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.

 

Obama Kills Mission to The Moon....REDUX

page: 1
6
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 25 2012 @ 03:13 PM
link   
After watching the State of the Union last night, I couldnt help remembering my greatest disappointment in the current President of the United States.


According to the Washington Post, Obama will seek to shelve the $81bn Constellation program, which called for a return to the moon by 2020 and human landings on Mars by the middle of the century. The plans were laid out by his predecessor, George Bush, in 2004.

Get the whole article here:
www.guardian.co.uk...

Why would President Obama kill the Constellation Program? Especially considering it was such a small percentage of the national budget.

I know that I am a bit of a space nerd, but is it not imperative that we go forth into space?
Is that not where our inevitable future lies?
And the obvious first place to begin upon our trek to the stars is on the moon.
And, eventually, to colonize the moon as a base from which to launch deep space missions.

BTW, please do not turn this into a "did we actually go to the moon" thread.
This thread is strictly to discuss WHY we are not going back to the moon as the previous president and previous heads of NASA wanted...

IMHO, there is absolutely ZERO chance of a Richard Branson type making it to the moon. It takes the resources of a country to do something this grand.
A few billionaires will never be able to muster a space program to rival what America can do.....or China, ESA, or others....

I am personally appalled that we have no current plans to go back to the moon and I wonder what your thoughts are.
And if you are in favor of killing the mission, please give me your reasons...

Above all, please keep this discussion civil....that is my only request


Christosterone




posted on Jan, 25 2012 @ 03:16 PM
link   
I reckon he knows what is on the moon and doesn't want it advertised to the public, why do you think he thought about no fly zones on the moon? Crap! Nobody owns the moon, not even the United States Of America!



posted on Jan, 25 2012 @ 03:16 PM
link   
In the current financial environment, I think it would be wasteful (financially not scientifically).

Sure I would love to see a manned mission to the moon, but $81,000,000,000 could be used for more immediate NEEDS at this time.



posted on Jan, 25 2012 @ 03:19 PM
link   
To be fair, if my country was trillions of dollars in debt, engaged in multiple, costly invasions and overseeing a presidency that is experiencing one of the worst global economic meltdowns in history.

I probably wouldnt spend 80 billion dollars on going to the Moon either.



posted on Jan, 25 2012 @ 03:21 PM
link   
All the rage that is coursing through my veins. Space exploration and of course, expansion is needed now more than ever! What the hell is he thinking!? Yes, money is tight, but this is our species survival were talking about.

We need resources, the moon is full of Titanium and of course, helium 3. (We have yet to know how to utilize this gas) However, speculation is it could be used as fuel. This is simple, not complicated. If we want to survive, we would have started 30 years ago.



posted on Jan, 25 2012 @ 03:22 PM
link   
reply to post by Chamberf=6
 


Like the war the POTUS is planning on Iran.


This is deeply saddening, not that I don't understand we're in rough times, but we're just printing our way out of this one, right?! Why not spare the extra paper for this adventure.



posted on Jan, 25 2012 @ 03:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by scotsdavy1
I reckon he knows what is on the moon and doesn't want it advertised to the public, why do you think he thought about no fly zones on the moon? Crap! Nobody owns the moon, not even the United States Of America!


I will be honest with you....the no fly zones on the moon was VERY weird and I have absolutely no rational answer as to why we would do that...

Makes me sometimes wonder if that professor (I dont remember who) was being honest when he said that Neil Armstrong told him that their were menacing craft on the moon which made it abundantly clear that we were not welcome.....

And as for owning the moon, I would say that all of humanity owns it....and I want somebody to go there.
Because our time on this planet is finite. If we are to survive, we must begin to break the bonds of this earth...and find another!!!!
Because one day will be here soon enough when humanity (all races and countries) will no longer be able to survive here....and I want our possibly unique existence to persist...be it here or elswhere...

chris



posted on Jan, 25 2012 @ 03:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by Ixtab
To be fair, if my country was trillions of dollars in debt, engaged in multiple, costly invasions and overseeing a presidency that is experiencing one of the worst global economic meltdowns in history.

I probably wouldnt spend 80 billion dollars on going to the Moon either.


Quite the opposite. In a world where we are surrounded by nothing but death, war, and corruption, mankind needs to be able to still look to the starts and dream. Killing the dream of space and uncovering mysteries of the cosmos was killing one of last things we had and it is disturbing some people don't realize what we're doing shelving these projects and retiring our space fleet.
edit on 25-1-2012 by Lapislazuli because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 25 2012 @ 03:25 PM
link   
reply to post by Christosterone
 


People in government have always fought the space program, saying that its a waste of money because there is nothing up there to profit off of. They always looks at how much something costs over the scientific opportunities.

Also I think apathy has a lot to do with it.

People are just not generally excited about space exploration anymore. Mostly because the laymen has these grandiose expectations, like we'll go to the moon and find some ancient alien space base, or we will just so happen to find a crystal that will power our world for eternity.

Hopefully the space program we'll go forward in robotics and if our probes, rovers and future robotics reveal anything amazingly worth while we will head back out there. We just need to continue to develop a safer more efficient space craft so that when we do decide to go back out we will be ready.



posted on Jan, 25 2012 @ 03:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by AaronWilson
All the rage that is coursing through my veins. Space exploration and of course, expansion is needed now more than ever! What the hell is he thinking!? Yes, money is tight, but this is our species survival were talking about.

We need resources, the moon is full of Titanium and of course, helium 3. (We have yet to know how to utilize this gas) However, speculation is it could be used as fuel. This is simple, not complicated. If we want to survive, we would have started 30 years ago.


