$2 bill that Gene Cernan carried on three missions sells for more than $90K

The $2 bill that astronaut Gene Cernan carried on all three of his space missions in 60s and 70s has now sold at auction for $91,519.

Signed and flight-certified by Cernan, the bill is encapsulated and graded by Paper Money Guaranty (PMG) as Choice Fine 15. The holder notes its provenance as having been flown aboard Gemini 9A (1966), Apollo 10 (1969), and Apollo 17 (1972), and traces its origin to Cernan’s personal collection.

A signed letter of provenance from Cernan states that the bill was originally owned by his father and later carried by the astronaut on each of his spaceflights. The letter documents its presence during low Earth orbit on Gemini 9A, lunar orbit on Apollo 10, and on the lunar surface during Apollo 17.

This auction was space-focused and realized a total of $1,764,603. It included items from a number of other Gemini and Apollo missions, including an American flag that astronaut Dave Scott flew on Gemini 8, the mission that achieved the first docking in space but then had to due an emergency splashdown because a thruster began firing uncontrollably. It sold for $47,406.

Hat tip reader Wayne DeVette.

2 comments

Who really was Jay Gould?

The life and legend of Jay Gould

To get to the point, right at the start, Jay Gould was not a “Robber Baron”, nor was he the worst “Robber Baron,” as many journalists of his time as well as many historians in the next century liked to slander him, implying he was unethical, cruel, and routinely used under-handed tactics to destroy others while making himself wealthy. In fact, he was no more a robber baron then the entire class of hard-nosed businessmen who in the 1800s became America’s first generation of today’s billionaires, using the free enterprise system to gather wealth to themselves while building vast industries that employed millions and made the lives of everyone better and more prosperous.

I have just finished reading Maury Klein’s 1997 fine biography of Jay Gould, the Life and Legend of Jay Gould, and was not surprised to learn that Gould was never the evil personification of worst sort of capitalist, as routinely portrayed by our leftist academia for the past century. Instead, I discovered he was no different then all the other leading businessmen of his time, hard-nosed and ruthless when it came to cutting deals, but strongly committed to making the businesses he ran profitable and successful, providing the public a useful product they would be eager to use.

You see, in a free capitalist society, you can’t succeed unless you are willing to be ruthless at times. This doesn’t necessarily mean you routinely use violence, or break the law, or go out of your way to hurt others, but it does mean you defend yourself from attack, and retaliate quickly using legal means when under attack. These rules apply today as they did in Gould’s time. Nothing has changed.

Gould was no different than Cornelius Vanderbilt (whose life I reviewed here). Nor does he differ from John D. Rockefeller, or Elon Musk, or Jeff Bezos, or any one of the thousands and thousands of American businessmen, who from the founding of this country used its free but legal framework to build a nation while enriching themselves.

Gould’s most famous area of success involved his ownership of many railroads, both in the American west as well as the first elevated subways in New York City. He also gained full control over Western Union, and for more than a decade ran a system that provided the entire country and even the world its first instantaneous method of communications. To gain control over these venues involved many battles, some of which required tactics that were harsh, even a bit under-handed, and clever. Sometimes it required payoffs to politicians, or tricky stock deals that once completed left many others sinking in the wake.

A typical anti-Gould newspaper cartoon from 1882
A typical anti-Gould newspaper cartoon from 1882

Gould’s tactics however were never much different than those of others of his ilk. And like those others, his overall good management of his companies he controlled, as well as the good treatment of the people who worked under him, garnered strong loyalty and support across these industries. Gould wanted control, but always when he had it he used it to make his product better and more useful.

When he died, it was the people who knew him who had good things to say about him, and it was the journalists who did not who continued to spread the slanders, because it made good copy and sold newspapers. And sadly, for the decades that followed, historians used those news reports — mostly wrong — as their primary sources of information, and thus the legend of an evil Gould was created.

Klein’s biography is a worthy effort to counter this bad history. More Americans should read it, if only to realize their past history was far more admirable than what they have been taught for the past few generations.

Gould’s tactics — and his success — were things he learned very earlier on in life, when he went out on his own.
» Read more

8 comments

A military pilot’s perspective on downed pilot rescue in Iran Easter weekend

An evening pause: The details of the amazing search & rescue effort to recover a downed American pilot in Iran last weekend has been covered quite thoroughly in the media, especially the alternative press. This video gives us the compelling perspective of the men and women who made that rescue happen. Even if you oppose Trump’s present actions against Iran, Steeve’s reveals a fundamental aspect of the American way of war that illustrates again the best part of America. The key quote, “Will you be worth the trip?”

Hat tip Mike Nelson.

18 comments

America’s first foreign war on “the shores of Tripoli” has apparently never ended

I have just finished two books that very nicely recount America’s first foreign war in the first decade of the 1800s, following its independence from Great Britain. The war was President Thomas Jefferson’s effort to stop the piracy of American ships by the three Islamic nations on the north coast of Africa — Algeria, Tunis, and Tripoli (now in Libya) — then called the Barbary coast.

These Arab nations had for decades made it policy to hold all Mediterranean shipping hostage, demanding tribute from everyone or else they would attack ships, steal their goods, and either enslave their crew and passengers or hold them for ransom. The European nations paid, endlessly, rather than fight. The U.S. initially paid, but by 1800 and the election of Jefferson as president, it was tired of paying — especially because the payments were never enough to stop the raiding, nor were they enough to free those already captured and enslaved. When the ruler of Tripoli declared war against the U.S., Jefferson was glad to oblige.

