• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Praying to Obama

A video released earlier to day show a community organizing group praying to Barack Obama about health care. After each part of the prayer they shout "Hear our cries Obama". What in the world is the country coming to when we start praying to our leaders.

Praying to Obama
really? how could that be? one time the INCORRECT slogan doesn't even match what what's it's attempting to portray....."deliver us obama" describes the words "hear us oh god".

do you have some proof that the group added the captions? this is crap.
 
This is a good illustration between the difference between men running things and women running things.

Men: "Let's blow **** up!"
Other men: "COOL! Good idea!"
Well you know how women got their name, don't ya? Man said watch me do ?? (something really stupid) and she said 'Wo man', you really shouldn't do that. ;)


.
 
Really smart dudes come up with some bloody awful ideas. I think even Carl Sagan was in on the macho plot to detonate a nuke on the moon back in the day.

The mission, "A mushroom cloud so large it could be seen on Earth."

It would be funny if it weren't true.
 
Have you been watching the documentary on our national parks? Imagine what would have happened to Yellowstone if it hadn't been protected. We should be treating the moon as an international park.
 
Have you been watching the documentary on our national parks? Imagine what would have happened to Yellowstone if it hadn't been protected. We should be treating the moon as an international park.

At the very least we should man it before we start orchestrating a man made monument to the Grand Canyon.

Let's just hope it doesn't look too cool. Or they'll do it again.

I wonder what stopped them from detonating a nuke on the moon during the cold war. I wonder if the men reasoned out on their own that it might not be a good idea or if their wives just bitch nagged them to death and withheld sex till they gave up the mission.
 
Yeah but this new mission isn't about crash landing some debris on the surface. It is about launching a Centaur rocket deep into the moon creating a huge explosion and modifying the surface of the moon in that area.

Is your problem then the scale, rather than the impact? It's still completely insignificant. The moon is very large, and there isn't anything there except for impact craters. The impact from the rocket is no bigger than millions of others. What's the problem?

The purpose is supposedly to find water - which India already has.

It was recently confirmed that there is water on the Moon, this is true. The LCROSS mission was launched months before this confirmation. Even if there were any reason to call it off now, that would be impossible. The spacecraft encountered a problem in August in which it lost about half of its fuel. There is barely enough to complete the current mission, far less abort and avoid the lunar surface altogether

The big deal for me is two fold. Firstly, the lack of collective knowledge, interest, and discussion surrounding the event despite it's being 9 days away. No media discussion for something that's unprecedented and rather historic.

The lack of public interest in space matters is sad, I agree. This is a general feature of our society and as nothing to do with LCROSS.

Second, I think there's a ton of ramifications for this type of act which warranted addressing/discussing. We're essentially launching a rocket into the moon. That, in my mind, constitutes a weapon in space

Intent matters. Anything can be a weapon if you use it as such. This is a purely scientific mission and reading anything else into it is missing the point.

and modifying a celestial body

"Modifying a celestial body" is what happened each and every of the other dozens of times in which we have piloted spacecraft or other objects into asteroids, planets, moons, and anything else of scientific interest that's out there. Everything in space is constantly being pelted by countless bits of matter of every size. That's just what happens. If you're concerned about the Moon I assure you, this is nothing that hasn't happened billions of times in the past and is nothing more than what will happen billions of times in the future regardless of man's actions. The only difference is that we have a satellite observing this in a planned fashion.

- both of which I bet we'd have a problem with if any other country was doing it.

I will point you once more to the Japanese probe that impacted the moon in June

Since India has just this month proven there is in fact water on the moon there is no need for a destructive rocket attack against the planet.

As I've stated before, the mission is well past committed. You can't just hit the brakes and turn it around. Even if that were possible, there is still plenty to be learned from directly observing a lunar impact, and the mission holds considerable scientific value even if it won't be the one to definitively answer the media-friendly question of the existence of lunar water
 
Is your problem then the scale, rather than the impact? It's still completely insignificant. The moon is very large, and there isn't anything there except for impact craters. The impact from the rocket is no bigger than millions of others. What's the problem?

It was recently confirmed that there is water on the Moon, this is true. The LCROSS mission was launched months before this confirmation. Even if there were any reason to call it off now, that would be impossible. The spacecraft encountered a problem in August in which it lost about half of its fuel. There is barely enough to complete the current mission, far less abort and avoid the lunar surface altogether

The lack of public interest in space matters is sad, I agree. This is a general feature of our society and as nothing to do with LCROSS.

