Podcast appearances and mentions of Neil Armstrong

Peter Hillary's father, Sir Edmund Hillary, was the first person to climb Mt. Everest. Mark Armstrong's father, Neil Armstrong, was the first person to walk on the moon. Now, the two sons of iconic explorers are going on an adventure together to the North Pole. A new film documents this journey, and a parallel journey their fathers took together in 1985. The working title of the documentary is North Pole '85, and was produced by an Icelandic film crew.

My fellow pro-growth/progress/abundance Up Wingers,China's spacefaring ambitions pose tough competition for America. With a focused, centralized program, Beijing seems likely to land taikonauts on the moon before another American flag is planted. Meanwhile, NASA faces budget cuts, leadership gaps, and technical setbacks. In his new book, journalist Christian Davenport chronicles the fierce rivalry between American firms, mainly SpaceX and Blue Origin. It's a contest that, despite the challenges, promises to propel humanity to the moon, Mars, and maybe beyond.Davenport is an author and a reporter for the Washington Post, where he covers NASA and the space industry. His new book, Rocket Dreams: Musk, Bezos, and the Inside Story of the New, Trillion-Dollar Space Race, is out now.In This Episode* Check-in on NASA (1:28)* Losing the Space Race (5:49)* A fatal flaw (9:31)* State of play (13:33)* The long-term vision (18:37)* The pace of progress (22:50)* Friendly competition (24:53)Below is a lightly edited transcript of our conversation. Check-in on NASA (1:28)The Chinese tend to do what they say they're going to do on the timeline that they say they're going to do it. That said, they haven't gone to the moon . . . It's really hard.Pethokoukis: As someone — and I'm speaking about myself — who wants to get America back to the moon as soon as possible, get cooking on getting humans to Mars for the first time, what should I make of what's happening at NASA right now?They don't have a lander. I'm not sure the rocket itself is ready to go all the way, we'll find out some more fairly soon with Artemis II. We have flux with leadership, maybe it's going to not be an independent-like agency anymore, it's going to join the Department of Transportation.It all seems a little chaotic. I'm a little worried. Should I be?Davenport: Yes, I think you should be. And I think a lot of the American public isn't paying attention and they're going to see the Artemis II mission, which you mentioned, and that's that mission to send a crew of astronauts around the moon. It won't land on the moon, but it'll go around, and I think if that goes well, NASA's going to take a victory leap. But as you correctly point out, that is a far cry from getting astronauts back on the lunar surface.The lander isn't ready. SpaceX, as acting NASA administrator Sean Duffy just said, is far behind, reversing himself from like a month earlier when he said no, they appear to be on track, but everybody knew that they were well behind because they've had 11 test flights, and they still haven't made it to orbit with their Starship rocket.The rocket itself that's going to launch them into the vicinity of the moon, the SLS, launches about once every two years. It's incredibly expensive, it's not reusable, and there are problems within the agency itself. There are deep cuts to it. A lot of expertise is taking early retirements. It doesn't have a full-time leader. It hasn't had a full-time leader since Trump won the election. At the same time, they're sort of beating the drum saying we're going to beat the Chinese back to the lunar surface, but I think a lot of people are increasingly looking at that with some serious concern and doubt.For what it's worth, when I looked at the betting markets, it gave the Chinese a two-to-one edge. It said that it was about a 65 percent chance they were going to get there first. Does that sound about right to you?I'm not much of a betting man, but I do think there's a very good chance. The Chinese tend to do what they say they're going to do on the timeline that they say they're going to do it. That said, they haven't gone to the moon, they haven't done this. It's really hard. They're much more secretive, if they have setbacks and delays, we don't necessarily know about them. But they've shown over the last 10, 20 years how capable they are. They have a space station in low earth orbit. They've operated a rover on Mars. They've gone to the far side of the moon twice, which nobody has done, and brought back a sample return. They've shown the ability to keep people alive in space for extended periods of times on the space station.The moon seems within their capabilities and they're saying they're going to do it by 2030, and they don't have the nettlesome problem of democracy where you've got one party come in and changing the budget, changing the direction for NASA, changing leadership. They've just set the moon — and, by the way, the south pole of the moon, which is where we want to go as well — as the destination and have been beating a path toward that for several years now.Is there anyone for merging NASA into the Department of Transportation? Is there a hidden reservoir? Is that an idea people have been talking about now that's suddenly emerged to the surface?It's not something that I particularly heard. The FAA is going to regulate the launches, and they coordinate with the airspace and make sure that the air traffic goes around it, but I think NASA has a particular expertise. Rocket science is rocket science — it's really difficult. This isn't for the faint of heart.I think a lot of people look at human space flight and it's romanticized. It's romanticized in books and movies and in popular culture, but the fact of the matter is it's really, really hard, it's really dangerous, every time a human being gets on one of those rockets, there's a chance of an explosion, of something really, really bad happening, because a million things have to go right in order for them to have a successful flight. The FAA does a wonderful job managing — or, depending on your point of view, some people don't think they do such a great job, but I think space is a whole different realm, for sure.Losing the Space Race (5:49). . . the American flags that the Apollo astronauts planted, they're basically no longer there anymore. . . There are, however, two Chinese flags on the moonHave you thought about what it will look like the day after, in this country, if China gets to the moon first and we have not returned there yet?Actually, that's a scenario I kind of paint out. I've got this new book called Rocket Dreams and we talk about the geopolitical tensions in there. Not to give too much of a spoiler, but NASA has said that the first person to return to the moon, for the US, is going to be a woman. And there's a lot of people thinking, who could that be? It could be Jessica Meir, who is a mother and posted a picture of herself pregnant and saying, “This is what an astronaut looks like.” But it could very well be someone like Wang Yaping, who's also a mother, and she came back from one of her stays on the International Space Station and had a message for her daughter that said, “I come back bringing all the stars for you.” So I think that I could see China doing it and sending a woman, and that moment where that would be a huge coup for them, and that would obviously be symbolic.But when you're talking about space as a tool of soft power and diplomacy, I think it would attract a lot of other nations to their side who are sort of waiting on the sidelines or who frankly aren't on the sidelines, who have signed on to go to the United States, but are going to say, “Well, they're there and you're not, so that's who we're going to go with.”I think about the wonderful alt-history show For All Mankind, which begins with the Soviets beating the US to the moon, and instead of Neil Armstrong giving the “one small step for man,” basically the Russian cosmonaut gives, “Its one small step for Marxism-Leninism,” and it was a bummer. And I really imagine that day, if China beats us, it is going to be not just, “Oh, I guess now we have to share the moon with someone else,” but it's going to cause some national soul searching.And there are clues to this, and actually I detail these two anecdotes in the book, that all of the flags, the American flags that the Apollo astronauts planted, they're basically no longer there anymore. We know from Buzz Aldrin‘s memoir that the flag that he and Neil Armstrong planted in the lunar soil in 1969, Buzz said that he saw it get knocked over by the thrust in the exhaust of the module lifting off from the lunar surface. Even if that hadn't happened, just the radiation environment would've bleached the flag white, as scientists believe it has to all the other flags that are on there. So there are essentially really no trace of the Apollo flags.There are, however, two Chinese flags on the moon, and the first one, which was planted a couple of years ago, or unveiled a couple of years ago, was made not of cloth, but their scientists and engineers spent a year building a composite material flag designed specifically to withstand the harsh environment of the moon. When they went back last summer for their farside sample return mission, they built a flag, — and this is pretty amazing — out of basalt, like volcanic rock, which you find on Earth. And they use basalt from earth, but of course basalt is common on the moon. They were able to take the rock, turn it into lava, extract threads from the lava and weave this flag, which is now near the south pole of the moon. The significance of that is they are showing that they can use the resources of the moon, the basalt, to build flags. It's called ISR: in situ resource utilization. So to me, nothing symbolizes their intentions more than that.A fatal flaw (9:31). . . I tend to think if it's a NASA launch . . . and there's an explosion . . . I still think there are going to be investigations, congressional reports, I do think things would slow down dramatically.In the book, you really suggest a new sort of golden age of space. We have multiple countries launching. We seem to have reusable rockets here in the United States. A lot of plans to go to the moon. How sustainable is this economically? And I also wonder what happens if we have another fatal accident in this country? Is there so much to be gained — whether it's economically, or national security, or national pride in space — that this return to space by humanity will just go forward almost no matter what?I think so. I think you've seen a dramatic reduction in the cost of launch. SpaceX and the Falcon 9, the reusable rocket, has dropped launches down. It used to be if you got 10, 12 orbital rocket launches in a year, that was a good year. SpaceX is launching about every 48 hours now. It's unprecedented what they've done. You're seeing a lot of new players — Blue Origin, Rocket Lab, others — driving down the cost of launch.That said, the main anchor tenant customer, the force driving all of this is still the government, it's still NASA, it's still the Pentagon. There is not a self-sustaining space economy that exists in addition or above and beyond the government. You're starting to see bits of that, but really it's the government that's driving it.When you talk about the movie For All Mankind, you sort of wonder if at one point, what happened in that movie is there was a huge investment into NASA by the government, and you're seeing that to some extent today, not so much with NASA, but actually on the national security side and the creation of the Space Force and the increases, just recently, in the Space Force's budget. I mean, my gosh, if you have $25 billion for this year alone for Golden Dome, the Missile Defense Shield, that's the equivalent of NASA's entire budget. That's the sort of funding that helps build those capabilities going forward.And if we should, God forbid, have a fatal accident, you think we'll just say that's the cost of human exploration and forward we go?I think a lot about this, and the answer is, I don't know. When we had Challenger and we had Columbia, the world stopped, and the Space Shuttle was grounded for months if not a year at a time, and the world just came to an end. And you wonder now if it's becoming more routine and what happens? Do we just sort of carry on in that way?It's not a perfect analogy, but when you talk about commercial astronauts, these rich people are paying a lot of money to go, and if there's an accident there, what would happen? I think about that, and you think about Mount Everest. The people climbing Mount Everest today, those mountain tourists are literally stepping over dead bodies as they're going up to the summit, and nobody's shutting down Mount Everest, they're just saying, well, if you want to climb Mount Everest, that's the risk you take. I do wonder if we're going to get that to that point in space flight, but I tend to think if it's a NASA launch, and it's NASA astronauts, and there's an explosion, and there's a very bad day, I still think there are going to be investigations, congressional reports, I do think things would slow down dramatically.The thing is, if it's SpaceX, they have had accidents. They've had multiple accidents — not with people, thank goodness — and they have been grounded.It is part of the model.It's part of the model, and they have shown how they can find out what went wrong, fix it, and return to flight, and they know their rocket so well because they fly it so frequently. They know it that well, and NASA, despite what you think about Elon, NASA really, really trusts SpaceX and they get along really well.State of play (13:33)[Blue Origin is] way behind for myriad reasons. They sat out while SpaceX is launching the Falcon 9 every couple of days . . . Blue Origin, meanwhile, has flown its New Glenn rocket one time.I was under the impression that Blue Origin was way behind SpaceX. Are they catching up?This is one of the themes of the book. They are way behind for myriad reasons. They sat out while SpaceX is launching the Falcon 9 every couple of days, they're pushing ahead with Starship, their next generation rocket would be fully reusable, twice the thrust and power of the Saturn V rocket that flew the Apollo astronauts to the Moon. Blue Origin, meanwhile, has flown its New Glenn rocket one time. They might be launching again soon within the coming weeks or months, hopefully by the end of the year, but that's two. They are so far behind, but you do hear Jeff Bezos being much more tuned into the company. He has a new CEO — a newish CEO — plucked from the ranks of Amazon, Dave Limp, and you do sort of see them charging, and now that the acting NASA administrator has sort of opened up the competition to go to the moon, I don't know that Blue Origin beats SpaceX to do it, but it gives them some incentive to move fast, which I think they really need.I know it's only a guess and it's only speculation, but when we return to the moon, which company will have built that lander?At this point, you have to put your money on SpaceX just because they're further along in their development. They've flown humans before. They know how to keep people alive in space. In their Dragon capsule, they have the rendezvous and proximity operations, they know how to dock. That's it.Blue Origin has their uncrewed lander, the Mark 1 version that they hope to land on the moon next year, so it's entirely possible that Blue Origin actually lands a spacecraft on the lunar surface before SpaceX, and that would be a big deal. I don't know that they're able to return humans there, however, before SpaceX.Do you think there's any regrets by Jeff Bezos about how Blue Origin has gone about its business here? Because obviously it really seems like it's a very different approach, and maybe the Blue Origin approach, if we look back 10 years, will seem to have been the better approach, but given where we are now and what you just described, would you guess that he's deeply disappointed with the kind of progress they made via SpaceX?Yeah, and he's been frustrated. Actually, the opening scene of the book is Jeff being upset that SpaceX is so far ahead and having pursued a partnership with NASA to fly cargo and supply to the International Space Station and then to fly astronauts to the International Space Station, and Blue Origin essentially sat out those competitions. And he turns to his team — this was early on in 2016 — and said, “From here on out, we go after everything that SpaceX goes after, we're going to compete with them. We're going to try to keep up.” And that's where they went, and sort of went all in early in the first Trump administration when it was clear that they wanted to go back to the moon, to position Blue Origin to say, “We can help you go back to the moon.”But yes, I think there's enormous frustration there. And I know, if not regret on Jeff's part, but certainly among some of his senior leadership, because I've talked to them about it.What is the war for talent between those two companies? Because if you're a hotshot engineer out of MIT, I'd guess you'd probably want to go to SpaceX. What is that talent war like, if you have any idea?It's fascinating. Just think a generation ago, you're a hot MIT engineer coming out of grad school, chances are you're going to go to NASA or one of the primes, right? Lockheed, or Boeing, or Air Jet, something like that. Now you've got SpaceX and Blue Origin, but you've got all kinds of other options too: Stoke Space, Rocket Lab, you've got Axiom, you've got companies building commercial space stations, commercial companies building space suits, commercial companies building rovers for the moon, a company called Astro Lab.I think what you hear is people want to go to SpaceX because they're doing things: they're flying rockets, they're flying people, you're actually accomplishing something. That said, the culture's rough, and you're working all the time, and the burnout rate is high. Blue Origin more has a tradition of people getting frustrated that yeah, the work-life balance is better — although I hear that's changing, actually, that it's driving much, much harder — but it's like, when are we launching? What are we doing here?And so the fascinating thing is actually, I call it SpaceX and Blue Origin University, where so many of the engineers go out and either do their own things or go to work for other companies doing things because they've had that experience in the commercial sector.The long-term vision (18:37)That's the interesting thing, that while they compete . . . at a base level, Elon and Jeff and SpaceX and Blue Origin want to accomplish the same things and have a lot in common . . .At a talk recently, Bezos was talking about space stations in orbit and there being like a million people in space in 20 years doing economically valuable things of some sort. How seriously should I take that kind of prediction?Well, I think a million people in 20 years is not feasible, but I think that's ultimately what is his goal. His goal is, as he says, he founded Amazon, the infrastructure was there: the phone companies had laid down the cables for the internet, the post office was there to deliver the books, there was an invention called the credit card, he could take people's money. That infrastructure for space isn't there, and he wants to sort of help with Elon and SpaceX. That's their goal.That's the interesting thing, that while they compete, while they poke each other on Twitter and kind of have this rivalry, at a base level, Elon and Jeff and SpaceX and Blue Origin want to accomplish the same things and have a lot in common, and that's lower the cost of access to space and make it more accessible so that you can build this economy on top of it and have more people living in space. That's Elon's dream, and the reason he founded SpaceX is to build a city on Mars, right? Something's going to happen to Earth at some point we should have a backup plan.Jeff's goal from the beginning was to say, you don't really want to inhabit another planet or celestial body. You're better off in these giant space stations envisioned by a Princeton physics professor named Gerard O'Neill, who Jeff Bezos read his book The High Frontier and became an acolyte of Gerard O'Neill from when he was a kid, and that's sort of his vision, that you don't have to go to a planet, you can just be on a Star Trekkian sort of spacecraft in orbit around the earth, and then earth is preserved as this national park. If you want to return to Earth, you can, but you get all the resources from space. In 500 years is that feasible? Yeah, probably, but that's not going to be in our lives, or our kids' lives, or our grandkids' lives.For that vision — anything like that vision — to happen, it seems to me that the economics needs to be there, and the economics just can't be national security and national prestige. We need to be doing things in space, in orbit, on the moon that have economic value on their own. Do we know what that would look like, or is it like you've got to build the infrastructure first and then let the entrepreneurs do their thing and see what happens?I would say the answer is “yes,” meaning it's both. And Jeff even says it, that some of the things that will be built, we do not know. When you had the creation of the internet, no one was envisioning Snapchat or TikTok. Those applications come later. But we do know that there are resources in space. We know there's a plentiful helium three, for example, on the surface of the moon, which it could be vital for, say, quantum computing, and there's not a lot of it on earth, and that could be incredibly valuable. We know that asteroids have precious metals in large quantities. So if you can reduce the cost of accessing them and getting there, then I think you could open up some of those economies. If you just talk about solar rays in space, you don't have day and night, you don't have cloud cover, you don't have an atmosphere, you're just pure sunlight. If you could harness that energy and bring it back to earth, that could be valuable.The problem is the cost of entry is so high and it's so difficult to get there, but if you have a vehicle like Starship that does what Elon envisions and it launches multiple times a day like an airline, all you're really doing is paying for the fuel to launch it, and it goes up and comes right back down, it can carry enormous amounts of mass, you can begin to get a glimmer of how this potentially could work years from now.The pace of progress (22:50)People talk about US-China, but clearly Russia has been a long-time player. India, now, has made extraordinary advancements. Of course, Europe, Japan, and all those countries are going to want to have a foothold in space . . .How would you characterize the progress now than when you wrote your first book?So much has happened that the first book, The Space Barons was published in 2018, and I thought, yeah, there'll be enough material here for another one in maybe 10 years or so, and here we are, what, seven years later, and the book is already out because commercial companies are now flying people. You've got a growth of the space ecosystem beyond just the Space Barons, beyond just the billionaires.You've got multiple players in the rocket launch market, and really, I think a lot of what's driving it isn't just the rivalries between the commercial companies in the United States, but the geopolitical space race between the United States and China, too that's really driving a lot of this, and the technological change that we've seen has moved very fast. Again, how fast SpaceX is launching, Blue Origin coming online, new launch vehicles, potentially new commercial space stations, and a broadening of the space ecosystem, it's moving fast. Does that mean it's perfect? No, companies start, they fail, they have setbacks, they go out of business, but hey, that's capitalism.Ten years from now, how many space stations are going to be in orbit around the earth?I think we'll have at least one or two commercial space stations for the United States, I think China. Is it possible you've got the US space stations, does that satisfy the demand? People talk about US-China, but clearly Russia has been a long-time player. India, now, has made extraordinary advancements. Of course, Europe, Japan, and all those countries are going to want to have a foothold in space for their scientists, for their engineers, for their pharmaceutical companies that want to do research in a zero-G environment. I think it's possible that there are, within 10 years, three, maybe even four space stations. Yeah, I think that's possible.Friendly competition (24:53)I honestly believe [Elon] . . . wants Blue to be better than they are.Do you think Musk thinks a lot about Blue Origin, or do you think he thinks, “I'm so far ahead, we're just competing against our own goals”?I've talked to him about this. He wishes they were better. He wishes they were further along. He said to me years ago, “Jeff needs to focus on Blue Origin.” This is back when Jeff was still CEO of Amazon, saying he should focus more on Blue Origin. And he said that one of the reasons why he was goading him and needling him as he has over the years was an attempt to kind of shame him and to get him to focus on Blue, because as he said, for Blue to be successful, he really needs to be dialed in on it.So earlier this year, when New Glenn, Blue Origin's big rocket, made it to orbit, that was a moment where Elon came forward and was like, respect. That is hard to do, to build a rocket to go to orbit, have a successful flight, and there was sort of a public high five in the moment, and now I think he thinks, keep going. I honestly believe he wants Blue to be better than they are.There's a lot of Elon Musk skeptics out there. They view him either as the guy who makes too big a prediction about Tesla and self-driving cars, or he's a troll on Twitter, but when it comes to space and wanting humanity to have a self-sustaining place somewhere else — on Mars — is he for real?Yeah, I do believe that's the goal. That's why he founded SpaceX in the first place, to do that. But the bottom line is, that's really expensive. When you talk about how do you do that, what are the economic ways to do it, I think the way he's funding that is obviously through Starlink and the Starlink system. But I do believe he wants humanity to get to Mars.The problem with this now is that there hasn't been enough competition. Blue Origin hasn't given SpaceX competition. We saw all the problems that Boeing has had with their program, and so much of the national space enterprise is now in his hands. And if you remember when he had that fight and the breakup with Donald Trump, Elon, in a moment of peak, threatened to take away the Dragon spacecraft, which is the only way NASA can fly its astronauts anywhere to space, to the International Space Station. I think that was reckless and dangerous and that he regretted it, but yes, the goal to get to Mars is real, and whatever you think about Elon — and he certainly courts a controversy — SpaceX is really, really good at what they do, and what they've done is really unprecedented from an American industrial perspective.My earliest and clearest memory of America and space was the landing on Mars. I remember seeing the first pictures probably on CBS news, I think it was Dan Rather saying, “Here are the first pictures of the Martian landscape,” 1976, and if you would've asked me as a child then, I would've been like, “Yeah, so we're going to be walking on Mars,” but I was definitely hooked and I've been interested in space, but are you a space guy? How'd you end up on this beat, which I think is a fantastic beat? You've written two books about it. How did this happen?I did not grow up a space nerd, so I was born in 1973 —Christian, I said “space guy.” I didn't say “space nerd,” but yeah, that is exactly right.My first memory of space is actually the Challenger shuttle exploding. That was my memory. As a journalist, I was covering the military. I'd been embedded in Iraq, and my first book was an Iraq War book about the national guard's role in Iraq, and was covering the military. And then this guy, this was 10 years ago, 12 years ago, at this point, Elon holds a press conference at the National Press Club where SpaceX was suing the Pentagon for the right to compete for national security launch contracts, and he starts off the press conference not talking about the lawsuit, but talking about the attempts. This was early days of trying to land the Falcon 9 rocket and reuse it, and I didn't know what he was talking about. And I was like, what? And then I did some research and I was like, “He's trying to land and reuse the rockets? What?” Nobody was really covering it, so I started spending more time, and then it's the old adage, right? Follow the money. And if the richest guys in the world — Bezos Blue Origin, at the time, Richard Branson, Paul Allen had a space company — if they're investing large amounts of their own personal fortune into that, maybe we should be paying attention, and look at where we are now.On sale everywhere The Conservative Futurist: How To Create the Sci-Fi World We Were Promised Faster, Please! is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit fasterplease.substack.com/subscribe

