The last time a human stepped on the moon was 1972. Why?

reply to post by JayinAR



how are you so sure that they have a base on the moon?proof?

It cost NASA 100 billion for Apollo 13. Over the course of ongoing space exploration it gone up in the trillions. I can think of better uses for that money. Let's face it space needs to be put on the back burner so we can get cleaner energy, agriculture, health, etc under better control. Here we want to explore space and we can't even fix a fraction of our most common problems.

The last time a human stepped on the moon was 1972. Why?

Says who?

reply to post by sean


That trillions is currently being spent on "defense and military"... basically to kill each other.

While health, cleaner energy, agriculture, etc. are all vitally important, none of them face the elephants in the room... overpopulation and dwindling global resources.

Space should be on the forefront of all global agendas. There are countless paths of research and industry that would blossom as a result of expansion into the solar system.

Most importantly the two biggest unsolvable issues being ignored by our world (overpopulation and finite resources), would instantly begin to be addressed.

There is lots of "space" (pun intended) and resources in our solar system and beyond. For instance, asteroids are extraordinarily resource rich, and huge, which if used correctly, would allow us to maintain a pristine planet while still fulfilling material needs of an ever increasing population.

People may even apply innovation to the need for fast travel, and in the coming generations we could see some amazing scientific advances...

... if we can get into space before killing ourselves off.

The had the capability in 1972 to go to the moon. In 2013 they don't, its a different set of people in Nasa who do not have the technical or manageable know how to send men safely to the moon and back. And that is the simple truth of it.

What makes you think it was the last time? Do you put that much trust un the government, to tell you all their dirty little secrets? Thats called gullible, believing whatever 'they' (governments and their agencies, NASA is a government agency) tell you.

When you have the "ability" to steal BILLIONS of dollars from the hard working Americans, Canadians etc... You then have the ability to build, construct, develop, advance anything you are told to in terms of technology or weaponization.

Put those two paragraphs together, and take away your faith in your government, and Im sure you can come to a better conclusion then the elite scientists of the world going to the moon in '72 or whatever..

And we wonder why the government gets away with everything, why America is becoming a dictatorship. The Americans will believe whatever they are told!

supermarket2012
Yes everybody it is quite true! Only a "foolish mortal" would DARE to think ANY differently than what this poster proposes!!! You foolish mortals and your logic. ALL OF YOU, DIRTY, DIRTY MORTALS!

Oh I am sorry, are you disgruntled? Does my difference of opinion bother you? Better get acclimated to it around here my friend.

supermarket2012
Or, perhaps it was really all about us competing with the Soviet Union, although that doesn't make sense....because the cold war didn't end till much later.

Actually it makes perfect sense. What doesn't, is how the Cold War ending much later has anything whatsoever to do with competing with the Soviets back in 1969. Feel free to explain if you like. ~$heopleNation

covertpanther
When you have the "ability" to steal BILLIONS of dollars from the hard working Americans, Canadians etc... You then have the ability to build, construct, develop, advance anything you are told to in terms of technology or weaponization.

You mean like the trillion that Rumsfeld claimed was unaccounted for? Yeah, I could not agree more. ~$heopleNation

The last president in the Whitehouse wanted to go back to the moon, made the announcement in 2004. At the time, many projects including the shuttle program were being scrapped in favor of developing new space vehicles. The lofty goal of returning to the moon was cancelled it appears due to the cost and that's not just a guess. In 2004 NASAs budget was $86 billion, in 2014 the budget will be $14 billion. I could not find these figures on NASA's website because the server is down because of the government is shut down. If they can't afford to keep a website running, how can they afford a trip to the moon? America will never send another manned mission to the moon at this rate, not with the idea so unpopular with politicians.

Grimmley

eManym
Maybe it was because the Military Industrial Complex found no military value in sending people to the moon and funded something else. Surveillance satellites and the space shuttle program were much more suitable to their needs.

Actually, that is not entirely accurate. If you look at it from purely a tactical/strategic view point the moon is the ultimate in "high ground" You can observe, intervene and even retaliate to almost any situation from that stand point. If they "did" have military forces of some kind stationed on the moon, you could easily launch a strike anywhere on the planet either being from kinetic weapons (i.e. missiles, particle based weapons etc), energy weapons (near vacuum of space would work wonders), to deploying assault ground forces to anywhere, since most defensive grids are looking at the outer boarders and horizons and not space. This is not mentioning the surveillance that could be done from there.

I personally believed we DID go to the moon, I am on the fence as to weather or not we did send black missions there I do not know. I do think it would be a worthy project, albeit the nations of earth did say that the moon was off limits for anything military wise, but when has that stopped any nation from doing something that it wasn't allowed to do...

