NationStates Jolt Archive

Just caught on the news that Bush had claimed he wants to colonise the Moon, I think this is an amazing idea, Get us of this planet head to the future, If we were of this planet our hygeine would be a lot better, the amount of parasites and bacteria on earth is disgusting !

Im all for this mission.

Yeah I heard about it.

Questionable scientific benefit, fiscally irresponsible considering the deficit, technologically dodgey... but dammit its a space colony!!!

Looks like a boys and toys thing to me. Still, its not my money. Go for it

http://cnn.netscape.cnn.com/news/science.jsp

Maybe after the deficit shrinks to Reagan levels. I support the concept if he'll take all the money from the upper 25% of the population. I'd prefer it if the international space station was finished and any facility would be international as well. However none of that's going to happen and the 7 trillion dollar debt will only increase.

It would proberly fail and kill everyone inside. I think should be banned from watching sci-fi, it leads him to stupid ideas :D

It would proberly fail and kill everyone inside. I think should be banned from watching sci-fi, it leads him to stupid ideas :D

Nah, space is awesome. Space colonization is even more awesome.

Yeah I heard about it.

Questionable scientific benefit, fiscally irresponsible considering the deficit, technologically dodgey... but dammit its a space colony!!!

Looks like a boys and toys thing to me. Still, its not my money. Go for it
This is actually one of the good ideas he's had. Don't quibble over too many details. The benefit comes from taking the first step to making Humans a real spacefaring species that opens up the option of expansion to other planets. The benefit is in the doing of it itself.

I think the only way to stop him from having bad ideas is to stop him from having any ideas. I've actually partially agreed with three things he's done the last week. That means he's trying to get liberal voters on his side. Politically a good idea, but is it his?

Bush is a dumb ass! :tantrum:

Bush is a dumb ass! :tantrum:

wow! my respect for you has gone from 0 to -1! </lamejoke for a lame comment>

i think it's great! Bush is doing a good thing by finally getting us outta this place we call "lovely planet" who knows? Maybe I can hitch a ride onto a passing asteroid and become the first inter-planetary hitchhiker!

Maybe we can find Risa!

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Kûk‡xenisi n!ok‡x'osi xno-k‡xek‡emi.-The state only exists to serve itself.
"Oppose excessive military spending, yet believe in excessive spending on junk food and plastic surgery to make all your women look like LARDASSES!"-Sino, when I criticized excessive military spending.
http://www.sulucas.com/images/steatopygia.jpg
I'm male. Note the pic of attractive women.

I hope he funds NASA's new launch vehicle.

I hope he funds it out of his own pocket. Or at least his campaign finances, that is what it's for anyway.

Blasted deficit and spend neocons. Doesn't quite have the same ring as tax and spend liberals, same basic meaning though.

Colonizing the moon is the first step in going to Mars. I'm all for it. :)

Actually if you read the article I posted you'll find he mentioned manned-missions to Mars in a decade or so. I like the idea but realism crushes my idealism in this case, the liberal desire to explore and learn needs to be ignored while we get back on our feet and eliminate the deficit.

Another goverment funded corporate welfare check. Lets give lots of money to another defence contractor for anohter wasted project
AWESOME!!!

On a related note, has anyone seen teh Get Your War On comic where Bush convinces the world that the Moon must be invaded, funny stuff

I like this initiative, I've always been a space fan and I'd like to see NASA strengthened. NASA in my opinion has always been a good agency.

Space is cool. We will finally be able to test the SW vs. ST thing out for real.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Kûk‡xenisi n!ok‡x'osi xno-k‡xek‡emi.-The state only exists to serve itself.
"Oppose excessive military spending, yet believe in excessive spending on junk food and plastic surgery to make all your women look like LARDASSES!"-Sino, when I criticized excessive military spending.
http://www.sulucas.com/images/steatopygia.jpg
I'm male. Note the pic of attractive women.

Oh god no. PLEASE TELL ME HE WON'T! It's just re-election bullcrap.

don't tell me this is true! :shock:
what the....

This thing willl never work. Maybe in the future, but its almost impossible now. :shock:

Oh, what a good idea! Now we get to totally screw up ANOTHER planet. Don't we all feel happy.

I'd rather see the debt reduced first.

Oh god no. PLEASE TELL ME HE WON'T! It's just re-election bullcrap.

Actually it's a new space race with China:
By 2020, we will achieve visiting the Moon,
Source: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/3288043.stm

He better not turn it into another capitalist, statist dystopia.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Kûk‡xenisi n!ok‡x'osi xno-k‡xek‡emi.-The state only exists to serve itself.
"Oppose excessive military spending, yet believe in excessive spending on junk food and plastic surgery to make all your women look like LARDASSES!"-Sino, when I criticized excessive military spending.
http://www.sulucas.com/images/steatopygia.jpg
I'm male. Note the pic of attractive women.

Just caught on the news that Bush had claimed he wants to colonise the Moon, I think this is an amazing idea, Get us of this planet head to the future, If we were of this planet our hygeine would be a lot better, the amount of parasites and bacteria on earth is disgusting !

Im all for this mission.
This is my biggest problem with Bush. He spends too much money! Develope that space plane NASA is working on, sell the plans, and privatise the whole damn thing. He's wasted my taxdollars on seniors who hardly need it. He's wasting it on children who don't need it. He's wasting it on a medly of programs. And at this point, even Dean looks to be better. Bush is a good president otherwise, so I'm sorry that this issue cancels him out.

The moon is common property owned by everyone on Earth. He has no right to colonise it. IMPERIALISM! :x

The moon is common property owned by everyone on Earth. He has no right to colonise it. IMPERIALISM! :x
It's arguable, actually, that the moon is a US territory. We planted a flag on it, and arguably claimed it. Trouble is that we can't physically defend that claim yet.

Too true! Keep the scourge of capitalism off the moon.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Kûk‡xenisi n!ok‡x'osi xno-k‡xek‡emi.-The state only exists to serve itself.
"Oppose excessive military spending, yet believe in excessive spending on junk food and plastic surgery to make all your women look like LARDASSES!"-Sino, when I criticized excessive military spending.
http://www.sulucas.com/images/steatopygia.jpg
I'm male. Note the pic of attractive women.

Why keep capitalism off the moon? Rocks have no civil rights.

We have been in low earth orbit for too long. It is time to move out from this earth. This is the most important and far reaching decision made by a President since J.F.K. challenged us to reach the moon in the 60's. Like the moon project then, this new initiative will drive us to create more technological inovations that will benefit all society.

I have had the pleasure of covering a number of launches at the cape and I can tell you all that the same drive and determination that got us to the moon the first time is still there waiting to be directed to another goal. Will they be able to make space travel safe? Not today. Probably not tomorrow. But brave men and women will go out none the less for this is the wonder of humanity.

Back to the moon? Oh yes! And then on to Mars. Fasten your seat belts and hang on. It's going to be an incredible ride.

Note how this comes when shuttle flights are grounded for 2 years, and now what about the ISS? Do we just abandon that and let it sit up there half-built?

If Bush wants to pay for it, let's repeal the tax cuts on the top 1-5 percent of American society, and reduce the debt before we go thinking about moon colonies.

And the GOP accused liberals of too much spending, yet they are doing a great job cutting the budget and tightening the gov't's belt.

Actually, this idea (and the concept behind it) was being referenced by a left-winger named Lyndon LaRouche (http://www.totse.com/en/technology/space_astronomy_nasa/moonmars.html) back in 1985. It's still a part of his campaign platform, if you wish to call it that. He's been running on the Looney ticket for over eight terms now (although many of his ideas are incredibly valid.)

The idea is that it's not about science, or even about colonizing Mars. As shown in JFK's era, putting forth a larger goal before the nation mobilizes it, increases morale, and invokes a sense of hope in its people (not to mention, deifies the president who sets the task and accomplishes it.)

While I believe JFK cared for the people, I don't think that Bush's goals are quite so moral. Re-election is just around the corner, you know. It doesn't hurt to establish yourself in the American mind as a visionary, like one of our most beloved prior presidents. Especially when many of what used to be your most ardent supporters are losing their faith and charm with you as a war that was over months ago drags on.

A push to colonize the moon, manned missions to Mars, etcetera would simultaneously mobilize the nation and increase standards of education and inevitably standards of living as the research programs (much like NASA has done) develop technologies which become integral and improving in other aspects of American and human life. There are literally hundreds of "spin-off" technologies created by NASA that affect every industry, from the methods used to purify baby food, to better car brakes.

If it actually were a JFKish president, I'd see it as more than an empty gesture. As it is, it's a political ploy, and I don't appreciate blatant manipulation of the inherent hopefulness and "wide-eyed wonder" of the human spirit.

With all of that said, space is supercool. I wanna go there.

The moon is common property owned by everyone on Earth. He has no right to colonise it. IMPERIALISM! :x
It's arguable, actually, that the moon is a US territory. We planted a flag on it, and arguably claimed it. Trouble is that we can't physically defend that claim yet.

The moon, in economic terms, is a public good. It is non-rivalrous (everyone can enjoy it), and non-exclusive (planting a flag on doesn't mean it's yours). The moon is open to all on Earth.

The moon is open to all sorts of ideology. If Socialists or Capitalists or Communists want a peice go for it! I want another US state up there.

The moon is common property owned by everyone on Earth. He has no right to colonise it. IMPERIALISM! :x
It's arguable, actually, that the moon is a US territory. We planted a flag on it, and arguably claimed it. Trouble is that we can't physically defend that claim yet.

The moon, in economic terms, is a public good. It is non-rivalrous (everyone can enjoy it), and non-exclusive (planting a flag on doesn't mean it's yours). The moon is open to all on Earth.
I wasn't saying it was the US's. But, whichever nation does move in, I'd like them to respect a little request: I own land on the moon, in the Sea of Tranquility, next to the Menzle Crater, at $40 an acre. I got it for my birthday gift, actually, and there's a ton of legal paperwork that goes along with it. So I just ask that they respect the fact that their is private property on the moon.