The war that followed was the first in which American troops fought on foreign soil and planted the American flag in victory. It was also the first in which joint operations by American naval and land forces led to that victory. And finally, it was the first battle for the U.S. Marines, thus establishing firmly that branch of the military.

Thomas Jefferson and the Tripoli Pirates

The Pirate Coast

The two books to the right tell this story most effectively, but in very different ways.

First there is The Pirate Coast: Thomas Jefferson, the first Marines, and the secret mission of 1805 by Richard Zacks. Published in 2005, it is a very rich and well-researched work, while being remarkably readable because it tells the story from the point of view of the individuals involved. There is much triumph and tragedy in this story, and Zacks captures both.

Then we have Thomas Jefferson and the Tripoli Pirates, written by Brian Kilmeade and Don Yaeger and published ten years later in 2015. Unlike Zacks’ book, it does not delve as deeply into the lives of the many players, Instead, it is a fast-reading short but very thorough overview of this war.

Both books are worth reading, though The Pirate Coast is the better history. I strongly recommend you read both, however, beginning with the Kilmeade/Yaeger book.
» Read more

30 comments

Neptune as seen by Voyager-2 in 1989, four days before closest approach

Neptune as seen by Voyager-2 on approach
Click for original image.

Cool image time! In two earlier posts I highlighted the pictures taken by Voyager-2 of Neptune’s two largest moons, Triton and Proteus, when it made its close fly-by of Neptune in 1989. Other than a very distant low resolution picture of 105-mile-wide Nereid, Voyager-2 took no other good images of Neptune’s other known moons.

So today, let’s begin a tour of some of Voyager-2’s imagery of Neptune itself. The picture to the right, reduced slightly to post here, was taken on August 20, 1989 as the spacecraft was beginning its approach to Neptune. It shows the full daylight hemisphere of the gas giant. From the caption:

The images were taken at a range of 4.4 million miles from the planet, 4 days and 20 hours before closest approach. The picture shows the Great Dark Spot and its companion bright smudge; on the west limb the fast moving bright feature called Scooter and the little dark spot are visible. These clouds were seen to persist for as long as Voyager’s cameras could resolve them. North of these, a bright cloud band similar to the south polar streak may be seen.

Next week I will post some of the other good shots taken of Neptune, as well as one or two close-ups of Triton that need highlighting. Sadly, at that point we will have more or less reviewed most of the best data now available of this distant world. Astronomers have used the Hubble Space Telescope in subsequent years to attempt to track its weather patterns, but even Hubble really can’t provide enough resolution to really make that research substantive.

But stay tuned. The Voyager-2 images to come are worth viewing.

1 comment

The battle of Gettysburg as seen by those who lived it

Witness to Gettysburg by Richard Wheeler

I just finished one of the best histories I have ever read, and want to recommend enthusiastically to my readers. It is called Witness to Gettysburg, and was written by Richard Wheeler. My version was the 1987 edition, but a new edition was published in 2021.

Why was it so good? To understand this we need to look at the nature of the material historians use to construct their work. Some of this source material is more important than others. In the case of Wheeler’s book, he used the best material in the most vivid way possible, and put aside other materials that could have distracted from the story.

In writing my own histories of space exploration in the 20th century, I quickly learned there were two types of sources I needed to depend on. First there are what historians call original or primary sources. These are the testimonies of the actual participants, the individuals who actually did the deed and thus knew better than anyone what really happened. In the case of space, astronauts, their families, and the engineers and managers of NASA at the time made up this group.

Primary sources can also include others who were not actually participants but lived at the time and witnessed the events as they occurred. For example, news articles written by reporters as events unfolded fall into this group. So can the historian himself, if he or she was alive during those events. In the case of my own books, that made me this kind of primary source. I was alive when the space age began, and saw it unfold in real time, with my own eyes.

Any history that does not rely on these original sources, or gives them short shrift, should not be taken seriously.

Next come secondary sources, books and academic articles written after the fact by historians, economists, sociologists, or researchers from any number of academic fields. Such works are of great value for any historian, as they can give you a wider context and alternative interpretations of the long term consequences of what happened. They can also be invaluable for tracking down more original sources.

There is however a danger if you rely too much on these secondary sources. Often academics begin treating their analysis of events as more important than that of the primary sources, even though they weren’t there and only know of the events secondhand. When I got my masters degree in early colonial history in the 1990s I discovered this tendency to be a very big problem in academia. My history teachers wanted me to learn early colonial history from what past historians thought about it. I wanted to learn that history from the people who lived it. My teachers didn’t like that, and constantly challenged my conclusions because I was contradicting those other historians. I countered that I had read the original sources, and discovered those other historians were simply wrong.

In the end, I found I actually knew more about that history than my teachers, as they were seeped in arguing the analysis of their compatriots rather than studying the real data.

Now, back to Wheeler’s book, which focuses entirely on the battle of Gettysburg, from the moment Robert E. Lee began his invasion north to the end of the battle when he was retreating in defeat.

What made this book so good is Wheeler’s approach. To quote him in his introduction:
» Read more

16 comments
1 2 3 91