NASA is lost in Space

page: 1
1
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join

posted on Dec, 5 2012 @ 06:01 AM
link   
According to this article, NASA needs to focus on its destination before it makes its trip(s) into Space. Their new goal is: "Pioneering: Sustaining U.S. Leadership in Space." DUH! NASA's problem is that they are passive and not passionate about Space exploration. We got a man on the Moon in 12 years and now after 40 years, even with better Technology, we haven't been back to the Moon-publicly. I think we have been back secretly and there is much more going on in Space than we know. Check out the article/


www.space.com...




posted on Dec, 5 2012 @ 06:06 AM
link   
There's no point in going back to the moon right now, and it's very expensive.



posted on Dec, 5 2012 @ 06:21 AM
link   
reply to post by SpearMint
 


Why not, why should we not go back ? and so what if it's expensive, there are plenty of expensive things on Earth and most of those are a waste of money, i'd rather money was spent on space exploration than useless breeders. I'm with the OP, i think there is more going on than we are told



posted on Dec, 5 2012 @ 06:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by FFS4000
reply to post by SpearMint
 


Why not, why should we not go back ? and so what if it's expensive, there are plenty of expensive things on Earth and most of those are a waste of money, i'd rather money was spent on space exploration than useless breeders. I'm with the OP, i think there is more going on than we are told


And we go back and do what? Not saying it is completely unworthy, but just to go back because we can is silly and a waste of resources. We go back to the moon, we land, we see what we've seen before and come back home? Seems like a reasonable utilization of resources......



posted on Dec, 5 2012 @ 06:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by FFS4000
reply to post by SpearMint
 


Why not, why should we not go back ? and so what if it's expensive, there are plenty of expensive things on Earth and most of those are a waste of money, i'd rather money was spent on space exploration than useless breeders. I'm with the OP, i think there is more going on than we are told


Because there's not much we can get out of it. Tell me why we should.

When I say it's expensive, I mean EXPENSIVE, the last estimate I heard was over 104 billion USD. Not to mention risky with our primitive rocket technology.
edit on 5-12-2012 by SpearMint because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 5 2012 @ 06:32 AM
link   
Not going to the Moon for 40 years has allowed us to have the Space Shuttle program and the International Space Station. Those two things taught us a lot about living in space and developing new technologies. The brief lunar missions could only achieve so much: put some equipment here, grab a few rocks there, take a few panoramas.

Science is also a big part of NASA; they can achieve more of it with robotic missions than with humans, and for less money.



posted on Dec, 5 2012 @ 06:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by SpearMint

Originally posted by FFS4000
reply to post by SpearMint
 


Why not, why should we not go back ? and so what if it's expensive, there are plenty of expensive things on Earth and most of those are a waste of money, i'd rather money was spent on space exploration than useless breeders. I'm with the OP, i think there is more going on than we are told


Because there's not much we can get out of it. Tell me why we should.

When I say it's expensive, I mean EXPENSIVE, the last estimate I heard was over 104 billion USD. Not to mention risky with our primitive rocket technology.
edit on 5-12-2012 by SpearMint because: (no reason given)



I disagree...how would you or any of us (including NASA) know if it's a waste of money? You come from already accepted dogma that there is nothing of interest there. Yet we know there is water in craters and there are plenty of Moon "weirdness" to make it an interesting place to explore. This should be a number 1 goal for all man kind, not just NASA.

In conclusion, when they say "it's expensive"....it really makes no sense. What do you mean expensive...that doesn't matter. If we do not explore our solar system and the galaxy...we are doomed in the end anyway (not in the near future I know). SO this has to be our primary goal as a species. Our survival depends on it.

What is more important than survival of the species? If we are to survive, we have to learn about the universe. The Moon is the first and logical place to start learning. No amount of money lost should ever come in to play.



posted on Dec, 5 2012 @ 06:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by SpearMint

Originally posted by FFS4000
reply to post by SpearMint
 


Why not, why should we not go back ? and so what if it's expensive, there are plenty of expensive things on Earth and most of those are a waste of money, i'd rather money was spent on space exploration than useless breeders. I'm with the OP, i think there is more going on than we are told


Because there's not much we can get out of it. Tell me why we should.

