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.

 

NASA Ends Plan to Put Man Back on Moon

page: 2
11
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 14 2010 @ 03:04 PM
link   
Is NASA afraid of quantum mechanics for propulsion, or is it just over their head?

I admit it is over my head... but it was understood by physist Burkhard Heim in the mid 1950's.




posted on Jun, 14 2010 @ 03:15 PM
link   
It would be futile going to the moon in any case. Wev'e practically screwed the earth up. Move to the moon and screw that up, then Mars? Leaving a trail of # in our wake. It's so called progress that's brought our current civilization to it's knees.



posted on Jun, 14 2010 @ 03:36 PM
link   
This is one of those situations where, as a naysayer, it's sort of sad to be right. Hey, I grew up a while back when the space program was in top gear, and everybody had dreams of flying in space and doing cool stuff.

But as I grew up and actually paid attention to what was going on, I realized that whole sci-fi dream of lots of people flying around and working in space just wasn't going to happen. Space is really, really big, and it's got a whole lot of nothing in it except maybe deadly radiation. Maybe someday we'll figure out anti-gravity and warp drive, but until then just about anything we try to do in space is just too expensive. It costs way too much to get there and stay there than what you get out of it. Or can't do a thousand times cheaper with robots. Maybe someday our intelligent robot offspring will sail among the stars, but not us.

A spirit of exploration is good. But Magellan was at least sailing in an atmosphere he could breathe and on a planet where he could find food and water. He didn't have to take along his own air.

Human beings evolved on Earth, and we're just not built for any kind of long-distance space travel. It's what I was saying about paying attention. I took note of what the Russians were doing in their space stations and what the results were. Not good for human spaceflight.

But every now and then the politicians come out and do their Kennedy thing and talk about the wonderful programs we're going to do in space, and it's just a lot of hot air, because when the budget comes around we're going to ditch the Moon Base Project and keep funneling money into military programs that provide white-collar welfare jobs for the overabundance of highly-educated people in this country so they don't pack up and sell their rocket science skills to the highest bidder. No sense getting worked up about it.

Unless somebody makes a huge, paradigm shifting breakthrough in propulsion, we ain't going anywhere any time soon. And by "soon" I mean long after the carvings have worn off the tombstones of your grandchildren's grandchildren. Although we'll probably stop burying people in a couple hundred years, if not sooner. We'll need every bit of land to grow food for a population twice the size. We're going to have to figure out ways to live right on Earth, because we're stuck here.



[edit on 14-6-2010 by Blue Shift]



posted on Jun, 14 2010 @ 03:46 PM
link   
Good. Government needs to cut back it's spending somewhere. This is a good start.



posted on Jun, 15 2010 @ 01:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by Oneolddude
Lets be realistic.

You want to travel in space?

You already are on the perfect space craft that has all the support services needed to get our whole race to where it needs to go.


Valid point. I don't really want to travel in space but it seems like we must in order to survive as a species. The dinosaurs thought the Earth was a good spaceship too until a big rock fell from the sky and wiped them all out.

We have a chance to avoid the fate of the dinosaurs by colonizing another planet so if one of them gets wiped out, there's a "backup" colony that will survive.

It's not a question of IF another giant rock will strike the Earth, it's a question of WHEN. It would be a shame to have the ability to avoid our own extinction, and then not do it, which seems to be what you are proposing.



posted on Jun, 15 2010 @ 01:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by Blueracer
Good. Government needs to cut back it's spending somewhere. This is a good start.


If you really think our space program is the place that our Current Govt. needs to cut back on spending - then I seriously worry about your priorities!

(how 'bout a little cut in the Corporate welfare queens budgets?)


And although posters are right to point out some irrationality in expecting a significant manned presence in space at this time - a moon base (possibly multinational in composition) is a serious no-brainer!

1) It can be used to do reasonable and useful experiments
2) It can be used to survey/mine valuable mineral sites
and
3) It's a straight forward Human incubator if an unexpected ELE occurs on Earth.

I would also add

4) It's a no brainer to setup moon based telescopes as well.

If nothing else the US should be creating one to show space dominance and to set up a weapons platform up there - given the current state of thought in the MIC these days.

Therefore - with so many pro's - and so few cons - it continues to elude me why we haven't been building up to this since the early 80's?

I still feel like we have not been given all the information yet - something is being delibertly covered up - as to why we aren't returning to the moon in the last 38 years!?!!



posted on Jun, 15 2010 @ 01:39 PM
link   
NASA is politically forbidden to tell the truth.

They just can’t come out and say something like, “Gee folks, but despite the propaganda stunt that was televised in the 1960's to ‘save face’, we still don’t have the technology to put a man on the moon and bring him back to Earth both alive and in good health. Anyone with a slide ruler and the most basic understanding conventional rocket propulsion technology and radiation shielding requirements, knows this statement to be the truth."




posted on Jun, 16 2010 @ 11:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by Doc Velocity

Nasa ends plan to put man back on Moon


Nasa ends plan to put man back on Moon

Once again, this administration seems intent on ignoring the will of the American people and any opposition from Congress. Oh, no, Mr. Obama, we can't be wasting one or two billion on Nasa while we're still pumping hundreds of billions into your other FAILED "stimulus" programs. We simply can't pursue something as trivial as manned space exploration; after all, it might spark our imaginations and renew our sense of hope.

Sad and sick, isn't it — an administration that promised us HOPE is now crushing the hope out of our lives.

Sorry, lying bastard.

— Doc Velocity



Don't blame Obama on this. NASA wasted billions on the constellation program and they don't even have a lander design ready! They never intended to go back.



[President] Obama proposed in February that it should be scrapped because it was “over budget, behind schedule and lacking in innovation”, but he has met opposition in Congress, which has yet to approve his plan.


That says it all!!





[edit on 16-6-2010 by dragnet53]



posted on Jun, 16 2010 @ 11:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by Larryman
"... and lacking in innovation"

Next time NASA does a 'manned return to the Moon' program, they should include the 'innovation' of quantum anti-gravity lift and propulsion - ie: a flying saucer. Or 'borrow' the military TR-3B triangle. But, if they insist on continuing to play the rocket game... then


I say let the air force take over the space program. That XB37 shuttle looks kick ass!

NASA stands for No advance Spaceship Allowed!



new topics

top topics



 
11
<< 1   >>

log in

join