Okay,

Our first mission to the moon happened pretty quick right?

Kennedy pushed towards going to the moon and we went in the same decade.

2004, we have a lot better technology yet its going to take nearly 11 years for us to go back, why so long?

[Edited on 16-1-2004 by Thatoneguy]

Because we are building a base, not just going there. Plus we need to redevelop engines with enough power to get us to the moon again.

It probably has something to do with the lack of interest, lack of money, huge deficit, and our risk-averse space program.

If we actually attempted to cooperate with other countries to get to the Moon and Mars, we'd probably get there faster.

The announcment of a lunar outpost is only being used as a tool for getting President Bush re-elected; people like to hear these kinds of proposals. Some people actually think that we already have a base on the moon, and some of the evidence is credible, but it is highly unlikely.

Originally posted by TheConservative
The announcment of a lunar outpost is only being used as a tool for getting President Bush re-elected; people like to hear these kinds of proposals. I applaud him for this strategy, and I hope that we actually carry out operations like this in the next 25 or so years. Some people actually think that we already have a base on the moon, and some of the evidence is credible, but it is highly unlikely.

yep...it's a positive news thing.
keep the flow going since nasa is having success right now.

And those things are gonna take a while to plan and build.

quote from flinx:

If we actually attempted to cooperate with other countries to get to the Moon and Mars, we'd probably get there faster.

thanks flinx.

As one who grew up in the 60s and watched with awe as Neil Armstrong stepped on the moon in 69' I was very disapointed to see the whole program go to hell because of selfish shortsighted political opposition.

Knowing we could do better I have not been excited about the orbital truck opps - shuttle nor the blackhole for space dollars called the international space station.

Now I am hopeful to see a return to where we should already have been.

It would be a comfort in my old age to know that man has gotten off planet and might actually have an even chance at longterm survival of the species.

Looking forward to that goal makes me believe that politics and money are not an important issue that should slow us down, no - politics and money issues should be swept aside.

Hopefully we can stop military excursions into other countries over the next 11 years so we can actually afford to budget for this mission and others. Think of what we could achieve if we spent the dollar$ on exploration instead of war. It would stagger the imagination.


---Matty (mattywhelz)

Originally posted by mattywhelz
Hopefully we can stop military excursions into other countries over the next 11 years so we can actually afford to budget for this mission and others. Think of what we could achieve if we spent the dollar$ on exploration instead of war. It would stagger the imagination.


---Matty (mattywhelz)

True, but why waste billions or even a trillion or so dollars on an experiment like this? What would we do if WWIII broke out, and our government was spending all this money to hastily build a moon base? Think of what the deficit would be. We are talking, possibly a few trillion dollars! It is best to slowly finance and research the possibilities of a lunar base, and to slowly shuttle back and forth to the moon to construct this base. If we actually start this project, it will be many years from now, probably 20, 25, or more years. I am for it, as long as we take it easy and don't get carried away with it.

[Edited on 16-1-2004 by TheConservative]

Good points Conservative. I guess I was thinking a little utopian. Too many years of Star Trek viewing and thinking like Gene Rodenberry. "Explorations" could also include all types of advances in science, medicine, etc. I was just stating the obvious of what the human race not just the United States could accomplish for the betterment of all people if we allocated our resources for exploration and not war. Unfortunately until we can change our waring ways, eliminate racism and bigotry.....these blights on humanity will be carried to the stars with us.


---Matty (mattywhelz)

If one believes in UFOs, as I know many of the people on ATS do, the idea of a manned space program is a bit silly isn't it?

I'm still for it though, just in case I'm wrong about UFOs...

Yes, the idea that Bush has said this to sucker in some votes came across my mind.



[Edited on 16-1-2004 by Thatoneguy]

aye, we are building a (permanent) base on the moon from which we may launch a mission to Mars. The first official Mars mission (by NASA) was scheduled for 2002, then it was pushed back to 2007, now it's at 2014. Congressional oversight commitees have not approved of the facilities we have currently, therefore new containment facilities (on the moon) must be constructed and assembled. The space shuttle won't reach the moon, Saturn rocket won't work, and Apollo capsules and whatnot are too small with obsolete technology. I honesly forsee a somehwhat of a Trekkie look to our new space program.

By the way conservative, it's not propaganda. Iraq was turned into propaganda. Mars is an actual goal with international signifigance.
Cheers,
- Tass

I think its a great thing that this is happening now I think with the US EU and Russia concentrating on going to mars and even China joining the race this will promote peace and some stabillity and the sense of excitment to see man go back to the moon and then mars what a great time to be alive.

Originally posted by junglejake
Because we are building a base, not just going there. Plus we need to redevelop engines with enough power to get us to the moon again.

all ready there in russia I mean. the energia boosters can be used if they get some upgrades. and our computers are more powerfull then those used in 60
materials got better. And if they use those engines planned to being used in the x33 in stead of those old pieces being used in older versions of rocket propulsion currently used.