Intent matters. Anything can be a weapon if you use it as such. This is a purely scientific mission and reading anything else into it is missing the point.

"Modifying a celestial body" is what happened each and every of the other dozens of times in which we have piloted spacecraft or other objects into asteroids, planets, moons, and anything else of scientific interest that's out there. Everything in space is constantly being pelted by countless bits of matter of every size. That's just what happens. If you're concerned about the Moon I assure you, this is nothing that hasn't happened billions of times in the past and is nothing more than what will happen billions of times in the future regardless of man's actions. The only difference is that we have a satellite observing this in a planned fashion.

I will point you once more to the Japanese probe that impacted the moon in June

As I've stated before, the mission is well past committed. You can't just hit the brakes and turn it around. Even if that were possible, there is still plenty to be learned from directly observing a lunar impact, and the mission holds considerable scientific value even if it won't be the one to definitively answer the media-friendly question of the existence of lunar water

Plus, it will make a really cool video!
 
okay....i found a different video to watch, whcih included to captions the opening poster mentioned.
 
Is your problem then the scale, rather than the impact? It's still completely insignificant. The moon is very large, and there isn't anything there except for impact craters. The impact from the rocket is no bigger than millions of others. What's the problem?
My problem is the intentional destruction of a celestial body of which we still know very little about. Sending a rocket into a crater on the south pole which has the MOST hydrogen sounds destructive to me.

It was recently confirmed that there is water on the Moon, this is true. The LCROSS mission was launched months before this confirmation. Even if there were any reason to call it off now, that would be impossible. The spacecraft encountered a problem in August in which it lost about half of its fuel. There is barely enough to complete the current mission, far less abort and avoid the lunar surface altogether
That's an argument for never having gone this route in the first place if you ask me. We don't need to hurl rockets at the moon. And things, as you've stated, can go wrong. Also if India was able to trump NASA and find water without blowing crap up then clearly we're blowing crap up just to blow crap up.

The lack of public interest in space matters is sad, I agree. This is a general feature of our society and as nothing to do with LCROSS.

Our media sucks. Still Obama should address the nation. If NASA truly wants all eyes on the sky on OCT 9 and if you can see it with an amateur telescope perhaps Obama ought to bring that up on one of his visits to late night tv. Or just drop it randomly in an interview like the time he let us know Kanye West is a jackass.

Intent matters. Anything can be a weapon if you use it as such. This is a purely scientific mission and reading anything else into it is missing the point.
We signed a space treaty agreeing not to weaponize space or modify a celestial body.

How is launching a rocket at the moon in compliance with that treaty?



"Modifying a celestial body" is what happened each and every of the other dozens of times in which we have piloted spacecraft or other objects into asteroids, planets, moons, and anything else of scientific interest that's out there. Everything in space is constantly being pelted by countless bits of matter of every size. That's just what happens. If you're concerned about the Moon I assure you, this is nothing that hasn't happened billions of times in the past and is nothing more than what will happen billions of times in the future regardless of man's actions. The only difference is that we have a satellite observing this in a planned fashion.

Stuff crash landing into the moon is not nearly on the same level as launching a rocket into a crater that has the highest hydrogen content. It's different the way a meteor shower is different from us purposefully launching a missile into Iraq.

I will point you once more to the Japanese probe that impacted the moon in June



As I've stated before, the mission is well past committed. You can't just hit the brakes and turn it around. Even if that were possible, there is still plenty to be learned from directly observing a lunar impact, and the mission holds considerable scientific value even if it won't be the one to definitively answer the media-friendly question of the existence of lunar water

Again, crash landings are not the same as searching out the most visible hydrogen laden crater to launch a rocket into. It warrants discussion. It's a decision that should not have been made by a few with little to no discussion by humanity as a whole.
 
Really smart dudes come up with some bloody awful ideas. I think even Carl Sagan was in on the macho plot to detonate a nuke on the moon back in the day.

The mission, "A mushroom cloud so large it could be seen on Earth."

It would be funny if it weren't true.

Now there is a good idea.... test our new nuclear weapons on the moon instead of in a virtual computer world. Much better than here on Earth and we could do REALLY BIG weapons.... like 200 MT crust busters!!!! Like make it a yearly thing on the 4th of July.

nuclear.gif
 
did that woman in the video call martin luther king a prophet?