That's right, DB.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Kûk‡xenisi n!ok‡x'osi xno-k‡xek‡emi.-The state only exists to serve itself.
"Oppose excessive military spending, yet believe in excessive spending on junk food and plastic surgery to make all your women look like LARDASSES!"-Sino, when I criticized excessive military spending.
http://www.sulucas.com/images/steatopygia.jpg
I'm male. Note the pic of attractive women.

I wasn't saying it was the US's. But, whichever nation does move in, I'd like them to respect a little request: I own land on the moon, in the Sea of Tranquility, next to the Menzle Crater, at $40 an acre. I got it for my birthday gift, actually, and there's a ton of legal paperwork that goes along with it. So I just ask that they respect the fact that their is private property on the moon.

The moon doesn't belong ANY NATION! It belongs to the people of the world, not the tool of an organisation to either win votes or to conduct stupid scientific study when you can't solve the problems on Earth. :roll:

Another goverment funded corporate welfare check. Lets give lots of money to another defence contractor for anohter wasted project
AWESOME!!!

On a related note, has anyone seen teh Get Your War On comic where Bush convinces the world that the Moon must be invaded, funny stuff


So, you're another doubter. "Comic"? I think not. We must go the moon, as soon as possible, in order to end terrorism.

It's been proven now - and only Commies and Liberals would say otherwise - that just before the outbreak of the invasion of Iraq, Saddam moved all the WMD to the moon and concealed them on the dark side of the moon, along with Osama bin Laden and Pink Floyd.

You'd better be careful dismissing the importance of going to the moon right now, or you'll have to be investigated as a possible terrorist sympathizer.

PT

I wasn't saying it was the US's. But, whichever nation does move in, I'd like them to respect a little request: I own land on the moon, in the Sea of Tranquility, next to the Menzle Crater, at $40 an acre. I got it for my birthday gift, actually, and there's a ton of legal paperwork that goes along with it. So I just ask that they respect the fact that their is private property on the moon.

The moon doesn't belong ANY NATION! It belongs to the people of the world, not the tool of an organisation to either win votes or to conduct stupid scientific study when you can't solve the problems on Earth. :roll:

You are right. The moon currently does not belong to anyone. However soon...

First good thing Bush has done.

Now you have Bush doing what has typically been viewed as a liberal move. And the liberals are all crying that it isn't right to do so.
Liberals complained about the ISS and now are saying lets finish it first. The technology learned from the building of ISS is what makes this proposition possible. Much new technology will come from this new undertaking as well. But the liberals are suddenly against science (the same science that tells us when we can legally kill babies). The liberals complain about not creating enough new jobs, and here is a way to employ thousands of people for years, but that is not a good idea. The liberals talk about lowering the deficit yet putting all these people to work and stimulating an economy is not the right thing to do. Very curious actions by the liberals towards this plan.

Did I not say he was going to do this?

Colonizing the moon is the stepping stone to infinity.

its too bad this aint going to be any different from what nasa did in the 60s

except its gonna be more like an ISS on the moon this time instead of a couple of moonwalks for rocks. This is not colonization - it's bullshit

I think theyre going about this all wrong. - theyre trying to build a house without a foundation.

What they need to do is improve thier orbital launch tech and improve our biomedical technology in space so that its possible to set up a facility of some selfsuficiency. Sending up shuttles and rockets to the moon to resupply astronauts would be a lot more expensive than doing it for ISS staff. What we need first is a cheaper, better and faster way into and from orbit.

I wonder what progress has been made with variable specific impulse magneto-plasma rockets. A vasimr engine was suposed to be tested at the ISS last year - never heard anything about it - guess it never happend. You cant go across the nation on a bicycle - well I guess you could, but it would be extremely impracticle.

It should go ahead as soon as possible, for as we all know the earth is a ticking tikme bomb if a natural disaster doesnt wipe us out it would be ourselves in a war.

If we had a space colonie on the moon it would keep the human life cycle going.

Does that sound bad? - - - I think not :!:

Oh god no. PLEASE TELL ME HE WON'T! It's just re-election bullcrap.

Actually it's a new space race with China:
By 2020, we will achieve visiting the Moon,
Source: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/3288043.stm

I'm putting my money on saying bush plans to colonise and claim the moon, so that america remains most the most advanced. The fact is it's going to cost trillions, and probably lives.

Oh god no. PLEASE TELL ME HE WON'T! It's just re-election bullcrap.

Actually it's a new space race with China:
By 2020, we will achieve visiting the Moon,
Source: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/3288043.stm

I'm putting my money on saying bush plans to colonise and claim the moon, so that america remains most the most advanced. The fact is it's going to cost trillions, and probably lives.

In Ad 2101, war was beginning... :P

It should go ahead as soon as possible, for as we all know the earth is a ticking tikme bomb if a natural disaster doesnt wipe us out it would be ourselves in a war.

If we had a space colonie on the moon it would keep the human life cycle going.

Does that sound bad? - - - I think not :!:

To maintain our way of life - if all life on earth was wiped out in war and natural disaster - it would take selfsufecient colonies of millions of people. We just cant afford to do something like that. At least NASA and the US alone cannot. dont pretend. Whats needed is a new, International Aerospace Administration that can combine resources and work out more efficient means to do what needs to be done. And what needs to be done is reduce the cost of orbital launch & space technology to the point where any well off nation or corporation can afford to open up a space tourism industry. In the immediate short-term this is the only way to finance a larger, capable space program.

The Lunar plan is bullshit just like the one in 1969 was. Not that they ever made it beyond the backlot of a hollywood production company. I don't think they are going to be doing any colonization, it's just re-election rhetoric.

First thing he's done of which I approve, plus he's planning to send to Mars too.

Bout bloody time I say.

At least it would put to rest all those doubters who say that they never could have made it to the moon to begin with.

I'm all for establishing a moon base, however, I think it will take a lot of time and mone (and yes possibly lives). However, I think the main reason for the move is political. Bush wants Americans to be able to be on hand to welcome the Chinese to the moon in 2020. Legacy material if you ask me...

We shouldn't worry about colonizing the moon. First, it's a waste of money and second, we should try to worry about problems here on earth before we try to colonize the moon.

I know why Bush wants to go to the moon. My money says that within three years of the US establishing a moonbase, there will be zero oil left on the moon. That's right, there will not be a drop left. Also, the moon will be bereft of life, except for humans, and the atmosphere will be unbreathable. Damn you, Bush!

Im sorry but America has managed to mess up this world and now it wants to do it to the moon and maybe even mars. I think bush and his simple brain should come back down to earth

"It is time for us to enter the solar system."
-George DoubleJyy

"It is time for us to enter the solar system."
-George DoubleJyy

:lol:

That is funny, I love Bush quotes!

4 words : What is the point?

The moon is a big lump of rock that has no interesting features that we have not already seen so there is no point of going there again.

It takes as much energy to get to mars as it does to get to the moon only it takes longer to get to mars so the argument that it couls be used as a starting point to get to mars is useless too.

So what is the point? oh yes it's a ploy to get him a couple more votes.

Good for Bush! Finally, he's doing something worthwhile with money.

I agree with the house-foundation idea mentioned earlier. Colonizing the moon? With what, the space shuttle?

There are about a billion steps towards colonizing the moon, and right now we're in the low.... millions, maybe. Unless Bush plans on staying for a few more terms it's nothing more than a reelection campaign.

It's impossible....(well....unless their space ships have 3inches of lead lining)..

I'd be all for this if it wasn't totally infeasible (and therefore likely a ploy to get votes from more moderate/left-leaning types).

There is no way we can afford to do the kind of research and make the vehicles to get matierials to the moon to make a base. At the moment, the only manned vehicle that has landed on the moon is the lunar lander, and that isn't exactly good for any kind of mass transit. We could probably send materials in unmanned packages (like the mars rover missions), but how do we plan to get the people down there? A hellofalota lunar lander missions? The cost would be astronomical (bad pun :P). Not that the alternative of researching and building new vehicles capable of landing and taking off on the moons surface would be much better.

And of course there is the problem of supplies. The choices are "self sufficient" (needs quite a bit of time and money to do R&D to make this feasible) or supply missions like the ISS, also very very costly.

Whoever said the details aren't important: a mission like this is built on very very precise details. An insignifigant error can mean millions (if not billions) of dollars, and possibly human lives.

Just caught on the news that Bush had claimed he wants to colonise the Moon, I think this is an amazing idea, Get us of this planet head to the future, If we were of this planet our hygeine would be a lot better, the amount of parasites and bacteria on earth is disgusting !

Im all for this mission.

Let's all take up a collection, pay for Bush to go and colonize the moon, and just not bother about getting him back down here again, for a long, long time.

PT

I'd be all for this if it wasn't totally infeasible (and therefore likely a ploy to get votes from more moderate/left-leaning types).

There is no way we can afford to do the kind of research and make the vehicles to get matierials to the moon to make a base. At the moment, the only manned vehicle that has landed on the moon is the lunar lander, and that isn't exactly good for any kind of mass transit. We could probably send materials in unmanned packages (like the mars rover missions), but how do we plan to get the people down there? A hellofalota lunar lander missions? The cost would be astronomical (bad pun :P). Not that the alternative of researching and building new vehicles capable of landing and taking off on the moons surface would be much better.

And of course there is the problem of supplies. The choices are "self sufficient" (needs quite a bit of time and money to do R&D to make this feasible) or supply missions like the ISS, also very very costly.

Whoever said the details aren't important: a mission like this is built on very very precise details. An insignifigant error can mean millions (if not billions) of dollars, and possibly human lives.


The survival of Human life isnt worth any amount of cash, Its a safegaurd of our very existance if we were to colonise the moon.

Sorry; multiple post.

%!!*&&$ multiple posts!

I'd be all for this if it wasn't totally infeasible (and therefore likely a ploy to get votes from more moderate/left-leaning types).