STAR for you...
I could not say it better if I tried....
The amazing thing to me is that lack of attention this gets...Our current government spent way more on bailouts for companies that bordered on criminal organizations than they would on a manned mission to the moon...

One day earth will become inhabitable and we MUST be prepared to leave...
Until then, like you said, lets mine the whole dang Solar System for natural resources starting with the moon...

BTW, I only want to "mine the whole dang Solar System" if we are not impacting any life that may or may or may not exist on the planets we plan to mine


chris



posted on Jan, 25 2012 @ 03:31 PM
link   
mission to the moon costing 81 billion?
holy crap? 81 billion what? pesos? surely not dollars...

thats insane. If nasa is asking for that, I would tell them to go straight to erm..the moon...but figuratively.

I think the cost/profit needs to be consider..what would a manned mission do on the moon that a couple million $ robot could not? What does it bring back that somehow translates into more: jobs/resources/science?

I would see that 81b going towards something like a huge space station for scientific research and the like.

the materials are expensive, but not crazy expensive. the fuel to get to a high earth orbit is also expensive but not insane. That money, and some shrewd oversight as to how each dollar is being spent could do wonders for the industry.

This just shows me how wasteful nasa is with the money if that is the number they came up with, and for what purpose? There needs to be a hell of a lot more transparency in the space industry's spending habit...now I am going to revisit the secret space fleet threads we have with a bit more open mind..christs sakes. 81 million..sure, expensive, but sure...but billion? how gullible are we?



posted on Jan, 25 2012 @ 03:31 PM
link   
Is it just me, or would us landing back on the moon be a HUGE rallying point for the people of the USA? In a time where there is no positive news, I could only imagine the power and reinvigoration landing back on the moon would have for this country...

I don't get it.....at all. A huge mistake by the Obama administration. HUGE.



posted on Jan, 25 2012 @ 03:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by Openeye
reply to post by Christosterone
 


People in government have always fought the space program, saying that its a waste of money because there is nothing up there to profit off of. They always looks at how much something costs over the scientific opportunities.

Also I think apathy has a lot to do with it.

People are just not generally excited about space exploration anymore.


Great post...
As I said in another post re the costs: It is amazing that the current regime in power was happy to bail out financial institutions who hedged markets and whose activities bordered on criminal....imho
And yet there are those who continue to argue that we need not "waist" money on space exploration!!!

WAIST MONEY on Space Exploration????

There is no better place to spend money than in space (within reason of course)
I am not advocating spending 1/2 of our GDP on going to space, but a percent or 2 would suffice


chris



posted on Jan, 25 2012 @ 03:35 PM
link   
I like the comments so far, but I'd like to try a slightly different direction.

I don't see anything in Obama's history, or his record as President to indicate that he wants the US to be an exceptional country. I think he wants us to be just one more nation in a mob of nations.

If the US took the lead in space colonization we would be exceptional again, and it wouldn't have been done by the United Nations. I'm sorry, but I don't believe he wants us to be anything special, or a world leader.



posted on Jan, 25 2012 @ 03:39 PM
link   
How the he'll would it not benefit the USA, in 2012, to be the first country to put a base on the moon? Wouldn't that be a sign of complete domination over other countries?

Also, so we built nukes....other countries copied and have them. Why in the he'll havnt other countries copied our lunar program from the frigging 1960s, and beat us and put a base on the moon?

Makes me wonder........we never went.



posted on Jan, 25 2012 @ 03:41 PM
link   
reply to post by Christosterone
 


Keep watching. Obama is actually out to destroy all of USA. His 30 percent tax to the rich would destroy America overnight. He is short-minded and doesn't even consider the future consequences of his actions. At 30 percent, the American rich would have no trouble at all finding a cheaper country to live in. The rich already have international lifestyles and it's all to easy for them to remove America from their flight plans. A 30 percent tax for the rich would destroy us overnight. I would favor a 20 percent tax for everybody before I tried singling out the rich.



posted on Jan, 25 2012 @ 03:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by Chamberf=6
In the current financial environment, I think it would be wasteful (financially not scientifically).

Sure I would love to see a manned mission to the moon, but $81,000,000,000 could be used for more immediate NEEDS at this time.


Why would it cost that much now? All NASA needs is the computer power of a commadore 64 or even less because that is how they got to the moon years ago.

Oh and some gold foil tape and lots and lots of hype to shield the ship from radiation.
Regards, Iwinder



posted on Jan, 25 2012 @ 03:41 PM
link   
reply to post by amongus
 





Why in the he'll havnt other countries copied our lunar program from the frigging 1960s, and beat us and put a base on the moon?


I thought Russia was proposing it (yet again).



posted on Jan, 25 2012 @ 03:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by Iwinder

Originally posted by Chamberf=6
In the current financial environment, I think it would be wasteful (financially not scientifically).

Sure I would love to see a manned mission to the moon, but $81,000,000,000 could be used for more immediate NEEDS at this time.


Why would it cost that much now? All NASA needs is the computer power of a commadore 64 or even less because that is how they got to the moon years ago.

Oh and some gold foil tape and lots and lots of hype to shield the ship from radiation.
Regards, Iwinder


Hey I didn't come up with the figure.

NASA and governmental estimates did.



posted on Jan, 25 2012 @ 03:43 PM
link   
reply to post by Lapislazuli
 


Nah, my hopes and dreams are the governments do not collapse due to fiscal irresponsibility and I am forced into marauding the waste lands for irradiated buzzard carcass to eat.

Untill we have reached an advanced one world utopian government, space exploration in my opinion can take a back seat. Reality on the ground, for me, is a far more pressing issue.




top topics



 
6
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join