This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
Smithsonian Launches Crowdfunding Campaign to Restore Neil Armstrong’s Spacesuit
On Monday, the 46th anniversary of the Apollo 11 moon landing, the Smithsonian launched its first crowdfunding campaign they’re calling “Reboot the Suit” to conserve, digitize, and display Neil Armstrong’s spacesuit that he wore on the moon. The museum has raised over 86 percent of its $500,000 goal since the launch of the campaign.
The campaign to restore Armstrong’s suit is the first in a year-long partnership with the crowdfunding platform, Kickstarter. Museum officials hope to use the platform to target new donors to the Smithsonian Institution, which receives over $800 million in federal funds every year – about 62 percent of its $1.3 billion budget. Restoration of the suit is not covered by federal appropriated funds, hence another reason to crowdfund the project. The Smithsonian is also in the middle of a seven year, 1.5 billion fundraising campaign; however, officials do not expect their crowdfunding efforts to compete with that or other fundraising campaigns.
The Smithsonian plans to use the funds to preserve the suit, digitize it via 3D scanning, photogrammetry, chemical analysis, CT scanning, and other means, and have it ready to display on the 50th anniversary of the moon landing in 2019.
Supporters of the campaign are eligible to receive rewards for their tax deductible donations ranging from digital posters to tours of the Emil Buehler Conservation Lab at the Steven F. Udvar-Hazy Center in Chantilly, VA to see the suit in person. It’s also been rumored that donations over $15,000 will give you the chance to publicly insult Buzz Aldrin and have him punch you in the face à la Bart Sibrel.
[original]
»
- EquityNet's blog
- 10846 reads
- Printer-friendly version
- Send to friend
- advertisements -
Even the Apollo film made it thru the Van Allen radiation, going and coming back, without a scratch. Photographic film was just tougher back in the 60's.
"There is a tremendous reluctance among the American people to let go of the notion that we sent men to the Moon. There are a couple of reasons for that, one of them being that there is a romanticized notion that those were great years – years when one was proud to be an American. And in this day and age, people need that kind of romanticized nostalgia to cling to. But that is not the main reason that people cling so tenaciously, often even angrily, to what is essentially the adult version of Santa Claus, the Easter Bunny and the Tooth Fairy. What primarily motivates them is fear. But it is not the lie itself that scares people; it is what that lie says about the world around us and how it really functions. For if NASA was able to pull off such an outrageous hoax before the entire world, and then keep that lie in place for four decades, what does that say about the control of the information we receive? What does that say about the media, and the scientific community, and the educational community, and all the other institutions we depend on to tell us the truth? What does that say about the very nature of the world we live in?
"That is what scares the hell out of people and prevents them from even considering the possibility that they could have been so thoroughly duped. It’s not being lied to about the Moon landings that people have a problem with, it is the realization that comes with that revelation: if they could lie about that, they could lie about anything."
Dave McGowan, Wagging the Moondoggie
"There is a tremendous reluctance among the American people to let go of the notion that we sent men to the Moon."
There is no reason to let go of it, as Americans did land on the Moon.
Sadly, most will not believe what they do not want to believe, even if the truth is obvious in hindsight.
Kind of like all of the Lance Armstrong supporters that still believe in him, even after he confessed on Oprah that he doped all those years.
and I still believe Arnold won those 7 Mr Universe's because he knew how to take testosterone....
get rid of these stupid rules...if people want to only take cliff bars & nutri=grains, let them have their own race....
Great quote DarwinMode. His expose on Laurel Canyon and the .gov inspired music industry is great. How is Dave McGowan still alive?
"That is what scares the hell out of people and prevents them from even considering the possibility that they could have been so thoroughly duped. It’s not being lied to about the Moon landings that people have a problem with, it is the realization that comes with that revelation: if they could lie about that, they could lie about anything."
I deal with this everyday with sheeple that are scarred shitless of the truth, what it will mean, and above all, what it will force them to do if they allow it to seep into them.
Scared shitless. But then, when they're hungry, they won't be so afraid anymore.
