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.
Originally posted by XaniMatriX
we worked our way all the way back from having technology to colonize space easily, to sending military equipment into orbit, sorry but that is an insult to JFK and all the great people who inspired this world to do great things, and not sell it off piece by piece.
Originally posted by JuniorDisco
Do you not appreciate how priorities change? How in 1960 it can be a matter of urgency to get a man on the moon to make it look like you're not losing to the Evil Empire, but by 2013 your main goal is to win a race involving improved communications and suchlike?
Frank Borman “The whole concept of changing our mission and getting ready in four months was done because we were in the “Can Do” program… “Beat the Soviets to the Moon”. NASA likes to talk about scientific exploration and our lunar expert here… Bill Anders… he can pick up all the rocks in the world… that’s just wonderful… the reason we went to the moon on Apollo 8 was to beat the Russians… I want to give you a clue!” Source (video) airandspace.si.edu...
Originally posted by Zaphod58
reply to post by XaniMatriX
We've never had the technology to "colonize space easily". We're still years away from it now. Landing sometime on the moon for a couple days is a lot different from colonizing.
The shuttle did so much more than you claim. A few hundred advances at least came from shuttle missions, and a few dozen useful satellites that we use without even thinking about were launched from it, along with a lot of other missions.
Originally posted by XaniMatriX
But your telling me that the moon, couldn't have replaced the ISS station?
And what do you mean by useful satellites? you mean spy satellites that belong to the military, that have nothing to do with space exploration but the exploitation of human beings.
Originally posted by captainpudding
I'm, going to go out on a limb and assume he's talking about GPS and telecommunications satellites . . . you know, the ones that make posting on ATS a possibility?
Originally posted by Zaphod58
Originally posted by captainpudding
I'm, going to go out on a limb and assume he's talking about GPS and telecommunications satellites . . . you know, the ones that make posting on ATS a possibility?
Take 5.
Telecom satellites, as well as Hubble, Chandra, Magellan, Ulysses, and others all launched from a shuttle mission. As well as all the medical, and scientific advances we use and take for granted every day. Everything from cell phones, to that super comfortable mattress you sleep on, to the velcro that holds things for you have come from the space program.
Originally posted by Zaphod58
reply to post by XaniMatriX
Military satellites are used by the military. Commercial companies don't ever use them, and the military only uses commercial satellites if it's absolutely necessary. The vast majority of satellites launched are commercial satellites. Out of a list of 105 satellites launched by the shuttle, probably at least 80% are commercial use or exploration.
Originally posted by XaniMatriX
also we sent those men through radiation, thank you for adding that, which is so dangerous we can't do it today?
but 40 years ago that sounded like a great idea? to the point where we were more brave and ambitious then, to actually pull it off in a decade, then completely trash the project, with 3 rockets missing that never even had the chance to fly, i have many reasons do doubt the program, there were even god damn rovers on the moon before any of the footage was ever shown, and when did the people hear of those?edit on 17-4-2013 by XaniMatriX because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by Zaphod58
reply to post by XaniMatriX
Your question isn't a question. The military uses their own equipment, except for launch facilities. They don't use exploration, or data from anywhere but themselves, and their own facilities.
So, the military isn't supposed to use satellites? Only civilians are allowed to?edit on 4/17/2013 by Zaphod58 because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by Zaphod58
reply to post by XaniMatriX
The people back home also didn't say "Why are you still going there? There's no reason to now that we've been there. We have big enough problems here, so stop spending all that money, and fix our problems here first!" It had nothing to do with being too dangerous, it had everything to do with political and economic pressure.edit on 4/17/2013 by Zaphod58 because: (no reason given)