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.

 

Why No Manned Missions to Mars Yet???

page: 2
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 17 2005 @ 08:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by ShadowXIX
Great point since between Russia and the US I dont think half of what we have sent to Mars has made it there in one piece. Though Russia has a much worst track record then the US.


Three words.

Meters or Feet???

they see all, you are so unbelievably, saddeningly right.


[edit on 2/17/2005 by Amorymeltzer]




posted on Feb, 17 2005 @ 08:34 PM
link   
Lastday Prophet the evidence presented to show the moon landing was a hoax has been debunked to death give it up.

And saying the shuttle was blown up on purpose there is no evidence to even suggest that.

Please deny ignorance dont embrace it



posted on Feb, 17 2005 @ 08:43 PM
link   
Here's a link I give out to everyone who talks about the moon 'hoax.' Others do too, its on a lot of threads. It's a good one, I suggest taking a read through.

www.badastronomy.com



posted on Feb, 17 2005 @ 08:47 PM
link   
Believe what you will, I am not the one decieved, time will tell.



posted on Feb, 18 2005 @ 12:16 PM
link   
They will get colonize the moon first, because it has the dual purpose thingy that the Pentagon would like to see: you could build a maglev accellerator that not only is used for transport and mining, but also to dump moonrocks on rogue states on earth, can't do that from mars.

Bussiness and millitary , especially under Reagan/Bushlike administrations, is close marriage in the usa, the millitary needs the bussiness to come up with new toys and the bussiness needs the milltary to "open up " new markets and "liberate" resources around the world, so it makes a lot of sense to combine expensive space investments. A Clintonion like toy such as the Hubble space telescope can kiss its %%% goodbye because it has no dual purpose value.

Mars robots are justified by the fact that they do have a lot of dual pupose , they lay the groundwork for the mech soldiers and drones of future warfare (and frankly they seem very well suited for more or less affordable deep space missions)


Right now , the pentagon seems to focus on being able to turn the near earth orbits and space in a access denial area for others states at will by 2030. This means not only rocketshilelds against axis-of-evil ,(millitary) but also the bussiness sort of "secures " the first rights to moonresources etc.

Some people have accused Bush of having no agressive spacevision for NASA, but on the contrary, I think he has a very firm spacevision, it's just that so much of it is tucked away in black projects and not public.

One posive side of the millitarisation of space is that the development of hypersonic bombers might lead to cheaper commercial space access in the future and putting spying eyes in the sky everywhere ensures that the Bush administration must get a pretty good idea about the environmental state of our planet, maybe they will decide it becomes necessary to sign Kyoto afterall ....



[edit on 18-2-2005 by Countermeasures]

[edit on 18-2-2005 by Countermeasures]



new topics

top topics
 
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join