“Os fins justificam os meios”“Se não têm pão, que comam brioches”“Diga ao povo que fico”Ao longo da vida a gente vai ouvindo umas frases que parece terem existido desde sempre, já reparou? E aprende que elas foram ditas por personalidades históricas, cientistas, pensadores, nobres, artistas... Até que um dia descobre que não, não foram. Tipo esses três exemplos aí de cima. Fui procurar entender mais a respeito e trouxe algumas curiosidades interessantes, que estão apenas esperando seu play. Vai lá, que tem coisa bem legal pra você usar na sua próxima conversa em um bar, uma festa, uma visita aos parentes. ========================APRENDA EM 5 MINUTOS é o programa que ensina coisas que você nem sabia que precisava saber. Os episódios são roteirizados e apresentados por Alvaro Leme. Jornalista, doutorando em Ciências da Comunicação na ECA-USP e criador de conteúdo há vinte anos, ele traz episódios sobre curiosidades dos mais variados tipos. São episódios curtos, quase sempre com 5 minutos — mas alguns passam disso, porque tem tema que precisa mesmo de mais um tempinho.Siga a gente no Instagram: http://instagram.com/aprendapodcasthttp://instagram.com/alvarolemehttp://instagram.com/andreglasnerComercial e parcerias: alvaroleme@brunch.ag======================Quer saber mais? Confira as fontes que consultei para criar o episódio- De Dom Pedro I a Neil Armstrong: frases famosas que nunca foram ditasPor Edison Veiga, BBC Brasil- Confira 15 frases “históricas” que, na realidade, nunca foram ditasPor Thiago Lincolins e Letícia Yazbek, Aventuras na História- 8 frases icônicas que nunca foram ditasPor Jessica Soares, Superinteresante

