MrAl,
If you watched the ABC evening news yesterday, August 26, 2012, you would have seen an item which mentioned that it was "believed" Armstrong composed his landing speech on the way to the Moon. The news report further said that Armstrong originally composed "a man", but later decided to removed the "a". Then they said that Armstrong thought he spoke without the "a", but he wasn't sure. It was a confusing news report, but it shows that I picked up on something way back when he landed and spoke.
You might also want to look at these links. I guess it shows I had sharp ears back when I watched the Moon landing in my mid twenties at the prime of my life.
**broken link removed**
https://news.yahoo.com/one-small-step-man-neil-armstrong-misquoted-034331471.html
Anyway, those reports appear to originate from the original source.
Ratch
Hello again,
That first link didnt work, that second link was exactly like i posted previously: the computer analysis.
In the computer analysis there was evidence that the 'a' was sounded but much shorter than usual. Maybe you picked it up. What we need now is for more of the 600 million viewers to come forward with their rendition of it as maybe more people heard it too. It was too long ago for me but for others like you maybe not.
Yeah that news report is basically a waste of time. They make the typical mistake of using the word "believe" holding something in question and then go on to state other 'facts' as if the original statement was totally true and it is sometimes hard to figure that out because they may go on and on.
"It was believed that in 1641 Godzilla attached Japan. The monster knocked over several buildings and squashed hundreds of cars on its way back to the ocean".
So the second sentence appears to give credence to the history of Godzilla, but it really says nothing because in the first sentence they were not even sure if it really happened at all. So the whole thing could be nonsense
My take on this is that if they did a computer analysis of the tape that exists TODAY and found evidence of the 'a' then it was really there but too short for most people to hear. If they did later 'try' to remove it, they didnt do a good enough job and left a trace of it still in there but then i would want to know what reason they would have for wanting to remove the 'a'.
Yeah it doesnt make that much difference but if it could be proven that the 'a' was really removed (although not completely) then it is proved that they really do try to alter things before (or even after) they get to the media. I wonder now if anyone has an original recording that they made on that day.
So far no one can seem to prove this one way or the other, which shows how stupid society has gotten. They cant even get that one sentence right on such a historic day.
We cant trust the media these days anyway.