Neil Armstrong was misquoted ?

I read this last night and wondered to myself why I didn't see it sooner and why I couldn't find it on ATS.
Small and insignificant it may be compared to everything going on today, just a simple letter but that single letter means so much.
Just a little slice out of the vast information cake.

m.space.com...

Completely plausible

a reply to: MGaddafi

Hi. Can you please post more, maybe an excerpt from the link? Some of us (well, me anyway) don't click on most links. Thanks. (Is this the "One small stoop for man, one giant peep for mankind" quote?)

a reply to: Aleister

The link documents Neil Armstrong saying that he actually said, "That's one small step for a man, one giant leap for mankind."

It blathers on about the way the original quote is grammatically incorrect since the use of "man" in the sentence basically represents mankind, so the sentence essentially says, "That's one small step for mankind, one giant leap for mankind."

Apparently, they did an audio analysis which concluded there was a bump in the sound wave between "for" and "man", but it was too quick for the human ear to comprehend.

a reply to: Aleister

I didn't want to ruin the surprise hence why I was so vague with description. But if you wish.

originally posted by: MGaddafi
I read this last night and wondered to myself why I didn't see it sooner and why I couldn't find it on ATS.
Small and insignificant it may be compared to everything going on today, just a simple letter but that single letter means so much.
Just a little slice out of the vast information cake.

m.space.com...

Completely plausible

I watched that as it happened, and I had no problem with what he said, and couldn't understand what the mini-fuss was about. If you take the American accent it comes out as 'feraman' and rolls easily. In my English accent for me to say, for a man, the phrase is more stilted and doesn't roll so easy.

a reply to: glitchinthematrix

Thats what I got, too.

One little misquote from "a" man, not sure it matters to mankind. Lets rewrite history, again.

My personal view is that he fluffed his line, and history has tried to make amends by imposing a sort of pareidolia for the ears and insisting that the 'a' is there.

The reality is that it doesn't matter: everyone knows what he meant.

a reply to: MGaddafi

So no matter how insignificant this actually was, I have to wonder how his grammar correction was made in real time? So the way I see it, the world wasn't watching the actual first step on the moon by Neil Armstrong, but a recording with the corrected grammatical statement. If back than NASA was able to feed the public bogus astronaut recordings and pass them off as real time video, just think of all the other recordings that were made that were either scrapped or dubbed with different statements from the astronauts.

originally posted by: MGaddafi
I read this last night and wondered to myself why I didn't see it sooner and why I couldn't find it on ATS.
Small and insignificant it may be compared to everything going on today, just a simple letter but that single letter means so much.
Just a little slice out of the vast information cake.

m.space.com...

Completely plausible

I heard it live, I had listened to hundreds of hours of ar-to-ground comm so was used to vowel-chopping, and I thought there was an 'a' in there from the beginning. The person next to me said, 'what did he say', and I remember enunciating, 'that's one small step for a man...', just like I'd heard it seconds before.

originally posted by: WeRpeons
a reply to: MGaddafi

So no matter how insignificant this actually was, I have to wonder how his grammar correction was made in real time? So the way I see it, the world wasn't watching the actual first step on the moon by Neil Armstrong, but a recording with the corrected grammatical statement. If back than NASA was able to feed the public bogus astronaut recordings and pass them off as real time video, just think of all the other recordings that were made that were either scrapped or dubbed with different statements from the astronauts.

Uh, no. You've stopped 'wondering' and IMHO have started 'wandering' into fantasy, based on insulting a legion of people smarter, braver, and far more reality-grounded than you seem to be. Turn back toward the light, we can help.

My husband has lectured on this for years. Probably since he watched the landing in '69 as a child.



a reply to: glitchinthematrix

I've watched several programs on this, as well as listened to the actually speech over and over....simple fact, he fluffed up. BUT, he had just become the first man to set foot on the moon, he knew what he meant, we know what he meant, he can be forgiven for a simple grammatical error given the situation and excitement he must have been feeling (as well as the nerves).

Besides, until this was brought up, the majority of people wouldn't have noticed, and took the speech as it was intended.

a reply to: JimOberg

Uh, no. You've stopped 'wondering' and IMHO have started 'wandering' into fantasy, based on insulting a legion of people smarter, braver, and far more reality-grounded than you seem to be. Turn back toward the light, we can help.

...we have people in this world who do have brighter minds and they're being used to develop machines for wars, and to covertly create biological weapons to be tested and used on the population in military conflicts. If you think this is all BS you need to do some research on past CIA activities and government covert activities which are all based upon facts.

You my friend are not reality-grounded when you're ready to accept everything your government passes off in the media as fact! They've been caught many times with their pants down thanks to whistle blowers, and the release of secret documents made public after these "smarter and braver" people were safe, dead and gone.

