Mars!

Status
Not open for further replies.
But are you sure there was even a man on the moon? The radiation should have killed them and the pictures from the landing are questionable at best. More likely it was a clever move by our government to make the Soviets give up on the space race since we were so much farther ahead of them. Looking at how little we've done since the apparent moon landing. I think this is the most likely case. A vast conspiricy!
 
I believe the radation that you refer to is the Van Allen Belt? Actually, they recieved slightly more than a chest x-ray would have given.

This too, is more of the Fox Hoax. I still say that Fox needs to finance a trip to the moon to prove their claims. Of course that would mean more of the same so that they could have a sequal.
 
Wet1 is my boy...

Thank god someone actually believes NASA in the moon landing. I've heard so many damn conspiracy theories about the moon. Its this simple, we went, and we left after a few years. The reason the USSR never went is because they were too far behind to beat us to the moon, they didn't have the technical experience to go safely to the moon. The whole thing about Fox was something to show during sweeps to bolster ratings. Its that simple. Thanks again wet1 for agreaing with me
 
Wet1 is my boy...

Thank god someone actually believes NASA in the moon landing. I've heard so many damn conspiracy theories about the moon. Its this simple, we went, and we left after a few years. The reason the USSR never went is because they were too far behind to beat us to the moon, they didn't have the technical experience to go safely to the moon. The whole thing about Fox was something to show during sweeps to bolster ratings. Its that simple. Thanks again wet1 for agreeing with me
 
'Tis not hard to agree with what you believe.

To me the best way to Mars would be to find the key to industrial use of space. NASA will never make it economically easy for others to reach space. That is not their mission and they are indeed funded by the government. As such there is not a need for them to supply the means or technology for it.

But if industry could see a fine profit for their investment all would be different. This would supply people in space beyond the trained few. New techonologies would emerge through necessity. And business will find the ways that make it cheaper. With people come the need for habatits, places to live, recreation, new requirements for new enviroments. At present we only have a limited presence in space and this is what needs to change. This could be the very thing that drove the movement to settle the moon. To me, this we need!
 
'The reason .... '

thecurly1,

I wish you'd check out some of your 'facts' before posting. I'm getting tired of following you around to see what you've posted.

The Soviets (it was still the USSR then) weren't that far 'behind', only a few months, I believe. They were just being more cautious - The proof of it is that they didn't turn three of their Cosmonauts into 'crispy critters' like we did our Astronauts.
 
No real subject

I know it was the USSR, but that's not what I'm writing about. The Soviets were ahead of us for a while, but I believe they were farther behind than just a few months. They had killed the first man in space Yuri Gagarin, in a latter space adventure. Now I don't remember the issue, but Popular Science in 1999 or 1998 had an issue entitled "Soviet Space Secrets", they were doing some pretty dangerous stuff with their spacecraft to make advances. They stuffed three men in a two man, (Soyuz?) capsule and proclaimed that they were the first to put three men in space. If you go to popsci.com you maybe able to find it. Yes, we did sadly kill three astronauts during Apollo 1, but that's not bad for the number of men we put in space from the Mercury program on.

About all the things I post, what can I say I love this site and can type very, very fast.:D :D :D
 
There you go again!

They had killed the first man in space Yuri Gagarin, in a latter space adventure.
Click to expand...
Yuri was a hero of the USSR and great for public relations!

They never allowed him to fly into space again and he died a few years later in a plane crash.

Check out: http://howe.iki.rssi.ru/GCTC/gctc_e.htm

"Gagarin was celebrated as a hero in the Soviet Union. Monuments were raised to him and streets named in his honor. He never went into space again. He resumed his test flight career and was killed on March 27, 1968, on a routine mission near Moscow"
 
Last edited:
Thanks for clearing that one up

I remembered Gagarin diying, I thought it was in a space accidnet but wasn't positive. Alright, he died in a plane crash, that's what I heard. It all makes sense now.
 
I think that prehaps we are a little off topic so I will attemp to redirect it in the general direction.

marscones_mgs.jpg


In the picture you will see cones on the martian surface. It is speculated that these cones, which are located near large volcanoes, were caused by lava flows melting ice under the surface and the steam venting upwards with enough force to create the cones. This picture comes from APOD.

http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/image/0106/marscones_mgs.jpg
 
Last edited:
hey aLL
:)
hey wet1... i cant see the cones?
#but i dont know what i am looking for!
can you describe them a little more please.

i wonder what sort of minerals/resources we could mine from mars?

grove on all :)
 
The cones like small volcanoes. The points face upwards. Does this help? Each has a small, concave bottom.
 
Last edited:
First of all I'd like to apologize for the stupid coment about the moon landing possibly being a fake. I guess i saw that show on Fox like lots of other people. I checked out the sight provided by "thecurly1" and I stand corrected (for now;) ). The moon landing was real.

That is some interesting evidence of water being embedded in the moon. Still, how would you extract the moisture from the ground for a station you might have there? Maybe enclosing a section of it with plastic and heating the ground. Regardless of how, it seems that it would be a rather long and expensive process for a very little volume of water.
 
It does kinda resemble the moon doesn't it. It's the surface of Mars.
 
It came to my attention

last night that there is now a dust storm raging on Mars. It has the potential to cover the whole planet. An astromoner that I am aquainted was grumbling about the quality of observation available due to the storm.

Could you imagine your mother telling you not to leave a dust trail in the house? Well there goes the solar power for the next week.

Also this was taken by the HST on June 26 during the closest passage of Mars to the Earth. Resolution is said to be 10 kilometers.

1080480.jpg


http://www.msnbc.com/news/1080480.jpg
 
Last edited:
i agree with you tetra this planet has been out grown and those stupid polotitions can't see it. we need to stop and think about what we are doing to this planet. The natural rain forests are being eniolated by greedy buisiness men who can't see for profit! Trees are the only thing sustaining us ot this planet and we're distroying them!!!!!What can one small person do?
 
Welcome to the forums jcb15digger! You have asked the riddle of the century. The rain forests are being demolished for more than one reason. Farmers need fields to plant their crops. To get them they burn the trees down. Only the soil where they burn will not support crops for a long time. So in a few years they have to go back and do it again. Somewhere else.

Exotic woods from trees are getting rarer to locate. Logging companies are trying to find and get all they can to stay in business. Even common trees with lumber valve is needed to build houses and other structures.

But what to do to stop it is the question!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top