There is no way we can afford to do the kind of research and make the vehicles to get matierials to the moon to make a base. At the moment, the only manned vehicle that has landed on the moon is the lunar lander, and that isn't exactly good for any kind of mass transit. We could probably send materials in unmanned packages (like the mars rover missions), but how do we plan to get the people down there? A hellofalota lunar lander missions? The cost would be astronomical (bad pun :P). Not that the alternative of researching and building new vehicles capable of landing and taking off on the moons surface would be much better.

And of course there is the problem of supplies. The choices are "self sufficient" (needs quite a bit of time and money to do R&D to make this feasible) or supply missions like the ISS, also very very costly.

Whoever said the details aren't important: a mission like this is built on very very precise details. An insignifigant error can mean millions (if not billions) of dollars, and possibly human lives.


The survival of Human life isnt worth any amount of cash, Its a safegaurd of our very existance if we were to colonise the moon.

so what, do these things have babies when we turn our backs?

I'd be all for this if it wasn't totally infeasible (and therefore likely a ploy to get votes from more moderate/left-leaning types).

There is no way we can afford to do the kind of research and make the vehicles to get matierials to the moon to make a base. At the moment, the only manned vehicle that has landed on the moon is the lunar lander, and that isn't exactly good for any kind of mass transit. We could probably send materials in unmanned packages (like the mars rover missions), but how do we plan to get the people down there? A hellofalota lunar lander missions? The cost would be astronomical (bad pun :P). Not that the alternative of researching and building new vehicles capable of landing and taking off on the moons surface would be much better.

And of course there is the problem of supplies. The choices are "self sufficient" (needs quite a bit of time and money to do R&D to make this feasible) or supply missions like the ISS, also very very costly.

Whoever said the details aren't important: a mission like this is built on very very precise details. An insignifigant error can mean millions (if not billions) of dollars, and possibly human lives.


The survival of Human life isnt worth any amount of cash, Its a safegaurd of our very existance if we were to colonise the moon.

Look, it's IMPOSSIBLE. There never was a manned moon landing. The Earth's magnetic field deflects 'cosmic rays' away from the planet, and they form the Van Allen belts above the Earth. These rays can tear people's DNA to shreds - hence, anyone trying to get to the moon would not come out perfectly alright at the other end (unless they have adequate protection - 3mm of aluminium foil is not adequate).

Look, it's IMPOSSIBLE. There never was a manned moon landing. The Earth's magnetic field deflects 'cosmic rays' away from the planet, and they form the Van Allen belts above the Earth. These rays can tear people's DNA to shreds - hence, anyone trying to get to the moon would not come out perfectly alright at the other end (unless they have adequate protection - 3mm of aluminium foil is not adequate).

1. Its not impossible

2. The moon landing was real

3. China will soon do the same

4. I think protection will be found 'research'

5. Safeguarding human life is worth any risk.

Altaran, put down the damned comic books and take a course in astronomy.

I'm all for conspiracy theory, but saying we never landed on the moon is simple idiocy. The government has no reason or justification to lie to us to that extent... making up that much publicity just to back up an event like that is simply impractical.

And "cosmic rays". Right. Has it not occured to you that we've sent probes FAR beyond the Van Allen belts, probes equipped with sensors scanning on multitudinous frequencies for just that sort of thing? And nothing turned up.

I'm glad some of you have the presence of mind not to bash Bush on this, even those of you that have done nothing else in the past. It's a good idea, and a return to an age of enlightenment that we put behind us because it cost a few bucks and one or two people got killed here and there. Do you know how many people were killed in the early days of the automobile? But I'd wager that not too many of you are afraid of getting into a car.

That's all. Good night.

I'm all for conspiracy theory, but saying we never landed on the moon is simple idiocy. The government has no reason or justification to lie to us to that extent... making up that much publicity just to back up an event like that is simply impractical.

You do know what the space race was, right? You DO know that the USSR's accomplishments far outweighed those of the US (first man in space, first satellite etc.)? There was every reason for propaganda during the Cold War to fake such an event.

And "cosmic rays". Right. Has it not occured to you that we've sent probes FAR beyond the Van Allen belts, probes equipped with sensors scanning on multitudinous frequencies for just that sort of thing? And nothing turned up.

Right. So, how do you explain the Northern Lights? Some birds waving glo-sticks?

THis is seriously cool. But also Infeasable. I think the money could be spent on better space ventures. Specifically the moon base.

Maybe its just to pay lip service to an election promise.
Bush said "Its time to move out of earth, and explore the solar system"
The big book of stupid bush quotes said this was silly because we are in the solar system so how can we go out and explore it. But that sounds like they were straining a bit.

With the whole columbia thing. There has been very little space exploration going on. So maybe this was a way of Vicariously fulfilling it.

Put the money towards mars, moon base later.
I say this not because its good strategy, I just want the Mars thing to happen ASAP :D

http://us.news2.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/cx/uc/20040109/bs/bs040109.gif

Now you have Bush doing what has typically been viewed as a liberal move. And the liberals are all crying that it isn't right to do so.
Liberals complained about the ISS and now are saying lets finish it first. The technology learned from the building of ISS is what makes this proposition possible. Much new technology will come from this new undertaking as well. But the liberals are suddenly against science (the same science that tells us when we can legally kill babies). The liberals complain about not creating enough new jobs, and here is a way to employ thousands of people for years, but that is not a good idea. The liberals talk about lowering the deficit yet putting all these people to work and stimulating an economy is not the right thing to do. Very curious actions by the liberals towards this plan.

Single space probes cost many millions of dollars as do routine rocket launches. The ISS costed an arm and a leg. And there hasnt been a manned mission that went any distance since apollo.
You make it sound like it would be a cakewalk.

It would cost a fuck-load just to get it constructed, and then you have to take into account reapeated missions. It would not be easy andit would be very dangerous. So dont act as if criticism is unfounded.

There isnt anyone who doesnt think its a very cool idea. And who knows what they will be capable of in 10 years. But couldnt the money be spent on other things?
There are other space based ventures that this several trillion could go towards.

When bush spent that 87 billion on iraq. There was a really good thread talking about a space elevator, and how you could build one for less than the cost of this occupation.
Doesnt all that fancy nanotechnology sound like it would be great, and a space elevator would fuel development of it.

You would never have to worry about expensive rockets agin. Without even having to pay for a spaceshipyard. You could have a permanant contruction yard in space, and not have to worry about getting the materials up there. It would be a great incentive for Nuclear powered Ion propulsion. Real, Actual nuclear propulsion.
And That would be a great stepping stone for a mission to mars.
Plus it would pretty much qualify as the new wonder of the world.



Now, I dont know how colony wriggled its way into the conversation. But its not an accurate term. By saying colony people mean a permanant base. The u.s wouldnt own the entire moon by doing it. The U.S couldnt claim an entire celestial body. There are treaties preventing it. No country would tolerate the U.S owning such a huge share of resources. It could never be enforced. They would be allowed to own part of it, but not all of it.

I've said it before and I'll say it again. Im doubt those other worldly stakes would hold up in a court of law, especially if it was against a person who had actually been there and was living there.

Does it seem fair that you can own something that no one has ever been to?

Why? Found oil up there have they?

Here are my reasons to go to the moon…

1) Spending on science is always a good idea.

2) The US should start the moon initiative sometime.

3) To colonize the moon is part of the America’s destiny.

4) The moon is the gateway to the universe. The is how we will learn to colonize other worlds.

5) To strive for the almost impossible is noble, not to strive for the impossible is comfortable.

1) Spending on science is always a good idea.
Agreed, the thing is, Bush doesn't have any money to spend on science. He is already so far in debt that a new, costly project is beyond a bad idea.

2) The US should start the moon initiative sometime.
I agree that someone should start it sometime, but does it half to be the US? China is doing just fine with their moon initiative.

3) To colonize the moon is part of the America’s destiny.
I thought it was to span from the pacific to the atlantic (Manifest Destiny). I don't see the moon anywhere on the map of north america.

And of course, assuming there is such a thing as destiny, how did you come to know it?

4) The moon is the gateway to the universe. The is how we will learn to colonize other worlds.
That's fairly accurate, but once again, it takes time and money. We have and abundance of the former and none of the later. Lets wait 'till we have some money to spend on this.

5) To strive for the almost impossible is noble, not to strive for the impossible is comfortable.
:?:

You make good points, but I think the money’s there. The economy is growing. If not it’s worth the deficit.

Well, asking should the US be colonizing the moon is just like arguing who should colonize the new world in the era of exploration. Who so colonizes space will continue being a super power. Being an American I like having a powerful and technologically advance country. Colonizing the moon will create jobs, colonization technology, as well as a space trained work force.

You don’t see the moon on the map of American destiny? I do. I’m hoping parts of it (not all) of it will be the 51st etc… state.

3) To colonize the moon is part of the America’s destiny.
I thought it was to span from the pacific to the atlantic (Manifest Destiny). I don't see the moon anywhere on the map of north america.


Not YET. :D

i dont see why people think its impossible. we landed on the moon in 1969!! about 30 years ago, and we're just now thinking about starting a colony. i think we're long over due and the technology has existed since the 70's and 80's. score one for bush.

No, the technology doesn't exist. They don't even have the technology to LAND on the moon anymore; NASA has scrapped all models of the landing modules and many of the blueprints as well. And Colonizing would require a LOT more than just landing. NASA is lacking the technical skills to do this right now.

i dont see why people think its impossible. we landed on the moon in 1969!! about 30 years ago, and we're just now thinking about starting a colony. i think we're long over due and the technology has existed since the 70's and 80's. score one for bush.

Alright. You win, how about near impossible?

alright , lets say we took a time machine back to 1960(jsut bear with me) and took a poll of how many people thought it was impossible to land on the moon, youd be surprised that many would say it was near impossible. it takes a leap of faith and if we have enough funding and enough focus and not a bunch of skeptics we can do it within 10 years easy, maybe even sooner.

