why were missions to moon stopped?

page: 1
12
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join

posted on Jul, 17 2013 @ 06:24 PM
link   
ok watched a program last night on h2(history 2) in uk about the new released ufo files,its never really occurred to me before about why no ones been sent back to the moon.

mean on this program its suggested the reason being is they found more than they would like people to know and if you think about it then it kinda makes sense cause if they,ve done it half a dozen times then surely thats not even scratching the surface of exploring it so why all of a sudden stop?

i know you say post links and i,ve searched for the program but can,t find it so maybe some1 could help me out and post a link,thanx




posted on Jul, 17 2013 @ 06:27 PM
link   
reply to post by sparky31
 


The moon is a dead planet, they tested samples from launching a weapon into the surface and measured the plume for elements. Not much was to be found, unless you're looking for a steady source of selenium.



posted on Jul, 17 2013 @ 06:28 PM
link   
Sorry but I cannot find the programme to post a link.

However to reply to your OP manned space flight is too expensive and did not make economic sense when information can be gathered in a cheaper fashion using unmanned flights. Sorry but that is the Dollars and cents reasoning.

Manned space flight was necessary at the time of the Cold war to show american supremacy as was the space race.



posted on Jul, 17 2013 @ 06:30 PM
link   
I personaly think NASA is just a big PR front.

The real works done by the USAF
And the space program a lot more advanced and extensive than we think but in a militrised way.

They got to the moon did what was needed then shifted the focus on black projects instead while just keeping NASA around to please the public and act as incomptently as possible to hold back civilian space explotation.

No aliens or lizzard people just good old fashioned human greed and power trips.

My theory anyway.
edit on 17-7-2013 by crazyewok because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 17 2013 @ 06:32 PM
link   
reply to post by sparky31
 


Lack of ressources, I presume? When public interest declined so did politicians' willingness to fund the project. That wouldn't have been the last (or first) time.

But yeah, we barely scratched the surface - it would be like aliens spending a week in Rocky Mountains and say 'now we have explored Earth' ..



posted on Jul, 17 2013 @ 06:36 PM
link   
Assuming they went in the firs place.



posted on Jul, 17 2013 @ 06:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by Tiger5
Sorry but I cannot find the programme to post a link.

However to reply to your OP manned space flight is too expensive and did not make economic sense when information can be gathered in a cheaper fashion using unmanned flights. Sorry but that is the Dollars and cents reasoning.

Manned space flight was necessary at the time of the Cold war to show american supremacy as was the space race.
yeah but they are spending how many more billions on mars at this moment when surely its cheaper to send humans back to the moon?i bet there is alot more surprises to be found on the moon than we think

come on what they believed about moons round other planets have all been rewritten in last few years so why not go back and study our own?
edit on 2013 by sparky31 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 17 2013 @ 06:43 PM
link   
About the time of the first landing in 1969, it was decided to use an existing Saturn V to launch the Skylab orbital laboratory pre-built on the ground, replacing the original plan to construct it in orbit from several Saturn IB launches; this eliminated Apollo 20. NASA's yearly budget also began to shrink in light of the successful landing, and NASA also had to make funds available for the development of the upcoming Space Shuttle. By 1971, the decision was made to also cancel missions 18 and 19. Source

So by the time of Apollo 14 and 15 missions, they already knew that Apollo 17 would be the last mission.

Read more about the cancelled missions here.
edit on 17-7-2013 by wildespace because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 17 2013 @ 06:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by Knives4eyes
reply to post by sparky31
 


The moon is a dead planet, they tested samples from launching a weapon into the surface and measured the plume for elements. Not much was to be found, unless you're looking for a steady source of selenium.


they thought everything was dead but things keep amazing them like enceladus

just cause what they believed in first place we can,t take as fact,things need to be looked in too before you can go saying things are 100% truth.



posted on Jul, 17 2013 @ 06:54 PM
link   
For sure - Manned trips to the moon were not stopped! Fact is, they never even started. There were no moon landings with astronauts walking on the surface.- they made it up.
edit on 17-7-2013 by Lysistrata because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 17 2013 @ 07:00 PM
link   
We are not allowed to go to the moon.
They won't let us.

We were never supposed to gain the technology to leave this planet.
Things have started to escalate since the 40's when the plans were first laid down for leaving the atmosphere .



posted on Jul, 17 2013 @ 07:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by FinalCountdown
We are not allowed to go to the moon.
They won't let us.

We were never supposed to gain the technology to leave this planet.
Things have started to escalate since the 40's when the plans were first laid down for leaving the atmosphere .
yeah and to me this massive jump in technology has to make you question where has it come from all of a sudden.

in less than a hundred years we have leapt to things that just seem impossible but for thousands if not millions of years we just don,t know..... we were stagnant............did we all of a sudden start using our brain?
edit on 2013 by sparky31 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 17 2013 @ 07:25 PM
link   
Having grown up watching the Apollo moon landings, the official reason was that the majority of the population felt it was a waste of time and money. However my question is, since when does the government care what the majority wants?