Don't know if I heard that right.
 
whole thing seems a little "cultish" to me...

CULT + POLITICS = VERY BAD

It seems like the kind of event I try to avoid at all costs. Bad trombone, people in religious robes, and too much chanting.
 
My problem is the intentional destruction of a celestial body of which we still know very little about. Sending a rocket into a crater on the south pole which has the MOST hydrogen sounds destructive to me.

What's being destroyed As I've stated before, this is nowhere near the scale of impacts that happen regularly on the moon. All that happens is that the surface soil is moved around a bit

Also, I looked into the masses and found that this is actually smaller than the Japanese probe that impacted in June


That's an argument for never having gone this route in the first place if you ask me. We don't need to hurl rockets at the moon. And things, as you've stated, can go wrong. Also if India was able to trump NASA and find water without blowing crap up then clearly we're blowing crap up just to blow crap up.

Nothing went wrong. The fact that other scientific organizations made progress is in no way a bad thing. Also, your flippant references to "blowing crap up" shows a great deal of ignorance. Spectral analysis of a high energy impact can yield a wealth of information with a degree of certainty that is very difficult to match.

Our media sucks. Still Obama should address the nation. If NASA truly wants all eyes on the sky on OCT 9 and if you can see it with an amateur telescope perhaps Obama ought to bring that up on one of his visits to late night tv. Or just drop it randomly in an interview like the time he let us know Kanye West is a jackass.

I seriously doubt that Obama has never talked about LCROSS at all. It is not a major mission, and I am completely unsurprised that it isn't a major talking point, but I'm sure he has discussed it whether or not it made CNN's front page. I don't see the need for him to address the nation at all - what would he say? As you've stated, the Indians have already announced the presence of water.

We signed a space treaty agreeing not to weaponize space

This is in no way a weapon

or modify a celestial body.

How is launching a rocket at the moon in compliance with that treaty?

When the Eagle landed was that "modifying a celestial body?" How about when any of the dozens of probes in [ame="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_artificial_objects_on_the_Moon"]this list[/ame] impacted? How
about when the Japanese probe impacted?

Previously you stated that the Japanese probe was okay but this mission is not. I looked into it, and the Japanese probe was in fact bigger than the Centaur ([ame="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LCROSS"]2,300 kg[/ame] vs [ame="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SELENE"]2,900 kg[/ame]). Does this change your opinion at all?

stuff crash landing into the moon is not nearly on the same level as launching a rocket into a crater that has the highest hydrogen content. It's different the way a meteor shower is different from us purposefully launching a missile into Iraq.


Are you under the impression that there is an explosive warhead being launched into the moon? Your usage of the term rocket and the phrase "blowing crap up" seems to suggest that. All that's impacting the moon is the empty upper stage. In any other mission this piece of hardware would just be set adrift (to eventually impact a celestial body)

Again, crash landings are not the same as searching out the most visible hydrogen laden crater to launch a rocket into. It warrants discussion. It's a decision that should not have been made by a few with little to no discussion by humanity as a whole.

It was discussed heavily during the planning stages. Being a routine scientific mission, the rest of humanity had better things to worry about (namely, American Idol)




Out of all of that there are really two things I'd like an answer to. Are you under the impression that there is an explosive warhead being launched into the moon? Does the fact that the Japanese probe, which you previously stated you were okay with, was bigger than the LCROSS impactor change your opinion at all?
 
Last edited:
What's being destroyed As I've stated before, this is nowhere near the scale of impacts that happen regularly on the moon. All that happens is that the surface soil is moved around a bit

Also, I looked into the masses and found that this is actually smaller than the Japanese probe that impacted in June

This is a rocket being intentionally launched into the south pole at the point of highest hydrogen content.

On Oct. 9 at 4:30 a.m., the Ames team will send that 2-ton rocket crashing precisely into the target to send up a cloud of dust and debris more than 6 miles high.

Read more: NASA chooses moon crater for crash of rocket


There, acting as what the Ames team calls its "shepherding spacecraft," LCROSS will guide an empty Centaur rocket weighing two tons toward its target. The rocket will crash into the crater at 5,600 mph, creating a new crater - perhaps as large as 5 miles wide.

