Moon, asteroids, and Mars are GO!

Discussion in 'Astronomy, Exobiology, & Cosmology' started by cygonaut, Jan 9, 2004.

  1. Undecided Banned Banned

    Messages:
    4,731
    I think we can afford it, I guess we disagree there, fair enough.


    If you borrow hundreds of billions of dollars, thus negating any future development. Funny thing is that the Chinese will most likely be funding this indirectly. So can you find me where this money can come from in a budget that is $500 billion in the hole? Also you're in Canada, so we is incorrect, they can.

    As far as "a phallic race to the moon"? I don't see any need to get Freud involved, I don't even follow what that's supposed to mean.

    Try to think about it, what do most men do? Same thing with this and nationalism...

    again I disagree but you're certainly welcome to your opinion.

    So letting millions go without the basics is a future? So we can find out what rock is on mars?
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. buffys Registered Loser Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,624
    as I said, we disagree. I'm content to agree to disagree.
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. Undecided Banned Banned

    Messages:
    4,731
    Cognitive surrender I assume?
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. buffys Registered Loser Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,624
    If that gives you pleasure feel free to assume that. There's plenty of arguments posted here for and against the idea that the mars plan would or wouldn't bankrupt us or steal food from the needy. No point in repeating ourselves.

    EDIT:forgot to comment on this one and couldn't just leave it alone
    what, you mean shave? Leave the toilet seat up?

    OH ... I get it! all men are controlled by their dicks and that's the cause of every problem on the planet, yes, very insightful.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
    Last edited: Jan 10, 2004
  8. Esoteric Tragic Hero Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    307
    "In testimony before Congress last fall, Michael D. Griffin, a former associate administrator for exploration at NASA, said the agency could accomplish major lunar and Martian exploration by increasing the agency's $15 billion budget by $5 billion a year..."

    How much are we spending in Iraq, 2 billion a month if im not mistakened?.
     
    Last edited: Jan 11, 2004
  9. Persol I am the great and mighty Zo. Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,946
    Once again, just because they waste money in one place doesn't mean they should do that in other areas as well.
     
  10. Undecided Banned Banned

    Messages:
    4,731
    It is very insightful because states are ego's and those in charge of those egos are males. They are innately impressed by Big things, and they want dominance over all others. It's only logical, what the hell do you think the Cold War was?

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  11. 15ofthe19 35 year old virgin Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,588
    Nico, what exactly fuels this obsession you have with the penis?

    You know there are a lot of us that think Freud was a penis-obsessed asshat, and there is absolutely no way to prove us wrong. So what is your story?
     
  12. Persol I am the great and mighty Zo. Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,946
    Regardless of the penis or whatever the reason may be, ego still appears to be the driving force in country based competition. However, I don't think this has anything to do with the penis, except that us guys have them, and guys also happen to act like this.
     
  13. Undecided Banned Banned

    Messages:
    4,731
    Bigger is better, it is as I have said innate to all males. They define being a male by the size of their "partner", their cars, their houses, bigger, and bigger and bigger and bigger. A female would be less likely to do this, they are more pragmatic individuals. Freud was right everything has a sexual connection, we can't deny it. Persol I agree that this has nothing to do with the penis directly, Bush didn't look down and say. TO THE MOON! But there is unconsciously a thing with males. You have to think of states as a ego, and when you're ego is threatened by a bigger player, you make it your damned mission to not be usurped.
     
  14. buffys Registered Loser Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,624
    Freud never said everything has a sexual connection, "sometimes a cigar is just a cigar" ... ring a bell? Anyway he was and idiot and his views don't really relate to this much, I can't speak for anyone else but when I mentioned national ego I was referring to simple pride (and thats hardly just a male thing).

    This is exactly why I think this upcoming announcement might actually be followed through. Wether it's Bush in power or Hillary Clinton for that matter if China's plans are genuine, America would never allow itself to be surpassed in this area as long as it still had 10 cents to spend. As I've said before I'm glad we're so damned competitive (in this case at least) but I just fear that this will turn out to be the International space station all over again (impressive but ultimately useless). Instead of doing this the best and most thoughtful way I have a bad feeling it will be purely political (in other words the most expensive, unnecessarily flashy and with as little substance as is possible while still achieving the goal).

    To be fair I suppose I should let Bush make the announcement before I actually start judging the particulars but his track record so far gives me little hope.
     