Now when we did go to the moon, did we find something, my gut says more than likely, just what it is I dunno, I would like to know, but chances are no one on earth minus a select few will ever truly know.

Grim

Anyone who is capable from striking targets all the way from the moon will do it a 100 gazillion times easier from the earths surface.

Who is to say for sure that no one has been on the moon since the Apollo missions?, how would people like you and me know for sure?.

The technology of getting into orbit has improved so much that several of those Space Shuttle flights could very well have staged fuel to get to the moon into orbit to replenish a vehicle in order to get to the moon.

Maybe those classified missions weren't sattellites, they could have been fuel tanks to make it to the moon in a "relay" fashion, of course they would have to put other supplies in place also but one can probably fathom my reasoning, yes?.

I wondered why they never tried that, but then who knows for sure if they didn't?

Really, how would people like you and me ever know for sure?.

Maybe there is already a colony established on a planet within reach for those "special people" to go to, it would explain how it almost seems they are trying to destroy the planet, living like there is no tomorrow, no future.

How would we know?.

Certainly would explain a lot of money that supposedly disappeared though, wouldn't it ?.

In next few years (2015 ) will have ability to do circumlunar missions (thats looping around the moon and returning to earth for you "moon Hoaxers") using Space X new Falcon Heavy booster and Dragon Rider space capsule

Falcon Heavy (still undergoiung testing) uses 2 Falcon first stages as strapon boosters to Falcon Core stage. Has
unique propellent cross feed system where core stage engines (9 in each Falcon first stage) draw propellents (LOX
and RP 1 Kerosene) from strap -on boosters . Thrust at launch is 3.9 million lbs (4.5 million in vaccuum)

2nd stage is single engine of 180,000 lbs thrust

Payload in earth orbit is 53,000 kg (117,000 lbs) , lunar trajectory is 16,000 kg (35,000 lbs)

Dragon Rider crew size on lunar mission 3-4 (up to to 7 in earth orbit)

Be interesting to see if such a mission is in the works..........

reply to post by droid56


I have my reserves about if we went to the Moon, one amazing reason we should be going to the moon is Helium 3. One space shuttle cargo load of H3 would power the U.S. for one year, pollution free!

reply to post by maxzen2004

One problem. Well, there's more than one problem but, major problem: There are no reactors capable of using the stuff and won't be anytime soon. If, and when, such reactors are a reality it might be a good idea if it turns out that H3 is as abundant as theorized.

reply to post by Phage


Nobody is going to create a reactor that will harness near limitless energy. "If I can't put a meter on it, I am not going to fund it."

Your research for your Tesla thread should have told you that.
Haha

reply to post by JayinAR

Why can't you meter it?
The power from fission plants is metered, isn't it?

reply to post by Phage


The fuel is far too cheap. Of course you CAN meter it, but the profit margins would be a FRACTION of what they are currently with oil.

They will only pursue legit options for alternative fuels when they begin losing money with the current system. Considering we are currently sitting on record surplusses at the moment yet profits continue to rise due to inexplicable refinery explosions in which, conveniently, nobody was around to be killed in, I don't see the JP Morgans of the world falling over themselves to provide cheap fuel.

reply to post by JayinAR

Sorry, I don't get the connection. Why do low costs equal low profit margin? Profit = price - cost.

But even with a low profit margin, if you sell a lot of something you make a lot of money.

reply to post by Phage


See edit

Bornin66
reply to post by OrionHunterX

 

I believe your on the right track. Hey is a bean counter world. If there is not profit in it then it doesn't happen. I believe we've come to a point in the USA that we no longer need to have a manned Nasa run space program because our covert space program is so advanced in comparison that it's just deemed unnecessary. Most believe what is seen are aliens and are ridiculed and ignored for saying they saw something unknown. I believe we are seeing our own technology and those ships are cruising our solar system with impunity. It's the covert part that angers me. Just take a look at the SR-71 Blackhawk. In testing in the late 60s and fully operation in 71. Seeing it today still blows my mind. But nothing since then ??? What have we been doing ??? I think it's more likely that technology has progressed and we have not been told. Why waste billions on a PR campaign like NASA did in the 60/70 when you can blame little grey aliens who look harmless. Don't want to scare people too much and make the pop culture think they were blood thirsty 12 foot tall lizard beings. It's all a show folks. We are told and shown what they want us to know and think. The Alien cover story is more effective and profitable then a NASA manned space program. Simple economics. And Hollywood does it's part as well.

There is no such vessel as an SR-71 Blackhawk (there is an SR-71 BlackBird). The SR-71 was in operation in 1964 or a bit earlier (The precursor was flown in 1962). I'm not sure where you're getting your information.