With enough funding you can Achieve anything (Theres one for the motivaitonal booklets)

But can america afford to spend such money on a frivolous purpose?

frivolous?? how do you know its frivolous? we havent even begun to scratch the surface of whats humanly possible in space. for all you know we may discover a cure for cancer and aids and other stuff if given the chance. there have already been numerous medical breakthroughs in space. and hey, without, we wouldnt have velcro.

You make good points, but I think the money’s there. The economy is growing. If not it’s worth the deficit.
It just hit me! We're already so far into debt, why not a little more? At least it's for something worth doing this time.

*sits back to watch the moon landing 2.0*

frivolous?? how do you know its frivolous? we havent even begun to scratch the surface of whats humanly possible in space. for all you know we may discover a cure for cancer and aids and other stuff if given the chance. there have already been numerous medical breakthroughs in space. and hey, without, we wouldnt have velcro.

For all you know the Astronauts may come back infected with the Terrible Space Plauge!!!

dont talk to me as If i dont like the space program, I do. Thres no point in finding out what humanly possible in space because we dont have the technology yet to find out. Space shuttle launches are impressive and all, but they dont really achieve anything daring. They barely leave the earths atmosphere. they just hang around and and leave the planet.

Check my previous post. I think a space elevator would be better. It would encourage new technolgy with even more practical applications and would make space travel as a whole a lot more feasable.

a space elevator..sounds iinteresting. much harder than colonizing the moon but nevertheless feasable, and interesting.

Surprised you havnt heard of it.

Its so cool, It might throw the earth's orbit out of kilter :D

i have heard of it, jsut not in the actual sense of building it, only in scifi books and stuff like that. as for really building it it would take undoubtably the entire world behind it to make it happen.

listen to me...I come from the future...DO NOT let Bush colonize the moon! It's where he plans to launch nukes from! Please hear me out! I'm Chinese! I know what happens in July of 2008!

yes, all the more reason to suppot Bush, haha, let us destroy those communists...at least hes taking a risk, clinton only launched some missles, that the biggest risk he took, and his little incident.....

listen to me...I come from the future...DO NOT let Bush colonize the moon! It's where he plans to launch nukes from! Please hear me out! I'm Chinese! I know what happens in July of 2008!

Kick ASS!!!!

You do realise that the Neo-cons will take that as enouragement, not discouragement.

listen to me...I come from the future...DO NOT let Bush colonize the moon! It's where he plans to launch nukes from! Please hear me out! I'm Chinese! I know what happens in July of 2008!

Kick ASS!!!!

You do realise that the Neo-cons will take that as enouragement, not discouragement.

forget them! just remember! when you see a proposition to ban the Constitution and give free beer to all men, VOTE NO!

lol

bwahhhhh

Well it's about damn time! See? Bush was bound to do something right! HA!

A space colony is all good and well... but what about the aging space shuttle? I haven't heard anything about a new shuttle since the collapse of the x-1 project a couple of years ago. With the Columbia tragedy last year, and most of the space fleet hitting 20+ years in age, i think before we can think of having a permanently manned station on the moon, we need to update the fleet. An i personally think this could be just as expensive as the development and construction of the actual moon base.

Possibilities:

1) Bush has shown that he can aspire to loftier goals than snatching protected lands for corporate interests and invading muslim nations.

2) Bush wants to pull a 'JFK' by being remembered as the President that started a new space race.

3) Bush has watched 'The Right Stuff' 25 times since becoming President. :wink:

I have always been a fan of space travel. I consider every dollar spent by NASA(especially if it's intelligently spent) to be money well spent. I'd like to see a permanent colony set up on the moon to become a stepping stone to the rest of the solar system and deep space.

This isn't without flaws though.

I turn to George Carlin for a difference of opinion.

"THe latest disaster for the rest of the universe is that we're gonna go to Mars. Oh, yeah. We're gonna go to Mars! Then we're gonna colonize deep space. With our spray cheese, cinnamon dental floss, edible women's panties and sneakers with lights in the heel. ANd all the other impressive things we've done down here!

But what are we gonna tell the intergalactic council the first time one of our unwed teen mothers tosses her baby into a trash dumpster? How are we going to explain that to the space people? Or that our ambassador was only late because his breakfast was cold and he had to spend an hour punching his wife around the kitchen? Or that it's just a quaint tradition that over 60 million women in the third world have had their clitorises forcibly removed to reduce their sexual pleasure so they won't cheat on their husbands. Can't you just tell how much the rest of the galaxy is just waiting for US to show up?" -George Carlin

The reorganization began more than a year ago, but was made public one day after Bush unveiled his plan to establish a base on the moon by 2020 and eventually send people to Mars.

That pisses me off. I was under the impression that man would be going to mars by 2020 at the latest. Bush hasnt Revamped the Space program. HE HAS SET IT BACK!!!

The reorganization began more than a year ago, but was made public one day after Bush unveiled his plan to establish a base on the moon by 2020 and eventually send people to Mars.

That pisses me off. I was under the impression that man would be going to mars by 2020 at the latest. Bush hasnt Revamped the Space program. HE HAS SET IT BACK!!!


No....not really.

After the Columbia disaster, the space program was in doubt as to its future.
All this means is that there is a DEFINATE plan to continue on...
Its really the only smart thing Bush has ever done.

There's a very good, solid, non-political reason to do what he says he wants to do.
Ever heard of the Dinosaurs? You know what killed them? a big-assed rock, that's what.
Guess what we can't (in spite of Hollywood's repeated fantasizing) prevent at our current technological level? Uh-Huh, that's right. Guess what? we can't even spot one before it hits, or misses, and the solar system isn't nearly as empty as you might think.
In the last 10 years, there's been something like seven near-misses with things that can kill every living thing on earth (including Bacteria and Cockroaches), and it's only a matter of time before those misses (most by less than ten degrees or ten minutes time) become impacts, dude.
Boom-Splat, the right/left argument becomes moot, and the question of whether or not God exists is answered for every human being on earth.
Now, we can't stop 'em-because we lack both the ability to see one, and the ability to get something out there to stop it.
The problem isn't the speed of light, it's the angle of observation-something coming straight at Earth is damned near impossible to see/percieve, and anything moving at us from outside LEO is pretty much impossible to intercept with our current launch capability.
A serious Permanent base on the Moon gives a low-g launching point and assembly area, as well as a stable platform for detection. That's the basis for the first step in creating a state of being where we might be able to do something about the smaller stuff-a few decades after establishing said base.
We can't do jack-(censored-censored) about it by remaining Earthbound and wailing about who's responsible for what overages, or bitching about who should or shouldn't be included in the Tech-grab-bag that a serious space-programme actually represents.

A nuclear missile would not save the earth from a planet killer. All the proposals to save earth from asteroids assume we know aout it decades in advance.

Its not possible to stop one atthe frop of the hat.

And as for making it a genetic bank in case something does happen to humanity thats not practical, beause it would require a population way more than a space station could support.

And the space program was not in doubt over columbia. Those that said it were were simply chicken littles, Who didnt rellay know the score.

A nuclear missile would not save the earth from a planet killer. All the proposals to save earth from asteroids assume we know aout it decades in advance.

Its not possible to stop one atthe frop of the hat.

And as for making it a genetic bank in case something does happen to humanity thats not practical, beause it would require a population way more than a space station could support.

And the space program was not in doubt over columbia. Those that said it were were simply chicken littles, Who didnt rellay know the score.

I beg to differ.
It was most certainly in doubt.

the question was....will these shuttles continue to be used?
As they get older....they become more dangerous to use.

Wether or not the ENTIRE program would continue was never the issue.
however....major investigations into crew safety, and Shuttle maintenance is currently being conducted.

Dont forget....the last 20 years has seen the most Astronauts killed ever.
14 in all.

thats 11 more than the first 20 years.


So as space travel becomes more dangerous, dont think that N.A.S.A isnt at least a little unsure how to correct these issue.

Well in that repsect I wish it were cancelled. The shuttle is such a waste of space its not funny.

Space elevator (http://www.space.com/businesstechnology/technology/space_elevator_020327-1.html) All the way!!!

If anyone has any illusions about the feasability of putting a sustainable base of people on the moon, I have two words: Biosphere Two.

It was the multi-million dollar experiement started in 1986 that was supposed to be an attempt to create "earth in a bubble" with 3000 species, all the earth's major ecosystems, and supply 8 people self-contained in there for a year. The 8 people went in in 1991 and had to be let out before the year was up because the levels of oxygen were dangerously low while the levels of carbon dioxide had sky-rocketed. In short, millions of dollars of research and effort went into making this huge glass bubble and the project failed miserably. And it was being done on EARTH. (for current details on Biosphere 2 check out: http://www.boston.com/news/globe/health_science/articles/2003/10/21/biosphere_2_gains_credibility_loses_funding/ )

If all the best minds and money screwed this up on Earth, just think what kind of problems we would have trying to do this on the moon! Sure, technology has progressed and we (hopefully) have learned a lot from the mistakes made in Biosphere 2. We are still a far cry, however, from making a feasible, sustainable, artificial biosphere here on Earth... much less putting one on the moon. I mean at least when Biosphere 2 had to be stopped mid-way we were able to let the humans out into the real world to breathe. We really don't have that kind of luxury on the moon being as there's no atmosphere to speak of there. :wink:

Bush is a dumb ass! :tantrum:

Colonization of the moon has been on NASA's mind ever since the end of the Apollo era. In fact, they were pushing for manned missions to Mars by 1990 by using an advanced form o the Satrn V rocket, the Nuclear saturn which utilized nuclear propulsion to get us there and back. It would have used the same basic model as the Saturn V (the Command, Service, and Lunar Modules-in this case it would be called the Martian module or something snazzy like that). And although i hate bush to death, hes not a dumbass like you say. Hes just prioritizing nasa's agenda, MAKING them do what they said they were going to do, except in a shorter time, even though this is all to get him reelected.

It's a good idea so colonise space, although I hope this will not get Bush more voters. It has to happen once.
But as it's going to cost a lot, I think it's better for the US and Europe to work together.