When I say it's expensive, I mean EXPENSIVE, the last estimate I heard was over 104 billion USD. Not to mention risky with our primitive rocket technology.
edit on 5-12-2012 by SpearMint because: (no reason given)


One reason to go back is to place permanent networks of deep space optical and radio telescopes on the far side...cuts out all light and radio spectrum interference there, and they don't need to carry propellent.

Another is to carry out longer term micro-gravity experimentation..from crystalography, electronics, and biological experiments, all benefit from the isolation (esp. biological research) and low gravity.

A small(ish) manned base is useful as either a launch pacility for system probes or for manned missions to either asteroids or Solar planets..a launch from the moon (after processing lunar soils for fuel) would be significantly beneficial in terms of fuel capacities and ease of launch. More onboard fuel means longer mission durations.

Then there's Lunar Helium 3 to mine, which may become the fuel that replaces oil in the short to mid time frame.

The obvious elephant in the room is Lunar based weapons and spy aparatus...

Lots of reasons to go back to the moon.



posted on Dec, 5 2012 @ 06:49 AM
link   
Here is the proposal for dealing with cost of exploration of space/Moon.

Simply beg the FED to print some bills and splash it towards NASA. If it could be splashed for banks, why not something that actually has some scientific (and economic) value.



posted on Dec, 5 2012 @ 06:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by MarioOnTheFly

Originally posted by SpearMint

Originally posted by FFS4000
reply to post by SpearMint
 


Why not, why should we not go back ? and so what if it's expensive, there are plenty of expensive things on Earth and most of those are a waste of money, i'd rather money was spent on space exploration than useless breeders. I'm with the OP, i think there is more going on than we are told


Because there's not much we can get out of it. Tell me why we should.

When I say it's expensive, I mean EXPENSIVE, the last estimate I heard was over 104 billion USD. Not to mention risky with our primitive rocket technology.
edit on 5-12-2012 by SpearMint because: (no reason given)



I disagree...how would you or any of us (including NASA) know if it's a waste of money? You come from already accepted dogma that there is nothing of interest there. Yet we know there is water in craters and there are plenty of Moon "weirdness" to make it an interesting place to explore. This should be a number 1 goal for all man kind, not just NASA.

In conclusion, when they say "it's expensive"....it really makes no sense. What do you mean expensive...that doesn't matter. If we do not explore our solar system and the galaxy...we are doomed in the end anyway (not in the near future I know). SO this has to be our primary goal as a species. Our survival depends on it.

What is more important than survival of the species? If we are to survive, we have to learn about the universe. The Moon is the first and logical place to start learning. No amount of money lost should ever come in to play.


Of course money is important, what a silly thing to say, especially when we're talking about a country already hugely in debt. If something should happen to Earth, the moon won't be much help to us, our survival does not depend on spending a billions upon billions of dollars and not getting much out of it.



posted on Dec, 5 2012 @ 06:53 AM
link   
reply to post by MysterX
 


Couldn't agree with you more, just lacked the proper terminology to explain why it would be beneficial to have a man made base on the Moon.

If we had started (maybe we did) 40 years ago...we would be much further knowledge wise than we are today with our ISS or shuttle missions.



posted on Dec, 5 2012 @ 06:55 AM
link   
reply to post by SpearMint
 





spending a billions upon billions of dollars and not getting much out of it.



Still you remain firm in your stance that you wouldn't get anything out of it.

I disagree...so we can move along I guess.



posted on Dec, 5 2012 @ 06:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by MysterX

Originally posted by SpearMint

Originally posted by FFS4000
reply to post by SpearMint
 


Why not, why should we not go back ? and so what if it's expensive, there are plenty of expensive things on Earth and most of those are a waste of money, i'd rather money was spent on space exploration than useless breeders. I'm with the OP, i think there is more going on than we are told


Because there's not much we can get out of it. Tell me why we should.

When I say it's expensive, I mean EXPENSIVE, the last estimate I heard was over 104 billion USD. Not to mention risky with our primitive rocket technology.
edit on 5-12-2012 by SpearMint because: (no reason given)


One reason to go back is to place permanent networks of deep space optical and radio telescopes on the far side...cuts out all light and radio spectrum interference there, and they don't need to carry propellent.

Another is to carry out longer term micro-gravity experimentation..from crystalography, electronics, and biological experiments, all benefit from the isolation (esp. biological research) and low gravity.