In July of 1969, Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin left the first human footprints on the moon. They also left two pairs of boots, a handful of tools, and four vomit bags. This lunar litter was far from the last space junk humanity has produced. In 2006, Suni Williams lost her camera while tussling with a stuck solar array on the ISS. And the following year, a similar job resulted in the loss of a bag filled with $100,000 worth of tools. These accidental satellites typically have short lifespans, before falling back to Earth and burning up in our atmosphere. However, other pieces of space junk, like SpaceX's Tesla Roadster, will be stuck in their orbits for the foreseeable future.1969年7月，尼尔·阿姆斯特朗和巴兹·奥尔德林在人类历史上第一次在月球上留下了脚印。他们还留下了两双靴子、一些工具以及四个呕吐袋。这些月球垃圾远不是人类制造的最后一批太空废弃物。2006年，宇航员苏尼·威廉姆斯在国际空间站上处理卡住的太阳能电池板时丢失了她的相机。第二年，一次类似的任务又导致一个装有价值10万美元工具的袋子遗失。这些意外的“人造卫星”通常寿命很短，最终会坠回地球并在大气层中烧毁。然而，像SpaceX的特斯拉跑车这样的太空垃圾，将在可预见的未来长久地被困在轨道上。In the early days of space travel, this kind of littering was largely considered inconsequential. But in today's crowded skies, orbital debris poses a serious threat to the thousands of satellites that underpin Earth's vital technologies. Currently, there are over 131 million pieces of debris whipping around the planet at an average speed of 10 kilometers a second. This debris ranges in size from pieces as large as an entire bus, to those as small as a grain of sand. But roughly 1 million pieces are at least one centimeter across, which is large enough to severely damage most satellites. While losing any spacecraft is bad enough, the knock-on effects are even worse. When satellites crash into debris or each other, such as in 2009, when an American communications satellite collided with a defunct Russian satellite, they can explode into thousands of pieces. And if events like these happen often enough, the increase in debris could trigger a catastrophic cascade that researchers have named the Kessler syndrome: a runaway effect which could destroy untold numbers of orbiting spacecraft.在太空探索的早期，这种“乱扔垃圾”的行为被认为无关紧要。但在当今拥挤的太空环境中，轨道碎片对支撑地球重要科技系统的数千颗卫星构成了严重威胁。目前，有超过1.31亿块碎片以平均每秒10公里的速度围绕地球飞行。这些碎片大小不一，从一辆公共汽车那么大到一粒沙子那么小不等。其中大约有100万块直径至少一厘米的碎片，这已经足以严重损坏大多数卫星。失去任何一颗航天器本身已经够糟糕了，但连锁反应更为可怕。当卫星与碎片或彼此相撞时——比如2009年，美国一颗通信卫星与一颗报废的俄罗斯卫星相撞——会产生数千块新的碎片。如果此类事件频繁发生，碎片数量的增加可能引发一种灾难性的连锁反应，即研究人员所谓的“凯斯勒综合症”：一种失控的效应，可能毁灭无数在轨航天器。But what does all this mean for people on Earth? Well, even if space shrapnel does take down a satellite, most debris burns up during re-entry. So theprobabilityof waking up to a spacecraft in your yard is very small. That said, some large specimens can survive the trip, such as the SpaceXCapsulethat landed in an Australian field in August of 2022. And the odds of something similar happening again grows alongside the amount of space junk. So how can we save our satellites and ourselves from all this trash?那么，这一切对地球上的人意味着什么呢？即使太空碎片击落了一颗卫星，大多数残骸在重返大气层时都会烧毁。所以，你早晨醒来发现院子里掉了一艘飞船的概率非常低。不过，也有一些体积较大的物体能在重返地球时幸存下来，比如2022年8月坠落在澳大利亚农田中的SpaceX飞船舱。而随着太空垃圾数量的增加，这种事情再次发生的几率也在上升。那么，我们该如何拯救卫星和自己免于这片“太空垃圾场”呢？Part of the solution is to stop creating waste in space, but debris is generated in a lot of ways. In addition to collisions, solar radiation erodes spacecraft surfaces, motors spew slag, and satellite launches routinely abandon rocket bodies, covers, cowlings, and explosive bolts. Since 1957, we've ferried almost 16,000 satellites to space using thousands of disposable rockets. Researchers are finally experimenting with new systems that can send up over 100 satellites in a single rocket launch. Meanwhile, both NASA and private companies are working to prevent existing satellites from becoming junk by using servicer satellites to refuel, inspect, and repair them. But we also need to clean up the junk that's already up in orbit.解决问题的一部分是停止在太空中制造垃圾，但碎片的来源非常多。除了碰撞外，太阳辐射会侵蚀航天器表面，发动机会喷出熔渣，而每次发射卫星时，火箭的主体、保护盖、整流罩以及爆炸螺栓等部件都会被遗弃。自1957年以来，人类已通过数千枚一次性火箭将近1.6万颗卫星送入太空。研究人员终于开始尝试使用新系统——能在一次火箭发射中部署超过100颗卫星。同时，美国国家航空航天局（NASA）及多家私人公司正努力防止现有卫星成为太空垃圾，他们利用“服务卫星”为其加油、检查和维修。但我们也必须清理那些已经在轨道上的垃圾。When a satellite is ready to retire, engineers can use controlled re-entry to intentionally burn it up in Earth's atmosphere. Ideally, this would happen as soon as a satellite is out of use, but outside the US, current guidelines allow defunct satellites to remain in orbit for up to 25 years, but this rule has barely been enforced. Beyond retired spacecraft, researchers have identified some particularly dangerous debris, so efforts could be made to tackle them first. Some debris experts have proposed using lasers, based both on Earth and in space, to nudge small debris to a higher, safer orbit or into the atmosphere. And private companies are attempting to use space tug boats to ferry large debris to less dangerous orbits.当一颗卫星准备退役时，工程师可以通过“受控再入”的方式，让它在地球大气层中有意烧毁。理想情况下，这应在卫星停止使用后立即进行。但除美国外，目前的国际准则允许报废卫星在轨道上停留长达25年，而这一规定几乎从未被严格执行。除了退役卫星外，研究人员还确定了一些特别危险的碎片，因此可以优先处理这些目标。一些碎片专家提议利用地面或太空中的激光，将小型碎片推向更高、更安全的轨道，或让其坠入大气层中燃烧。而私人公司则尝试使用“太空拖船”，将大型碎片拖往较不危险的轨道。Whatever the solution, all these satellites and orbital debris reflect human consumption back on Earth. So if we want to keep using and exploring this final frontier, we'll need to get better at cleaning up our trash both up there and down here.无论采用哪种解决方案，这些卫星和轨道碎片都折射出人类在地球上的消费行为。如果我们想继续利用并探索这片“最后的疆域”，就必须学会更好地清理我们的垃圾——无论是在太空中，还是在地球上。

In this candid episode of the SpeakersU Podcast, James Taylor and Maria Franzoni tackle one of the most dangerous traps for professional speakers — ego. While confidence is essential to step on stage, unchecked ego can sabotage client relationships, damage reputations, and even end careers. Maria shares shocking true stories of “speakers behaving badly,” from diva demands and drunken disasters to midnight tantrums over hotel rooms. James reveals how cultural differences, gender perceptions, and even microphone preferences can blur the line between professionalism and arrogance. Together they explore how to stay grounded, easy to work with, and respected — even when success and attention start to inflate your self-image. If you've ever wondered where confidence ends and ego begins, this episode offers hard-won lessons, cautionary tales, and practical ways to keep your feet firmly on the ground.     Key Takeaways Confidence ≠ arrogance – A healthy ego gets you on stage; an inflated one gets you blacklisted. Be easy to work with – Kindness to AV teams, organisers, and staff is remembered (and shared). Do your own briefing calls – Never outsource relationships that build trust with clients. Ego destroys reputations fast – Word travels quickly among bureaus and event planners. Cultural context matters – What reads as confidence in the US may look like arrogance in the UK. Boundaries vs. bad behaviour – Riders and technical requests are professionalism, not ego. Stay grounded – Family check-ins, gratitude, and humility keep you level when success rises.     Memorable Quotes “Speakers need ego to get on stage — but when it tips into arrogance, it can destroy your career.” – Maria Franzoni “Our job is to be champions for our craft, not divas of the greenroom.” – James Taylor “Do your own briefing calls — if Neil Armstrong could, so can you.” – Maria Franzoni “Confidence is caring about the craft; ego is caring only about yourself.” – James Taylor “You can't control how others treat you, but you can control how you treat everyone around you.” – Maria Franzoni     Episode Timestamps 00:00 – Welcome and playful banter about podcast “coolness” 01:20 – Why ego deserves its own chapter in The Bookability Formula 03:07 – When ego makes speakers inflexible on stage timings 04:18 – The ripple effect of bad behaviour on AV and event teams 06:29 – How negative energy travels fast between events and bureaus 07:15 – “Speakers behaving badly” – examples from Maria's agency days 09:07 – Do your own briefing calls (and why Neil Armstrong did his) 10:45 – Cultural and gender differences in how ego is perceived 12:13 – When high standards aren't arrogance but professionalism 13:20 – Midnight hotel tantrums and balcony meltdowns 14:08 – Respect the client's exhaustion – empathy over entitlement 16:42 – Drunken speeches and recycled stories: reputations ruined 18:04 – Tracking your material to avoid repetition and mistakes 19:44 – Cultural nuances: big intros that work in the US flop in Europe 20:24 – Crossing ethical lines: relationships and reputation at events 21:56 – Zig Ziglar's “five calls a day” rule to stay grounded 23:20 – Tips & tools of the week: elected-office speaking practice and portable AI recorders 27:25 – Future of AI speaker assistants — “Digital Maria Franzoni?” 27:52 – Wrap-up, humour, and listener invitation     Have a question or story for James and Maria? Email: hello@speakersu.com

Quick recap: The program began with a focus on Neil Armstrong's academic background and connections to USC, including his completed coursework and potential master's degree, as well as his compensation as a NASA civil servant. The discussion concluded with an examination of space engineering education and industry practices, including the balance between government oversight and contractor responsibility, and the challenges of returning to the moon and planning future space missions. We were joined by Marshall Martin, Phil Swan, John Hunt and Dr. Ajay Kothari.I hosted this Space Show program featuring Dr. Mike Gruntman, who discussed his latest book about Neil Armstrong's connection to USC. Gruntman revealed that Armstrong, while serving in the Navy during the Korean War, took courses at USC from 1955-1962, eventually completing all coursework for a master's degree in aeronautics except for his thesis, which he never completed due to his NASA commitments. I also announced upcoming programs with Phil Swan, and Bill Gowan as well as a special day Halloween show featuring Dr. Sharma from Cedars-Sinai discussing their 3D printing of cardiac tissue and new space medical lab research unit.Mike discussed the history of the Apollo program, focusing on Neil Armstrong's involvement with Purdue University. He detailed Armstrong's earned Master of Science degree and shared insights from his personal archives, including his grades and the content of his lecture at USC on the moon landing. Mike also highlighted the significant workforce reduction following the Apollo program and the practice of bringing in top industrial talent to lead NASA projects, which he suggested could be relevant for future space missions. He drew a link to workforce reductions planned for NASA at this time.I informed Mike and the audience about Roger Launius upcoming appearance as a guest on their space show program on November 7th. Mike shared interesting findings about Neil Armstrong's compensation as a NASA civil servant in 1969, which was significantly higher than Michael Collins's salary as the latter was still in the military. They discussed Armstrong's academic background and his desire to become a professor, as well as his contributions to NASA and his subsequent career as a university professor. Marshall commented on the astronauts' reputation for being “rock-hard” test pilots, and Mike explained NASA's development of a lunar lander research vehicle and simulator for training astronauts to land on the moon.Mike discussed the unique space engineering department at USC, highlighting its success and the contributions of its students. He mentioned that Buzz Aldrin visited the campus several times, inspiring students. Mike also shared insights into the history of the Apollo program and the impact it had on the aerospace industry. David inquired about the current mood regarding the Artemis program at USC, to which Mike responded that faculty opinions vary, with most not having detailed knowledge of the program.Mike discussed the evolution of space engineering education and industry practices, highlighting the shift from performance-driven government programs to financially-driven commercial space initiatives. He explained that while commercial space has grown to be six times larger than government space worldwide, government programs remain crucial for technological advancement and fundamental research. Mike emphasized that both approaches are necessary, as government programs provide the performance-driven environment needed for technological innovation, while commercial space drives cost efficiency and rapid development.Mike discussed the balance between government oversight and contractor responsibility in space exploration, drawing on Apollo-era practices where NASA maintained discipline while granting significant autonomy to contractors like Grumman. He noted that today's government centers have varying levels of expertise, with some being effective while others are ossified, making it challenging to remove ineffective parts without harming the whole. Mike also compared Soviet space programs' heavy bureaucratic oversight with the U.S. approach, suggesting that while Soviet control could prevent fraud, it often stifled innovation. He concluded that while there are no easy solutions, NASA needs to make clear decisions about lunar exploration and contractor roles, particularly given SpaceX's current delays in meeting launch schedules.Mike discussed the challenges and considerations for returning to the moon, emphasizing the need for a strategic plan that could include a lunar gateway for long-term infrastructure. He highlighted the importance of strong leadership and the influence of politics on space programs, noting that NASA should provide a feasibility assessment for any mission. Mike expressed optimism about long-term lunar exploration but expressed concerns about the lack of investment in technologies like artificial gravity and nuclear reactors, which are crucial for sustained human presence on the moon and future Mars missions. He suggested prioritizing a return to the moon before attempting a direct trip to Mars, as it could serve as a stepping stone for future exploration.The discussion focused on space exploration and the challenges of congressional oversight. Dr. Gruntman, a space expert, explained how SpaceX's approach to rapid development and testing, reminiscent of NASA's George Mueller's strategy in the 1960s, differs from traditional government methods. They discussed the importance of the Lunar Orbit Rendezvous strategy in enabling the moon landing. John raised concerns about potential delays in Elon Musk's Mars colonization plans due to on-orbit refueling challenges. The group also discussed the need for better congressional oversight of space programs, with David questioning how to educate lawmakers on space issues. Mike noted that professional societies could play a role but have become politicized. The conversation concluded with a brief discussion about the Mars Society presentation scheduled for Friday by Phil Swan who participated in this program today.Special thanks to our sponsors:Northrup Grumman, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Helix Space in Luxembourg, Celestis Memorial Spaceflights, Astrox Corporation, Dr. Haym Benaroya of Rutgers University, The Space Settlement Progress Blog by John Jossy, The Atlantis Project, and Artless EntertainmentOur Toll Free Line for Live Broadcasts: 1-866-687-7223 (Not in service at this time)For real time program participation, email Dr. Space at: drspace@thespaceshow.com for instructions and access.The Space Show is a non-profit 501C3 through its parent, One Giant Leap Foundation, Inc. To donate via Pay Pal, use:To donate with Zelle, use the email address: david@onegiantleapfoundation.org.If you prefer donating with a check, please make the check payable to One Giant Leap Foundation and mail to:One Giant Leap Foundation, 11035 Lavender Hill Drive Ste. 160-306 Las Vegas, NV 89135Upcoming Programs:Broadcast 4450 ZOOM Phil Swan | Friday 24 Oct 2025 930AM PTGuests: Phil SwanZoom: Phil talks about going to Mars with kinetic energyBroadcast 4451 Zoom OPEN LINES | Saturday 25 Oct 2025 1200PM PTGuests: Dr. David Livingston, The Space Show Zoom Team & Zoom callersZOOM Open Lines discussion Get full access to The Space Show-One Giant Leap Foundation at doctorspace.substack.com/subscribe

Send us a textJim Clash covers extreme adventure and classic rock. Over three decades of writing for Forbes, Clash, who holds an MBA from Columbia University, has penned four books, most recently Amazon bestseller “Amplified,” about ‘60s music. His first-person stories include supersonic flights in eight separate aircraft pulling up to 9 Gs and flying to 84,000 ft; driving a Bugatti at 253 mph and Indy cars at 200 mph; expeditions to the North and South Poles; summiting the Matterhorn and 23,000-ft. Aconcagua; a C-130 flight through Category V Hurricane Dorian; chasing tornadoes; riding jet skis on 60-ft waves in Portugal; a U-2 flight to the edge of space; bullfighting; being shot point-blank in a ballistics jacket, and more. Interviews include Neil Armstrong, Mario Andretti, John Glenn, Edmund Hillary, Roger Bannister, Grace Slick, Joe Frazier, Chuck Yeager and Edward Teller. For fun, Jim gives 170-mph rides at Daytona speedway. He's a former director at The Explorers Club.See more of Jim's work at Forbes and on his FaceBook pageGet Jim's books here on AmazonSupport this Podcast:  buy me a coffeeHosted by Michael J. ReinhartMichaelJReinhart.com   Whiskey and a Map:  Stories of Adventure and Exploration.  #space #JamesClash #biggestwaves #supersonicflight