This isnt just a US endevour. This is an international endevour as Bush stated it will be in his speech givin this past week (wednesday). The major players will be the US, possibly Europe and Russia (for sure). POSSIBLE partners include India and China.

Its not a goodidea to colonise space. Its actually a pretty bad one.
It is however a seriously cool idea.

dp

(Bugger it)

I posted the entire article but it mucked up the page.
So heres the link
Clicky (http://www.salon.com/news/wire/2004/01/16/hubble/index.html)

Because of this new plan they are gonna let hubble die.

Is anyone old enough to remember when Bush snr. proposed this. How long did it take to get shot down? It just seems they are taking this awfully serious.

Bush, or more specifically rove would be the type to pull such a ridiculous stunt.
Bush will never go down in history as kennedy did, he will go down much like kennedy's latter

After this I dont think its fair that republicans can claim to be fiscally responsible.

This isnt just a US endevour. This is an international endevour as Bush stated it will be in his speech givin this past week (wednesday). The major players will be the US, possibly Europe and Russia (for sure). POSSIBLE partners include India and China.
Actually, a printed copy of his plan states definite cooperation with India and China. I don't know much about India's space program, but China's is becoming pretty big, pretty fast. Already, they are developing advanced anti sattelite missles.

Personally I thnk this is the first good idea the Bush administration has had (I doubt he thought of it himself).

It's about time we went to Mars and built a colony on the moon. We're natural explorers, and Mars is next. To do that, we need a moon base. (Plus it will be kinda cool).

This is probably a reaction to China putting a man in space - the second space race has started.

How come profitabilty and the economy is only an issue when it benefits republicans?

And india has a kind of, complex. They like to think of themselves as a firstworld country so they do a lot of stuff like this.

Pigs might fly perhaps - but this is pigs in space !!

I loved that show.

Looks like a boys and toys thing to me. Still, its not my money. Go for it

I definately agree with that!! Some men have their trucks and power tools, Dubya has a moon colony. I don't see much of a difference, do you? :D

A nuclear missile would not save the earth from a planet killer. All the proposals to save earth from asteroids assume we know aout it decades in advance.

Its not possible to stop one atthe frop of the hat.

And as for making it a genetic bank in case something does happen to humanity thats not practical, beause it would require a population way more than a space station could support.

And the space program was not in doubt over columbia. Those that said it were were simply chicken littles, Who didnt rellay know the score.

As for the numbers needed to support a permanent colony, a viable breeding population of 100.

However.. I think it's a better idea to ignore the moon completely and concentrate on a Mars colony.

That doesnt sound right that it would only take a hundered people to repopulate the entire Species.

Bush on the moon! What a great idea! The sooner he and all his cronies Foxtrot Oscar the better the world will be.

'One small step for man, one giant leap for a moron'

That doesnt sound right that it would only take a hundered people to repopulate the entire Species.

100 viable specimens is the minimum for a viable, sustainable population in humans. One hell of a bottleneck though.

That's how the biotech scientists are planning to get extinct species such as the Thylacine back.. clone seven or eight from specimens with as much variation as possible, and breed them to a population of 100.

The biological concept of minimum viable populations is the minimum number required for the population to have a 95% chance of surviving for a certain period of time.

I think that it is about time we got into the "space age", but colonising the moon is utterly pointless - it's just a big rock. We should try to land a manned spacecraft on mars.

happy 1500th post :D

bush on the moon?

does he think he'll find oil there or something?

Actually

Clicky (http://memes.org/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&sid=2397&mode=thread&order=0&thold=0)

:D

Just caught on the news that Bush had claimed he wants to colonise the Moon, I think this is an amazing idea, Get us of this planet head to the future, If we were of this planet our hygeine would be a lot better, the amount of parasites and bacteria on earth is disgusting !

Im all for this mission. why colonaise the moon when you can destroy it muhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahhahahahhahahahah cough cough cough i think it is great because its evill yes evil i love this word evil :tantrum:

OMG! Invading mars for the oil!!

H.G.Wells was soooo wrong.

The USA represents a little over 2% of the worlds population but uses up around 1 third of the earths precious natural resources. So i say GO FOR It who gives a s**t .

(that's pin yin Chinese for Happy New Year)

Happy New Year! (according to the lunar calendar)

It's the Year of the Monkey!

May all your nations peacefully prosper in the New Year!

Phunny Woks

I think that it is about time we got into the "space age", but colonising the moon is utterly pointless - it's just a big rock.
So is the earth.

This is a rediculous idea! Bush has no right to even suggest the idea of a massive overhaul of the space program. This man is wasting millions of dollars a day, the deficit is..well to the moon, we have men and women dieing everyday almost in Iraq, 20% of our children don't have health care insurance, we have had the first negitive growth in a quarter of a century, and while the unemployed number looks to have dropped that is only because less people are looking!

This man has no idea what fiscal responsibility is. While i agree that it is vital we explore outer space more in the future, i do not want George Bush and Chaney running the show.

How about we put the money towards public education and avoid the union killing voucher program. How about we open up the WTE talks (its a closed door meeting of 800 or so of hte worlds biggest corporations, they end up decided policy that effect us all). But no, lets go to the moon. And you know why? Because it will divert attention away from our problems right here right now!

I think that it is about time we got into the "space age", but colonising the moon is utterly pointless - it's just a big rock.
So is the earth.

But Jupiter isn't! Go for Jupiter! :P

This is a rediculous idea! Bush has no right to even suggest the idea of a massive overhaul of the space program.
Yes he does. He's the president.

Well, its just an election promise, and he will cut funding from the international space station, and build a small base on the moon. But he won't raise funding that much at all, which means the base will be an iss stuck on the ground and only about the same size.

'Well, it looks like he has finally given up on earth.'

don't tell me this is true! :shock:
what the....

This thing willl never work. Maybe in the future, but its almost impossible now. :shock:

The previous bush had this all ready to go but it was stopped due to a $400 billion price tag.

EDIT: Two other notes: the moon has enourmous potential due to its comparatively abundant Helium 3 supply, an energy source over a million times more powerful than coal. This is not sci-fi, we could power the us for at least a millenium with this resource being mined from the moon. Also, the entire purpose of this seems to be focused on quietly killing off the US manned spaceflight program, since NASA will have to divert funds from ISS and the shuttle.

Personally I thnk this is the first good idea the Bush administration has had (I doubt he thought of it himself).

It's about time we went to Mars and built a colony on the moon. We're natural explorers, and Mars is next. To do that, we need a moon base. (Plus it will be kinda cool).

This is probably a reaction to China putting a man in space - the second space race has started.

A space race with china? HIGHLY unlikely. The chineese need to put a man on the moon first. Not only that, they need more money. and they need to get more time in space. They really need to retrace the steps of the soviets or the americans in order to catch up. To catch us will take quite some time. and by then the US will be already well on its way to accomplishing its goal of getting to mars. Not only that, we have way more money to pump into the space program which is civilian run, while they dont have as much (and is miltiary run) so they will have quite a few problems going the way they are.

EDIT: Two other notes: the moon has enourmous potential due to its comparatively abundant Helium 3 supply, an energy source over a million times more powerful than coal. This is not sci-fi, we could power the us for at least a millenium with this resource being mined from the moon. Also, the entire purpose of this seems to be focused on quietly killing off the US manned spaceflight program, since NASA will have to divert funds from ISS and the shuttle.

How do they know theres helium on the moon?

don't tell me this is true! :shock:

what the....



This thing willl never work. Maybe in the future, but its almost impossible now. :shock:



The previous bush had this all ready to go but it was stopped due to a $400 billion price tag. ...

In other words, Bush Sr. could do the arithmetic, and he understood the sums. Dubya just says, "Wow! A big number... Daddy, is that gonna cost half my weekly allowance, or all of it?"

That doesnt sound right that it would only take a hundered people to repopulate the entire Species.



100 viable specimens is the minimum for a viable, sustainable population in humans. One hell of a bottleneck though.



That's how the biotech scientists are planning to get extinct species such as the Thylacine back.. clone seven or eight from specimens with as much variation as possible, and breed them to a population of 100.



The biological concept of minimum viable populations is the minimum number required for the population to have a 95% chance of surviving for a certain period of time.

Of course, if you aren't careful, cousins start intermarrying cousins -- and before too long you end up with another George Bush...

:twisted:

PT

Well, its just an election promise, and he will cut funding from the international space station, and build a small base on the moon. But he won't raise funding that much at all, which means the base will be an iss stuck on the ground and only about the same size.

'Well, it looks like he has finally given up on earth.'

Or, this may be the first indication we have that he doesn't expect the earth to survive his "war on terrorism".

We know he still can't find bin Laden, still can't find the Iraqi WMD -- heck, he probably still can't find his own backside without a full-time nurse guiding his paper-filled hand. It stands to reason that the only way he's going to manage to destroy any terrorists is to destroy most of the planet. Now to do that he'll want to evacuate the Chiefs of Staff and so on, and probably his family and friends.

Can't you just picture how it happened?

Dubya: "Where will we go? I don't know where most places on the planet even are, and I'm going to destroy or irradiate it in the end, so where's going to be left? ... hmmm ...

"Hey! Look up there! That big round thing! What's that called again?"

Anonymous aide: "That's called the moon, Mr. President."

Dubya: "Well now, that's just perfect! It's a bit small after Texas, but it should hold all the folks I need to take with me, once we deport all the folks living there now."

Anonymous aide: "But Mr. President, there aren't actually any people living there."

Dubya: "Better and better! Let's get to work here, I want to be able to move there pretty quick, so I can get on with the job of wiping out terrorism throughout the world."

Anonymous aide: "Err, Mr. President, no one lives there because it's just barren rock. No water, no atmosphere, nothing much at all except some space junk."

Dubya: "Space junk?"

Anonymous aide: "...from President Kennedy's space program, sir."

Dubya: "Ah, so it's already ours. Well then, tell somebody at NASA or somewhere that we're going back to the moon, we're going to do a Pilgrim Fathers thing there, settle down and colonize it and everything. Maybe even some witch-burnings so it'll feel more like home. Tell 'em to hurry up. I want to get this done in a hurry."

