NASA had a "probe and drogue" docking mechanism; in A Clockwork Orange, "my drooges" is dialoguesteemCreated with Sketch.

in life •  last year

I'm working my way through "Wagging the Moondoggie", currently reading part 10 of 14: http://centerforaninformedamerica.com/moondoggie-10/

Yesterday or the day before (not in the above series), I read that the very first spoken line of dialogue in "A Clockwork Orange" was "Men on the moon?", then the thug character laughed, and then "Men spinning in space?" before they beat the old drunk up. Of course, Stanley Kubrick did that movie, as well as Dr. Strangelove, 2001, and the moon missions.

I've known NASA were liars for a couple years now.

So it was really neat while reading that site to find this passage:

"Time-Life also fills us in on the details of the “probe and drogue” docking mechanism: “The probe, a 10-inch cylinder extending from the nose of the command module, must be inserted into a cone-shaped receptacle, the drogue of the LM … As the probe finds its mark, automatic spring latches lock the two together. The whole probe-and-drogue assembly will be removed, clearing the tunnel through which [the astronauts] will enter the LM. Inside the command module, [the command module pilot] flips a switch that frees the LM.”

Pictured below are the command module’s docking probe, the LEM’s drogue (with the LEM allegedly in Earth orbit on the alleged Apollo 9 mission, in yet another spectacular shot from NASA’s collection), and a close up of how the mechanism was supposed to work. Curiously left unexplained was how, with the probe-and-drogue assembly having been removed, the LEM was able to dock with the command module the second time, upon its return from the lunar surface."

Image credits: NASA, and centerforaninformedamerican.com.

I find it interesting that the movie he did after the moon missions (A Clockwork Orange was 1971) includes "my drooges" and wonder if it might be an oblique reference to a part used in a docking maneuver that he might have taken part in fictionally creating?

Authors get paid when people like you upvote their post.
If you enjoyed what you read here, create your account today and start earning FREE STEEM!
Sort Order:  

good work!

·

Thanks! I'm not sure I would have noticed the "A Clockwork Orange" reference, if I hadn't seen that ZH comment. It also mentioned that "2001" took a really long time to produce, which also meant that Kubrick definitely could have had time to spend on the moon missions -- which he then referenced in every (?) work after that.

this is a great post to go fishing for new steemit users with! haha :) @libertyteeth

·

:) Upvoted and followed, cheers!

I am like you. I realized that the conquest of space was only a lie. At first it made me a shock but now it's better.

·

Exactly -- I absorbed the "new" paradigm two years ago. It was a rather jarring experience, making me question everything, even mathematics. I came back from the edge though, as 2+2 is still 4 (in any base greater than 4, that is), and my computer's still working, etc.

But I did learn that so many "truths" we all think we all know, are complete fabrications. That's both jarring and, oddly, comforting! Certainly, there remain many ways to creatively be killed, but I now know that a nuclear explosion won't be one of them. Also, I know that language evolves, but creatures do not (they do, however, adapt, which is similar but they 're still "after their own kind" as stated in Genesis).

And that six million number keeps popping up throughout history, which is odd; why attribute more deaths to an event than there were? What's their goal, there?

Excelente trabajo en su pots lo felicito

·

Eu falei "obrigado" en um outra comment, mais eu acho que voce esta falando Espanol. Yo no ablo mucho Espanol, solo um pocito; mas es perto de Portguese, que eu falo fluente (falo; escrive, nao muito bem... :) ).

Entonsis, gracias!