Quick Summary: The program focused on discussing space architecture developments over the past 18 years, including the impact of reduced launch costs and the current state of lunar mission initiatives. The conversation covered technical details of lunar construction projects, including power requirements, reactor deployment, and the development of construction equipment and materials for moon bases. The discussion concluded with an overview of funding sources, regulatory challenges, and educational programs related to lunar exploration, emphasizing the importance of NASA partnerships and commercial opportunities in space infrastructure development. Joining us in the program were John Jossy, John Hunt, Bill Gowan, Marshall Martin, and Dr. Ajay Kotari.David and Sam discussed the significant changes in space architecture over the past 18 years since he was first a guest on The Space Show. Sam highlighted the reduction in launch costs as a key enabler. Sam explained his focus on using plant material for industrial processes like 3D printing on the moon. The discussion concluded with an overview of upcoming Space Show programs and a reminder about listener-supported fundraising efforts including Substack subscriptions.Sam discussed the significant impact of reduced launch costs on space exploration, highlighting SpaceX's role in this development. He expressed concerns about the U.S. lagging behind China in lunar missions and emphasized the importance of maintaining a strong pace in space leadership. Sam also detailed Astroport's efforts to build moon ports, including the development of a 15-acre testbed in Midland, Texas (west Texas) to simulate lunar conditions for testing construction and engineering techniques. He stressed the need for further research into civil engineering and geotechnics for moon base construction, as well as the importance of cargo complement and autonomous construction technology.We talked quite a bit about landing pads and Sam showed creative videos of their lunar development, construction and land pad plans via Zoom screen sharing. Sam explained that while the Artemis III landing pad is planned for the 2030s, their fusion surface power program might require building the power reactor foundation first, which would involve bringing construction equipment in the first landing. They are developing a brick bot as a technology demonstrator to be launched by 2028, and while they have some interface with Starship, they are not directly working with them. Sam emphasized the importance of standardized containerized cargo for logistics, Our Space Show program team asked about the power requirements for various tasks, noting that NASA mentions 100 kilowatts but questioning if more power would be needed for activities like sintering regolith and building roads.Sam also explained the power requirements for their lunar construction project, noting that while 20 kilowatts is sufficient for brickmaking, more power is needed for other tasks. He described plans to use portable solar power towers to generate energy for rovers and construction equipment, with potential suppliers including Astrobotic and Honeybee. Our guest also emphasized that they would act as general contractors, subcontracting various components to partners like Astrobotic for mobility platforms and other utilities. He concluded by showing an additional video of the construction layout and deployment process for the reactor and associated equipment.We discussed the development of lunar landing pads give I asked him to describe one in detail. Sam said that they would be 100 meters in diameter with a 50-meter target landing area and a 25-meter apron. He described the construction materials, including interlocking bricks that are 50 millimeters thick, and highlighted challenges in creating bricks in a vacuum environment due to outgassing. He also presented their work on material science, including the use of biomass to create 3D-printed tiles and the development of an excavator with interchangeable implements for lunar construction.Our guest explained the system architecture for a brick-making demonstration on the moon, aiming to combine multiple processes into one platform to create bricks in a vacuum by 2028. He described a subscale vibrating compactor being developed and its power requirements. The group discussed the layout for a lunar base, including the need to place a nuclear reactor over a kilometer away from the habitation zone for radiation protection and to prevent blast effects from affecting assets. John Jossy questioned why the initial landing couldn't be closer to the reactor site, but Sam clarified that the initial landing would be automated and not intended for return, with the goal of establishing a permanent outpost. Radiation exposure was a reason and safety measure were being carefully planned and designed into the project.The team discussed the logistics of deploying a nuclear reactor and associated equipment on the moon, focusing on the challenges of cargo capacity and the need to bring multiple pieces of equipment for both the reactor and landing pad construction. They explored options for power transmission, including the possibility of wireless power transmission, and discussed additional radiation protection measures, with Marshall suggesting the use of topology and walls to shield the reactor. Sam mentioned their work on the Lido mission in the Marius Hills area, which includes developing technologies for accessing and utilizing lava tubes, though these are not currently present at the South Pole site being considered.I asked about his sources o funding and if he was already generating revenue. Sam explained that Astroport is funded through NASA contracts and DOD contracts, with revenue generated through R&D, and they are preparing for Phase 3 funding next year. The team discussed reactor options, with John Hunt suggesting a pebble bed reactor, and Sam noted they will follow NASA's chosen provider for the reactor. I inquired about his regulatory issues and challenges for putting equipment on the Moon and developing it much like the development of a large r/e project here on Earth. Sam mentioned regulatory and legal challenges for lunar operations, including the need for state government sanction and licensing, while John Hunt raised concerns about radiation exposure during human landings, which our guest suggested could be addressed by shutting down the reactor temporarily.Sam discussed the progress and challenges of developing lunar infrastructure in collaboration with Orbit Fab, focusing on water supply and fuel processing. He highlighted the need for further research on lunar dust impact on machinery and potential partnerships with humanoid robotic companies.Before concluding, I asked Sam to discuss his nonprofit WEX Foundation for middle school stem programs. I also stated I would like to do a separate Space Show program focused on WEX. Sam shared insights into the WEX Foundation's STEM education program, which aims to engage middle school students in space exploration. Listen to the program which he described in some detail.Our discussion concluded with a conversation about the logistics and funding of lunar missions, with Sam emphasizing the importance of NASA as an anchor customer and the potential for commercial customers in the future.Special thanks to our sponsors:Northrup Grumman, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Helix Space in Luxembourg, Celestis Memorial Spaceflights, Astrox Corporation, Dr. Haym Benaroya of Rutgers University, The Space Settlement Progress Blog by John Jossy, The Atlantis Project, and Artless EntertainmentOur Toll Free Line for Live Broadcasts: 1-866-687-7223 (Not in service at this time)For real time program participation, email Dr. Space at: drspace@thespaceshow.com for instructions and access.The Space Show is a non-profit 501C3 through its parent, One Giant Leap Foundation, Inc. To donate via Pay Pal, use:To donate with Zelle, use the email address: david@onegiantleapfoundation.org.If you prefer donating with a check, please make the check payable to One Giant Leap Foundation and mail to:One Giant Leap Foundation, 11035 Lavender Hill Drive Ste. 160-306 Las Vegas, NV 89135Upcoming Programs:Upcoming ShowsBroadcast 4448 ZOOM Dr. Mike Gruntman | Tuesday 21 Oct 2025 700PM PTGuests: Dr. Mike GruntmanZoom: Mike talks about his new book, “Neil Armstrong at USC and on the Moon”Broadcast 4449: Hotel Mars with Homer Hickam | Wednesday 22 Oct 2025 930AM PTGuests: John Batchelor, Dr. David Livingston, Homer HickamHome Hickam is the Hotel Mars guest this weekBroadcast 4450 ZOOM Phil Swan | Friday 24 Oct 2025 930AM PTGuests: Phil SwanZoom: Phil talks about going to Mars with kinetic energyBroadcast 4451 Zoom OPEN LINES | Saturday 25 Oct 2025 1200PM PTGuests: Dr. David Livingston, The Space Show Zoom Team & Zoom callersZOOM Open Lines discussion Get full access to The Space Show-One Giant Leap Foundation at doctorspace.substack.com/subscribe

Bart Sibrel is an American conspiracy theorist and filmmaker known for his belief that the Apollo Moon landings were faked. He is a prominent figure in the moon-landing denial movement and has produced several films promoting this idea. Sibrel's major claims and activitiesFilms: Sibrel's most notable works are the films A Funny Thing Happened on the Way to the Moon (2001) and Astronauts Gone Wild: An Investigation Into the Authenticity of the Moon Landings (2004). In these pseudo-documentaries, he uses what he claims is "leaked" NASA footage and other supposed inconsistencies to argue the landings were staged.Confronting astronauts: As part of his investigations, Sibrel has repeatedly accosted and confronted Apollo astronauts, including Buzz Aldrin, Neil Armstrong, and Eugene Cernan. He would ask them to swear on a Bible that they walked on the Moon.The Buzz Aldrin incident: In 2002, outside a hotel in Beverly Hills, Sibrel confronted Buzz Aldrin and called him "a coward and a liar and a thief" for not swearing on the Bible. Aldrin responded by punching Sibrel in the face, an incident that gained significant media attention. No criminal charges were filed against Aldrin.Underlying claims: Sibrel points to various discredited claims to support his theory, including:Inconsistencies in shadows: He has claimed that shadows in Apollo photographs are not parallel, which he says indicates multiple light sources in a studio setting. This ignores the scattering and reflection of light from the lunar surface.Radiation from the Van Allen belt: Sibrel argues that astronauts could not have survived the trip through the intense radiation of the Van Allen belt. In reality, the Apollo crew passed through the belts in a relatively short period, and their exposure was well within safe limits.Technological limitations: He alleges that 1960s technology was not advanced enough to land on the Moon. This claim is a key point in his films and a common argument among deniers. Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-opperman-report--1198501/support.

Ali se v mednarodni politiki 21. stoletja vlade res lahko zanašajo samo še na izsiljevanja in grožnje z uporabo sile – ali pa je druge države vendarle mogoče prepričevati tudi z znanstvenimi in umetnostnimi dosežki ter smelimi idejami?Četudi še nikoli niste bili v Združenih državah, najbrž dobro veste, kaj bi vam rekli tamkajšnji policisti, če bi vas slučajno prijeli – povedali bi vam, da ste aretirani, da imate pravico molčati in da imate pravico do odvetnika. To veste, ker ste si skozi leta ogledali kopico ameriških filmov in televizijskih serij. Pa veste, kaj bi vam v enakem položaju rekli kitajski, ruski, francoski, nemški ali, zakaj pa ne, slovenski policisti? Ne? No, če je tako, tedaj lahko rečemo, da so ameriške kriminalke izvrstno opravile svoje delo in vam približale ameriški vsakdanjik, ameriške vrednote, ameriško kulturo. In domnevati je mogoče, da smo Združenim državam, kadar lomastijo po svetovnem odru in kršijo mednarodno pravo, táko ravnanje marsikje po svetu lažje in hitreje pripravljeni spregledati ali ga opravičiti, ker nas v naših vsakdanjih življenjih pač preplavljajo ameriški filmi in glasba, ker občudujemo prebojnost ameriških vesoljskih in digitalnih tehnologij, ker zagrizeno spremljamo športne tekme v tamkajšnjih profesionalnih ligah. Temu politologi in raziskovalci mednarodnih odnosov menda rečejo mehka moč. In Združenim državam je ne primanjkuje. Ali pač? Zunanja politika druge Trumpove administracije namreč v pomembni meri temelji na grobih grožnjah najstarejšim in najbolj zvestim zaveznicam in tako se postavlja vprašanje, ali filmi in glasba res še lahko amortizirajo tesnobo ob ameriških ozemeljskih pretenzijah po Grenlandiji in Kanadi, ali res še lahko ublažijo ogorčenje ob izsiljevalskih carinah? Pa ne le to; bolj ko se namreč Trumpova administracija – tak je vsaj vtis – požvižga na ugled Združenih držav, bolj ostro se postavlja vprašanje, ali lahko ta trend izkoristijo v poglavitni ameriški tekmici in Kitajsko predstavijo kot tisočletno velesilo, ki ima svetu marsikaj ponuditi – od globoke Konfucijeve filozofske misli prek slastnih mandžurskih cmočkov do osupljivih zmogljivosti futurističnih maglev železnic? In kaj je v takih okoliščinah z mehko močjo drugih akterjev globalne politike od Rusije in Indije do Evropske unije? To so vprašanja, ki so nas zaposlovala v tokratni Intelekti, ko smo pred mikrofonom gostili sinologinjo dr. Heleno Motoh z Znanstveno-raziskovalnega središča Koper ter politologe dr. Danico Fink Hafner, dr. Ano Bojinović Fenko in dr. Jureta Požgana s Fakultete za družbene vede Univerze v Ljubljani. Foto kolaž:- Konfucij (Wikipedija, javna last)- Michael Jordan na ploetnih v Barceloni leta 1992 (Wikipedija, gapvenezia)- Panorama Šanghaja (Wikipedija, xiquinhosilva)- Hamburger (Wikipedija, hongreddotbrewhouse)- Bob Dylan, Nobelova nagrada za književnost l. 2016 (Wikipedija, Chris Hakkens)- Tradicionalni mandžurski cmočki »jiaozi« (Wikipedija, Emcc83)- Bela hiša (Wikipedija, Zach Rudisin)- Maglev vlak v Šanghaju (Wikipedija, chainwit.)- Kip svobode v New Yorku (Wikipedija, AskALotI)- Buzz Aldrin na Luni, 20. julij 1969 (Wikipedija, Neil Armstrong)- Veliki kitajski zid pri Jinshanlingu (Wikipedija, Jakub Hałun)- Hollywood, Los Angeles (Wikipedija, Thomas Wolf)- Mo Yan, Nobelova nagrada za književnost l. 2012 (Wikipedija, Johannes Kolfhaus)- Prizor z otvoritve poletnih OI v Pekingu l. 2008 (Wikipedija, Tim Hipps)- Panorama New Yorka (Wikipedija, King of Hearts)- Promocijski plakat za kitajsko video-igrico Black Myth Wukong (Wikipedija, DatBot)

What iconic line was uttered by Neil Armstrong after setting foot on the moon for the first time? Play. Share. Listen with Co-Host of Hot Mic w/ Hutton & Withrow, Chad Withrow.  Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

This is a free preview of a paid episode. To hear more, visit smokeempodcast.substack.comNancy and Sarah talk about a lightning-rod conversation between NYT podcaster Ezra Klein and award-winning writer Ta-Nehisi Coates. The two men spar on the political project of Charlie Kirk and the problem with / way forward for Democrats, and pretty much every side of the audience gets ticked off.Nancy was underwhelmed with the conversation; Sarah was reminded of private arguments she's had and sees more common ground between Coates and Kirk than either might like to believe.Also discussed:* Sarah is done with echo chambers* Coates: “I think Charlie Kirk was a hatemonger” mmmmkay* The animating fuel of hate is bipartisan* The world could use another James Baldwin* Cue Rodney King: Can't we all just get along?* Buckley-Vidal cage match!* Behold the sound of Sarah's Diet Pepsi* We are caught between real life and floating in the cloud* America, a country of spoiled children?* The ‘80s comic novel that wins every season* Sarah vs. her ring light* Nancy's mantra: “I disagree with you. Let's have dinner.”* Does Sarah look like Nicole Kidman? Her parents think so.* Pro/con: Keith Urban's hair* Baby Girl as overcompensation* That time Nancy met Nicole Kidman and became the first journalist to learn Kidman and Tom Cruise were getting divorced* Farts, snores: Human embarrassment, discussed* Is Portland a war zone? Nancy reports.* Wet panties are not a political endorsement!Plus, love for Neil Armstrong and his son, Nancy and her daughter crush on a portly CIA director, and why America has many many stories.