Anonymous aide: "But what about the American people, Mr. President? What should we tell them?"

Dubya: "Hell, what do I care? Tell the American people it's a new space program. Tell them anything, so long as they give us the money to go there. Better yet, I'll tell them myself. You know how they just can't bear to say no to me..."

I guess that buys us a little time ...

PT

Clicky (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/magazine/3429857.stm)

Interesting stuf. The first bit I've seen from the other side.

The trip means leaving the protection of Earth's magnetic field. Astronauts aboard the International Space Station orbit low enough to stay shielded, but going further means exposure to cosmic radiation and occasional intense solar flares. Apollo astronauts experienced high numbers of colourful flashes sometimes called "ghosts", caused by charged particles passing through their optic nerves.

Astronauts on the lunar surface are just as vulnerable. For each Apollo mission a network of observatories watched the Sun for show-stopping indications of unusual activity, but if a solar flare had occurred post-launch then astronauts would have had no real defence.

During August 1972 a solar flare erupted with such strength that any exposed astronaut would have been killed within hours. For any future moonbase a buried radiation shelter is a must-have.


I was wondering how to deal with the Cosmic rays. Although I didnt realise you could just hide in an underground shield. It'll have to be an underground base. Betcha wer'ent expecting that were you.

Not that constructing it would be fun. It is difficult to dig the compact lunar soil deeper than about 15 cm, and once disturbed, moondust gets everywhere.

Which is also interesting

On the plus side, operating a moonbase might actually be cheaper than maintaining the International Space Station. Everything up in orbit needs to be positioned there by expensive rockets, but the Moon already has plenty of useful raw materials.

Researchers at Houston's Johnston Space Centre have turned simulated lunar material into concrete and glass. And running short of air should never be a problem: moondust is composed of 40 per cent oxygen.


And that I was totally not expecting. Although There is a distinct lack of ability. I dont see how ya gonna contruct facility, underground, in hard rock, With extremely heavy Radiation Sheilding in an impossibley hostile environment. But hey. Seeing as how NASA is gonna be spending all of their money on this. Maybe it is possible :?

But I still think Karl Rove is a friggin Asshole for cooking this up.

Pretty intersesting facts here, So a space station would be too dangerous without a way to stop these 'Solar Flares'.

What is a solar flare and whats it made of ?

Pretty intersesting facts here, So a space station would be too dangerous without a way to stop these 'Solar Flares'.

What is a solar flare and whats it made of ?

A solar flare is practically a big emission of gas that extends from the Sun. It contains LARGE amounts of radiation and travels millions of miles a second. Its actually so strong it knocks around Earth's magnetic belt. If astronauts were out in space whe none of those solar flares errupted, they could be killed instantly by the super huge doses of radiation. For more clarification and to get accurate minute to minute updates on the suns status, go to http://www.spacew.com. You can also get some nice pics taken fro the GEOS satellites that monitor the sun and take readings. The site us updated with new information every few minutes or so and sends out solar storm alerts. (last summer the sun was VERY active. I monitored it and there werre like 4 or 5 solar flares within a 2 month time span.)

Yeah what he said. The earth is protected by its Magnetic Field. But outsie of it you are taking a big gamble.

Heres something else. I It's a good article because it gives Credence to the Idea of Militarisation of Space

Clicky (http://www.portlandphoenix.com/features/top/ts_multi/documents/03049361.asp)

And once you've read that. Read this. Clickity-Clack (http://memes.org/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&sid=2421)

I reckon most of you find this idea disconcerting.

Well im not saying that you cant realistically place weapons OUTSIDE of earths magnetic field, but 1) it would be impractical unless you have a superfast system, and two, and 2) it would be damn costly considering that ANYTHING with an elextrical circuit gets effected by solar flares. It could permanently damage anything with a circuit that is outside of the earths magnetic sphere. During solar flares, the radiation and bombardment of atomic particles are so strong that it knocks satellites offline, out of orbit, and it even messes with electricity down here on gods green earth.

So to place such weapons in space you would need ADEQUATE shielding, something in the form of superconductors big enough to repel the radiation, and/or large quantities of fuel to keep the thing in proper orbit. Those are a couple facts people fail to realize, or some just dont know about.

Hey, the main benefit of this is the fact that we're doing this. (Circular, huh?)

To explain, many of our technical advancements came from the early space program, and restarting NASA should bring in many rewards. Right now, NASA is dithering around, but with a vision, it can have a purpose again, and move forward. Also, this is a (timid) first step in Space Colonization. Think about how scary, risky, and unknown the first European vessels heading to the New World were? Remember how much the Old World benefitted from this?

We could be approaching a new age of Expansion (in a few centuries, at least), and if America can get out there first, then, "Go us!" Seriously, this should spark up some competition, or at least vision, and benefit the whole species.

I agree.

Although it does indeed have some potential monetary benefits, space exploration is one of the noble undertakings humans can do.
The testicular fortitude to branch out from Terra Firma, and seek the stars beyond, is a great thing.

In many ways much like the explorers of old.
Of course they too, were in it for the money.

Its a great time to be alive people.

Unless we re-elect Bush....then...we may not get the chance to enjoy it.

I agree.

Although it does indeed have some potential monetary benefits, space exploration is one of the noble undertakings humans can do.
The testicular fortitude to branch out from Terra Firma, and seek the stars beyond, is a great thing.

In many ways much like the explorers of old.
Of course they too, were in it for the money.

Its a great time to be alive people.

Unless we re-elect Bush....then...we may not get the chance to enjoy it.

I love the idea of space exploration. I wish I could go. But this decision isn't terribly clever at this time. We are a nation in a mess, in the midst of a world in a mess. We don't know how to take care of ourselves, govern ourselves, relate to one another or deal with disputes rationally. In personal, local, national and international relations humans are an irrational, unmannered race that tends to act like spoiled 3-year olds who have been at a party too long and need a nap badly.

Do we really want to take all that off the planet, and start polluting the rest of the solar system and maybe the galaxy with what we are pleased to call our "civilization"? Our last trip to the moon was an expensive picnic complete with expensive litter being left behind.

God help the solar system!

PT

Pretty intersesting facts here, So a space station would be too dangerous without a way to stop these 'Solar Flares'.

What is a solar flare and whats it made of ?

A solar flare is practically a big emission of gas that extends from the Sun. It contains LARGE amounts of radiation and travels millions of miles a second. Its actually so strong it knocks around Earth's magnetic belt. If astronauts were out in space whe none of those solar flares errupted, they could be killed instantly by the super huge doses of radiation. For more clarification and to get accurate minute to minute updates on the suns status, go to http://www.spacew.com. You can also get some nice pics taken fro the GEOS satellites that monitor the sun and take readings. The site us updated with new information every few minutes or so and sends out solar storm alerts. (last summer the sun was VERY active. I monitored it and there werre like 4 or 5 solar flares within a 2 month time span.)

Cool now i know

Hey, the main benefit of this is the fact that we're doing this. (Circular, huh?)

To explain, many of our technical advancements came from the early space program, and restarting NASA should bring in many rewards. Right now, NASA is dithering around, but with a vision, it can have a purpose again, and move forward.

As I've explained, NASA has made more advancements doing nothing than just focusing on one thing.

Maybe he should spend his money making sure the Earth is still habitable first instead of going "Lunar".

can he take Blaire with him?

maybe if America stopped claiming superiority of the world due to their size and actually joined up with other countrys we would get a lot further in the space research department. -- After all every American is an immigrant from somewere else

Rejoice fellows! We shall soon beat Al-Quada to the moon and disarm Mars! :lol:

After all every American is an immigrant from somewere else.

erm, not so much. many of us were born in America and have never lived anywhere else. we're as much natives of America as any European is a native of their own country.

That doesnt sound right that it would only take a hundered people to repopulate the entire Species.

Just so long as one of the 100 isn't Dubya, or the gene pool would be awash with terminal stupidity.

Surf's UP!

BB

Well, its just an election promise, and he will cut funding from the international space station, and build a small base on the moon. But he won't raise funding that much at all, which means the base will be an iss stuck on the ground and only about the same size.

'Well, it looks like he has finally given up on earth.'

Or, this may be the first indication we have that he doesn't expect the earth to survive his "war on terrorism".

We know he still can't find bin Laden, still can't find the Iraqi WMD -- heck, he probably still can't find his own backside without a full-time nurse guiding his paper-filled hand. It stands to reason that the only way he's going to manage to destroy any terrorists is to destroy most of the planet. Now to do that he'll want to evacuate the Chiefs of Staff and so on, and probably his family and friends.

Can't you just picture how it happened?

Dubya: "Where will we go? I don't know where most places on the planet even are, and I'm going to destroy or irradiate it in the end, so where's going to be left? ... hmmm ...

"Hey! Look up there! That big round thing! What's that called again?"

Anonymous aide: "That's called the moon, Mr. President."

Dubya: "Well now, that's just perfect! It's a bit small after Texas, but it should hold all the folks I need to take with me, once we deport all the folks living there now."

Anonymous aide: "But Mr. President, there aren't actually any people living there."

Dubya: "Better and better! Let's get to work here, I want to be able to move there pretty quick, so I can get on with the job of wiping out terrorism throughout the world."

Anonymous aide: "Err, Mr. President, no one lives there because it's just barren rock. No water, no atmosphere, nothing much at all except some space junk."

Dubya: "Space junk?"

Anonymous aide: "...from President Kennedy's space program, sir."

Dubya: "Ah, so it's already ours. Well then, tell somebody at NASA or somewhere that we're going back to the moon, we're going to do a Pilgrim Fathers thing there, settle down and colonize it and everything. Maybe even some witch-burnings so it'll feel more like home. Tell 'em to hurry up. I want to get this done in a hurry."

Anonymous aide: "But what about the American people, Mr. President? What should we tell them?"

