Can anyone tell me what the image is supposed to mean?: Science Marches On

I can't seem to understand quite what the page image is supposed to mean regarding the trope. I mean, I know about the man in the moon, but I don't see how that's relevant.

In 1920's-era fiction, it was believed that space travel could only be possible by shooting people to the moon like a bullet from a gun.

The image features both the man in the moon and this sort of travel in a 20's serial, both of which are obviously disproved today.

If the image needs explaining, simply place a picture of the 1969 moon landing below it. The caption could read: "Above: Space travel in the 1920s. Below: Space travel in the 1960s."

Just made a guess. I knew it was early 1900s, but not when.

edited 13th Jun '11 10:37:10 AM by Torquey

It's "1902" rather than "1920's", and it wasn't from a serial. It was a stand-alone film.

edited 12th Jun '11 5:21:13 PM by Madrugada

Yes, I've never quite understood this. The best I've managed was "the moon is made of cheese". But then the bullet made no sense. Also, no one ever thought it was possible.

bump

I think this is a great piccy, and definitely appropriate. It shows multiple cases where science has marched on - people speculating the moon was so small (compare the size of the moon lander), that there was a 'man on the moon', and that a viable method to get there was to shoot someone in a giant bullet. That's quite a lot of outdated suppositions! (though admittedly a lot of them are _really_ old or just fanciful).

Three day clock, tick tock.

I would say that the "comparison picture" suggestion is good. Take this one, put it with a shot from the original moon landing, and then have the comparative caption.

What about a pic of an alchemist side-by-side with a pic of someone working in a modern laboratory.

Do most people know what alchemy is, though? I mean, I know what it is, but...

Plus, this one probably has more amusement value...

How's this?

With caption like, "1902 vs 1969". Or the dates could be put on the picture itself.

Bump...any other thoughts?

Just for fun.

"Houston? I am looking around, but I don't see that ship we shot into the eye."

I think Star Trek and a Cell Phone might be a better example of it

[1]◊ Sci-Fi in 1969.

[2]◊ Reality in 2011.

That'd be more Technology Marches On than this...I'm gonna play around with this tonight, the more I think about it, the less I like the moon landing pic.

edited 2nd Sep '11 2:08:43 AM by Willbyr

I guess so, Should Technology Marches On be in the See also / not to be confused section? it's not on that page at all.

Yeah, that distinction needs to be made.

How's this? I can swap the first panel with a cleaner static shot if the screencap from the film is too murky.

edited 2nd Sep '11 7:12:08 AM by Willbyr

I like the moon landing compared with the bullet in the eye.

The other is less clear.

It may be a bit less clear, but it actually addresses the comparison that's on the page between the method in the 1902 movie and real life, so it fits the trope better.

edited 2nd Sep '11 7:26:22 AM by Willbyr

Bump; any other thoughts?

I like the latest pic with the barrel and the Saturn rocket. My only suggestion is to consider using a shot of the rocket before launch, since it'd be less blurry. Hmm... how hard would it be to get a shot of the crew entering each vessel? Would that be illustrative at all?

I have a static shot from the film of the "crew" entering the vessel...as far as the Apollo astronauts getting into the lunar lander, I dunno if any pics of that are out there.

I like the moon landing one. Dates would be nice, too...