The rest of us knew and know it was all about male glory, a pissing competition between two unequally matched oppositional world powers in which the real and only superpower Mother Nature had the last laugh.

Heaps of people at the time thought the moon landing was a crock and still do for the very good reason it was carried out by the most bellicose murderous military power in world history which was still in the throes of napalming the people of Vietnam and Cambodia. In response, 1968-69 was the height of a worldwide anti-war movement and student and youth radicalisation whose principal raison d’etre and focus was to end the US-led assault on these countries.

This was achieved. The greatest achievement of that era. That’s the lesson, the main lesson worth remembering and celebrating.

For whom?

My point is not that the Mercury/bunch of Russkie Korolev-infused stuff/Gemini/Apollo missions were not good or bad in themselves but rather that there’s no way you could have stopped humans from behaving like that at the time.

It’s too late to complain about what should have happened so you might as well sit back and chew over what really happened.

Which is that the US Government spent the equivalent of a few bad years in Vietnam or Iraq on throwing to the moon, and bringing back, a bunch of supreme products of the US military/industrial/entertainment system – who all somehow turned in one way or another to be somewhat mystical on their return.

The first man to set foot on somewhere on other than earth now spends all his time flying gliders and avoiding interviews. All his moon walking colleagues are not that easily accessed for open comments either.

Look at the Apollo program this way. The US used everything at their disposal over nine years to beat the Russkies to the moon. And what did they get back?

Enough data to make it clear the moon was not made of anything economically viable ((BEEP) ah…Houston…we have a (BEEP)..ah..gusher (BEEP)…ah.. no…(BEEP)…that’s a negatory(BEEP)..I say again…negatory..er…not oil
Houston(BEEP)).

The undying admiration of the world for a short while.

And a bunch of superbly trained pilot/engineers who all returned from the Moon in a very Zen state of mind.

Sure the whole things sounds today like lunacy. But you’ll never ever know if you never ever go.

And let’s face it, if we didn’t indulge in grand, imaginative, indulgent, expensive, inspiring, dangerous, unpredictable and gallant gestures from time to time, we wouldn’t be the human race we know too well and often love.

We might be rather more sustainably loveable — and more equitable in our conduct.

Fran

Nice observation there Jack. Never underestimate ego and prestige as driving forces in human affairs.

“From a purely scientific perspective, Apollo was a lousy investment.”

Are you kidding? The Apollo program greatly drove the technology of putting hi-tech stuff into space and then controlling it there. Like the satellites which hook up our communications and watch our weather, beam entertainment into loungerooms, allow GPS to find us and monitor the earth for ecological, economic and strategic hot spots. How much do you currently pay for a few hours goggling around Google Earth?

Admittedly a lot of these benefits would have been realised eventually but thanks to JFK’s deadline, they got to us faster.

And let’s face it, if we didn’t indulge in grand, imaginative, indulgent, expensive, inspiring, dangerous, unpredictable and gallant gestures from time to time, we wouldn’t be the human race we know too well and often love.

From a purely scientific perspective, Apollo was a lousy investment. But, as New Scientist puts it, it was never really about science:

The Space Race to the Moon was a very, very good investment from a strategic point of view. THe USAF’s landing on the moon was, as Russian space experts now admit, “a defeat for the Soviet space program“:

“The Americans’ main goal was competition with the Soviets around the lunar programme. Their victory in this was undoubtedly a highly significant event in the contest between the two systems,”

The Space Race was, as the name indicates, a sub-set of the Arms Race bw USA and USSR. The USA’s victory in the Space Race was a major aspect in its victory in the Arms Race. This Arms Race victory in turn was a major factor in the USA’s victory in the Cold War.

The USA’s victory in the Cold War created a Peace Dividend. So the US victory in the Space Race did, in a significant way, help to promote the global spread of peace and prosperity over the nineties and noughties.

Right now a new Space Race is brewing in NE Asia, as industrial giants of the East look to stake a claim on the Moon. This is largely in response to the discovery of ice in lunar craters. A sufficient supply of ice would allow the powering, atmosphering and hydration of a lunar base. Most likely such a base would be heavily “manned” by robots or AI devices, reducing the need for organic supply.

A self-sustaining lunar base could come in handy for launching cheap satellites or manafacturing installations. Popular mechanics indulges in a bit of lunar economic forecasting:

The base could be an ideal location for manufacturing processes best suited for low gravity, or for helium-3 mining to fuel future fusion reactors. The agency also sees the moon as the perfect construction site and launchpad for eventual manned journeys to Mars.

All this shows that peaceful competition bw nations, based on technological metrics, can be a real boon to humanity. At any rate it looks good on a nations CV.

You can just see him muttering over and over again “luvvies…bitchslap…revolver” while fondling his ring.

http://johnquiggin.com/index.php/archives/2009/07/26/sockpuppet-ban/

Anyway my view on this whole Phallus 11 thang is that rockets and dicks look the same because it’s form following function. They’re both designed to minimise resistance and store fluids that are transformed into heat and pressure in order to deliver a (surprisingly small) payload to a precise location.

Of course on one hand you have blastoff followed by ascension whereas on the other hand it’s vice versa.

One day I’m gonna grow to be an astronaut and visit heavenly bodes as captain of Innuendo 11.

Would you like me to also explain why reading a book before passing judgement on its observations is generally regarded as a useful exercise?

But of course. One of the most risible sexists in contemporary literature was way more funny than present day feminist Australian oiks, eh Nabs? LOL!

To celebrate the anniversary, I just reread Mailer’s ‘Of A Fire On The Moon’ which still holds up very well indeed as a wonderful piece of prose. Not to mention that Mailer really did his research to the point where he could clearly describe in technical detail for a layperson audience stuff like how to work the DSKY and what went wrong exactly with the AGC on final approach.

And his musings on the whole patriarchy thing are a lot more thought out and funnier that some of the observations expressed here.

sg@112. It was onboard Apollo 8 while orbiting the moon.

Perosnally I preferred Apollo 7’s approach where they took premixed martinis up with them for a CMB (Command Module Bender)experiment.

Dodi was Egyptian and had a business base in London, jane. Were you thinking of Jemima Goldsmith and the Swashbuckling Heart-Throb Cricketer?

Apparently the Mythbusters busted the flag and several other moon landing myths some time ago.

I also agree that there were far too many people involved for the landings to be faked and the secret kept. Bit like the Diana conspiracy theorists. Having her married off and whisked off to sharia heaven in Pakistan or somewhere would have been far better than a martyr’s death as far as the royal family was concerned, I would think.

It is the manner of men first to wonder that any such thing should be possible, and after it is found out to wonder again how the world should miss it so long