Dubya: "Hell, what do I care? Tell the American people it's a new space program. Tell them anything, so long as they give us the money to go there. Better yet, I'll tell them myself. You know how they just can't bear to say no to me..."

I guess that buys us a little time ...

PT

PT, dude, you sure you haven't revealed some kind of state secrets or something?

Surf's UP!

Beach Boys

“Colony” in Bush means “Nuclear missile silo” :D

Hey guys! Bush wants a man on the moon by 2020. By then, he'll be long out office. By the time anyone really starts living in space, he'll be six feet under Crawford. His daughters can go, instead.

Hey guys! Bush wants a man on the moon by 2020. By then, he'll be long out office. By the time anyone really starts living in space, he'll be six feet under Crawford. His daughters can go, instead.

Who's famous for the Space program? Was it Kennedy who started the program, or Nixon who presided over it?

And dont say it! Nixon is famous for....other things.

Hey guys! Bush wants a man on the moon by 2020. By then, he'll be long out office. By the time anyone really starts living in space, he'll be six feet under Crawford. His daughters can go, instead.

Who's famous for the Space program? Was it Kennedy who started the program, or Nixon who presided over it?

And dont say it! Nixon is famous for....other things.
There were all corrupt, sex crazed lunatics if you ask me. The politician who should get the most credit is James E. Webb, who's name is on the second generation Hubble being built.

Hey guys! Bush wants a man on the moon by 2020. By then, he'll be long out office. By the time anyone really starts living in space, he'll be six feet under Crawford. His daughters can go, instead.

Who's famous for the Space program? Was it Kennedy who started the program, or Nixon who presided over it?

And dont say it! Nixon is famous for....other things.
There were all corrupt, sex crazed lunatics if you ask me. The politician who should get the most credit is James E. Webb, who's name is on the second generation Hubble being built.

Technically, Nixon was too busy flexing his political and military muscles, and abusing his position to oppress his political critics, to be very sexually active, so although he was undoubtedly corrupt, I wouldn't describe him as sex-craved... :lol:

A little more seriously, he was under treatment for mental instability and was abusing certain drugs; it's likely he was impotent. Also, being sexually faithful to Pat was probably how he made himself better about beating her.

PT

I can just see the new items on CNN

Martians have WMD, Bush to declare liberation of Martians from dictator Green Guy

After an exhaustive investigation into the occupants of Mars, GW Bush has called the UN to authorise Earth forces to invade Mars to liberate it from the Dictator Green Guy. Green Guy is hindering US attempts to discover WMDs by moving Mars further away from Earth so US probes take longer to reach it. "Our rovers have discovered traces of Anthrax, water, and other WMDs. Green Guy is being non-responsive with communications and does not return the Presidents calls" Bush accused.

Hey guys! Bush wants a man on the moon by 2020. By then, he'll be long out office. By the time anyone really starts living in space, he'll be six feet under Crawford. His daughters can go, instead.

Who's famous for the Space program? Was it Kennedy who started the program, or Nixon who presided over it?

And dont say it! Nixon is famous for....other things.
There were all corrupt, sex crazed lunatics if you ask me. The politician who should get the most credit is James E. Webb, who's name is on the second generation Hubble being built.

Technically, Nixon was too busy flexing his political and military muscles, and abusing his position to oppress his political critics, to be very sexually active, so although he was undoubtedly corrupt, I wouldn't describe him as sex-craved... :lol:

A little more seriously, he was under treatment for mental instability and was abusing certain drugs; it's likely he was impotent. Also, being sexually faithful to Pat was probably how he made himself better about beating her.

PT
Ok, so he wasn't sex crazed. I just said that because JFK was. Everyone thinks he was such a great president, when in reality, he got all of his great ideas from his brother, Bobby. But JFK was sex crazed. I mean, ever saw Marylin Monroe singing Happy Birthday to him?
Nixon was just corrupt. Kennedy must have been, too. I mean, he got involved, by Bobby's consent, btw, into Latin America, the Cuban Missle Crisis, Civil Rights, etc. Great policies really, but I hold out suspicion that he was killed for one of them.
Of course, the most corrupt was also instrumental to the space program: LBJ.

Hey guys! Bush wants a man on the moon by 2020. By then, he'll be long out office. By the time anyone really starts living in space, he'll be six feet under Crawford. His daughters can go, instead.

Who's famous for the Space program? Was it Kennedy who started the program, or Nixon who presided over it?

And dont say it! Nixon is famous for....other things.
There were all corrupt, sex crazed lunatics if you ask me. The politician who should get the most credit is James E. Webb, who's name is on the second generation Hubble being built.

Something tells me they probably wont be too focussed on that now.



Martians have WMD, Bush to declare liberation of Martians from dictator Green Guy

After an exhaustive investigation into the occupants of Mars, GW Bush has called the UN to authorise Earth forces to invade Mars to liberate it from the Dictator Green Guy. Green Guy is hindering US attempts to discover WMDs by moving Mars further away from Earth so US probes take longer to reach it. "Our rovers have discovered traces of Anthrax, water, and other WMDs. Green Guy is being non-responsive with communications and does not return the Presidents calls" Bush accused.

Works easilly well doesnt it?

http://www.salon.com/comics/tomo/2003/01/13/tomo/story.jpg

Thanks funny! and too true as well.

Thanks
God bless the Moon :P

I can just see the new items on CNN

Martians have WMD, Bush to declare liberation of Martians from dictator Green Guy

After an exhaustive investigation into the occupants of Mars, GW Bush has called the UN to authorise Earth forces to invade Mars to liberate it from the Dictator Green Guy. Green Guy is hindering US attempts to discover WMDs by moving Mars further away from Earth so US probes take longer to reach it. "Our rovers have discovered traces of Anthrax, water, and other WMDs. Green Guy is being non-responsive with communications and does not return the Presidents calls" Bush accused.

Tsk, tsk! Such racial stereotyping! Everyone knows Martians aren't green -- the majority are a dusky indigo, with minorities which are greyish-blue or pale to medium-dark purple. There are a few who display the equivalent of what we call "albinism" who are a quite sharp shade of lavender.

That Bush would choose to misrepresent the facts in this way is of course hardly a surprise, but why repeat it?

:)

PT

PS -- Are you telling us they've already discovered traces of oil on Mars? Uh-oh...

I bet those rovers have some test for Oil, PT. :P

The big question is this:
Will this stunt work?
Will this get him re-elected?
Do trekkies outnumber muslims in the USA?

The big question is this:
Will this stunt work?
Will this get him re-elected?
Do trekkies outnumber muslims in the USA?

That's 3 questions not one, but I fear the third one is the important one. I enjoy StarTrek myself and have done from the start, but I can't help noticing how USA-centric it is. If that only meant those ideals and virtues that typify our country at its best, I would be glad. Even Quark would have to stop complaining about our root beer.

But they seem to have left behind the early attempt to really get to grips with depicting the "differentness" of different planets and cultures, and the significance of the struggle to learn to live with those differences. StarTrek seems to be homogenizing the universe.

And that's where I see Dubya's head: in a dream of americanizing the galaxy, complete with coke machines on the moon and shell gas stations on mars. Who knows what he has in mind for uranus...

...but I suspect a lot of us will see the Bush-league space program as an act of American-ness. Your question of the numbers is going to be important as far as this policy/day-dream/kite-flying exercise will be important next November.

I'll say it again: God help the universe if we get out there.

PT

"Direct from the Moon, our reporter Li-Ar-Ish:

As you can see, all moonlings have hidden from us, no doubt due to the enormous losses their heavy stone-battalions have suffered, and the fact that they have hidden a WMD somewhere, we think. The President, despite officially denying any knowledge at all about the Moon, wished our soldiers good luck this morning, and he expects the Moon to be fully Americanized, drinking Coke, eating Pizza and cheering our President sometime during the next 13 hours."

The big question is this:
Will this stunt work?
Will this get him re-elected?
Do trekkies outnumber muslims in the USA?

That's 3 questions not one, but I fear the third one is the important one. I enjoy StarTrek myself and have done from the start, but I can't help noticing how USA-centric it is. If that only meant those ideals and virtues that typify our country at its best, I would be glad. Even Quark would have to stop complaining about our root beer.

But they seem to have left behind the early attempt to really get to grips with depicting the "differentness" of different planets and cultures, and the significance of the struggle to learn to live with those differences. StarTrek seems to be homogenizing the universe.

And that's where I see Dubya's head: in a dream of americanizing the galaxy, complete with coke machines on the moon and shell gas stations on mars. Who knows what he has in mind for uranus...

...but I suspect a lot of us will see the Bush-league space program as an act of American-ness. Your question of the numbers is going to be important as far as this policy/day-dream/kite-flying exercise will be important next November.

I'll say it again: God help the universe if we get out there.

PT


Well...yes...three questions...but I could make it into one:
"Will Bush's stunt be enough to get the votes of the trekkies and by that get himself re-elected."
Reagan had StarWars, so now Bushie wants Star-Trek.

I don't really watch star-trek so I can't be sure of this, but I do remember people making the arguement that star-trek was communist propaganda: In the future everyone on earth is equal and money doesn't exist, people don't get paid for their work as work is it's own reward...etc
Not very capitalist.

As for yanks in space, that's fine with me...Then they are firing stuff at other planets instead of firing it at the rest of us.

Another goverment funded corporate welfare check. Lets give lots of money to another defence contractor for anohter wasted project
AWESOME!!!

On a related note, has anyone seen teh Get Your War On comic where Bush convinces the world that the Moon must be invaded, funny stuff


The above is really the lowdown on what this plan is. It is another missile defence, shield,Its Bush with his head in the clouds having the science explained to him by the defence corporations trying to sell the idea, (everybody with half a brain know that the missile defence shield was impossible, there was an extensive article in Discover about how it will never ever work, yet the govt sunk 125billion into it) Bush likes the idea of taking credit for the first moon colony, and somehow thinks we will vote for him because of his ridiculous claims. On a side note, has anyone seen any science behind these claims? I am assuming that if the science was any good it would be what is presented first, but considering I havent seen any science at all, I think this is all just a pipe dream.