Read more: Moon mission looking at possible colony sites

How is that not destructive? You can be destructive to the moon without completely destroying it. You can damage something without obliterating it.


Nothing went wrong. [

Yes, something did. They had a fuel problem.

NASA’s LCROSS lunar probe used up most of its fuel supply over the weekend when it was hit by a control problem with its Inertial Reference Unit, causing excess thruster firing. Initial reports were that about 70 percent of the fuel was used up.

LCROSS Loses Much of Fuel Supply | Parabolic Arc


The fact that other scientific organizations made progress is in no way a bad thing. Also, your flippant references to "blowing crap up" shows a great deal of ignorance. Spectral analysis of a high energy impact can yield a wealth of information with a degree of certainty that is very difficult to match.
The entire purpose of the destructive mission is to find proof of water. This proof has already been found.

What is the primary mission goal of LCROSS?

There is evidence from previous missions for enhanced hydrogen deposits at the poles of the Moon. Due to limitations in the data sets that measured this hydrogen, we still do not know the form of the hydrogen, that is, is it in the form of water (H2O) or some other hydrogen-bearing compound, such has hydrated minerals or hydrocarbons.


LCROSS - FAQ

India has already done this and we were partnered with them while they did it!

Three different spacecraft—India’s Chandrayaan-1, and NASA’s Cassini and Deep Impact—detected trace amounts of water molecules (H20) and hydroxyl (OH) while mapping the moon’s surface. Researchers estimated that 32 ounces of water can be found for every ton of the moon’s top layer, meaning that the moon is still drier than any desert on Earth.


Proof of Water on the Moon: What Does It Mean for the Future of Space Exploration?

Since the mission has already been accomplished there is no need to blow up anything, create any new deeper craters on the moon, pollute the moon, etc. with this mission.

I seriously doubt that Obama has never talked about LCROSS at all. It is not a major mission, and I am completely unsurprised that it isn't a major talking point, but I'm sure he has discussed it whether or not it made CNN's front page. I don't see the need for him to address the nation at all - what would he say? As you've stated, the Indians have already announced the presence of water.

I haven't found anything. And why wouldn't he address the nation on this? The fact that India in partnership with us Americans has proven there is water on the moon is a significant find itself. Since he's going on late night tv this is just the sort of thing that might warrant a mention.

This is in no way a weapon

Right a rocket isn't a weapon and launching it right into a moon to create a huge explosion that alters the land isn't destructive. :roll:



When the Eagle landed was that "modifying a celestial body?" How about when any of the dozens of probes in this list impacted? How
about when the Japanese probe impacted?

Previously you stated that the Japanese probe was okay but this mission is not. I looked into it, and the Japanese probe was in fact bigger than the Centaur (2,300 kg vs 2,900 kg). Does this change your opinion at all?

No because NASA has made much of how this impact, this rocket, will be launched at a much steeper impact angle as opposed to the Jap. probe.

Kaguya was flying at a horizontal velocity of about 4,000 mph, but the spacecraft struck the moon at an angle of just 1 degree. The grazing impact was expected to diminish the crater size and dust cloud caused by the crash.
Spaceflight Now | Breaking News | A smashing end for Japanese lunar orbiter mission

The goal in this mission is the exact OPPOSITE of going for a smaller crater. The objective is to create a huge disturbance, large plume, and the angle is 70 degrees vs 1 degree.

The lunar impacts of the 2000 kg upper stage and the 700 kg S-S/C will take place at a velocity of 2.5 km/sec and at an angle of 75°

LCROSS - Mission Rationale

Are you under the impression that there is an explosive warhead being launched into the moon? Your usage of the term rocket and the phrase "blowing crap up" seems to suggest that. All that's impacting the moon is the empty upper stage. In any other mission this piece of hardware would just be set adrift (to eventually impact a celestial body)
The way it is being launched into the moon at a steep angle is very different from it just crash landing. It is akin to blowing a hunk out of the moon.



Out of all of that there are really two things I'd like an answer to. Are you under the impression that there is an explosive warhead being launched into the moon? Does the fact that the Japanese probe, which you previously stated you were okay with, was bigger than the LCROSS impactor change your opinion at all?
See above.

Jap probe was intentionally crash landed at an angle that would cause the smallest crater/plume/damage possible.

This rocked will be launched at the moon like a missile at a steep angle designed to go to deep, create a huge crater, and a visible dust plume.

Two completely different things.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom