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 do we not have a base on the moon??

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 29 2005 @ 02:25 PM
link   
It has been many years now since man has apparently been to the moon. The question I would like answered is why have we not built a habitat there? Surely with all the talk about manned missions to mars the most logical step would be to do a trial run of the mission to the moon first, where help and a rescue mission (if needed) are possible. The longer we dont return to the moon the more I am inclined to think that all the sceptics about the appollo missions are right and that it really was faked. Surely the scientific gains in doing this would give us some idea of how to plan and execute a much more solid platform for basing future mars missions.If our governments dont mind spending billions on wars all over the world why is it such a problem pouring similar kinds of cash into a space program that in my opinion would give the human race a little bit of hope about the future and may help us join together instead of fighting each other.
Has nasa or any other agency given valid reasons for why this has never been done?

Any answers or comments appreciated.




posted on Apr, 29 2005 @ 02:27 PM
link   
1) $$$$
2) $$$$
3) the reptilians don't want us there




private companies will be sending people there in 10-20 years anyway.....



posted on Apr, 29 2005 @ 02:32 PM
link   
I think the answer is really simple -- a moonbase is not a neccessity at any rate, at least now. The Mars manned exploration program is not either, for that matter, and was brought up as a campaign banner, by the current administration.

If we wanted to study more of the Moon, we could do it very successfully using robotic missions. Keeping humans there, with no ready water supply and in conditions of high radiation levels, can't really be justified.

I personally believe the main priority should be the development of a very safe, inexpensive and reliable orbital transport, before we venture any further. With technologies like SpaceShipOne, this may indeed become a reality within a couple of decades. After all, getting into orbit for a rescue mission or otherwise, should be a trivial matter. Right now, it's nothing like it.



posted on Apr, 29 2005 @ 02:35 PM
link   
I agree with the money thing but I also think it's a matter of bad PR.

The NASA PR machine has always been kind of craptacular, the minute public interest begins to wain in regards to Space exploration NASA's instinct has been to pull the plug and cut back as opposed to an agressive SPACE IS THE FUTURE kind of cool campaign sort of thing.

Also the fact that to get the american people to care just isn't enough this really is a get all the countries to pull their resources and make it a world wide effort to get a base on the moon situation.

The cold war certainly didn't help and the current political climate isn't helping any either, so until we get our collective crap together as a planet we won't be seeing any moon bases for a while.

Though I bet if you put a really cool mall on the moon with a great food court that'd motivate some people. Come Stay at the lunar hilton...sea of tranquility mall adjacent.

IMO of course and as always.

SPiderj



posted on Apr, 29 2005 @ 02:35 PM
link   
A Moon base is coming, wether it will have a US flag or a Hilton Hotels flag is another matter though



posted on Apr, 29 2005 @ 02:49 PM
link   
Well I agree that the Moon would be a good test ground for a venture to Mars, there just isn't much there. If we did put a base on the Moon, we would need a more reliable method of getting there, for supplies and rescue if needed. Look what happened after the shuttle disaster. The supplies on the Space Station ran short, and it is alot closer than the Moon.

Personally, I think the space elevator would be the way to go, which we were talking about in this thread.
www.abovetopsecret.com...

But this would take time to develope, but then a trip to Mars or the Moon would be much shorter, and thus the chances of success are better.



posted on Apr, 29 2005 @ 03:01 PM
link   
Thanks for the swift replies guys, I was really curious to know other peoples opinions on this. I just thought that if we had some sort of co-operation going on with other countrys and some common ground to build some sort of project on it would help to bind us together as one people and give us something to look forward to in our future instead of us all blowing the s**t out of each other on a daily basis. Who knows, we might even need our own "United Earth Army" so that we can start fighting with the ET's, mayby then the governments would give us some sort of funding for projects like this. It seems the only way our governments will throw money at projects is if they think they can win some sort of war


Thanks again and good day to you all.



posted on Apr, 29 2005 @ 03:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by Aelita
If we wanted to study more of the Moon, we could do it very successfully using robotic missions. Keeping humans there, with no ready water supply and in conditions of high radiation levels, can't really be justified.


They're working on it, found this very interesting article

www.space.com...



posted on Apr, 29 2005 @ 05:50 PM
link   



posted on Apr, 29 2005 @ 11:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by sardion2000
A Moon base is coming, wether it will have a US flag or a Hilton Hotels flag is another matter though


Personally, I prefer the Marriot.