Welcome dear listeners, to our series of ‘Talk Haunts' – a chat that's all scary ... just for you. So, grab a hot chocolate, maybe a tea, pull up a chair … because this is Haunted UK Podcast's Talk Haunts – Exploring the Unknown with Neil Armstrong – writer, author and founder of Enigmazine – a magazine which explores the unknown and investigates the paranormal. Neil has a wealth of experience in the publishing world but alongside this he also brings a lifetime of ghostly encounters and experiences – that need to be heard …Join us as we continue our chat with Neil about his supernatural experiences plus a scary encounter with a poltergeist when he was a child, which has stayed with him throughout his life.GIVEAWAY!! Also, on Patreon right now, you could be in with a chance to win two of Neil Armstrong's fascinating books, Ghostly Encounters and Phenomenon and Time Slip Phenomenon – simply join Patreon as a free member and comment on the pinned post. The prize draw will be drawn on May 19th, 2025.Enigmazine – the magazine which explores the unknown and investigates the paranormal is  available to buy in WH Smiths, Tesco, Waitrose and Asda – you can also subscribe at Enigmazine's website.Presented by Steven Holloway and Marie WallerProduced by Pink Flamingo Home StudiosScript editor: Marie Waller Proofreading The Haunted UK Podcast has teamed up with Northumbria University who are interested in sleep paralysis. Sleep paralysis is when people wake up and are unable to move and often see vivid experiences. We would particularly like to hear from people who are over eighteen years old and have paranormal experiences during sleep paralysis.We are proud to be a part of this fantastic study, and we'd love for all of you listeners to get involved if you've had any experience with sleep paralysis ... no matter how small.Get in touch using the following links:https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/ThingsThatBumpEmma.barkus@northumbria.ac.uknick.neave@northumbria.ac.ukcontactus@hauntedukpodcast.com

Cuatro astronautas viajarán en la misión Artemis 2 de la NASA en 2026, primera tripulación en orbitar la Luna en 50 años  Por Félix Riaño @LocutorCo  Artemis 2 será la primera misión tripulada a la Luna desde 1972. La NASA quiere enviarla entre febrero y abril de 2026. Viajarán tres astronautas de Estados Unidos y uno de Canadá. Será un vuelo de 10 días en la nave Orion para orbitar la Luna sin descender. Esta misión probará sistemas de seguridad y recogerá datos que permitirán aterrizar en la superficie con Artemis 3. La NASA busca adelantarse a China en esta nueva carrera espacial. ¿Qué significa regresar después de medio siglo y por qué ahora sí quieren quedarse?  Han pasado más de cinco décadas desde que Neil Armstrong dio el primer paso en la Luna. Desde entonces, ningún ser humano ha vuelto a viajar tan lejos. Ahora, la NASA se prepara para Artemis 2, un vuelo tripulado que orbitará nuestro satélite entre febrero y abril de 2026. Será un viaje de 10 días con cuatro astronautas: tres estadounidenses y un canadiense. La misión no aterrizará, pero pondrá a prueba la nave Orion y el cohete SLS, esenciales para futuros viajes. Esta misión también es parte de una competencia global: China tiene previsto alunizar con su propio programa antes de 2030. ¿Estamos entrando en una nueva carrera lunar? Artemis es el nombre que la NASA eligió para su programa lunar. Se llama así por la diosa griega de la Luna, hermana gemela de Apolo. El nombre conecta directamente con el recuerdo de los viajes Apolo de los años sesenta y setenta. Artemis 1, en 2022, fue la primera prueba: un vuelo no tripulado que verificó el funcionamiento del cohete SLS y la cápsula Orion. Aunque hubo fallas en el escudo térmico, los ingenieros corrigieron los problemas. Ahora Artemis 2 será la primera misión con humanos. Durante 10 días, la tripulación practicará maniobras de comunicación, verificará sistemas de soporte vital y observará la Luna desde órbita. No habrá alunizaje, pero este paso es indispensable para que Artemis 3, planeada para 2027, ponga de nuevo pies humanos sobre la superficie lunar.  El regreso humano a la Luna no ocurre en un vacío científico. Tiene un fuerte componente geopolítico. En los años sesenta la competencia fue con la Unión Soviética. Hoy la rivalidad es con China, que avanza con rapidez. Pekín ha diseñado un plan claro: usar su nave Mengzhou para orbitar la Luna, un módulo llamado Lanyue para descender y un cohete CZ-10 para lanzar estas piezas al espacio. Planea probar ese cohete en 2027 y enviar su primera misión tripulada con alunizaje antes de 2030. Además, han desarrollado el traje Wanu y un explorador lunar llamado Tano para dar movilidad a sus astronautas. Todo esto muestra que China quiere establecer presencia en el satélite, no como visita breve, sino como primer paso hacia bases permanentes. Estados Unidos no quiere perder la delantera, pero la presión por llegar primero genera tensiones dentro de la NASA: algunos funcionarios han advertido que acelerar puede poner en riesgo la seguridad de los astronautas. ¿Vale más la política que la vida humana?  La NASA insiste en que Artemis 2 será segura. Tras las fallas de Artemis 1, los ingenieros cambiaron la trayectoria de reentrada para reducir el estrés en el escudo térmico. Los cuatro astronautas —Reid Wiseman, Victor Glover, Christina Koch y Jeremy Hansen— han entrenado años para enfrentar cualquier emergencia, desde un corte de comunicaciones hasta fallas en motores o problemas de salud en pleno vuelo. El plan es que Artemis 2 demuestre que la cápsula Orion y el cohete SLS están listos para misiones más largas. Mientras tanto, el calendario aprieta: China se prepara para su propio alunizaje con el CZ-10 antes de 2030. Si Artemis 2 sale bien, Estados Unidos podría mantener la ventaja con Artemis 3 en 2027, donde sí habrá descenso. Pero lo más importante es que ambas potencias están pensando en lo mismo: establecer bases permanentes en la Luna que servirán como plataformas de lanzamiento hacia Marte. Esa visión cambia por completo el sentido de la exploración espacial.  El valor de Artemis 2 no se mide solo en lo que haga en órbita lunar. La nave llevará experimentos médicos para estudiar cómo el espacio profundo afecta a los astronautas: se tomarán muestras de sangre y saliva para medir hormonas, densidad ósea y masa muscular. Además, los astronautas vivirán diez días en un espacio muy reducido, equivalente al de una furgoneta grande, lo que servirá para evaluar efectos psicológicos del aislamiento. Orion también llevará chips biológicos llamados AVATARs, con tejidos humanos en miniatura para analizar los efectos de la radiación cósmica. Mientras tanto, China planea que su módulo Lanyue permita estancias cortas en la superficie, con la ayuda del explorador Tano. Allí buscarán agua, analizarán el suelo y probarán nuevas tecnologías. Estados Unidos apuesta por ir paso a paso, primero orbitando y luego alunizando. China, en cambio, busca llegar directo al objetivo: un alunizaje en menos de cinco años. Esta diferencia de estrategias muestra que el siglo XXI tendrá una Luna compartida, donde la cooperación o la competencia decidirán el futuro.  Artemis 2 será el primer viaje tripulado a la Luna en más de 50 años. Aunque no habrá alunizaje, será la base para futuros asentamientos lunares. China también prepara su llegada con la nave Mengzhou, el módulo Lanyue y el cohete CZ-10 antes de 2030. El futuro de la Luna ya no es ciencia ficción: será escenario de cooperación o competencia. Te invito a seguir y comentar este pódcast en Flash Diario.  En 2026 Artemis 2 orbitará la Luna. China prepara su propio alunizaje antes de 2030 con nuevas naves, trajes y exploradores.  

GS#436&437 May 13, 2014. Robert Trent Jones Sr. is regarded as the most historically significant golf architect of the 20th century. The fabric of golf in America - possibly the world - is embodied in the extraordinary career of Robert Trent Jones Sr. in golf course design. In this conversation with New York Times bestselling author and internationally distinguished historian James R. Hansen, he shares the compelling life story of the man who designed or redesigned a staggering 400+ courses spread over 43 U.S. states and 27 other nations, including instantly recognizable names as Spyglass Hill in California, and Ballybunion in Ireland.  James R. Hansen is a Professor of History at Auburn University in Alabama, a lifelong golfer, and his first book in 2005 "First Man" is the only authorized biography of astronaut Neil Armstrong.This episode is brought to you by BreakfastBalls.Golf. Visit BreakfastBalls.Golf for the best quality and pricing on premium used golf balls. Find your favorite brand at half the price of new balls!  Use GOLFSMARTER at checkout for 20% off your order!Check out "Invested in the Game", a new original podcast from Charles Schwab. This podcast is their way of sharing the incredible stories behind the game. Listen now at schwab.com/TheGame or wherever you get your podcasts.This episode is sponsored by Indeed. Please visit indeed.com/GOLFSMARTER and get a $75 SPONSORED JOB CREDIT. Terms and conditions apply. This episode is sponsored by HIMS. Start your free online visit today HIMS.com/golfsmarter and received personalized ED treatment options.   This episode is also brought to you by Policygenius. Secure your family's future with Policygenius. Head to policygenius.com to compare free life insurance quotes from top companies and see how much you could save.If you have a question about whether or not Fred is using any of the methods, equipment or apps we've discussed, or if you'd like to share a comment about what you've heard in this or any other episode, please write because Fred will get back to you. Either write to golfsmarterpodcast@gmail.com or click on the Hey Fred button, at golfsmarter.com

Der erste Mensch im Weltraum? Juri Gagarin. Der erste Mensch auf dem Mond? Neil Armstrong. Die jeweils Zweiten – German Titow und Buzz Aldrin – sind dagegen weitgehend unbekannt. Titow absolvierte im August 1961 den ersten „richtigen“ Weltraumflug. Lorenzen, Dirk www.deutschlandfunk.de, Sternzeit

In this episode, join Rabbi Ori Strum on a journey to the moon…well sort of. You will be amazed at the connection between the Avodah of Elul, and Neil Armstrong's famous line as he took those first few steps in the moon: “That's one small step for man, a giant leap for mankind.”Small steps really do matter. A lot!#jewishthought #judaism #torah #moon #elul #shofar #inspiration #smallstepstosuccess #armstrong

  Some people don't believe the Holocaust actually happened or that Neil Armstrong walked on the moon. And some people don't believe that 26 children and adults were massacred at Sandy Hook Elementary school in 2012. And the man best known for creating the Sandy Hook conspiracy is conflict entrepreneur and InfoWars star, Alex Jones, who called the massacre a “fake” and a “hoax.” Josh Koskoff, the lawyer for the families of the Sandy Hook victims, who obtained a $73 million settlement, also brought a successful legal action against Jones, who profited from the false narrative he created. Jones is a skilled communicator who knows how to communicate to a certain core of people who see him as the sole truth teller and everyone else as part of the deep state. Jones isn't short on charisma, and he isn't short on showmanship. The InfoWars stage is flashy and has a high tech look. If you didn't know better, you would think you were looking at a legitimate major news broadcast system. Trial testimony showed that Jones relied on a business model that was based on building a belief system with his audience so that he could sell a variety of products—male enhancements, t-shirts and more. He's a master at seducing people with his talk so that he can get them to buy his wares. Jones couldn't stop talking about Sandy Hook because of the amount of traffic it drove to his store. Not surprising, Jones monetized the trial. After every day in court, Jones would be on InfoWars, making belittling comments about the court. Of course, those comments would be used in court against Jones the following day.Jones created harm beyond his lies. It wasn't unusual for his listeners to accost the families of the victims in public and accuse them of pretending to have lost a child.

