupid shit?

    Indeed the posting of this as "we never went there anyway" even as a joke angers me. You'd think that after almost 40 years someone would spill the beans on the supposed secret? Well guess what, THERE WAS NO SECRET TO BE KEPT and even _if_ there was some way to bring idiots like you back in time, put you on a rocket, and land you on the moon, you'd still claim it was a movie set. There is no educating people like you because you will never admit that humanity is ever capable of doing extraordinary things. You'll attribute the Pyramids to space aliens and the Moon landings to fiction instead of the feats that people are capable of.

    It's called denying reality, assuming the worst of everyone, and willful stupidity.

    --
    BMO

    1. Re:Parent post is moronic. by Trogre · · Score: 4, Insightful

      There is no educating people like you because you will never admit that humanity is ever capable of doing extraordinary things.

      Or maybe they just believe that, you know, the US was unable to get a person to the moon in the 1960s and 1970s. Nothing to do with aliens, pyramids, evolution or creationism, just that they couldn't and didn't do it.

      As for myself I don't believe that, having seen sufficient evidence to convince me 99.9% that humans did in fact go to the moon in 1969 but that doesn't make it 100% absolute fact and it sure as blazes doesn't make anyone who disagrees with me an idiot.

      Otherwise I'd be no better than the tinfoil hatters who partake in conversations with their fingers in their ears.

      --
      "Nine times out of ten, starting a fire is not the best way to solve the problem." - my wife
    2. Re:Parent post is moronic. by Lord+Kano · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Maybe not a tinfoil hat wearer (signifying paranoia, really) but you're a card-carrying member of the club of crazies like Erich Von Daniken, scientologists, Richard Hoagland, and creationists.

      If they're crazy for thinking that the government is always lying to us, you're foolish for believing that the government never lies to us.

      The government that brought us the Tuskeegee experiment, non consentual testing of psychotropic drugs or exposing retarded children to radiation is capable of damned near anything.

      LK

      --
      "Hi. This is my friend, Jack Shit, and you don't know him." - Lord Kano
    3. Re:Parent post is moronic. by Ihlosi · · Score: 5, Insightful
      Or maybe they just believe that, you know, the US was unable to get a person to the moon in the 1960s and 1970s. Nothing to do with aliens, pyramids, evolution or creationism, just that they couldn't and didn't do it.



      Why of course the US wasn't able to get a person to the moon. That's why they borrowed all those German rocket scientists, who were out their jobs anyway after launching rockets at London became unfashionable.

    4. Re:Parent post is moronic. by famebait · · Score: 4, Insightful

      that doesn't make it 100% absolute fact

      Nothing can ever be proven to be. The is goes wihtout saying for everything. It's when you start to adamantly believe the less likely scenario that you have some backing up to do, and the arguments for fakery are all pathetic at best.

      Now, it is beyond any doubt possible to send stuff to the moon. It's just a question of applying known physics and technology, doing lots of tests, and spending a helluva lot of money. Faking it and keeping it secret until now would probably have cost much more than just going fpr real, so even bother?

      --
      sudo ergo sum
    5. Re:Parent post is moronic. by bmo · · Score: 4, Insightful

      "Or maybe they just believe that, you know, the US was unable to get a person to the moon in the 1960s and 1970s. Nothing to do with aliens, pyramids, evolution or creationism, just that they couldn't and didn't do it."

      We didn't just magically build a rocket and magically get to the Moon. And Shepard's and Gagarin's flights didn't magically appear either - they were based on 35 years of liquid fuel rocket science started by a geeky guy at his aunt's farm, name of Goddard - perhaps you've heard of him. By 1969, you're talking about 45 years of liquid fuel rocket engineering. Sure, engineering problems cropped up in designing something big enough to get to the Moon but they weren't insurmountable and by that time we had already figured out life support, multiple stage rocketry, reliable engines, computers, and the navigation systems needed to get from here to there and back.

      Can you even grok what it would take to pull off a hoaxed moon landing? You need to fool the entire Federal government, thousands of engineers, the entire US Navy, and all the people at places like Lockheed _including their investors_. And throughout all of this, you have to make sure that possibly thousands of people who know "the secret" that they will never talk, even on their deathbeds.

      And then you have to fool all the scientists with rocks that can't look like anything found on Earth.