  15. Jan Ardena Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,997
    cygonaut,

    Astronauts will return to the moon and prepare for exploring Mars and near asteroids U.S. President Bush is expected to propose next week.

    Let's hope they really go to the moon this time, eh!

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    Jan Ardena.
     
  16. Godless Objectivist Mind Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,197
  17. Jan Ardena Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,997
    Godless,

    Only an idiot believes this kind of crap:

    Why? It is entirely possible that the moon landings we see on the television was a hoax. I'm not saying that they didn't land on the moon, only that i don't believe what we saw was man on the moon. There is nothing idiotic about that.
    Apart from that it matters not a hoot if they landed on the moon. If they did, yippee, if they didn't, liars.
    And why are you getting irate?

    Tell me something Jan if the moon landing was fake, how the hell did we get the rocks back to earth?

    What moon paraphanalia do we have to compare them against to know that they are genuine moon rocks?
    Outside of human scientists, what other way is there of deciding they are genuine?

    Jan Ardena.
     
  18. Persol I am the great and mighty Zo. Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,946
    This is silly. Wy do you think the moon landing was a hoax. Hell, we can see the shit they left up there. Do you think that the USSR wouldn't cry foul?
     
  19. Vortexx Skull & Bones Spokesman Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,242
    No, because the US will pay them to fake a launch to mars from Baikonour

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  20. Persol I am the great and mighty Zo. Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,946
    You do realize that the US and Russia were not friends during the moon landing, right?

    Nowadays, there a probably a dozen different nations which would cry foul if a mission was faked. Do you think we are the only country who track objects and transmissions in space?
     
  21. Nasor Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,221
    Let's not allow this to degenerate into one of those threads where reasonable people waste a lot of time and effort arguing with morons who watch FOX and believe we never went to the moon. There are already more than enough of those.

    Anyway, I'm still waiting for someone to explain what the benefits of going back to the moon would be at this time. I'm all for exploiting the moon, but I think we need to wait until we've made significant advances in space technology before going back. There just isn't much point in returning until we have truly low-cost access to space. Let me use an analogy. Suppose you have a thousand workers and you're supposed to build a huge factory on top of a mountain. There's no good way up the mountain. There are two way to go about it:

    Option one would be having all of your workers begin climbing to the top with a few boards and pieces of metal strapped to their backs. If anyone objected, you could say 'Hey, we have to start somewhere!'

    Option two would be two have your workers build a road up the mountain, so that you could haul your building material up in trucks. It would also provide a convenient way to bring down the factory's products once you get it up and running.

    Bush is suggesting that we take the first approach. It seems foolish to build a permanent base on the moon when we don’t even have a good way to get there. It will require major breakthroughs in the aerospace industry before building permanent installations on the moon makes sense. Rather than wasting money on 'gee-whiz' missions, we should spend our space dollars on research and development so that one day going back to the moon really will make sense.
     
  22. EI_Sparks Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,716
    Nasor,
    How about this for an argument then?

    We know, after decades of observation and research, that microgravity is bad for the human body and that radiation levels in space can jump to lethal levels with little warning following solar activity. Also, it's difficult to construct things in space, not only for those reasons, but because of problems judging distances by eye, the "no mass but lots of inertia" mindset that takes time and training to gauge, and other problems.

    On the lunar surface however, you have enough gravity to alleviate some of the physiological problems, and to orient everything and make working far easier, and you have regolith everywhere, which not only yields several useful minerals and metals (read The High Frontier for the full analysis, then check the print date to see how long this has been known for), but which also acts as a highly cost-effective radiation shield and thermal insulator.

    In other words, going to the moon for a permenant base is actually the logical next step on from LEO, and is easier to do than LEO for some things.

    Plus, it's a ready source of material for orbital construction. Basicly, it's cheaper to go to the Moon, build a base there, then construct a ship in orbit to go anywhere else - perhaps not for the first ship, but get to two or three ships and you're breaking even.
    In the meantime, you have a manned lunar base to build on and to begin to exploit. Solar Power Satellites, asteroid mining, lunar mining - all now far, far easier.
     
  23. Persol I am the great and mighty Zo. Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,946
    But you are acoiding the issue. Why do we need to send people at all? We can just as easily (and cheaply) send probes from Earth. We are not going exploring in ships anytime soon, so what does the moon give us? Every other industry needs business plans to show what it actually costs, and what the benefit is. Where are these for a trip to the moon?
     

Share This Page