... one small step for A man ....

[spiney]

Apparently, that's what Neil Armstrong actually said, when he stepped on the moon (and not "one small step for man ......").

See: http://www.controlbionics.com/cb_one_small_a.htm .

(I heared this mentioned on today's R4 "PM" programme, 30 mins ago, and followed the link on the PM blog, BBC radio website).

 

[gameboy]

They use computers to analyse his voice - all those newspaper headlines!

Does make it grammatically correct.

 

[Saturlight]

And James Cagney didn't say: "See, I'll get you...dirty rat".

But Mike Yarwood did say: "And this is me."

 

[rolfw]

Not according to the audio file, it was what he meant to say, but not what he actually said.

 

[Saturlight]

Anyway, I don't recall an "a" being in it.

 

[gameboy]

From BBC web site

"Computer expert Peter Shann Ford says he has found the missing "a" from Neil Armstrong's famous first words from the moon.

Historians have long criticised Mr Armstrong for not saying the more grammatically correct, "One small step for a man...""

type this string in the BBC search bar to watch the video

'first words on moon'

(can't hear an 'a' in there)

 

[Llew]

The indefinite article is definitely indefineable... O-Ha

Llew

 

[dig deep]

Aaaaaa, what a miss

Going so far and not knowing what to say

 

[2cvbloke]

Although (personal opinion of course) we never actually went to the moon (unless they had 3 feet of Lead sheilding on the lunar lander in order to protect them from the layer of radiation that surrounds the Earth ), I think that what he actually said was right, as it was (supposed to be) a small step for man to make in order for it to be a giant leap for mankind...

 

[Saturlight]

Without the "a" works better. One small step for a man sounds a bit camp. ;)

 

[Salty25]

He didn't 'a' because it was a mouthfull, without the 'a' it's simply easier to say, can't blame Armstrong for that! And he did go to the moon, heard all the rubbish about shadows, and the flag moving and all that, and it's all easily explained.

 

[Saturlight]

Anyway, if you say one small step for a man, surely you have to say, "one small step for a mankind".

But that sounds daft.

 

[Llew]

Man = singular

Mankind = plural

You wouldn't say "a men" (unless you are religious O-Ha )

Llew

 

[spiney]

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/front/4225505.html .

 

[2cvbloke]

And he did go to the moon, heard all the rubbish about shadows, and the flag moving and all that, and it's all easily explained.

It's not the shadows, flags and reflections I'm bothered about, it's, as I said, the radiation I have trouble understanding how they managed to pass through without losing a single hair or come back with a green glow, but that's a whole other thread...

 

[spiney]

for 2cv:

http://www.clavius.org/envrad.html .

 

[Saturlight]

Man can be plural, since it is a shortened version of mankind.

 

[Oily]

What gets me about this whole space travel is that we went to the moon(supposedly)in 1969 with the technologly they had then,we've had 37yrs of advancing the technology but were have we been since

You'd think going to the moon would be doddle now,i know there's no reason for it now,or maybe there is?

 

[Analoguesat]

What gets me about this whole space travel is that we went to the moon(supposedly)in 1969 with the technologly they had then,we've had 37yrs of advancing the technology but were have we been since

You'd think going to the moon would be doddle now,i know there's no reason for it now,or maybe there is?

Out of the solar system and heading off to the stars! (Assorted Pioneer & Voyager craft)

 

[spiney]

Yes, but we HAVE been, that's the point. Why go again, for no particular reason?

As Analoguesat says, there's been a huge - and highly successful - programme of robotic exploration.