      It's just simpler to go to the moon and back. It's like "looking busy" at your employment - it's actually easier to do real work than to fake it.

      Even the government most capable of pulling off propaganda by faking a moon landing decided against it. The Soviet Union was a much more closed society and Star City was off limits to foreigners. They were ahead of us, and even got to the Moon before us with robotic probes. The entire far side of the Moon is full of Russian names! They could have staged a landing, and nobody would have been the wiser in the West until the fall of the Soviet Union two decades later. Yet they didn't. Why? BECAUSE IT WAS A STUPID IDEA.

      The fact is, the original poster is _just like_ those who believe in pyramid building aliens and creationists because they deny logic, history, human nature and plain evidence of reality. They are uneducable dolts.

      --
      BMO

    6. Re:Parent post is moronic. by Jussi+K.+Kojootti · · Score: 4, Insightful
      You're the one being stupid. Very few things in life are absolutely certain. Sure, it doesn't affect our daily lives that much but understanding it is philosophy 101 (check out Descartes -- a master of controlled paranoia).


      I can prove with 100% certainty that dropping a hammer on top of your head will cause you to experience pain.

      Did you know there are people who do not experience pain at all? It's extremely rare, but they do exist. So I'm inclined to say you are wrong... Then again the articles and documentaries I've seen of the subject might be fake, so I just can't be absolutely sure.



    7. Re:Parent post is moronic. by cshark · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Depends, I don't think all of the arguments are pathetic, but most of them don't spring from the early landings either. As far as arguments go, arguing that the first moon tapes look like guys walking around normally when you play them fast is just funny. If you've ever played them fast, you would know that thesis doesn't apply to any of the early televised moon stuff. As for what happened later... I'm going to break with Slashdot protocol here and say I don't know. Governments lose things all the time. It's not because there's an organized conspiracy. They're just top heavy and disorganized. Just think, wouldn't it be great if all conspiracy theories could be explained away that way? "Sorry, the CIA did shoot Kennedy, but it was an accident, and the operation was poorly documented."

      --

      This signature has Super Cow Powers

  24. and they did not have to deal with DRM by jackjeff · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Just imagine the first landing on Mars, and the "lost video" message that will go with it some 100years later...

    NASA used a special high quality encoding scheme, which was not widespread in those days. In addtition it was protected by a DRM made by company "x", which went bankrupt some 30 years ago... well we have the file, maybe we could even reverse engineer the DRM, but it's illegal because of DMCA.... Sorry dudes, the recording are lost forever because we need to protect the copyright holder rights :)

  25. I know where it is by Centurix · · Score: 4, Funny

    It's the one marked Buzz Aldrin: 1956 Wedding Tape.

    He'll never forget taping over that one...

    --
    Task Mangler
  26. A BETTER Moon Landing by bishop186 · · Score: 4, Funny

    It's cool. George Lucas took 'em -- he's going to add the things that he couldn't add the first time because of budget constraints. They'll resurface in a couple years complete with better special effects and a new ending where the Ewoks dance with Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldren.

  27. A lot of it by MichaelSmith · · Score: 3, Informative

    is here

  28. Re:That's because we probably didn't. by Archibald+Buttle · · Score: 4, Insightful

    You are having a laugh, right, and trolling us?

    I've looked into the arguments that the moon landings are fakes. Every single argument that has been made has been countered, without exception.

    For example, no stars in the pictures from the moon? Well, there wouldn't be - stars are very faint, and the exposure time for the film was insufficient to allow them to be seen.

    Objects appearing to be over the top of the etched markings on the pictures? That's image-bleed caused by slight over-exposure - a well known photographic problem.

    The flag waving? Well, of course it's going to wave when it's being moved around, that's simple physics, and will continue to wave for a while since there's no atmospheric resistance to help stop it.

    And so on.

    The simple reality is that it would have been harder to convincingly fake the moon landings than to go there.

  29. Oh Yes! by cluckshot · · Score: 4, Interesting

    One of the unique realities of living in the area of Huntsville, Alabama (MSFC) is that you get contact with people who are actually doing things. If you make the right contacts, you know who and what is going on. Here is what is going on regards to NASA and the original data from the Apollo missions. More precisely what has gone on.

