It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


NASA's moon plan too ambitious, Obama panel says

page: 2
<< 1   >>

log in


posted on Aug, 14 2009 @ 03:47 PM
I don't get it.

Burt Rutan's Scaled Composites won the X-Prize, building an LEO vehicle by themselves, launched from a carrier plane.

If they can do that, why the hell can't NASA make something similar, but bigger, to get to and from the space station?

And why, then, can't that system be used to put components in orbit, to be assembled by astronauts, to become spacecraft that are useable?

And why can Rutan do it on private funding, yet NASA can't do it with the backing of the US government?

Somethings just plain wrong there.

posted on Aug, 14 2009 @ 04:56 PM
I think that the new moon mission is designed to cost too much, that's the point. It's the reason that Buzz has been pushing for Mars - further away, more expensive and less immediately obtainable.

NASA knows that they won't get the cash - they can't support the ISS and the manned missions. The Constellation program is so uninspired, using the updated Apollo technology, instead of seeking alternative solutions? If Richard Branson can build a commercial service to provide trips into space using new technology, why can't NASA - after all there are the experts at this aren't they?

For the last 40 years NASA has kept us away from the moon and they are still doing it. There's something up there, on the moon, that NASA/Pentagon doesn't want us to know about.

posted on Aug, 14 2009 @ 06:28 PM

and it might be the wrong place to go, anyway.

Yes, wrong as in, can't get there.

Did we ever go in the 60s?

Here is why I think NOT:

NASA went from hearing JFKs vision on the TV in the summer of '62, to WALKING ON THE MOON, in 1969.

7 years.

In 7 years, they went from ZERO, to WALKING ON THE MOON.

Today, we have the benefit of heindsight, and to top it off we don;t even need to to do research to get the to the Moon as we have already been there. Nothing here is new. It's a case of just building a rocket, and going.

So... the only reason I can see for this *NOT* being possible today, at LESS financial cost, and given all the research was done back then, is because:

* We did NOT go in the 1960s
* We did NOT go in the 1960s
* We did NOT go in the 1960s
* Too many people have the capability to do independent, remote tracking of anything they do today, so can verify they are actually going.

Interesting that the only footage sent back of the Apollo landing sites were taken by ... NASA.

In 40 years, and up to this very day, no-one else has managed to photograph the landing sites?

The whole thing stinks.

This "we can't get back to the Moon because it costs too much" is convenient rubbish to cover up for the fact we didn't go last time.

posted on Aug, 14 2009 @ 09:09 PM
This is really funny cause according to some we've already been both places and even have bases on the moon and mars. They would just need to declassify 'some' of the crap. You all have seen NASA's airbrushed photos right? There something there just a question of who it's for.

If you think for 1 second that this is the only space program then your sadly mistaken.

This is just another example of those in power trying their best to keep up the rape and pillage of our tax dollars. Plain and simple, GREED!


posted on Feb, 1 2010 @ 11:45 PM
Everybody is an idiot, myself included.

This thread was started in August of 2009 and none of us searched for the ''Obama Moon'' subject
before we started creating endless ''Obama Hates The Moon'' threads.

For crying out loud!!!

I'm crashing into your yogi.... an attempt to snap you out of your ignorance!!!!

And we didn't go to the Moon.

new topics

top topics
<< 1   >>

log in