Liberty is a demand. Tyranny is submission..
But after that moment of realization, the fear fades and then the dawn with it.
It's frustrating that the only thing between millions of people of freedom is a primitive emotional reaction, and the thinnest of lies. Once you are through the rest is easy.
Until you realize that there are 7 billion or so zombies ready to kill you for that lie.
yep, always good to keep in mind the old adage, "it's easier to fool someone than convince them they've been fooled"...
and regards to suppressed advancements in medicine, the Royal Rife docu on YT is amazing
Mark Twain.
Why doesn't the Smithsonian restore the Zeiss lens collection that NASA supplied to Stanley Kubrick? The Apollo production was a phenomenal achievement for its day... it's a bit dated now, but we should be proud of that shit.
The Zeiss story is part of the mockumentary Kubrick's wife was in. It's not real. lol
Carl Zeiss was contracted by NASA to produce ten lenses with which to document their great moon landing achievement. His mention in the mockumentary has nothing to do with his being hired by the government to produce equipment that could capture historic events with minimal lighting. I thought that mockumentary was kinda funny, and I don't know who actually did the filming during the Apollo program; it seems a majority of hoaxers believe a second director took over after Apollo 12.
Personally, I don't know about any of that, but it is curious that Kubrick got his hands on two of Carl Zeiss' lenses -- 35mm and 50mm -- prior to his Barry Lyndon production when, according to non-hoaxer Digital Photography Review, Zeiss had only made ten such lenses (keeping one for himself and selling six to NASA and three to Kubrick). This isn't the smoking gun of the Apollo deception by any means, but it's a part of the thing.
That mocumentary, Dark Side of the Moon, pushed acquaintances (People only seen at gatherings.) of mine, and his wife, over the edge to finally grasping that Apollo, men, and the DC US, never went to the Moon.
They saw it because another friend, a landing believer, sent the link to them. After they watched it, they came to the same conclusion: If power would spend that kind of money on such an extravagant production mocking those that believe the landings a hoax, then the hoax believers must be on to something that power is uncomfortable with.
Pretty funny, as at one gathering of friends they were like, "Get the fuck out of here." And at the next, "Holy shit! Men have never gone to the Moon." Complete reversal. And the wife has gone to become a walking encyclopedia of Moon landing hoax facts. She must have a near photographic memory, as she can often quote the correct photo record numbers of any image she cites.
The wife has now also turned 6 others in their circle of friends. Backfire!
Liberty is a demand. Tyranny is submission..
"If man can fake send a man to the Moon, he should be able to...demolish three buildings, four planes, thousands of lives and blame it all on an entire civilization and culture."
"If power would spend that kind of money on such an extravagant production mocking those that believe the landings a hoax, then the hoax believers must be on to something that power is uncomfortable with." --kchrisc
That's exactly what I felt when Bush addressed the UN two months after 9/11. "We must speak the truth about terror. Let us never tolerate outrageous conspiracy theories concerning the attacks of September 11th -- malicious lies that attempt to shift the blame away from the terrorists." I was thinking, 'What the eff did I just hear?' It was just so explicit and odd that something just lodged in my brain. It still took me a good long while before I fully came to terms with the verity of our government's willingness to commit such naked perfidy, but Bush himself planted the doubt seed with that line from that speech.
bush only spoke the truth - the outrageous theory was that jet planes could bring down the entire WTC complex....and there were those who hated that we had freedom....we know now that those that hate our freedoms are the Zionists and the Saudi Arabians....
it's not too late if I am still able to write these words....
liberty not tyranny, thanks kchris.....
I did not know that about the treasonous one.
Liberty is a demand. Tyranny is submission.
.
Locked.
I just can't get beyond the fact no one has been further out into space then 350 miles.
A trip to the moon and back would irradiate Armstrongs brain and suit.