Send us a textIn this episode, the boys present another of their popular Dynamite Conspiracies episodes, in which Tayo is presented with new evidence about the moon landings and seems to cast doubt on whether we actually sent manned missions to the moon, due to statements made by NASA and Elon Musk. But does he change Tayo's mind or not? Is the new evidence compelling enough?But what are your thoughts on this topic?Do you agree with Tony and Tayo on this?Or do you have other thoughts?Links used during the show:-https://youtu.be/PllP0o41rqE-https://youtu.be/C4i8VPiyFvw-https://www.chem.purdue.edu/history/helium.html-https://www.nasa.gov/wp-content/uploads/static/history/alsj/a11/Apollo_11_TV_Tapes_Report.pdf-https://www.planetary.org/space-policy/nasa-budgetTune in and listen to the discussion. Please share your thoughts on these subjects.Although we greatly prefer effusive praise

"it took me a year to get an interview with astronaut Neil Armstrong"

Chas Fagan talks about being self-taught, researching subjects, incorporating history, Portraits of US Presidents & Barbara Bush US Stamp, The Pursuit of Happiness, memories, stories, art, sculptures 

John Wolfram joined the US Navy in 1967 and graduated from Underwater Demolition Training in Coronado, California in May 1968. As a Navy frogman, he was twice deployed to the war in Vietnam, where he received a Purple Heart from a leg wound inflicted during battle with the Viet Cong. John assisted in the Apollo 10 astronaut and space recovery and was the first frogman in the water to rescue Apollo 11 astronauts Neil Armstrong, Buzz Aldrin and Michael Collins after their historical moon landing. John is the author of Splashdown, The Rescue of a Navy Frogman first published in 2008. He is now involved in missions work around the world, with special interest in the country of Vietnam. In 2018 he raised funds to build a Memorial Bible College in central Vietnam to honor five fallen SEAL teammates and three home town friends. Find out more about John here:https://www.johnwolfram.com/See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

This Day in Legal History: Apollo 11On July 24, 1969, the Apollo 11 mission concluded when astronauts Neil Armstrong, Buzz Aldrin, and Michael Collins safely splashed down in the Pacific Ocean, returning from the first successful lunar landing. While the event was widely celebrated as a scientific and political triumph, it also raised an unexpectedly terrestrial legal issue: customs law. Upon returning to Earth, the astronauts were required to fill out a standard U.S. Customs declaration form. The departure point was listed as “Moon,” and the flight number: “Apollo 11.” Among the items declared were “moon rock and moon dust samples,” brought back from the lunar surface.Despite their unprecedented journey, the crew still had to comply with Department of Agriculture and Customs rules designed to monitor and control potentially hazardous biological materials. In the “Declaration of Health” section of the form, they noted that the presence of any condition that could spread disease was “To be determined.” This moment captured how U.S. law, even in its most routine forms, extended to the edge of human experience.The astronauts' re-entry into the U.S. technically triggered the same legal processes that greet travelers arriving from abroad. This event also underscored the broader legal challenge of adapting existing statutes to cover entirely new domains like space travel. Though humorous in hindsight, the customs declaration reflected a serious concern: whether extraterrestrial material might carry unknown biological risks.The completed form, now a historical artifact, reminds us that legal frameworks often evolve reactively. In 1969, space law was largely uncharted territory. Today, those early steps form part of the foundation for international agreements like the Outer Space Treaty and modern debates over resource rights beyond Earth.The U.S. Supreme Court granted President Donald Trump the authority to remove three Democratic members of the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC), reversing a lower court ruling that had temporarily blocked the dismissals. The CPSC was established by Congress in 1972 as an independent agency to protect the public from hazardous products, and its members were traditionally shielded from at-will removal by the president. The justices, in a brief unsigned order, suggested that Trump was likely to prevail in arguing that the Constitution gives him broad authority to remove executive officials, even from agencies Congress meant to be independent.This move followed a June ruling by District Judge Matthew Maddox, who sided with the ousted commissioners, citing a 1935 Supreme Court precedent (Humphrey's Executor v. United States) that upheld removal protections for independent agency officials. The Supreme Court's majority, with all three liberal justices dissenting, appeared to undermine that precedent. Justice Elena Kagan's dissent warned that using the Court's emergency docket to erode agency independence risked shifting constitutional power toward the presidency.The fired commissioners, whose terms extended through 2025 to 2028, had sued Trump, arguing their removal lacked legal justification. Their attorney, Nicolas Sansone, criticized the Court's decision as harmful to public safety oversight. The Justice Department, however, contended that limiting the president's removal power was unconstitutional.This decision echoes a similar ruling in May allowing Trump to remove members of other federal boards, reinforcing a pattern of the Court endorsing expanded executive control over federal agencies.US Supreme Court lets Trump remove consumer product safety commissioners | ReutersSupreme Court Lets Trump Oust Top Consumer-Safety Officials - BloombergU.S. District Judge Julien Xavier Neals withdrew a June 30 opinion in a securities fraud case against CorMedix Inc. after attorneys pointed out significant factual and legal errors. Lawyers flagged that the opinion included invented quotes, misattributed statements, and references to non-existent or misidentified cases. Among the problems was a supposed quote from Dang v. Amarin Corp. about “classic evidence of scienter,” which does not appear in the actual case, as well as misquoted content from a case involving Intelligroup and a fabricated citation to a Verizon case in the Southern District of New York.The withdrawn opinion had denied CorMedix's motion to dismiss a shareholder lawsuit alleging the company misled investors about its FDA approval efforts for the drug DefenCath. CorMedix's counsel, Andrew Lichtman of Willkie Farr & Gallagher, raised concerns but clarified he wasn't seeking reconsideration, only correction of the record. The same opinion had been cited as persuasive authority in a separate but similar shareholder lawsuit against Outlook Therapeutics Inc., before being discredited due to its inaccuracies.The incident drew attention not just for the mistakes themselves, but because judicial errors of this nature are rare—especially when resembling the kind of AI-generated errors that have recently led to lawyer sanctions. There is no indication AI was involved in drafting Judge Neals' opinion, but the situation reflects heightened scrutiny of legal drafting in an era where reliance on technology is increasing.Judge Withdraws Pharma Opinion After Lawyer Flags Made-Up QuotesColumbia University has agreed to pay over $200 million to the U.S. government in a settlement with the Trump administration, resolving federal investigations and securing the reinstatement of most of its previously suspended federal funding. The dispute stemmed from Columbia's handling of pro-Palestinian campus protests and alleged antisemitism, which led the administration in March to freeze $400 million in grants. In addition to the main settlement, Columbia will pay $21 million to resolve claims brought by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.The agreement includes several conditions: Columbia must discipline students involved in severe campus disruptions, reform its Faculty Senate, review its international admissions process, and overhaul its Middle Eastern studies programs to promote “viewpoint diversity.” The university is also required to eliminate race-based considerations in hiring and admissions and to dismantle its diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) programs.Columbia has agreed to appoint two new administrators: one to oversee compliance with the settlement and another to address antisemitism. The university has also severed ties with the pro-Palestinian group Columbia University Apartheid Divest and adopted a new definition of antisemitism that equates it with opposition to Zionism—moves that have sparked backlash among students and faculty.Rights advocates have voiced alarm over academic freedom and due process, especially amid reports of deportation attempts against foreign pro-Palestinian students. Critics say the government is equating legitimate political protest with antisemitism, while ignoring rising Islamophobia and anti-Arab bias.Columbia University to pay over $200 million to resolve Trump probes | ReutersFrench President Emmanuel Macron and his wife, Brigitte Macron, have filed a defamation lawsuit in Delaware against U.S. right-wing podcaster Candace Owens, alleging she spread false and harmful claims about Brigitte's gender identity. The suit centers on Owens' podcast series Becoming Brigitte, which claims Brigitte was born male under the name Jean-Michel Trogneux—actually the name of her older brother—and accuses the couple of incest and identity fraud. The Macrons argue these assertions amount to a global smear campaign intended to boost Owens' profile and cause personal harm.Owens responded by labeling the lawsuit a politically motivated PR move and maintained it is an attack on her First Amendment rights. Her spokesperson framed the suit as a foreign government's attempt to silence an American journalist. The Macrons, however, stated that they had made multiple requests for a retraction, all of which Owens ignored.Defamation lawsuits by sitting world leaders are rare, and as public figures, the Macrons must meet the high legal bar of proving “actual malice”—that Owens knowingly spread falsehoods or acted with reckless disregard for the truth. The complaint also notes the rumors originated in 2021 and were amplified by other high-profile commentators like Tucker Carlson and Joe Rogan. A similar French court case involving Brigitte ended in a temporary victory, but was later overturned on appeal and is now pending before France's highest court.French president Macron sues right-wing podcaster over claim France's first lady was born male | Reuters This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

El becario Gudi estrena una nueva sección de verano en la que cada miércoles hablará con alguna persona que ha sido famosa. En esta ocasión el primer ser humano que pisó la superficie de la Luna. 

3pm: The Foreword: What’s the point? // Astonishing Scottie Scheffler press conference questioning golfing fulfilment // This Day in History // 1969 - (July 20th) Neil Armstrong walks on moon // The CEO Kiss Cam story that refuses to go away

July 21, 1969. American astronaut Neil Armstrong becomes the first person to walk on the moon. This episode originally aired in 2022.Support the show! Join Into History for ad-free listening and more.History Daily is a co-production of Airship and Noiser.Go to HistoryDaily.com for more history, daily.See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

"Why did Walt Disney borrow against his life insurance—and what does that have to do with a pink pistol, a serial butt slapper, and a college freshman named Larry?" In this wildly entertaining and insight-packed episode, Kent Hance weaves together stories that span from the moon landing to Mickey Mouse, from late-night TV to freshman orientation at Texas Tech.

  “Why did Walt Disney borrow against his life insurance—and what does that have to do with a pink pistol, a serial butt slapper, and a college freshman named Larry?” In this wildly entertaining and insight-packed episode, Kent Hance weaves together stories that span from the moon landing to Mickey Mouse, from late-night TV to freshman orientation at Texas Tech.

2025晨鐘課－每天，都是新的起點 以歷史智慧滋養生活，點亮2025每一天！ 借鑑過去，活在當下，展望未來！ 粵語廣播網站 (時兆出版社授權錄製) https://soundcloud.com/mediahk Podcast@靈修廣播站 7月20日 「有史以來最偉大的一週」 「我若從地上被舉起來，就要吸引萬人來歸我。」 約翰福音 12：32   彼時，探索宇宙的征程才剛剛起步，但在美國總統約翰．甘迺迪（John F. Kennedy）1961年發表的《就國家緊急需求致國會特別文告》中，他敦促道：「本國應致力於在這個十年結束之前，實現人類登陸月球並安全返回的目標。」 八年後的1969年7月20日，阿波羅十一號的太空人成功登陸月球。第一位在月球表面行走的尼爾．阿姆斯壯（Neil Armstrong）在描述那一刻時說： 「這是我個人的一小步，卻是人類邁出的一大步。」 7月24日，搭載著尼爾．阿姆斯壯、麥可．科林斯（Michael Collins）和伯茲．艾德林（Edwin Aldrin）的太空艙在太平洋上緊急濺落，三名太空人安全返回地球。被成功救援後，為了防止「月球細菌」污染地球，三人還在大黃蜂號航空母艦上進行了為期21天的隔離檢疫。隔著一個小玻璃窗，尼克森（Nixon）總統向他們致敬，並說：「自造物以來，這是世界歷史上最偉大的一週……正是因著你們所成就的一切，世界變得前所未有地團結。」 如今，有人認為登月是一個騙局，因為那天「從月球上傳來」的一些圖，看來像是在飛行模擬器中預先錄製的。但無論陰謀論者怎麼說，不可否認的是，阿波羅十一號完成的是一項重大的科學成就。然而，它並不像尼克森總統所頌揚的那樣重要。它永遠無法與耶穌基督的受難週相提並論，因為那時整個人類的命運正岌岌可危。阿波羅十一號的確將三個人類送上了月球，但基督的十字架卻使所有人都能自由地來到上帝的面前。 阿波羅十一號的登月任務在全世界掀起了興奮與期盼的浪潮。作為一個在巴西南部長大的孩子，當時的我也急切地守在電臺旁，關注各種現場報導。但是在人類歷史上，無論是阿波羅十一號還是別的事件，都無法像基督的十字架那樣將更多的人「團結」在一起。保羅在〈哥林多後書〉第5章中告訴我們，在十字架上，「上帝在基督裡，叫世人與自己和好。」（19節）之後保羅發出呼籲：「我們替基督求你們與上帝和好。」（20節）。這是你的機會！切莫再拖延。 #媒體佈道部 #港澳區會 #聲音書 #時兆出版社 #每天，都是新的起點 #本書由時兆出版社授權刊載

Exciting Mars Mission Proposal: Discover the ambitious M Metis mission, which aims to be the first dedicated to studying Mars's space weather. Set to compete for a spot as a European Space Agency medium mission, this initiative will deploy two robotic orbiters, Henri and Marguerite, to investigate the Martian atmosphere and its interactions with solar winds. Dr. Beatrice Sanchez Cano from the University of Leicester highlights the mission's importance for future human exploration and the safety of astronauts on the Red Planet.- Unveiling the Sun's Secrets: Get ready for NASA's upcoming Solar Eruption Integral Field Spectrograph mission (SNFS), launching in July. This groundbreaking mission will explore the chromosphere, a crucial layer of the Sun's atmosphere, to understand the energy dynamics that lead to solar flares and coronal mass ejections. With innovative technology, the SNFS will provide unprecedented insights into solar activity and its effects on space weather.- Boeing's Starliner Update: We discuss the latest challenges faced by Boeing's Starliner capsule, which recently returned from its Crew Flight Test. After encountering multiple issues, including helium leaks and thruster failures, the timeline for its next launch has shifted to early 2026. NASA and Boeing are implementing rigorous evaluations and improvements to ensure the spacecraft's reliability for future missions.- A Glimpse into Apollo 11's History: Take a fascinating look at the personal mementos carried by Neil Armstrong during the historic Apollo 11 mission. Detailed manifests of these items have been made public, offering a unique insight into the personal side of this monumental achievement. The items are now preserved at Purdue University, connecting us to the legacy of space exploration.For more cosmic updates, visit our website at astronomydaily.io. Join our community on social media by searching for #AstroDailyPod on Facebook, X, YouTube Music, TikTok, and our new Instagram account! Don't forget to subscribe to the podcast on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, iHeartRadio, or wherever you get your podcasts.Thank you for tuning in. This is Anna signing off. Until next time, keep looking up and stay curious about the wonders of our universe.✍️ Episode ReferencesM Metis Mission[European Space Agency](https://www.esa.int/)Solar Eruption Integral Field Spectrograph[NASA](https://www.nasa.gov/)Boeing Starliner Update[Boeing](https://www.boeing.com/)Apollo 11 Items[Purdue University](https://www.purdue.edu/)Astronomy Daily[Astronomy Daily](http://www.astronomydaily.io/)Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/astronomy-daily-space-news-updates--5648921/support.