    The US officials at NASA ordered the destruction of all of the records associated with the Apollo Missions after the last flight to the moon. The Chief of the Records realized how stupid this was and he conspired with certian persons to have some 8 tons of records moved to a secured location with persons in custody who would not tell where the records were or admit they existed. The reason I know of this is that I had extended contact with the man who set this up. The reason he told me was that the discussion of returning to the moon was coming up about 8 years ago and NASA sent a some men out to see him asking if the rumor was true that he had done this and where they could get the records. He told them it didn't exist but on my arrival he was spitting mad at the idiots at NASA over wanting the records. He feared that they might be destroyed if NASA got them again. He felt they were priceless historic documents and that they must be protected. I do not expect them to appear for 100 years or more due to this.

    Contained in these records are films, data stores, and all of the technical documents for operation of the Apollo System. Why these were ordered destroyed he felt was a very malicious act. The real reason for the order was that the US Government at the time wanted to destroy the ability to return to the moon any time in the near future. They possessed about 5 rockets able to go and they wanted nobody able to operate them. The also did not want any more able to be fabricated. This discloses international agreements that involved the USSR and other parties that demanded the destruction of this data.

    Believe this or not if you will but this is in fact what happened. This discloses the very dirty nature of the behavior of some "well respected" parties in the world. I cannot hope to have people on this forum believe me, but maybe some will. The reason I was present was I was working as RN at the time and I was making Home Health visits 2 times a day to the home. Frankly I was more trusted than the NASA people by this former high ranking NASA man. My experience with such men has included former German Rocket Scientists and many others. When you meet these people you learn what has really gone on.

    This man who was the chief of the record keeping for the Apollow program told me how a year before the Sputnik launch the President of the United States had ordered the entire US Army Missile program lab at what is now Marshall dismantled and taken to the dump. When the Sputnik launch panicked the Americans, He and others had to go to the Base Dump and with their own money buy back the "Scrap" equipment in order to get the lab going again. Even the first test stand they built was built this way. It is now an historic monument!

    The description of some details here is slightly modified so as to keep some nasty people off the trail and to protect the records. The title of the position the man held is descriptive but not the real title. I am not sure if this man is still alive and I don't want to cause him or his associates any trouble. There have been several attempts to secure these records to have them destroyed over the years since 1973.

    --
    Never Politically Correct ~ I prefer the facts If you don't like what I say, get a life, or comment yourself.
  30. it would not surprise me by v1 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    if these tapes have been in some very rich person's "personal museum" for the last several years, the result of a quiet and large payoff to someone that had access to the archives. Things like this don't just "disappear", they "grow legs".

    --
    I work for the Department of Redundancy Department.
  31. They better not mess up... by BlackCobra43 · · Score: 3, Funny

    Buzz shot first.

    --
    I never spellcheck and I freely admit it. Save your karma for more worthwhile "lol erorrs" replies
  32. Re:That's because we probably didn't. by MobileTatsu-NJG · · Score: 3, Interesting

    "Not believing that we went to the moon doesn't give me a membership in a tinfoil-hat brigade."

    Back up a sec, this dude may have a point. The reason that the negative attitude exists for people who believe the moon landing is faked is because the rationale that has been publicized for this is ... ignorant ... at best. A few years ago, Fox showed some 'documentary' that claimed that there might be evidence the moon landing was a hoax. Every single point of the 'evidence' was EASILY refutable. For example: They claimed that the astronauts were too brightly lit and that the extra light must have come from studio lighting. They even had a 'professional photographer' come on the show and say that it was impossible for that sort of lighting to occur. This 'professional photographer' was completely ignoring the fact that light bounces, even on the moon.

    You'd have to be pretty ignorant to buy in to their logic. That's why, if you just announce that you don't believe it happened, it is generally assumed (whether it is right or wrong, sorry.) that you are part of this little group. If you are simply saying "I wasn't there, so I cannot say for certain", then I think that's a different story. I can sympathize with that. I wasn't even alive when the moon landing happened. In that respect, I cannot actually say it did. Fair enough.

    I think the mods were a little too quick on the trigger with modding down your post. You are right that simply not being 100% certain that the moon landing happened doesn't mean you're a ... pardon the expression ... looney. But in the future, I'd recommend that you clarify your views. Too much attention has already been paid to people who have bastardized science to prove their over-zealous point.

    --

    "I like to lick butts!" by MobileTatsu-NJG (#32700246) (Score:5, Informative)