Scrub up?
yep amazing that 46 years ago NASA was able to do 7 round trip apollo moon missions around 200,000 miles away(one way) and make it back safely each time...and now 46 years later the trips that are 200 miles into space result in catastrophic explosions a significant percentage of the time. Also interesting to read about those astronauts that were testing the lunar module back in the 1967. They complained that the lunar module was a lemon and had zero chance of safely doing what it was supposed to do....they( Grissom, White, and Chaffee) all died and then nobody ever spoke ill of the lunar modules again and then 2 years later they achieved amazingly successful results which have not been repeated in 46 years since.
Even I have to admit...the technology of th time would be very difficult today. Curtain rods and alluminum foil were made with a lot more quality in that day. Upon looking at pictures of the lunar module it becomes easier to understand why there is no way we could have another trip to the moon without about 20 years of additional improvements in technology.
https://truthandshadows.files.wordpress.com/2015/05/lunar-module-close-u...
I simply must have this astronaut costume for the whitehut Halloween party. Let them drink Tang.
Unless 50% of the posts on this article are sarc jokes, this country is fucked.
We need to start allowing people to die of stupidity, the gene pool is getting irreparably damaged.
Self-selection works. Haven't you ever heard of "Hold my beer; watch this!" :o)
Is this plan endorsed by the National Association of Space Actors?
Time to put up or shut up moon landing conspiracy theorists...
Explain the following: The ongoing Lunar Laser Ranging Experiment measures the distance between the Earth and the Moon using laser ranging. Lasers on Earth are aimed at retroreflectors planted on the Moon during the Apollo program (11, 14, and 15), and the time for the reflected light to return is determined.
I'll wait, you fucking nutters... (Tyler, some of these people may be finance gurus, but they also seriously have some screws loose in the head)
Quoting from James Hansen's biography of Neil Armstrong, First Man: The Life of Neil A. Armstrong: "For those few misguided souls who still cling to the belief that the Moon landings never happened, examination of the results of five decades of LRRR experiments should evidence how delusional their rejection of the Moon landing really is.
So did Space fucking aliens put them there? I await your scientific answer, and not "oh, they weren't emotional, so the moon landings never happened" bullshit. And after you are done explaining that, then explain each and every item on this web page.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third-party_evidence_for_Apollo_Moon_landi...
Standard Disclaimer: Tyler, this site really needs an ignore feature, because someone left the door open to the "I make decisions about science based on how I feel" asylum again.
Standard Disclaimer #2: Do you not see a problem with so believing in your own ideology that you can not see the flaws in it?
Agreed, cheech_wizard. When it comes to matters of current financial management on a global scale, I'm just as suspicious and outraged as any other tin foil hatter out there, but trying to disprove the moon landings in the face of all the hard evidence proving the exact contrary, Jesus H. Christ... It's like saying the 1906 San Francisco quake or Hiroshima never happened. Should I now start questioning the physical existence of those kids I've got wandering in my house, because - well, I dunno - for all I know they just might be astral appearances or the result of a foul commie plot instead of actual people in the flesh.
That's the problem with the internet these days: you'll always find information to corroborate whatever crackpot idea you feel inclined to share with the world, no matter how far-fetched it might be. Got an original conspiracy theory brewing in your head? Just google some key words on the net and presto, there's always some nutcase out there to provide "hard evidence" for your novel idea.
And another problem is that theories like these make it all too easy for the general public or TPTB to discredit and ridicule the entire ZH crowd: "you really want to heed the financial warnings of bozos who manage to come up with this kind of stuff? Really?"
Disclaimer: this does not mean a free an independent mind is uncalled for, to the contrary, but it is always wise to try to keep your reasoning within the realms of common sense.
Bahahahahahaha .... Cool Aid....get your Cool Aid here!!!!
Hey cheech_wizard... did you know that the Soviets also installed a laser reflector array on the moon in the mid-70s? Yet nobody doubts that they never set foot on the moon. You'll notice that Apollo hoax debunkers are just like 9/11 conspiracy debunkers: they instantly take a snarky defensive position, falling back on the comfort of the government-sanctioned official story while fervently ridiculing all with the temerity to dare question the state's preferred story.
I trained my super-duper powerful telescope on the moon and can not locate any of the "stuff" allegedly left there, including but not limited to the 2 chevy Volts.