Welcher Europäer, welche Europäerin wird als erste(r) zum Mond fliegen? 56 Jahre ist es her, dass erstmals Menschen den Mond betreten haben: Am 20. Juli 1969 stiegen Neil Armstrong und Buzz Aldrin aus ihrer Landefähre "Eagle" hinunter auf die staubige Oberfläche. Den nächsten bemannten Flug zum Mond plant die NASA für Mitte 2027. Es wäre die erste Landung von Astronauten seit 1972. Für Europa ist auch der Deutsche Alexander Gerst ein möglicher Kandidat für einen Flug zum Erdtrabanten. In diesem Podcast fragen wir ihn, was ihn an einer solchen Mission reizt. Und was er tut, um diesem Traum näherzukommen. Credits: Host in dieser Folge ist Stefan Geier. Redaktion: David Globig Technik: Hellmuth Nordwig Unsere Gesprächspartner: Alexander Gerst, ESA-Astronaut https://www.esa.int/Space_in_Member_States/Germany/Alexander_Gerst Josef Aschbacher, Generaldirektor der ESA https://www.esa.int/Space_in_Member_States/Germany/Josef_Aschbacher_ESA-Generaldirektor Zum Weiterhören: Hier könnt Ihr das komplette Gespräch mit dem ESA-Generaldirektor Josef Aschbacher hören: ESA-Chef Joseph Aschbacher - Was die europäische Raumfahrt jetzt tun muss https://www.ardaudiothek.de/episode/urn:ard:episode:7e0b4e7fc7d2703b/ Zum Weiterlesen: Alles zum ARTEMIS-Programm der NASA findet Ihr hier: https://www.nasa.gov/humans-in-space/artemis/ Und alles zur Beteiligung der ESA an den Artemis Missionen gibt es hier https://www.esa.int/Science_Exploration/Human_and_Robotic_Exploration/Orion/Artemis_I Wir freuen uns über Post von Euch: WhatsApp (https://wa.me/491746744240) oder iq@br.de Falls Euch der IQ-Podcast gefällt, freuen wir uns über eine gute Bewertung, einen freundlichen Kommentar und ein Abo. Und wenn Ihr unseren Podcast unterstützen wollt, empfehlt uns gerne weiter! IQ verpasst? Hier könnt ihr die letzten Folgen hören: https://www.ardaudiothek.de/sendung/iq-wissenschaft-und-forschung/5941402

Dean Regas chats with Mark Armstrong, son of Neil Armstrong, about the Apollo 11 moon landing. Listen in to learn about Mark's upbringing under the lunar spotlight, and his current work with the Vantage Earth Foundation.

Hej, 56 lat temu, w lipcu, człowiek – oficjalnie – postawił stopę na Księżycu. Neil Armstrong wypowiedział wtedy słynne słowa, które zna chyba każdy: „To mały krok dla człowieka, ale ogromny skok dla ludzkości.” Niezależnie od teorii, które później podważały prawdziwość tamtych wydarzeń, nie ulega wątpliwości, że to Amerykanie wygrali kosmiczny wyścig z ZSRR. O ile misja Apollo 11 wzbudza kontrowersje, o tyle sześć kolejnych wypraw na Srebrny Glob już zdecydowanie nie.Załogowe misje na Księżyc stały się inspiracją dla milionów Amerykanów i symbolem dominacji nad blokiem wschodnim. W najnowszym odcinku opisuję księżycową ścieżkę człowieka. Mam wrażenie, że w przestrzeni medialnej wciąż brakuje informacji o przebiegu programu Apollo i kolejnych lądowaniach na Srebrnym Globie. Uważam, że lądowanie na Księżycu było jednym z najważniejszych wydarzeń zimnej wojny. Jeśli jesteście ciekawi, jak doszło do tego, że człowiek stanął na Księżycu, zapraszam Was do obejrzenia odcinka! Nie ukrywam, że przyczynkiem do jego realizacji była kosmiczna misja naszego rodaka, Sławosza Uznańskiego-Wiśniewskiego.

In Folge 133 feiern wir ein zweites Mal unseren 5. Geburtstag! Nachdem wir in der ersten Partyfolge in die Vergangenheit geschaut haben, reden wir jetzt darüber, was das Jahr 2030 bringen wird. Nämlich coole neue Missionen zur Venus. Und coole neue Teleskope! Evi hat einen zweiten Geburtstagsfilm mitgebracht: “Das fünfte Element”. Und am Ende gibt es galaktische Geschenke. Wenn ihr uns unterstützen wollt, könnt ihr das hier tun: https://www.paypal.com/paypalme/PodcastDasUniversum Oder hier: https://steadyhq.com/de/dasuniversum Oder hier: https://www.patreon.com/dasuniversum

They filmed it in a studio. Stanley Kubrick directed it. And you've been living the lie for over 50 years. July 20, 1969. The entire world watched in awe as Neil Armstrong took "one small step for man, one giant leap for mankind." Except he never left Earth. What you witnessed wasn't human achievement—it was the most expensive movie ever made, funded by your tax dollars and orchestrated by the same government that convinced you they could be trusted with the truth. You've seen the "evidence." The waving flag in a vacuum. The missing stars in the photographs. The identical lighting angles that should be impossible. The Van Allen radiation belts that should have killed every astronaut. The perfect television broadcast from 240,000 miles away using 1960s technology. But they told you to ignore your eyes, ignore physics, ignore common sense. They called you a conspiracy theorist for asking obvious questions. In this explosive documentary examination, we dissect the most audacious lie in human history—and reveal exactly how they pulled it off. This isn't just about the moon landing. This is about discovering that your entire understanding of government honesty, scientific integrity, and media truth has been built on the biggest fraud ever conceived. The smoking gun evidence is overwhelming. NASA's own technical documents prove the technology didn't exist. The photographic analysis reveals studio lighting and impossible shadows. The video footage shows clear evidence of wires, slow-motion filming, and set construction. But most damning of all: the government's own scientists admitted privately that the mission was impossible with available technology. We'll expose how they used the Cold War as cover for the greatest propaganda operation in history. How they recruited Hollywood's best to create convincing footage. How they silenced astronauts who wanted to tell the truth. How they murdered witnesses who threatened to expose the deception. And most shocking of all: how they've continued the lie for decades, building an entire space program mythology on a foundation of fraudulent footage. But here's the real question: if they could fake the moon landing so convincingly that most people still believe it today, what else have they faked? What other "historic achievements" were actually staged productions? What other impossible claims have you accepted without question? The moon landing hoax wasn't just about beating the Russians. It was about proving they could make you believe anything. It was about testing the limits of mass deception. It was about discovering that with enough repetition, enough authority, enough ridicule of skeptics, they could make an entire planet accept the impossible as fact. Every time you've been called crazy for questioning official narratives, remember this: they convinced the world that 1960s technology could safely transport humans through deadly radiation, land on the moon, and broadcast perfect television signals back to Earth. If they could sell that lie, they can sell any lie. The astronauts know. The engineers know. The directors know. The politicians know. They've all been keeping the secret for over 50 years because admitting the truth would destroy the last shred of faith in government honesty. But truth has a way of surfacing. And brave investigators who refuse to accept impossible claims are the reason this magnificent deception is finally crumbling.Are you ready to question everything you thought you knew about human achievement? Because once you see the evidence that the moon landing was filmed on a movie set, you'll never trust another government claim again. WARNING: This documentary presents overwhelming evidence that the Apollo moon missions were staged. The proof that humanity's greatest achievement was actually its greatest deception may fundamentally alter your trust in government and media narratives.

Maria Franzoni has booked Neil Armstrong and Liza Minnelli—and mentored hundreds of speakers in between. In this episode of Leadership NOW with Dan Pontefract, she explains what separates the truly bookable speaker from the rest, and how those same principles apply to leadership, business, and long-term impact. We explore how speaker bureaus are evolving in an AI-enabled world, what event organizers actually want, and why celebrity status means far less than clarity, value, and being frictionless to work with. Maria also walks through her new model, The Bookability Formula, and why the most successful speakers aren't always the most famous—they're the most useful. This is a masterclass in leadership positioning disguised as a conversation about keynote speaking. If you want to lead with more presence, pitch with more purpose, or build influence that lasts, you'll want to listen through to the end. Learn more: Maria Franzoni: https://www.mariafranzoni.me Dan Pontefract: https://www.danpontefract.com

Klash With Kenzie took a few different turns today. Chicago’s best morning radio show now has a podcast! Don’t forget to rate, review, and subscribe wherever you listen to podcasts and remember that the conversation always lives on the Q101 Facebook page. Brian & Kenzie are live every morning from 6a-10a on Q101. Subscribe to our channel HERE: https://www.youtube.com/@Q101 Like Q101 on Facebook HERE: https://www.facebook.com/q101chicago Follow Q101 on Twitter HERE: https://twitter.com/Q101Chicago Follow Q101 on Instagram HERE: https://www.instagram.com/q101chicago/?hl=en Follow Q101 on TikTok HERE: https://www.tiktok.com/@q101chicago?lang=enSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Broadcast from KSQD, Santa Cruz on 6-05-2025: Dr. Dawn answers an email about Dupuytren's contracture treatment, explaining her clinic experience using acupuncture anesthesia combined with Traumeel injections directly into palm nodules. She describes how this anti-inflammatory homeopathic compound, when injected into tendon sheaths, can break the cycle of fibrosis formation. Dr. Dawn explores fascinating quantum physics concepts involving collagen microstructure, water molecules, and hydrogen ion movement that may explain how acupuncture and homeopathy work through crystalline formations in collagen tubules. She discusses vitamin A's critical role in measles complications, explaining how deficiency dramatically increases risks of encephalitis and cardiac damage. Dr. Dawn covers two forms of dietary vitamin A - beta carotene from plants requiring enzymatic conversion, and vitamin A from animal products. She warns about vitamin A toxicity risks, particularly birth defects in pregnancy, while noting that typical American diets are adequate unlike vitamin D. Dr. Dawn examines vitamin D deficiency affecting 68% of children in a South Florida study, linking inadequate levels to bone health, immune function, and gut barrier integrity. She explains how vitamin D receptors throughout the body regulate cell differentiation, insulin secretion, and tight junction formation that prevents leaky gut syndrome. There are higher deficiency rates in darker-skinned populations and the historical context of rickets during industrialization when urban environments blocked sunlight exposure. She highlights revolutionary medical technology, the world's smallest pacemaker for newborns, half the size of a rice grain. This injectable device dissolves naturally after hearts self-repair, controlled by light-emitting patches communicating through the baby's skin. This breakthrough eliminates risky surgical removal procedures that caused complications, such as Neil Armstrong's death from pacemaker wire infections. Dr. Dawn discusses research showing shingles vaccination reduces dementia risk by 20%, particularly in women. She explains the natural experiment in Wales where universal healthcare created clear vaccination cutoff dates, allowing researchers to compare dementia rates. Dr. Dawn hypothesizes that cross-immunity against herpes viruses may protect brain tissue, noting even stronger protection with newer Shingrix vaccines compared to older Zostavax. She covers alarming increases in invasive Group A Streptococcus infections, with cases more than doubling from 2013 to 2022. Dr. Dawn explains how flesh-eating bacteria secretes enzymes that dissolve epithelial barriers in throats and lungs, allowing systemic spread that destroys tissue. She links rising cases to increasing diabetes and obesity rates that compromise immune function, noting devastating mortality rates approaching 10,000 deaths nationwide. Dr. Dawn celebrates a breakthrough antibiotic discovery of Lariocidin which works against highly drug-resistant bacteria through novel protein synthesis inhibition. She explains how antibiotic resistance spreads between bacterial species just like social media memes, emphasizing the urgent need for new treatments as 4 million people die annually from resistant infections. Dr. Dawn advocates for public funding since pharmaceutical companies avoid antibiotic development due to poor profit margins. She answers an email about Epstein-Barr virus detection, explaining its role in mononucleosis, Burkitt's lymphoma, and chronic fatigue syndrome. Dr. Dawn describes how EBV can remain dormant and reactivate during stress or immunocompromise, potentially triggering autoimmunity. She discusses similarities between EBV reactivation, Lyme disease, and long COVID, suggesting they may represent variations of the same inflammatory syndrome with different triggers. She explores the nocebo effect - how negative expectations worsen outcomes - and its amplification through social media. Dr. Dawn cites studies showing people warned about erectile dysfunction or altitude headaches experience these symptoms more frequently. She discusses recent phenomena like TikTok-induced tics and vaccine side effect amplification, warning that online health information creates dangerous nocebo loops that spread faster than traditional word-of-mouth.

Broadcast from KSQD, Santa Cruz on 6-05-2025: Dr. Dawn answers an email about Dupuytren's contracture treatment, explaining her clinic experience using acupuncture anesthesia combined with Traumeel injections directly into palm nodules. She describes how this anti-inflammatory homeopathic compound, when injected into tendon sheaths, can break the cycle of fibrosis formation. Dr. Dawn explores fascinating quantum physics concepts involving collagen microstructure, water molecules, and hydrogen ion movement that may explain how acupuncture and homeopathy work through crystalline formations in collagen tubules. She discusses vitamin A's critical role in measles complications, explaining how deficiency dramatically increases risks of encephalitis and cardiac damage. Dr. Dawn covers two forms of dietary vitamin A - beta carotene from plants requiring enzymatic conversion, and vitamin A from animal products. She warns about vitamin A toxicity risks, particularly birth defects in pregnancy, while noting that typical American diets are adequate unlike vitamin D. Dr. Dawn examines vitamin D deficiency affecting 68% of children in a South Florida study, linking inadequate levels to bone health, immune function, and gut barrier integrity. She explains how vitamin D receptors throughout the body regulate cell differentiation, insulin secretion, and tight junction formation that prevents leaky gut syndrome. There are higher deficiency rates in darker-skinned populations and the historical context of rickets during industrialization when urban environments blocked sunlight exposure. She highlights revolutionary medical technology, the world's smallest pacemaker for newborns, half the size of a rice grain. This injectable device dissolves naturally after hearts self-repair, controlled by light-emitting patches communicating through the baby's skin. This breakthrough eliminates risky surgical removal procedures that caused complications, such as Neil Armstrong's death from pacemaker wire infections. Dr. Dawn discusses research showing shingles vaccination reduces dementia risk by 20%, particularly in women. She explains the natural experiment in Wales where universal healthcare created clear vaccination cutoff dates, allowing researchers to compare dementia rates. Dr. Dawn hypothesizes that cross-immunity against herpes viruses may protect brain tissue, noting even stronger protection with newer Shingrix vaccines compared to older Zostavax. She covers alarming increases in invasive Group A Streptococcus infections, with cases more than doubling from 2013 to 2022. Dr. Dawn explains how flesh-eating bacteria secretes enzymes that dissolve epithelial barriers in throats and lungs, allowing systemic spread that destroys tissue. She links rising cases to increasing diabetes and obesity rates that compromise immune function, noting devastating mortality rates approaching 10,000 deaths nationwide. Dr. Dawn celebrates a breakthrough antibiotic discovery of Lariocidin which works against highly drug-resistant bacteria through novel protein synthesis inhibition. She explains how antibiotic resistance spreads between bacterial species just like social media memes, emphasizing the urgent need for new treatments as 4 million people die annually from resistant infections. Dr. Dawn advocates for public funding since pharmaceutical companies avoid antibiotic development due to poor profit margins. She answers an email about Epstein-Barr virus detection, explaining its role in mononucleosis, Burkitt's lymphoma, and chronic fatigue syndrome. Dr. Dawn describes how EBV can remain dormant and reactivate during stress or immunocompromise, potentially triggering autoimmunity. She discusses similarities between EBV reactivation, Lyme disease, and long COVID, suggesting they may represent variations of the same inflammatory syndrome with different triggers. She explores the nocebo effect - how negative expectations worsen outcomes - and its amplification through social media. Dr. Dawn cites studies showing people warned about erectile dysfunction or altitude headaches experience these symptoms more frequently. She discusses recent phenomena like TikTok-induced tics and vaccine side effect amplification, warning that online health information creates dangerous nocebo loops that spread faster than traditional word-of-mouth.