I found it odd back then, and I still find it odd that the moon landings abruptly stopped. Back then they were talking about building moon bases and laboratories on the moon. I would think that would have been extremely advantageous for science alone. It could have also been used as a refueling or an alternative landing base for further planet exploration. Personally, I think something they witnessed on their last visit abruptly changed their decision to pursue additional moon landings.



posted on Jul, 17 2013 @ 07:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by Knives4eyes
reply to post by sparky31
 


The moon is a dead planet, they tested samples from launching a weapon into the surface and measured the plume for elements. Not much was to be found, unless you're looking for a steady source of selenium.



I took a bucket of water from the ocean. Not much in it...just water and a few microbes.



posted on Jul, 17 2013 @ 07:35 PM
link   
reply to post by Knives4eyes
 


Allegedly. I don't believe NASA. Never A Straight Answer.



posted on Jul, 17 2013 @ 07:58 PM
link   
Two reasons:

1. Funding shifted to the Space Shuttle program

2. The Moon had no value to the military.

Today, the reason funds are going to explore Mars is because the prospect of possible life there is being heavily lobbied.
edit on 17-7-2013 by eManym because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 17 2013 @ 08:12 PM
link   
My bet is that we are still going there but it is being kept secret. I wonder how many underground bases have been built there since the 60's. The moon is going to eventually become a death star if it hasn't already. It just seems logical, even in a purely strategic sense. Imagine once you have a base on the moon you could wipe out nearly everybody on earth and start fresh. Let them develop technology at their own pace, just intervening at certain points in history to achieve a desired outcome. It's a mind blowing thought to think that it may have already happened.



posted on Jul, 17 2013 @ 08:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by eManym
Two reasons:

1. Funding shifted to the Space Shuttle program

2. The Moon had no value to the military.

Today, the reason funds are going to explore Mars is because the prospect of possible life there is being heavily lobbied.
edit on 17-7-2013 by eManym because: (no reason given)
yeah we know they believe that about mars but they also believe life was brought to earth by meteors and comets and you only have to look at moon to know its been bombarded.we still don,t know anything about how life starts or manages to live in extremes conditions.

they are starting to find life where they once thought impossible so doesn,t that justifiy going back and having a look?



posted on Jul, 17 2013 @ 08:32 PM
link   
Nobody cared anymore.
This page here describes the television coverage of Apollo 17.

TV networks didnt bother to cover the stepping onto the lunar surface, and very little of any of the EVA activity was shown at all.


...the networks came on at 11:30 pm with their second, and final coverage of the first EVA. This time slot was selected not due to the lunar surface activity itself, but rather it was scheduled to not interfere with local news in the Eastern time zone.

...of the full seven hours and 30 minutes of EVA number two, less than 50 minutes were broadcast live on the networks.
I went to bed that night highly disappointed and somewhat bewildered by the manner in which the so-called “newsrooms” were treating this amazing adventure.

It is said that the first greatest power of the news media is to report- but the second greatest power of the news media is to ignore. With Apollo 17 I witnessed that second greatest power being demonstrated.



posted on Jul, 17 2013 @ 08:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by sparky31

Originally posted by Tiger5
Sorry but I cannot find the programme to post a link.

However to reply to your OP manned space flight is too expensive and did not make economic sense when information can be gathered in a cheaper fashion using unmanned flights. Sorry but that is the Dollars and cents reasoning.

Manned space flight was necessary at the time of the Cold war to show american supremacy as was the space race.
yeah but they are spending how many more billions on mars at this moment when surely its cheaper to send humans back to the moon?i bet there is alot more surprises to be found on the moon than we think

come on what they believed about moons round other planets have all been rewritten in last few years so why not go back and study our own?
edit on 2013 by sparky31 because: (no reason given)


The total cost of the Apollo Moon Program was $23.9 billion, accounting for inflation in today's dollars that comes to a total of $170 billion

Each Apollo mission cost about $18 billion each in today's dollars.

Source

Total cost of the Mars Science Laboratory was $2.5 billion.

You do the math. Unmanned missions costs a LOT less. Less equipment, no need for food, water or air. No heavy shielding from solar radiation needed. No massive amounts of fuel to get there as quick as possible, since the longer humans are in space, the more danger they are in. Instead, you can use a minimum amount of fuel and gravity assists from other planets and take your time getting there at a much lower cost.

I would love to see a manned mission to Mars, or even back to the moon. But as other's have posted: money controls everything.





new topics
 
12
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join