I have a $12 laser rangefinder that doesn't require a shiny surface on the opposing wall. Is it so hard to imagine that a more powerful laser might work perfectly hitting the moon's surface and not some phantom reflective surface planted there by a man on a mission to simply bankrupt russia?
1962 - Project "Luna See," headed by Professor Louis D. Smullin (left) and Dr. Giorgio Fiocco (right), successfully demonstrated high-power optical maser technology by being the first to bounce a laser beam off the moon's surface. High-intensity red light flashes were created by an optical maser (laser), sent through a transmitting telescope to the moon's surface, and detected with an optical receiver. This was the first time that space had been spanned by a laser light. Dr. Stanley Kass (center) from Raytheon discusses the experiment with Professor Smullin.
How does a person aim a laser at a tiny target, a few feet wide, on a spinning object that rotates once every 28 days from a spinning object that rotates once every 24 hours across 240,000 miles and hit the target every time?
Could it be that the moon has enough reflectivity to bounce a laser naturally?
Naaaawwwww!
MASERs run in the radio spectrum in the same range as RADAR, and people have been bouncing radio off the moon for almost a century. The moon is far less reflective in the optical band then in the radio.
As for aiming a LASER at a target on the moon it's pretty straight forward, much like adjusting a flashlight. Decollimate the beam a little to give you some spread, and place a filter on the telescope to filter out the ambient light reflected by the moon.
For the record the moon is tidally locked and the same face alway points towards the Earth, that means the target does not move across the face of the moon.
This kind of bullshit is how TPTB discredit all conspiracy theories.
#41
lol.... the moon doesn't spin.
That's why you only see the same side of the moon all the time.
That's why it's easy to hit a specific target on that object and detect an intensity increase of the beam off the target reflector once you've honed in on it.
They had the actual coordinates of where the reflectors are. it was a barrel shoot basically.
It rotates at the same rate as its revolution about the earth.
If it didn't we'd get to see all sides of it every month.
Ya'll need to stick to finance, your lack of earth science knowledge is apalling.
You said, "on a spinning object that rotates once every 28 days".
If it spun, then we would see the dark side of the moon.
It rotates around the earth, but it doesn't spin.
It does spin buddy, it's just tidal-locked exactly to the revolutions of the Earth (curious eh?). One revolution of the Earth equals one revolution of the Moon. It is just a humble Moon that revolves around the Sun too. ;)
One last try- the moon orbits in 28 days. It rotates once in 28 days. It shows the same face to the earth because of this gravitational lock. It spins. All planetary bodies rotate. It is speculated that this is so due to the 'conservation of angular momentum' imparted to the bodies during their formation from spinning clouds of debris.
Go back to astrophysics and ask for your money back.
I understand how sychronous rotation works. What I was explaining is how they can target the reflectors, because the moon's rotation creates static positioning of the surface facing us.
If the rotation of the moon were twice as fast, then it would spin in relation to the earth, but it doesn't. If that were the case, it would be infinity more difficult to locate the reflectors, which is what you were saying.
Fudomyo...logic question. lets assume we can aim a laser at something on the moon and see it reflect back. Does that prove that humans landed on the moon?
.
surface of moon is highly reflective. that's why you can see it at night shining so bright dumba$$
$500,000 to
"use the funds to preserve the suit, digitize it via 3D scanning, photogrammetry, chemical analysis, CT scanning, and other means, and have it ready to display on the 50th anniversary of the moon landing in 2019"
Almost anything in DC is outrageously too expensive.
"Earthmen.....on the MOON! Ah eh eheh eh ehh!"
~Beldar Conehead
The pro shop called -- your new putter has arrived.
He was on the moon?
When?
How does he want to proof it?
They destroyed and lost all original archives.
Copies and dupplicates are no proof.
The Smithsonian can sell the Hope Diamond if they need some cash. Fuck them.
Why doesn't the FED do crowdfunding for QE to bail out the banks?
Why didn't they do crowdfunding for GM or AIG?
How about crowdfunding for overseas military campaigns?
A half million for a movie prop?