A small(ish) manned base is useful as either a launch pacility for system probes or for manned missions to either asteroids or Solar planets..a launch from the moon (after processing lunar soils for fuel) would be significantly beneficial in terms of fuel capacities and ease of launch. More onboard fuel means longer mission durations.

Then there's Lunar Helium 3 to mine, which may become the fuel that replaces oil in the short to mid time frame.

The obvious elephant in the room is Lunar based weapons and spy aparatus...

Lots of reasons to go back to the moon.


In the future, yes, quite a long time from now. Currently the cost to get the helium 3 and the fossil fuel used to get there greatly outweighs the benefits. Right now though, there's no point. Things will be different if we build a space elevator and invent a better way to travel in space.
edit on 5-12-2012 by SpearMint because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 5 2012 @ 06:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by MarioOnTheFly
reply to post by SpearMint
 





spending a billions upon billions of dollars and not getting much out of it.



Still you remain firm in your stance that you wouldn't get anything out of it.

I disagree...so we can move along I guess.


Well you haven't made a counter argument.



posted on Dec, 5 2012 @ 07:03 AM
link   
reply to post by SpearMint
 


What is, if I may as, your occupation?

What do you for a living? An accountant maybe ?



Thank God Columbus never thought about things like "getting something out of it" before setting of in to the unknown, otherwise...who knows if you would even be alive today.



posted on Dec, 5 2012 @ 07:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by SpearMint

Originally posted by MarioOnTheFly
reply to post by SpearMint
 





spending a billions upon billions of dollars and not getting much out of it.



Still you remain firm in your stance that you wouldn't get anything out of it.

I disagree...so we can move along I guess.


Well you haven't made a counter argument.



Counter arguments are clear in my mind...you however think that nothing trumps financial calculations, so there is no point to debate it.



posted on Dec, 5 2012 @ 07:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by MarioOnTheFly
reply to post by SpearMint
 


What is, if I may as, your occupation?

What do you for a living? An accountant maybe ?



Thank God Columbus never thought about things like "getting something out of it" before setting of in to the unknown, otherwise...who knows if you would even be alive today.


None of your business. Money is a huge part of the world we live in, everything depends on it, you seem to think that there's an endless budget for things like this. Whether we get something out of it or not is extremely relevant. Sure it's sad, I would love for us to be able to do such things to see what comes of it, but you can't ignore the fact that it all comes down to cost vs benefit.
edit on 5-12-2012 by SpearMint because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 5 2012 @ 07:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by MarioOnTheFly

Originally posted by SpearMint

Originally posted by MarioOnTheFly
reply to post by SpearMint
 





spending a billions upon billions of dollars and not getting much out of it.



Still you remain firm in your stance that you wouldn't get anything out of it.

I disagree...so we can move along I guess.


Well you haven't made a counter argument.



Counter arguments are clear in my mind...you however think that nothing trumps financial calculations, so there is no point to debate it.


Funny how they're not leaving your mind isn't it?



posted on Dec, 5 2012 @ 07:24 AM
link   
reply to post by SpearMint
 


In your mind maybe. I am of opinion that sometimes in life we do things without thinking of the financial benefit. For instance, majority of people buy their houses with an installment plan. They don't have that money upfront. They will pay for it throughout their lives. Having children is also something that costs a lot of money...but we are not thinking most of the time about that. It's a simple matter of survival. We have to do it...no matter the cost. Cost is secondary.

Exploring the Moon, is in my mind, a necessity for our civilization. It is the cheapest first step on a staircase to heaven.

But you would rather splash billions on, let's say weapons for the military, because...it can be sold and money earned. Fine...that's you.

It is the reason the world is where we are today...on the brink of a global fallout. Because money is first...and every other interest that is born out of money...comes before all other human interests.



posted on Dec, 5 2012 @ 07:33 AM
link   
reply to post by SpearMint
 


What NASA mission is not going to seem expensive and on the surface show little return. By your argument the entire space program is a waste of money. It is argued that the research and exploration is followed by often unforeseen benefits. Many of us believe that our future is in space and that if we want to see anything we might recognize as ours exist long term then the expense is something we must shoulder.

It is not unwise to look at the moon as Earth's ultimate space port much like it is a fine harbor on the vast ocean of space itself. That alone when thinking long term makes moon exploration vital.





new topics
top topics
 
1
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join