MONEY! It's real expensive and people are focused elsewhere right now. International support is slim at the moment. Lack of interest, as well. Although, I guess the short answer is "Because we didn't build one in the 70s.'



posted on Apr, 29 2005 @ 11:18 PM
link   
Don't worry. We do have bases on the moon. So does everyone else.



posted on Apr, 29 2005 @ 11:50 PM
link   
Most of this stuff has been discussed already on ATS; Why don't we build a moon base? Why Nasa isn't going more aggressive on the space front.
Check this thread out: www.abovetopsecret.com...

IAF

[edit on 29-4-2005 by IAF101]



posted on Apr, 30 2005 @ 07:55 PM
link   
Hey, remember the OCEAN too!!! We haven't explored 1/10 of the ocean yet (under it). There could be some big monster-sized animals deep down there that we are unaware of.

And the ocean is very alien-like too. If you go down like 2000 feet, where it is totally black, you can see towers of stalactite rock or something like that......it looks straight out of Lord of the Rings, because it is 2000 feet down so the light doesn't penetrate, so the "skyline" is black.

You could also swim right up to a vent from a volcano and come within a few feet of the smoke coming out of it, because the pressure keeps the heat in the one area (whereas such a vent on the surface, you'd feel the heat from a good distance away). This is also assuming you wouldn't not get crushed by the water pressure that deep.



posted on Apr, 30 2005 @ 11:06 PM
link   
Robots do a more thorough job, and gather much more data.



posted on Apr, 30 2005 @ 11:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by sardion2000
A Moon base is coming, wether it will have a US flag or a Hilton Hotels flag is another matter though
Until Hilton or Branson etc..... make a huge investment, backed by shareholders that believe in their dream, don't expect a moon base anytime soon. We are just beginning to move into space and as any human endeavor in the past, it will be driven by profit. But people are working on it, and baby steps are being. made.www.space.com...



posted on May, 1 2005 @ 03:11 AM
link   
Actually, while many of you are on the right track, you have to take another thing into consideration: a moon base isn't the best testing ground for Mars or any other such space base, for the moon is MUCH different than Mars. Construction would be different, applying medicine would be wholly different, and experiments would perform different, as well. We're better off first understanding our extreme neighbors and then going right at Mars rather than screwing around with a $xbillions base on moon that wouldn't give us much more information than we have now.



posted on May, 1 2005 @ 09:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by concept
We're better off first understanding our extreme neighbors and then going right at Mars rather than screwing around with a $xbillions base on moon that wouldn't give us much more information than we have now.


Well, yes and no. In terms of getting to Mars, yes, tooling around on the Moon would be a poor investment.

In terms of knowledge about space and space exploration, how humans and life in general reacts to a space environment, bettering our technology, studying aspects of known and unknown science in near Zero-G, and possible energy sources, the a base on the Moon would ne indispensible.



posted on May, 1 2005 @ 10:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by Oakley
It has been many years now since man has apparently been to the moon. The question I would like answered is why have we not built a habitat there? Surely with all the talk about manned missions to mars the most logical step would be to do a trial run of the mission to the moon first, where help and a rescue mission (if needed) are possible. The longer we dont return to the moon the more I am inclined to think that all the sceptics about the appollo missions are right and that it really was faked.


Ask yourself this question too: Why didn't anyone else follow us to the moon?

It was faked.

Let the flaming begin.



posted on May, 1 2005 @ 12:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by Amorymeltzer

In terms of knowledge about space and space exploration, how humans and life in general reacts to a space environment, bettering our technology, studying aspects of known and unknown science in near Zero-G, and possible energy sources, the a base on the Moon would ne indispensible.


Yes, but the environment on Mars is much, much different than that of the moon. We've done a billion studies on the physiological effects of zero-g and the like, and since the moon and Mars have much different.

Mars: gm=9.8*0.107*(12775/6775)2 = 3.73m/s/s
(// 0.4 that is Earth -- technically .375 but who's counting?)
Moon: 1.6 N/kg

I weigh 200 lbs here on Earth, but just 75.4 on Mars, and just 33.2 on the moon. Therefore it's a bit of a moot point to first build a base on the moon, when nothing of the moon even slightly resembles Mars. It's like eating an apple in order to get ready to eat an orange.

Don't forget to take the peel off.


[edit on 5/1/05 by concept]



posted on May, 1 2005 @ 06:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by EastCoastKid
It was faked.


Nope!


As I said concept, a Moon base for helping us to Mars is pointless. But there's more to life than Mars, and I already listed many of the reasons why a Moon base would be invaluable.




top topics



 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join