Trump advisers' space plan: To moon, Mars and beyond

a reply to: Davg80

Quiet you, you can just pay for it.

Those pictures you want may show too much.....

It's obvious that Trump has a group of scrip/tweeter writers making up ***t to placate and keep the faithful detracted so they won't look at his lies, fabrications and total bull +*i%. The GOP is close to open revolt, his staff is fragmented with control issues and infighting.


Bridges are falling down, dams are failing, get a little rain and it floods everywhere, Hurricanes wipe out entire cities, but WTF, let's go to Mars. If you can't see it's just distraction....I don't think there's much hope for you.

Live in the orange glow and be happy. Or at least until you run over a yuggggeeee pot hole and need 1k worth of frontend repair.

F+*+ the infrastructure, were happy to live in a **** hole....Let's go to Mars!!!!

a reply to: olaru12

Ok seems what you may be concerned about issues that may have taken more than 3 weeks to transpire.

The spillway maybe older than 3 weeks.

The years of drought maybe older than 3 weeks.

Hurricanes happen and being prepared is not a POTUS responsibility.

And the pot hole that takes out your ball joint is more than likely more than 3 weeks old.

You are about 8 years late to the party. But jump in the water is warm.

a reply to: olaru12

Was it really necessary to come into a a thread on Space Exploration and turn it into political crap with politically trolling posts?

This isn't the Mud Pit forum.

But I shouldn't be surprised, as I said before: Haters gonna hate.

There is absolutely NO reason why we can not do more than one thing at a time. We can multitask. We can venture out into space and work on things here too.

Most of what you are griping and whining about has been addressed and work began on for over a decade now. Bridges are being rebuilt (I know, I keep having to detour around the work they are doing on them), Dams have been inspected with recommendations what what to do (if anything can be done, as in some cases it's not always easy to fix).

No, it does not flood everywhere just because of a little bit of rain (but then, exaggeration is a thing to do, right?).

Hurricanes have ALWAYS wiped out cities. I suppose that's Trumps fault too? How about the idiots that decided to build a city in a hurricane prone area? DOH!

Again: humans can multitask. We can walk and chew gum at the same time. Or were you not aware of that?

Could we all please the political trolling outside of the Mud Pit? It's getting sad around here that people have to whine everywhere they go.

a reply to: TerminalVelocity

Not likely, politics is a huge part of space travel.

Should it be?

a reply to: seasonal

It shouldn't be, no.

I do get that thinking exploration of space done purely for scientific advancement and never political reasons is not always the case (Sputnik, Moon Race, were both politics on a world level).

Getting humans out past low Earth orbit and into space on a more permanent basis should be a global thing (not having the eggs all in one basket, taping into other recourse that can help keep us from destroying our Earth, etc).

However, there are good reasons to not push out far right away: Mining the moon and asteroids, believe it or not, there are more of just about every mineral we want right here on Earth in our crust that is easier to get to than the Moon or any asteroid, if you look at the cost of lifting all the mining equipment and people needed up out of our gravity well.

Water: we have plenty of it here. It's still cheaper to desalinate sea water than it is to try and harvest and ice asteroid out in space.

Helium 3: great for fusion.......to bad we are still no where near having fusion reactors that work in such a way to take advantage of that (and it seems they are always saying only 20 more years, etc). Even so: you'd have mine billions of tons of Moon rock to get a sizable amount of He3 to make it worth it.

So basically, the real reason to get out there is: get humans off this rock and spread out, and, the technology that gets developed because of it. We always get a boost because of it.

Getting to Mars would be great. Getting to Mars safely, and doing so via a ship that was built in Earth or Moon orbit, is better.

Politics would be involved. Especially depending upon the base that would be put on the Moon, or Mars, or even in orbit. If national pride spurs that on, then great.

What really gets me is the whining and crying of: We shouldn't spend the money and go out there because we have so many problems down here that need to be taken care of!

It's gets me because: a huge amount of those problems are caused because we're all stuck down here in the first place.

It's also like saying: A person should not leave home when they are 18 because they've not grown up yet and learned all there is to learn.......never mind the fact that by leaving home and getting out there, they will learn a lot more.

Getting all whiny about space exploration because: Trump! is about a mature as some kid stomping up to their room and smashing their xbox or computer because their parents told them No about going to some party.

Very immature and stupid.

originally posted by: seasonal
a reply to: TerminalVelocity

Not likely, politics is a huge part of space travel.

Should it be?