I don't know about you, but I grew up watching these lunar landings. It's a legitimate question to ask if what I and millions of people watched that day wasn't recorded before hand and than replayed for the public, but than again, you must have all the answers.

originally posted by: JimOberg

originally posted by: MGaddafi
I read this last night and wondered to myself why I didn't see it sooner and why I couldn't find it on ATS.
Small and insignificant it may be compared to everything going on today, just a simple letter but that single letter means so much.
Just a little slice out of the vast information cake.

m.space.com...

Completely plausible

I heard it live, I had listened to hundreds of hours of ar-to-ground comm so was used to vowel-chopping, and I thought there was an 'a' in there from the beginning. The person next to me said, 'what did he say', and I remember enunciating, 'that's one small step for a man...', just like I'd heard it seconds before.

I heard it live too, and agree completely.

originally posted by: MGaddafi
I read this last night and wondered to myself why I didn't see it sooner and why I couldn't find it on ATS.
Small and insignificant it may be compared to everything going on today, just a simple letter but that single letter means so much.
Just a little slice out of the vast information cake.

m.space.com...

Completely plausible

This story has been around a while.

It was supposed to be "That's one small step for a man, one giant leap for Mankind", but the recording of the event does sound like the "a" is missing. However, Armstrong has long contended that he actually did say the "a".

I remember reading about this sound analysis from Peter Ford (as you mention) several years ago, and here is an article about it from 2006:
www.chron.com...

Another theory is that Armstrong's Ohio accent was one that would run the "for" and the "a" together in such a way that the "a" becomes almost unintelligible.

Was Neil Armstrong's Ohio accent to blame for millions mishearing his famous moon landing quote?

Speech scientists from Michigan State University and Ohio State University analysed the clip and studied how speakers from his native central Ohio pronounce 'for' and 'for a'.

The team suggest that in the midwestern American state Ohio there is typically a lot of blending between words such as 'for' and 'a.

And these results suggest it's entirely possible that Armstrong said what he claimed, even though people are statistically more likely to hear 'for man' instead of 'for a man' on the recording.

It seems entirely plausible that it could be a combination of these two factors: being a function of both his accent PLUS the quality of the audio transmission quality.

Lots of people here heard it live (me too). I like it as it is, without the 'a'. The first words actually spoken while something human-made was in touch with the Moon were when the lander's lead-out chord (wire) touched the surface and Buzz Aldrin said "Contact light". Have liked that since I heard about it.

originally posted by: WeRpeons
a reply to: MGaddafi

So no matter how insignificant this actually was, I have to wonder how his grammar correction was made in real time? So the way I see it, the world wasn't watching the actual first step on the moon by Neil Armstrong, but a recording with the corrected grammatical statement.

What.... on Earth are you on about?
The whole point is that what people heard sounded grammatically incorrect because the 'a' was supposedly missing. Did you actually listen or read? I think you've missed the point... Time to go back to sleep bud

originally posted by: WeRpeons
You my friend are not reality-grounded when you're ready to accept everything your government passes off in the media as fact! They've been caught many times with their pants down thanks to whistle blowers, and the release of secret documents made public after these "smarter and braver" people were safe, dead and gone.

I know you were addressing Jim, but what is it with you people where you think everything is so black and white? So because, for instance, I know we've been to the Moon I'm suddenly some flag waving patriot? I'm not even American! And like most people I don't trust plenty of things any Government says or does, nor the media. I'm particularly defensive of anything space related because for most of my life I've been in a unique position one way or another to be involved more than average Joe, as well as the fact I've actually studied in the relevant areas!
I've even hung out with and dined with Apollo Astronauts, sat next to Buzz Aldrin specifically. So stop judging people based on your own limited experience, that goes for anyone with the same mindset!

There are various shades of grey my friend in the real world, stop thinking like a computer that things are one way or another. The biggest downfall you and others like you have is when you decide you won't believe anything 'official' anymore and go down the slippery slop of schizophrenia.

I don't know about you, but I grew up watching these lunar landings. It's a legitimate question to ask if what I and millions of people watched that day wasn't recorded before hand and than replayed for the public, but than again, you must have all the answers.

You're joking right, I know Jim can speak for himself but I can't resist... Maybe you should research who you're talking to before you look even sillier!

a reply to: MGaddafi

I was just astounded that a simple letter can mean such a big difference. And that no one seemingly found this earlier. I didnt want to argure the point just wanted to bring it to ATS attention.

originally posted by: MGaddafi

I was just astounded that a simple letter can mean such a big difference. And that no one seemingly found this earlier. I didnt want to argure the point just wanted to bring it to ATS attention.

It was well known when I was a kid and that's been many MANY moons ago. It's news to you and a few others apparently.

Isn't it good to research and come up with some interesting historical tidbits that you weren't aware of before?

It's been a controversy since day one and depending on which paper of the day was read.