http://blogs.smithsonianmag.com/smartnews/2013/01/there-is-a-sculpture-on-the-moon-commemorating-fallen-astronauts/ Keeping You Current Sat, 18 May 2013 04:49:15 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.4 http://blogs.smithsonianmag.com/smartnews/2013/01/there-is-a-sculpture-on-the-moon-commemorating-fallen-astronauts/comment-page-1/#comment-3426 Libby Wilson Mon, 07 Jan 2013 18:05:53 +0000 http://blogs.smithsonianmag.com/smartnews/?p=9416#comment-3426 I see now that it's actually the next statement that may be the inaccurate statement: "In 1971, that number was 14,...". Shouldn't it read something like "In 1971, the total number was about 14 astronaut and cosmonaut deaths, only a few of which occurred in the line of duty." ? I see now that it’s actually the next statement that may be the inaccurate statement: “In 1971, that number was 14,…”. Shouldn’t it read something like “In 1971, the total number was about 14 astronaut and cosmonaut deaths, only a few of which occurred in the line of duty.” ?

]]> http://blogs.smithsonianmag.com/smartnews/2013/01/there-is-a-sculpture-on-the-moon-commemorating-fallen-astronauts/comment-page-1/#comment-3425 Libby Wilson Mon, 07 Jan 2013 17:54:38 +0000 http://blogs.smithsonianmag.com/smartnews/?p=9416#comment-3425 The statement "Around 20 astronauts have lost their lives in the line of duty" doesn't make sense to me. If there were 14 (maybe 16) as of 1971, there should be at least 14 more if only the deaths of the Challenger and Columbia shuttle astronauts are added. That would make the total at least 28 (maybe 30). The statement “Around 20 astronauts have lost their lives in the line of duty” doesn’t make sense to me. If there were 14 (maybe 16) as of 1971, there should be at least 14 more if only the deaths of the Challenger and Columbia shuttle astronauts are added. That would make the total at least 28 (maybe 30).

]]>