Politics is always a big part of everything where yuggggeee sums of money of Taxpayer dollars are being spent.
It's Trumps idea to reinvigorate the space program and it's not "hating" to bring up the economics of BS boondoggles.
How much debt is the US willing to take on for very, very, very long extremely expensive projects.
I have to live within my budget, am I wrong to bring up facts that others want to ignore because of their love for D. Trump.

I guess priorities don't matter.

btw...I'm all for the wall. I have a perfect Idea for one of the vendors that will be used even before the first backhoe is on location.

a reply to: olaru12

It will all work out. Well until the petro dollar take a dump.

originally posted by: seasonal
a reply to: olaru12

It will all work out. Well until the petro dollar take a dump.

It will all work out for me. I have options and know how to play the commodities market both hard and soft.

I just hate to see people suffer because of short sighted hero worship of a charlatan.

a reply to: olaru12

Maybe, I would hate to see what happens to all spending if the petro D crashes.

originally posted by: seasonal
a reply to: olaru12

Maybe, I would hate to see what happens to all spending if the petro D crashes.

Can the US sustain European prices for gas? Yugggeee opportunity for the speculators like you and me, catastrophe for the American working man and commuter. And certainly not good for rebuilding manufacturing. Crushing inflation all around.

War is our usual answer for those problems. You ready for that?

originally posted by: SaturnFX
Until there is a solid plan, and ground broke, on a space elevator, then any real space colonization/exploration plan for the common person is just a dream.

I do not agree, in that a lunar base is very important for future planetary ventures. It not only has 16% of Earth Gravity, making it much more economical to launch missions from there, but fuel's can be manufactured there from the Moon's vast resources, and most likely, vehicles can be made there as well. It will initially be expensive to get the infrastructure there to begin, but it will pay back enormously once it becomes operational.

a reply to: TrueBrit

Thank you for the insightful response. Good points. Glad you shared them.

a reply to: charlyv
As much I am in favor of a Moon base for a variety of reasons, yours isn't really one of them. You are talking about an industrial level of development. While it will happen, that's a long way down the road. Until then, sending stuff to Earth orbit and working on it there, then sending it off to "out there" would be easier than working on the Moon. We'll be rounding up a space rock soon, we'll get better at it. Lots of resources.

If the goal is to establish a colony on Mars, wouldn't Phobos make more sense as a "lunar" base?

a reply to: Kali74

Explanation?

a reply to: Phage

Moon base would be a baby step and practice baby step to "island" hop to the next identified base site.

I would imagine if we are going to be on the moon by 2020, we had better get the lead out.

Funny that Trump want to be on the moon in his second term. Usually politicians put the date out of their term (Obama care), like cowards.

a reply to: seasonal

Landing on the Moon will not make landing on Mars any easier.

originally posted by: olaru12
It's obvious that Trump has a group of scrip/tweeter writers making up ***t to placate and keep the faithful detracted so they won't look at his lies, fabrications and total bull +*i%. The GOP is close to open revolt, his staff is fragmented with control issues and infighting.


Bridges are falling down, dams are failing, get a little rain and it floods everywhere, Hurricanes wipe out entire cities, but WTF, let's go to Mars. If you can't see it's just distraction....I don't think there's much hope for you.

Live in the orange glow and be happy. Or at least until you run over a yuggggeeee pot hole and need 1k worth of frontend repair.

F+*+ the infrastructure, were happy to live in a **** hole....Let's go to Mars!!!!

You left out "The sky is falling" But CNN told you it's only raining since it is themselves doing all the cloud seeding. (If you see what is really happening).(someday)

a reply to: Phage

With a base on the moon, there is a much reduced chance of a big rocket exploding under you ass. It has 84ish% less gravity. Safer

There would be less in the way of weather/atmosphere to pose danger when launching.

But if you mean landing on the moon will not make it easier, it would seem practice would make perfect.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: seasonal

Landing on the Moon will not make landing on Mars any easier.

Correct.

But trying to set up a colony on Mars without doing it closer to home first is almost like daring the worst to happen.

I'm a firm believer in training first, doing second.

Setting something up on the Moon first, where the personnel are closer, conditions are actually harsher in many ways and succeeding at it would go a long ways in convincing more people that a Mars colony is doable.

Sure, there are plenty of things that could happen that being only about a quarter of a million miles from Earth won't mater and could take them all out, but it's almost a sure fire thing that it would be almost impossible going all the way to Mars.

No one says we have to do it closer to home first of course. But it does make sense to me that we progress that way, and should have been progressing this way:

Habitats in Earth orbit (and I mean something much more substantial than the ISS), Habitats or bases on the Moon, then reach out to other planets like Mars.

Of course, it's possible that I'm just heavily influenced by 1970s science fiction from when I was a kid. Waa-Waa guitars anyone?