If Phil was arguing otherwise then that displays a rather shocking degree of ignorance.

I agree it has nothing to do with the moon hoax myth.

Kraut: There were a lot of people who were members of the Communist Party that were not happy with Communism. I’m sure there were equal numbers who were Nazi only because it was a survival tactic. Werner Von Braun was one beneficiary of slave labor, which was one production tactic of the ruling Nazi party. He could hardly seek out independent contractors to build his rockets, when the top dogs were allocating resources based upon their dogma of superiority, ie, slaves were cheap,,,and expendable.
Vilifying von Braun because he was benefiting from a particular social stricture would require doing the same to ALL who so benefited, ie, ALL the German people. I see no advantage to denigrating all, when it was the leaders who were culpable.

Gary 7

It has to be said though — what a wonderful carving. It maintains the traditional style and wouldn’t look out of place, while keeping up to date with human achievements. Frankly, I wish more cathedrals would follow suit!

Yeah. The beginning of the construction of the “Kölner Dom” (cathedral of Cologne, Germany) began in the 13th century (if I remember correctly). It was finished about 150 years ago. They needed 600 years!! (Of course, for several hundered years there was no construction at all, but the number remains)

Your right about the kelp, but on closer inspection I don’t think that’s even an astronaut. It’s a sea otter. If you look at the face you can even see adorable little whiskers.

I wouldn’t be surprised; when I tell people how long it took to build the Basilica of St. Peter in Rome they’re shocked. Most people just assume that such large edifices must have been built in maybe 5 years like the skyscraper next door, but certainly in one person’s lifetime. Add to that the fact that people tend to imagine that these ancient buildings are never remodeled. People might shift things around their house twice a year but can’t imagine a priest wanting to replace a statue or painting or add a new section to a 400-year-old building. When the castle at Windsor was damaged in a fire about a decade ago, people were suprised at the extent of remodeling which had been done over the centuries and exposed as work was carried out to repair (and remodel) the damaged section of the castle.

As Angel said, the restorers intended to do their work not very conspicuous but easily identifiable as a restoration; that is the reason for the astronaut an other carvings; close to the astronaut there is a monkey eating an ice cream…

I’m surprised that Snopes doesn’t point out that there’s also a gargoyle eating an ice-cream not far from the astronaut.

Of course, the astronaut was not carved between 1513 (begining of the construction) and 1733 (the year of consecration of the New Cathedral).

There’s a rule when you restore an ancient building: The restoration must be identified at a glance. That’s why the stone used in this restoration is slightly clearer, and the astronaut was carved.

A near church was restored as well, and some members of a tuna were carved. That church is kown in Salamanca because a chorus acts every Sunday.

Thanks for your blog

That still does not prevent from heaping scorn on Mr. von Braun, an ethical and moral midget and an intellectual giant who instead of having been feted by the US should have been crushed. He was a confessing and powerful member of the NSDAP, no excuses, no bullshit about “extortion”. He was a powerful man, and could demand a big share of research fund.
The man was a crook, and shame unto America for engaging in situational ethics to beat the Russians.

Context is everything, but Phil’s statement can very easily be read as one of moral unconcern. That is my point.
Unfortunately, science and ethics seem to be quite often seen as “non intersecting” domains, and that is exactly the way the Nazis did science – as well as the Russians, and there is enough evidence to point the finger at America as well.

“In November 1937 (other sources: December 1, 1932), von Braun joined the National Socialist German Workers Party. An Office of Military Government, United States document dated April 23, 1947 states that von Braun joined the Waffen-SS (Schutzstaffel) horseback riding school in 1933, then the National Socialist Party on May 1, 1937 and became an officer in the Waffen-SS from May 1940 until the end of the war.”

“He began as an Untersturmführer (Second Lieutenant) and was promoted three times by Himmler, the last time in June 1943 to SS-Sturmbannführer (Wehrmacht Major).”

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wernher_von_Braun

All of this has been well known to the allies and the Germans.

In juxtaposition – my Grandfather, a skilled trades men, went for his communist believes one year to the concentration (not extermination) camp Berg am Moor. He never joined the NSDAP, neither did anyone else of my family, with considerable economic hardship to follow.
Braun is the example of the intellectual who thinks his work is more important than the ethical responsibilities involved as to consequences and conduct.
I clearly put him on the same level as Mengele, or any other scientific shyster operating during the Nazi Regime.

That still does not prevent from heaping scorn on Mr. von Braun, an ethical and moral midget and an intellectual giant who instead of having been feted by the US should have been crushed. He was a confessing and powerful member of the NSDAP, no excuses, no bullshit about “extortion”. He was a powerful man, and could demand a big share of research fund.
The man was a crook, and shame unto America for engaging in situational ethics to beat the Russians.

Context is everything, but Phil’s statement can very easily be read as one of moral unconcern. That is my point.
Unfortunately, science and ethics seem to be quite often seen as “non intersecting” domains, and that is exactly the way the Nazis did science – as well as the russians, and there is enough evidence to point the finger at America as well.