The moon landing was one of the most iconic moments in history. Viewers stood on their toes until the very moment that Neil Armstrong stepped onto the moon, and they stayed there until Neil Armstrong and Edwin Aldrin landed on American soil again. Authors The Times, William Safire, and Ayn Rand speak on the moon landing soon after the mission was accomplished. In the morning after America successfully landed the first aircraft on the moon, The Times published an article about the moon landing. Everyone in the world was interested in the moon landing. People across the world read this article to learn more about the moon landing.This article showed an overview of what happened on the ground breaking day.This article is effective because it shows how the moon …show more content…
Viewers of the rocket taking off would read this commentary. Ayn Rand stood by as the rocket shot towards the sky, and she recorded her thoughts of the day.The commentary involved the timeline and actions that Rand went through on the day of the moon landing. It seems much more relatable, since the writer made a nonfiction commentary have a storyline. Ethos is implied by Ayn Rand being a known novelist. She has automatic credibility because she has written stories before, so she knows how to make the story relatable. Logos is applied by using imagery. She uses so many details such as “The dark red fire parted into two gigantic wings…” The reader can envision the fire separating from one stream to two. Readers found the effective commentary reliable in that imagery that she puts forth. The moon landing mission housed a great accomplishment for the world. They burst through the glass that separated space and soil. The three authors are all well known publishers and writers. Authors all over the world found these pieces effective and reliable. Viewers and readers became aware of the effect that the moon landing
Click here to unlock this and over one million essaysShow More
The crew spent 33 and a half hours on the moon. And many scientific experiments were made like Shepard brining golf balls up and a makeshift club he made back home they also conducted the “Moon Trees” experiment. In which Shepard and Mitchell brought up several hundred seeds for trees and went to the future Apollo 16 landing spot while Roosa stayed in orbit. Orbiting the Kitty Hawk space module and taking pictures of the moon. The two attempted to grow trees on the moon and many of the trees germinated on the way home which deemed this experiment successful.
It was a great day for America as we won the “Space Race” and got safely to the moon, but not everyone was happy. In this essay, I will be talking about why some conspiracy theorists think that the historical moon landing of 1969 was staged and why I still believe that it was in fact, real. To begin, I will be showing you some evidence theorists use to support their claim of the landing being fake. The first is that when
The 1969 Apollo 11 mission garnered global attention in allowing man to take the first steps on the moon. With such a feat came worldwide responses from popular magazines and authors, each commending the event to an extent. The series of responses begins with a collection of articles from the well known Times magazine, each addressing the moon landing differently; one on the moon, one describing the process of landing, and the last one noting its global impact through renowned leaders. Following the Times articles is Ayn Rand’s The July 16.1969, Launch: A Symbol of Man’s Greatness article in which she narrates the launch, emphasizing man’s potential.
In a worse case scenario, such as the death of two astronauts during the first manned mission to the moon, William Safire’s “In Event of Moon Disaster” makes the loss a bit more palatable through employing pathos and ethos, but not logos due to his approach to the speech. Safire appeals to pathos and emotions through euphemisms and bittersweet positivity. At the opening of the prepared speech, Safire immediately utilizes a circumlocution, writing that “[Armstrong and Aldrin] will stay on the moon to rest in peace,” as opposed to graphically describing the death the astronauts would endure without oxygen and food. Moreover, humans are normally optimistic and take comfort in Safire’s euphemism because it sounds like the two astronauts did not suffer.
The speaker Ayn Rand, was incredibly passionate throughout the entire commentary. She addresses the fundamental significance of Apollo 11, stating that it is not political; it is philosophical. The audience for this particular situation would be anyone who enjoys commentaries. This publication was created by Rand, for the sole purpose of putting forward her philosophy of objectivism. The subject of this commentary was to talk about mankind itself, and how Apollo 11 completely redefined what it means to be a human.
The Space Shuttle Tragedy Address, the day when lives were lost due to an accident on the ground. The space crew had never lost an astronaut in space until this day ,but this accident touched and impacted our nation tremendously. On the 19th anniversary Ronald Reagan gave a rememberence speech that honored the seven flight members which was a heart felt speech that included textual devices such as tone, repetition, and historical evidence to help commemorate that tragic day. Reagan's tone of voice during the speech shows the emotional side of Reagan and his rememberence to the lives that were lost. When he speaks you can hear the emotion and his affection towards the tragedy.
Armstrong and Aldrin were the first people to ever step foot on the moon. They accomplished a dangerous job that people thought was unachievable. In the speech it states, “they will be mourned by their families and friends; they will be mourned by their nation; they will be mourned by the people of the world; they will be mourned by a mother Earth that dared send two of her sons into the unknown.” Not only would their families mourn, the nation would mourn to because of their success in landing on the moon and being able to achieve something that hasn’t been done. This shows that President Nixon had this speech prepared in case the mission had gone wrong.
The author used different elements of ethos, logos, pathos, and kairos to effectively communicate with the reader. Eve Tushnet the author of this essay does not have a whole lot of ethos. Eve is lacking credibility and character because she is not an established author. Eve is not a credible author because she is a freelance writer. Eve does not have good credibility because she blogs and contributes to an opinion magazine and website.
On July 20th, 1969, the Apollo 11 with astronaut Neil Armstrong and his crew, guided by thousands of NASA technicians, supposedly landed on the surface of the moon. It was certainly one of the most extraordinary events accomplished by mankind up to that date. Neil Armstrong’s first words upon stepping on the moon surface will always be remembered “ A small step for mankind, a giant leap for humanity”. Ever since then, this achievement has been a matter of discussion by several groups that either believed or disbelieved this.
Neil Armstrong’s bravery has helped him to be one of the only people to be on the moon and because of that he has inspired many people to follow in his footsteps. Neil is a hero to many people, was an excellent pilot, and he so excellent that he was not only the first person to have ever to successfully land a spacecraft on the moon; he also walked on the moon. (Gregory, Jim) Neil Armstrong was born on August 5, 1930 in an area near Wapakoneta, Ohio. Armstrong was the eldest of three children. His parents where Stephen Armstrong, who was an auditor, and his mom was Viola Engel Armstrong, and she was a homemaker.
When Neil Armstrong first touched down on the moon in 1969, millions of people watched him take the first step and create history (Villard). Yet even as we’ve moved on from the moon landings and consider them as a pivotal point for mankind, “Forty years after U.S. astronaut Neil Armstrong became the first human to set foot on the moon, many conspiracy theorists still insist the Apollo 11 moon landing was an elaborate hoax”(Than). The idea that our voyage to the moon was deliberately staged seems to resurface year after year. While the conspiracy theorists claim the moon landing was a hoax, creating a fake moon landing would have been more expensive and difficult than actually reaching the moon. The race to the moon began on October 5, 1957, when the Soviet Union launched Sputnik into orbit around the earth: “When the Soviet Union launched the satellite Sputnik, on October 4, 1957, the United States experienced a technological identity crisis”(Olson).