Self-consciousness. Dear Cheap Astronomy – Selfies in space. Buzz Aldrin claims to have taken the first selfie in space in 1966, where he fixed a Hasselblad camera on the hull on Gemini 12 and then leant back before triggering the camera. Later on, in 1969, Neil Armstrong took an accidental selfie – the only still photo of him on the Moon where he and his camera are reflected in Buzz Aldrin's visor.   Dear Cheap Astronomy – Is Hawking Radiation real? Long-term listeners are probably familiar with Cheap Astronomy's tendency to go a bit ranty in the face of any unreasonable acceptance of cosmology hypotheses. So, for example, the Universe is not only expanding but that expansion is accelerating. Sounds extraordinary, but there's sound observational evidence to back it up.   We've added a new way to donate to 365 Days of Astronomy to support editing, hosting, and production costs.  Just visit: https://www.patreon.com/365DaysOfAstronomy and donate as much as you can! Share the podcast with your friends and send the Patreon link to them too!  Every bit helps! Thank you! ------------------------------------ Do go visit http://www.redbubble.com/people/CosmoQuestX/shop for cool Astronomy Cast and CosmoQuest t-shirts, coffee mugs and other awesomeness! http://cosmoquest.org/Donate This show is made possible through your donations.  Thank you! (Haven't donated? It's not too late! Just click!) ------------------------------------ The 365 Days of Astronomy Podcast is produced by the Planetary Science Institute. http://www.psi.edu Visit us on the web at 365DaysOfAstronomy.org or email us at info@365DaysOfAstronomy.org.

- Un pequeño paso para el hombre, un gran salto para la humanidad, como dijo Louis Armstrong. - Tu primera tortilla sin romperla. Y es Neil Armstrong, no Louis Armstrong. En un episodio anterior de esta serie te presenté tres reglas del arte de la conversación. #7 Escoge un tema de interés mutuo. #8 Sé alguien que sabe escuchar #9 Adapta tu discurso a tu entorno Consigue el texto en mi web: Unlimitedspanish.com/410-el-arte-de-la-conversacion-4/

In this inspiring episode of American Potential, host David From is joined by Daniel Bassali, Vice President of Public Affairs for Americans for Prosperity, to discuss the launch of the One Small Step campaign—AFP's bold, nationwide effort to celebrate America's 250th anniversary by spotlighting the everyday citizens who are shaping the future of freedom. Bassali explains how One Small Step draws inspiration from iconic figures like Harriet Tubman, Betsy Ross, and Neil Armstrong—people who took action not for fame, but because it mattered. These American pioneers prove that profound change starts with a single courageous act. And today, that legacy lives on in community members testifying at city council meetings, homeschooling moms fighting for education freedom, and students like Caleb Williams who've become powerful policy advocates before the age of 21. Bassali and From explore how AFP serves as a platform to amplify these local voices, empower bottom-up solutions, and fuel a new generation of civic leadership. Whether it's helping someone write a letter to the editor or organizing grassroots momentum around school choice, every small step adds up to something greater. This episode is a rallying cry: You don't need a title or a microphone to make a difference. You just need to take the first step.

No Soap Radio - Jack Benny Visits the Apollo 11 Launch Our 7th No Soap Radio production is based on an original script written by Craig Shemin.  This Jack Benny Radio Show takes place in 1969.  Jack is invited to attend the launch of Apollo 11 which resulted in the first men walking on the moon.  All of the usual cast of characters make appearances including Mary Livingston, Dennis Day, Phil Harris, Rochester, Don Wilson, Frank Nelson, and Sheldon Leonard.   This production had its premiere at the 4th annual Jack Benny Convention in February, 2024. It was produced, directed and edited by Paul Kovit.  CAST:  Jack West as Jack Benny  Annette Bochenek as Mary Livingston  Paul Patterson as Rochester  Tony Semczuk as Frank Nelson and Sheldon Leonard  Zach Eastman as Dennis Day (talking) and Michael Collins  Robert Creighton as Dennis Day (singing)  Zach Dillinger as Phil Harris  Victoria Gordon as The Airline Clerk  John Henderson as Don Wilson and Buzz Aldrin  Paul Kovit as NASA Gate Officer, Airport Announcer and Countdown Announcer  Matthew Merback as Kodak Spokesman and Neil Armstrong  

Michelle Lucas knows what it means to chart your own course—especially when the stars aren't clearly mapped. In this heartfelt conversation, Michelle recounts her unexpected trajectory from a third-grader dreaming about rockets in a refrigerator box “space station” to becoming a NASA flight controller and the founder of Higher Orbits, a nonprofit bringing students' experiments to actual space. Beth and Michelle explore how childhood curiosity, persistent grit, and a few key mentors launched Michelle into the heart of space exploration—and how she's now using that same passion to light the path for others. Beth and Michelle unpack the realities of navigating NASA's culture, what safety really looks like behind the scenes, and how working in space changed Michelle's approach to life on Earth. Oh, and don't miss a fun connection Beth and Michelle laugh about:  a wax-molded space shuttle from Chicago's Museum of Science and Industry. More About Michelle Lucas: Michelle is the founder of Higher Orbits, a nonprofit organization that uses spaceflight to excite and engage students in STEM, leadership, teamwork, and communication. Before launching Higher Orbits, Michelle served in multiple roles at NASA, including flight controller, instructor, and safety team member. She's a lifelong space enthusiast who believes deeply in mentoring the next generation of explorers—and still proudly owns a cassette tape of her first astronaut shoutout from space. If you're in the Chicagoland area, you can meet Michelle at the Galactic Golf Outing on May 13—a fundraiser where you can literally tee off with astronauts to support Higher Orbits' mission. (Bonus: It's hosted at the Glenn Club, once home to Neil Armstrong's naval station.) Connect with Michelle and support student STEM dreams at higherorbits.org. If you enjoyed this episode and would like to share, I'd love to hear it!  We're sending stories to space AND sea! Launching MISSION 05 this week, and you'll want to make sure you have a place on board- www.storiesofspace.com  Join me and our guests for all of our conversations and stories at: LinkedIn - @casualspacepodcast Facebook - @casualspacepodcast Instagram - @casualspacepodcast YouTube - @casualspacepodcast83 or email me at beth@casualspacepodcast.com.  

Welcome dear listeners, to our series of ‘Talk Haunts' – a chat that's all scary ... just for you. So, grab a hot chocolate, maybe a tea, pull up a chair … because this is Haunted UK Podcast's Talk Haunts – Exploring the Unknown with Neil Armstrong – writer, author and founder of Enigmazine – a magazine which explores the unknown and investigates the paranormal. Neil has a wealth of experience in the publishing world but alongside this he also brings a lifetime of ghostly encounters and experiences – that need to be heard …Join us as we chat with Neil about his supernatural experiences plus a recent ghostly encounter which ultimately saved his life. Listen as we discuss with Neil the whole gamut of supernatural phenomena from time slips to Cannock Chase to Bigfoot to death bed visions – you won't want to miss this – and there's so much content, so many stories that it comes as a glorious two-parter! Enjoy!!Also, on Patreon right now, you could be in with a chance to win two of Neil Armstrong's fascinating books, Ghostly Encounters and Phenomenon and Time Slip Phenomenon – simply join Patreon as a free member and comment on the pinned post. The prize draw will be drawn on May 19th, 2025.Enigmazine – the magazine which explores the unknown and investigates the paranormal is available to buy in WH Smiths, Tesco, Waitrose and Asda – you can also subscribe at Enigmazine's website.Presented by Steven Holloway and Marie Waller Produced by Pink Flamingo Home Studios Script editor: Marie Waller ProofreadingThe Haunted UK Podcast has teamed up with Northumbria University who are interested in sleep paralysis. Sleep paralysis is when people wake up and are unable to move and often see vivid experiences. We would particularly like to hear from people who are over eighteen years old and have paranormal experiences during sleep paralysis.We are proud to be a part of this fantastic study, and we'd love for all of you listeners to get involved if you've had any experience with sleep paralysis ... no matter how small.Get in touch using the following links:https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/ThingsThatBumpEmma.barkus@northumbria.ac.uknick.neave@northumbria.ac.ukcontactus@hauntedukpodcast.com

Watch every episode ad-free & uncensored on Patreon: https://patreon.com/dannyjones Bart Sibrel is a filmmaker & investigative journalist who directed the films "A Funny Thing Happened on the Way to the Moon" and "Astronauts Gone Wild," and author of the book "Moon Man: The True Story of a Filmmaker on the CIA Hit List." SPONSORS https://nordvpn.com/dannyjones - Try it risk free now with a 30-day money back guarantee. https://www.bruntworkwear.com/danny - Get 10% off BRUNT with code DANNY. http://morning.ver.so/danny - Use code DANNY for 15% off your first order. https://www.magicmind.com/dannygm - Use code DANNY40 for 40% off your order. https://whiterabbitenergy.com/?ref=DJP - Use code DJP for 20% off. EPISODE LINKS https://sibrel.com FOLLOW DANNY JONES https://www.instagram.com/dannyjones https://twitter.com/jonesdanny OUTLINE 00:00 - Wernher von Braun's warning about the moon 07:27 - How CIA maintains control of Americans 12:21 - Why questioning the moon landing is offensive 22:36 - Classified moon landing footage 38:53 - Strange Apollo 10 footage 47:06 - Photos of astronauts on the moon 01:02:38 - Eyewitness confessions 01:14:37 - The Van Allen radiation belt 01:24:02 - Elon Musk on going to the moon 01:32:53 - Assaulted by astronauts 01:39:36 - NASA scientist who funded Sibrel's film 01:45:56 - The Apollo 1 fire 01:54:33 - Extreme temperatures on the moon 02:01:51 - Neil Armstrong's cryptic message 02:10:29 - Moon landing press conference 02:29:13 - Stanley Kubrick 02:34:39 - Bart Sibrel debate 02:39:00 - Google AI moon landing analysis 02:48:52 - Would disclosure destroy America? Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

“Fate has ordained that the men who went to the moon to explore in peace will stay on the moon to rest in peace.”These are the opening lines of the 'In Event of Moon Disaster' speech, written in 1969 in case the moon landing astronauts did not make it home.They were composed by President Richard Nixon's speechwriter, William Safire, who died in 2009, at the age of 79.The speech continued: “These brave men, Neil Armstrong and Edwin Aldrin, know that there is no hope for their recovery. But they also know that there is hope for mankind in their sacrifice.”Using archive from the Richard Nixon Presidential Library and NASA, Vicky Farncombe tells the story of “the speech that never was”.Eye-witness accounts brought to life by archive. Witness History is for those fascinated by the past. We take you to the events that have shaped our world through the eyes of the people who were there. For nine minutes every day, we take you back in time and all over the world, to examine wars, coups, scientific discoveries, cultural moments and much more. Recent episodes explore everything from football in Brazil, the history of the ‘Indian Titanic' and the invention of air fryers, to Public Enemy's Fight The Power, subway art and the political crisis in Georgia. We look at the lives of some of the most famous leaders, artists, scientists and personalities in history, including: visionary architect Antoni Gaudi and the design of the Sagrada Familia; Michael Jordan and his bespoke Nike trainers; Princess Diana at the Taj Mahal; and Görel Hanser, manager of legendary Swedish pop band Abba on the influence they've had on the music industry. You can learn all about fascinating and surprising stories, such as the time an Iraqi journalist hurled his shoes at the President of the United States in protest of America's occupation of Iraq; the creation of the Hollywood commercial that changed advertising forever; and the ascent of the first Aboriginal MP.(Photo: Edwin 'Buzz' Aldrin on the moon. Credit: Getty Images)

There was a time, before Neil Armstrong set foot on the moon, when some researchers believed women were better suited for space than men. In 1961, a group of female pilots—today known as the Mercury 13—quietly aced NASA's toughest astronaut tests, even outperforming the Mercury men in some areas. But with the space race heating up, their mission was grounded— but not by science. But what became of America's first female astronaut candidates?Guests: Margaret Weitekamp, chair of the space history department at the Smithsonian's National Air and Space Museum, and author of Right Stuff, Wrong Sex: America's First Women in Space Program andSpace Craze: America's Enduring Fascination with Real and Imagined Spaceflight Emily Calandrelli, engineer, author, and TV show host of Emily's Wonderlab and Xploration Outer Space