Don Penguinoini
Modi.
Oh, but still. What nation would not want to do it? IT would give them a name in the world.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Were the Moon Landings a Hoax?
- Thread starter silvermoon383
- Start date
Oh, but still. What nation would not want to do it? IT would give them a name in the world.
It is very very expensive. People can not justafy spending that much money on something of so little importance.
McBell
Unbound
Um...
What window?
Did I miss something?
I must have missed something.
What did I miss?
yossarian22
Resident Schizophrenic
Not important?!
The moon is the stepping stone to the solar system. If we are able to put even minor manufacturing capabilities on the moon, even if just fuel production, the cost of a launch will drop siginificantly.
McBell
Unbound
But who is wiling to put up the money to get to that point?
yossarian22
Resident Schizophrenic
Ugh, stupid politicians.
It will probably be done by the private sector.
Anyhow, we could get the cash by dropping the pointless manned mission to mars plan. There is no benefit to going to Mars other than saying "Hey look, we made it there"
cardero
Citizen Mod
There are some people who still believe this program is occuring.
Alternative 3 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
silvermoon383
Well-Known Member
Isn't that reason enough? The explorers of the Middle Ages sure thought so.
yossarian22
Resident Schizophrenic
No, its not. Sending a man to mars has little benefit for us what-so-ever. The moon has far more advantages and will drop the cost of future launches dramatically if manufacturing is up there? The moon is more important than mars.
Terrywoodenpic
Oldest Heretic
That is why they are spending the Trillions they are, on building the international space station. It is a far better stepping stone to the planets and stars... and to the moon itself... than going direct to the moon.
Don Penguinoini
Modi.
What about helium 2? Its an ore on the moon, apparently it is as twice as strong is our oil, and not pollouting. Cannot find links about it, but i have heard of it.
yossarian22
Resident Schizophrenic
The international space station won't serve to help us go to the moon. Its a science station primarily. And thigns would be proceeding much faster if it was just US technology sent up by Russian rockets. They still have the best rockets.
yossarian22
Resident Schizophrenic
Helium is inert. You are probably mistaking it for something else. Hydrogen 2 probably (also called deuterium I think)
silvermoon383
Well-Known Member
The station can easily be used as a gas station. In fact, that's part of the Constellation project NASA's working on right now.
yossarian22
Resident Schizophrenic
Ya, its probably just a pipe dream. Maybe if the US steals some Russian rockets...After that we can all hold hands around a massive peace symbol and sing "Imagine". Ouch okay maybe too much cynicism
It takes much less energy to launch off of the moon. The International space station should be used as a stepping stone to the moon though. Mars is useless to us now, and will remain useless for a long while yet. We should focus on the asteroids. Giant floating balls of ore