He's nuts. We simply don't have the technology right now! I mean, The British (my current home alnd now) sent a friggin' probe out and lost it! I MEAN COME ON! The moon was one thing, MARS! You can only spend what is it.... 6 months I think in a palce with gravity less then Earth, or when you come "Home" your body goes to mush! I mean, I may be wrong, but I know you can only be in Space for X ammount of time before your bones become brittle. And it takes what.. 6 months or so to get to Mars. How the hech are they going to eat!? I mean when they get there!?! No vegation, no meats, nadda! He's just trying to pull a JFK. Back into office! Pah. I wouldn't vote for him, he thinks he can do anything he wants. POWER TRIP! Well, our PM Blair is soon (or already is in) a bunker mentality. ugh! I hate it when polticans come out with bull like this! One thing to dream, but for cryin' out loud.

He's just trying to pull a JFK. Back into office! Pah. I wouldn't vote for him, he thinks he can do anything he wants. POWER TRIP! Well, our PM Blair is soon (or already is in) a bunker mentality. ugh! I hate it when polticans come out with bull like this! One thing to dream, but for cryin' out loud.

Fo real. I really dont believe that we have the tech or the resources to colonize the moon. Any science behind Bush's claims at all Id like to see it.

Bush have rockut...Bush fly moon!

If that was actually true, it would be rather cool.

First he decides to rip Alaska apart for its hydrocarbons, then he rules that coal firing power generators don't have to invest in pollution controls. He supports any government -- no matter how corrupt -- as long as it sells oil to him, then he invades Iraq to secure his own "piece of the rock". He doesn't accept the notion of global warming and refuses to adopt the Kyoto accord. NO WONDER HE WANTS TO GET READY TO HABITATE OUTER SPACE!!!

While I'm on this rant, what if Bush had taken the $160 Billion he's spent killing 10,000 Iraqis -- that's like putting a bounty of $15 Million on every person killed so far! -- and said "hey, let's bring clean water, renewable energy and sustainable agriculture to every nation in Africa and the Middle East"?

That's what Nesralians would do.

He's just trying to pull a JFK. Back into office! Pah. I wouldn't vote for him, he thinks he can do anything he wants. POWER TRIP! Well, our PM Blair is soon (or already is in) a bunker mentality. ugh! I hate it when polticans come out with bull like this! One thing to dream, but for cryin' out loud.

Fo real. I really dont believe that we have the tech or the resources to colonize the moon. Any science behind Bush's claims at all Id like to see it.

Ooh! the science is there alright! the science is there! Dubya has the evidence for it, right there on his desk. it's right there somewhere, right under the file marked "evidence for WMD" ...
:twisted:

don't hold your breath dude --- unless you're a pearl diver.

Surf's UP!

Beach Boys

we have the technology to build permanent space stations in zero gravity but not the technology to settle in low gravity?


...personally i think he'll never do it, there's no oil on the moon...

Yes but this low gravity is slightly faurhter than 200 Kilometers away.

I dont think This will nessicerally impress trekkies. They are about a utopian model of society. Not just space travel.

Also there are trekkies and trekkers. :D

space shuttles don't seem to have much trouble travelling that distance. and space shuttles are biig...

oh and they have a fairly large cargo bay to. sure, they couldn't set it up in one trip... but look up the meaning of the word "shuttle"

space shuttles don't seem to have much trouble travelling that distance. and space shuttles are biig...

oh and they have a fairly large cargo bay to. sure, they couldn't set it up in one trip... but look up the meaning of the word "shuttle"

They are also not designed to go that far.

yay doublepost! does anyone else find this forum slow?

i should have also mentioned that if we can already launch the building blocks for a space station into space, it's not hard to get it to travel to the moon, or any distance in ZERO GRAVITY. it just takes one bit of thrust in the right direction and it will travel all the way to the moon... landing it would be the tricky part, but not too hard.

They are also not designed to go that far.

space shuttles aren't designed to go as far as the moon?

Damn right. They are meant for use in Low Earth Orbit.

They are also not designed to go that far.

space shuttles aren't designed to go as far as the moon?

No.

It's an orbiter only.

And the moon is a long way away.

Like hundereds of thousands of Kilometers

what about the replacement for the space shuttle which is meant to be already fairly into development? (i don't know much about stuff like this, it doesn't really make much news outside of america)

Plus it's not in zero gravity. It's pulled very strongly by the Earth's gravity.

People inside it are only weightless because they're falling at the same rate as the shuttle. (I think I explaned that poorly cos I'm tipsy but I know I'm right.)

not for ages.

As far as I know they cant even decide on what would be best.

what about the replacement for the space shuttle which is meant to be already fairly into development? (i don't know much about stuff like this, it doesn't really make much news outside of america)

It's going to be an orbiter too. Just a cheaper to run one.

well explain why it would be that difficult to take components to build a moon base to the moon on whatever is used normally for trips to the moon (they don't teach about the US space program outside of the states, but they do teach physics) and set it up there, if they can do it using the space shuttle for space stations.

sure, it would be way too expensive to justify, but fairly possible i'd think

They use Ion engines to get to the moon now.

Europe just launhed one. The small probe should arrive in a couple of years.

THey used SAturn rockets for apollo. THey are too expensive, too outdated and have too small a cargo capacity to be used for inspace construction work.

what i don't see is how the reason for building the base in any way justifies how much it will cost.

sure, it will make an actual launch of anything cheaper... but you're either gonna have to launch the stuff and put it on the moon before you moon-launch it, or actually build it there. that means people spending a lot of time on the moon, and components for building being transported there anyway. plus you've got the ridiculous cost of setting it up and maintaining it.

I posted some Info on this a few pages back.

ITs not as impossible as it seems, Though Im still against it. I think a Space elevator would be a a far better investment. Essentially all the arguements used to justify a moon base can be used to justify a space elevator. And a space elevator is less dangerous and more cool.

good idea but dont let the fucking yanks do it

good idea but dont let the fucking yanks do it

"Space pirates!"
"?"
"You know, Pirates. But in Space!"

good idea but dont let the f--- yanks do it

I couldn't agree more.

I think that the world should do it together, in stages.
Maybe every country should be represented in space.
No one nation should have a monopoly on the space program.
And certainly not a government as untrustworthy as the yank one.
At least, not alone .

Too bad, so sad.

THe yanks will do it because the yanks already control it.

Make no mistake. They are doing this for money. And when you do something for money, you dont let something stop you.

i don't suppose anyone had handed bush a proposal of the space elevator thing before he started talking about this moon base...

and if the space elevator's gonna be done, the yanks couldn't do it alone, they'd need japan and australia's help at least

good idea but dont let the f--- yanks do it

With respect, Land, not all of us are like the idiots currently running our country. There are a growing number of us who are fed up with the current fashion for 1950s-style Cold War retro-politics. The important thing is whether there are enough of us who can be bothered to vote the Village Idiot and his tree-house full of chimps out of office. I think we're approaching critical mass, so don't give up.

What we have to hope is that whoever gets in instead of the Lone Ranger will turn out to be better in any appreciable way.

The deeper cultural blindness that afflicts so many of my countrymen is a more pervasive problem. However, it's the peculiar malice of the petty empire-building grandiosity that drives Bush and his ilk which makes it dangerous.

Without that, the "American" version of cultural blindness is little more dangerous than the varieties of cultural blindness that afflict most other countries I've ever visited, even though it's still annoying.

I've already said, I don't think we're ready to colonize space. I don't mean technologically and I don't mean just the Yanks. There are plenty of peoples around the world who have managed years or centuries of bloodshed long before the USA stuck their noses in.

[rant]
"We have the technology" -- to quote someone else's attempt at ridicule. But we don't have the level of humanity.

We need to do it as a world, not as nations. We don't know how to be a world yet. We can't even share this sandbox and play nicely, can we?

IMO until we realize that spending billions on weapons and wars is not a priority as long as there are families so poor they have to live by scrounging garbage dumps, and as long as there are people dying from diseases that some of us already can cure, we aren't ready. We barely deserve to call ourselves "humans".
[?rant]

PT

Clicky (http://www.popsci.com/popsci/aviation/article/0,12543,603663,00.html)

Just a liddle bump. I remember the heated debates we had over this and heres an article that actually seems to know what its on about.

cool this thread is still going, i liked this one.. hehe

To be fair how could we manage in space when we cant manage on a single planet.

Imagine we met aliens that were kind and good, bin laden would be trying to blow them up

Amazing. This is one of the first few threads I've posted on...and it's STILL alive! Wow!

Now, the question is in Bush's plan to colonize the moon include making the part of the moon US Soveriegn Territory? If so, the U.N. Outer Space Treaty signed in 1967 prohibits nations from owning territory on the moon. And furthermore, a corporation known as "Lunar Embassy" has filed Declaration of Ownership in Russia, the United States, and the United Nations claiming Ownership of the Moon, as the said Treaty does not prohibit Corporation's or Individuals from "owning" the moon.

What's with all the Bush talk? Bush's plan doesn't put astronauts on the moon until long after he will have left the Presidency, and it wouldn't put astronauts on mars until Bush is in old age or dead.. so, how is Bush taking over space exactly?

Woops, didn't know someone already pointed out the Lunar Embassy thing :P

Now, the question is in Bush's plan to colonize the moon include making the part of the moon US Soveriegn Territory? If so, the U.N. Outer Space Treaty signed in 1967 prohibits nations from owning territory on the moon. And furthermore, a corporation known as "Lunar Embassy" has filed Declaration of Ownership in Russia, the United States, and the United Nations claiming Ownership of the Moon, as the said Treaty does not prohibit Corporation's or Individuals from "owning" the moon.

How touching! Someone who seems to believe that anyone will honour a UN Treaty for one second longer than they deem politically, militarily or financially expedient! The whole Middle East mess, not to mention our invasion of Iraq, should be answer enough to that.

So, I guess you don't want to be told about Santa Claus or the Easter bunny... :lol:

PT