It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

probe to the moon........why?

page: 1
9
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 18 2014 @ 09:34 PM
link   
really? mans walked on the moon and they want us to invest in sending a probe to the moon?

to do what? more than the people that were already there? do not see the point if you ask me unless no one was there in first place lol



www.bbc.co.uk...




posted on Nov, 18 2014 @ 09:37 PM
link   
It's the closest place to colonize.



posted on Nov, 18 2014 @ 09:39 PM
link   
a reply to: AreUKiddingMe and sending a probe helps that why?


+3 more 
posted on Nov, 18 2014 @ 09:43 PM
link   
a reply to: sparky31

Finding landing areas, high resolution mapping, long term radiation readings, and a lot of other data that is better to know BEFORE you land there planning to stay for months at a time. Data that Apollo didn't need, and wasn't able to collect.



posted on Nov, 18 2014 @ 09:46 PM
link   
a reply to: sparky31
All means of employment shipped out to distant, Once Commie, countries, and now more must be wasted, sorry spent, To see if the Moon is Made of Cheese................. And they still don't know all about this so called planet..........'What a Wonderful World'.



posted on Nov, 18 2014 @ 09:47 PM
link   
a reply to: sparky31
O.P. has a point,why are humans not there?
Massive question really and it's jack sh!t to do with budgets and financing.



posted on Nov, 18 2014 @ 09:50 PM
link   
a reply to: southbeach

And you have a couple trillion dollars laying around to fund a colony, right?



posted on Nov, 18 2014 @ 09:52 PM
link   

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: sparky31

Finding landing areas, high resolution mapping, long term radiation readings, and a lot of other data that is better to know BEFORE you land there planning to stay for months at a time. Data that Apollo didn't need, and wasn't able to collect.
think and would hope we could do that already,mean we,r landing probes on comets so i would hope our closest satellite we could send more than a washing machine to find them things out.

if not then we are not progressing one little bit.

(natural satellite)
edit on 2013 by sparky31 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 18 2014 @ 09:55 PM
link   
a reply to: sparky31

And how exactly do you propose to do that, if you don't actually, you know, GO there? That's not something that can be done reliably from anywhere but actually being near the moon.

You don't go there with a manned mission without knowing that information FIRST.
edit on 11/18/2014 by Zaphod58 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 18 2014 @ 10:01 PM
link   

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: sparky31

And how exactly do you propose to do that, if you don't actually, you know, GO there? That's not something that can be done reliably from anywhere but actually being near the moon.

You don't go there with a manned mission without knowing that information FIRST.
well we,ve been there,so we,ve been told so even what the Astronauts have gathered in 5 mins is more than any probe is going to find out in 5 years.



posted on Nov, 18 2014 @ 10:02 PM
link   
It's our nearest celestial body. I don't understand why we aren't, or haven't been, sending everything we have there. I mean, Mars is cool and everything...and the Rosetta mission...but, the moon is RIGHT there. A mere quarter of a million miles away.

Honestly, I'm still stuck on why we aren't sending such more probes to delve the deeps of oceans here on earth. But, if we are to explore and expand into space...why not start with the moon? Seems logical to me.



posted on Nov, 18 2014 @ 10:08 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58
Right...i don't but the Federal reserve does.......and so what's your point Herr Gandalf?



posted on Nov, 18 2014 @ 10:08 PM
link   

originally posted by: kalunom
It's our nearest celestial body. I don't understand why we aren't, or haven't been, sending everything we have there. I mean, Mars is cool and everything...and the Rosetta mission...but, the moon is RIGHT there. A mere quarter of a million miles away.

Honestly, I'm still stuck on why we aren't sending such more probes to delve the deeps of oceans here on earth. But, if we are to explore and expand into space...why not start with the moon? Seems logical to me.
exactly the moons right there and its getting ignored,for why?who knows



posted on Nov, 18 2014 @ 10:13 PM
link   
a reply to: sparky31

And what good does a mission that stayed on the moon for a total of a couple of days when you're talking about a mission that has a minimum duration of six months? Apollo 17 had a total of 75 hours on the surface. That's going to give you great data for that THREE DAYS. That's not going to tell you what kind of exposures you're looking at over a week, or a month, or a year. Which is what you need to stay there.

What good does being on the surface, nowhere near the most likely landing areas for a long term colony, do for helping to plan for a colony, or even a science base that is there for months at a time? The Apollo missions were nowhere near the South Pole, which is the most likely place for a base to stay, as there is ice there, which would give them water for various things in the base.

Yes, we've been there, but again, the manned missions wouldn't give you enough data that is needed for a long term stay on the moon.



posted on Nov, 18 2014 @ 10:13 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Nov, 18 2014 @ 10:14 PM
link   
a reply to: southbeach

That there has been no interest in spending a few trillion dollars to go somewhere we've already been, when there are so many issues here on earth to deal with.



posted on Nov, 18 2014 @ 10:15 PM
link   

edit on 11/18/2014 by Zaphod58 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 18 2014 @ 10:16 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Nov, 18 2014 @ 10:18 PM
link   

edit on 11/18/2014 by Zaphod58 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 18 2014 @ 10:28 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58
Federal reserve prints money and i doubt the entities that are behind it care much about the issues on Earth unless it's about personal gain rather than solving geopolitical problems or global warming etc.
They care only about money and they print it so they can do whatever and go wherever they want.
My God man,you are a moderator with little vision.



new topics

top topics



 
9
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join