Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Neil Armstrong's customs form for moon rocks (2016)

magazine.uc.edu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 204 posts

Re: Neil Armstrong's customs form for moon rocks (2016)

#71

Post by ta1243 »

hammock wrote: post #44
perihelions wrote: post #6

These things were mainly publicity stunts. The supposed biohazard quarantine for returning Apollo astronauts was a theater performance, too. https://www.livescience.com/space/the-moon/the-apollo-moon-l... ( "The Apollo moon landing was real, but NASA's quarantine procedure was not" ) https://www.nytimes.com/2023/06/09/science/nasa-moon-quarant... ( "A review of archives suggests that efforts to protect Earth from con…

>These things were mainly publicity stunts. The supposed biohazard quarantine for returning Apollo astronauts was a theater performance, too. Wow. What else about Apollo was theater performance?

The entire thing was theater. It was to show off American technical superiority (the US having already lost the space race in terms of first sub-orbital flight, first satellite, first animal in orbit, first man in orbit, first spacecraft to the moon, first woman in space, first spacewalk etc)

Re: Neil Armstrong's customs form for moon rocks (2016)

#72

Post by bee_rider »

skeezyboy wrote: post #30
ceejayoz wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Reminds me a bit of when the UK accidentally invaded Spain on a training exercise. https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/uk-invade-spa... > Lord West said: "It wasn't one of the best days in my time. I had a phone call from the military commander saying, 'Sir, I'm afraid something awful's happened.' I thought, 'Goodness me, what?' And he said, 'I'm afraid we've invaded Spain, but we don't think they've notic…

the british armed forces are atrocious. i simply cannot fathom how britain controlled so much of the planet at one point

This was 2002. They are friendly countries, seems like everyone responded appropriately.

Re: Neil Armstrong's customs form for moon rocks (2016)

#73

Post by ta1243 »

metabagel wrote: post #45
bitwize wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

These French customs officials seemed more on the ball than the one I encountered. (Checked my passport, but didn't stamp it, causing problems for me upon landing for my next leg in Helsinki.)

I don’t think there is any requirement to stamp passports. Some people specifically ask for a stamp, because they want the memento.

In the Schengen area, if you are a non-EU person, until recently you needed to ensure you are stamped in and out otherwise you'll run into issues with them thinking you may have overstayed.

After UK went all freedumb and left the EU this caused a lot of issues, I have a UK colleague that visited his wife's family in Poland over a Christmas, didn't get a stamp on the way back, then ran into problems a few months later as they argued he had been in Europe for months.

Re: Neil Armstrong's customs form for moon rocks (2016)

#74

Post by AdamN »

hammock wrote: post #44
perihelions wrote: post #6

These things were mainly publicity stunts. The supposed biohazard quarantine for returning Apollo astronauts was a theater performance, too. https://www.livescience.com/space/the-moon/the-apollo-moon-l... ( "The Apollo moon landing was real, but NASA's quarantine procedure was not" ) https://www.nytimes.com/2023/06/09/science/nasa-moon-quarant... ( "A review of archives suggests that efforts to protect Earth from con…

>These things were mainly publicity stunts. The supposed biohazard quarantine for returning Apollo astronauts was a theater performance, too. Wow. What else about Apollo was theater performance?

The expense report for mileage was another one. Kind of cute and an interesting insight into the time period but it wasn't really needed.

Re: Neil Armstrong's customs form for moon rocks (2016)

#75

Post by ethan_smith »

yardie wrote: post #20

I did a 1100m passage from Puerto Rico to Miami. Anchored in the Bahamas bank but didn't step on land. And when we arrived in the US we weren't required to clear in since our last port of departure was PR. Pretty sure they were tracking us by drone, blimp, AIS, and radar the entire way because they weren't suspicious enough compared to my previous experiences. Curious why Apollo 11 would have to clear customs since t…

Under the 1967 Outer Space Treaty, the moon is considered international territory ("province of all mankind"), so technically they were returning from outside US jurisdiction, triggering customs requirements.

Re: Neil Armstrong's customs form for moon rocks (2016)

#76

Post by schneems »

pinkmuffinere wrote: post #59
hammock wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>These things were mainly publicity stunts. The supposed biohazard quarantine for returning Apollo astronauts was a theater performance, too. Wow. What else about Apollo was theater performance?

It feels as if this question is intended to make a strong implication, but I'm not sure what the implication is -- Can you clarify? I almost think you are suggesting the moon landing was fake, but that's very stereotypical, so I don't want to assume.

Not OP but: The very essence of the program was publicity. As soon as the public lost interest (mission accomplished!), the program was canceled. We built Saturn V rockets that we never launched.

That being said, I know a lot of things were unknown. We didn’t know if the surface of the moon would interact with the atmosphere inside the capsules to combust. Some of these unknowns were downplayed. Some others were played up for dramatic effect.

The whole process of getting a person to the moon took hundreds of thousands of involved workers and the. coordinated effort of a country’s politicians and populace to fund it. I think it’s unfair to boil it down to “just publicity” but it is a big part in keeping it afloat.

Re: Neil Armstrong's customs form for moon rocks (2016)

#77

Post by refulgentis »

Lammy wrote: post #60
refulgentis wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No. They're saying it was a stunt. Not setting legal precedent. There was no practical value.

The practical value is reinforcing among the general public the idea that humans should not be able to move freely around their own planet. In the future only money will have that right. The modern passport didn't even exist until World War Ⅰ: https://www.amazon.com/dp/0521634938 / https://archive.org/details/pdfy-S0NQwPjPkMlzZ2eS/mode/2up

Purple prose tripe re: some personal hobbyhorse masquerading as relevant commentary. Their obvious plan to subjugate hasn't come to fruition 50 years later, so its time to adjust your priors.

Re: Neil Armstrong's customs form for moon rocks (2016)

#78

Post by tomtomhowling »

perihelions wrote: post #6

These things were mainly publicity stunts. The supposed biohazard quarantine for returning Apollo astronauts was a theater performance, too. https://www.livescience.com/space/the-moon/the-apollo-moon-l... ( "The Apollo moon landing was real, but NASA's quarantine procedure was not" ) https://www.nytimes.com/2023/06/09/science/nasa-moon-quarant... ( "A review of archives suggests that efforts to protect Earth from con…

[flagged]

Re: Neil Armstrong's customs form for moon rocks (2016)

#79

Post by cynicalkane »

stronglikedan wrote: post #68
whycome wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What aspect of the review suggested that it was mostly for show?

Considering the source, the source is probably the only thing that "suggested" it, as they are known to do.

Are you claiming the New York Times is more likely than a comparable newspaper to fabricate random suggestions about astronauts? This is something they are "known to do"?

If you actually read the article, they include a direct link to the sources they cite and explain specifically what those sources say.

Re: Neil Armstrong's customs form for moon rocks (2016)

#80

Post by ahmeneeroe-v2 »

Lammy wrote: post #60
refulgentis wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No. They're saying it was a stunt. Not setting legal precedent. There was no practical value.

The practical value is reinforcing among the general public the idea that humans should not be able to move freely around their own planet. In the future only money will have that right. The modern passport didn't even exist until World War Ⅰ: https://www.amazon.com/dp/0521634938 / https://archive.org/details/pdfy-S0NQwPjPkMlzZ2eS/mode/2up

"modern passport not existing in past" ≠ "free human movement"

borders have largely had guards, who had no obligation to let people through, or even to treat them fairly and not rob them. frontiers had bandits who existed solely to prey on travelers.

even if you could move to a different settlement, you did not have the same legal rights as citizens of that city.

the "modern passport" has done more for free human movement than anything that came before.

Post reply on HN