View Poll Results: Should the US Reclaim the moon?

Voters
26. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes

    14 53.85%
  • No

    8 30.77%
  • I will not be voting in this poll

    4 15.38%
Page 6 of 14 FirstFirst ... 45678 ... LastLast
Results 51 to 60 of 132

Thread: Should the US ReCalim the Moon

  1. #51
    Guru
    Skateguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Houston/Heights
    Last Seen
    02-07-12 @ 08:01 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    2,571

    Re: Should the US ReCalim the Moon

    there is nothin on the Moon worth the expense of retrieving it, as we found out last time. --Just more Tax payer money to keep NASA doing "busy work." And the "we found 25 gallons of ice" don't wash. I got more than that in my rain barrel, if we need it. ---do people get the idea that we as a Nation are Broke! We continue to act like teenagers at the Mall, with Moms credit card. ---there is a reason they call it space
    Last edited by Skateguy; 01-27-10 at 04:17 PM.
    "Don't be particular bout nothin, but the company you keep"

  2. #52
    Sage
    Ikari's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Colorado
    Last Seen
    12-08-17 @ 01:05 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    54,124

    Re: Should the US ReCalim the Moon

    Quote Originally Posted by Scarecrow Akhbar View Post
    1) Claim discovered H2O assets for future use in space exploration and lunar colonization. Beleive it or not, one of the thnings the expanded westward settlement from the coastal colonies was the discovery of salt in Syracuse.
    It was something like a couple liters per tons of soil. Ok yeah, still cheaper than trying to import it from Earth; but it can't sustain any significant population. How are you going to get the water out of the soil? Machines? Processing? How does all that **** get there?

    Quote Originally Posted by Scarecrow Akhbar View Post
    2) Claiming military high ground. Study history, do not discount the value of having a nearly unassailable offensive base to deter potential enemy action.
    There is already treaties against that. Secondly, military high ground...for what? It's the moon, what can we do on the moon that we can't do with these things called satellites?

    Quote Originally Posted by Scarecrow Akhbar View Post
    3) Aluminum, titanium, silicon, oxygen, all to be found in lunar regolith, all essential for space construction. None of it would have to be lifted from the Earth, once the industries are established.
    Once the industry is established. Brilliant. And the time scale for that? You'd need mining, smelting, and production capabilities in the least along with machining. Where's it all come from? How many people do you need to run all this ****? Can that number of people be supported with the EXTREMELY low life sustaining resources on the moon?

    Quote Originally Posted by Scarecrow Akhbar View Post
    4) Vacuum, a vital manufacturing asset that we can't get enough of on earth.
    WTF are you talking about? We can achieve ultra high vacuum on earth. My vacuum chamber is at 10^-12 torr.

    Quote Originally Posted by Scarecrow Akhbar View Post
    5) Solar Damn Power.
    Extremely high radiation

    Quote Originally Posted by Scarecrow Akhbar View Post
    6) 1/6 Gee.
    Solar flares, solar winds, etc. **** that can cook a human. What are you going to do about that? Long term exposure isn't good. Everything lined with lead? How are you getting all that to the moon?

    Quote Originally Posted by Scarecrow Akhbar View Post
    7) Farside Radio silence. Forever out of sight and sound of earth, an astronomical research treasure.
    For what? You don't think we have discriminators now? There could be some gain from it, but the costs well outweigh any gain at this point.

    Quote Originally Posted by Scarecrow Akhbar View Post
    8) Inspiration for our youth and the end of relying solely on "spaceship Earth".
    Read a ****ing book. Why do they need us to go to the moon, spend HORRENDOUS amounts of money for **** that's most likely not going to produce much and not be sustainable? relying on spaceship Earth? If you're going to start talking that way, it's about colonization of space and that is orders of magnitudes more complex and expensive than even just talking about putting stuff on the moon.

    Quote Originally Posted by Scarecrow Akhbar View Post
    9) New experiences for art and the expression of the human soul.
    New expressions for the numbers it will take to represent our debt.

    Quote Originally Posted by Scarecrow Akhbar View Post
    10) Simple lebensraum.
    We're not out of space, and colonization of space is WAY more complex and in no way shape or form do we have the technology to do it right now. And to even invent that technology, ridiculous amounts of money and research has to be poured in. So much so that we're going to decrease research in other areas which are cheaper and would have a more dramatic, immediate impact on us.

    People need to think about this crap before they start running their mouths about space travel and colonization.
    Last edited by Ikari; 01-27-10 at 04:31 PM.
    You know the time is right to take control, we gotta take offense against the status quo

    Quote Originally Posted by A. de Tocqueville
    "I should have loved freedom, I believe, at all times, but in the time in which we live I am ready to worship it."

  3. #53
    Guru
    Skateguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Houston/Heights
    Last Seen
    02-07-12 @ 08:01 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    2,571

    Re: Should the US ReCalim the Moon

    Better take lots of chewing gum, to patch up all those tiny holes in your Buck Rogers space suit. People--you been watchin to many reruns of "Star Trek" It would cost millions to bring back a loaf of bread from the Moon.
    "Don't be particular bout nothin, but the company you keep"

  4. #54
    Guru
    USA_1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    BANNED
    Last Seen
    04-16-11 @ 02:45 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    3,142

    Re: Should the US ReCalim the Moon

    Quote Originally Posted by Scarecrow Akhbar View Post
    Do you recall the major catastrophic shooting war between the US and the USSR?

    That's funny, it never happened.
    Actually there have been several proxy wars with the Soviet Union since WWII.

  5. #55
    Banned
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Last Seen
    11-23-11 @ 10:06 PM
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    3,827

    Re: Should the US ReCalim the Moon

    Quote Originally Posted by Scarecrow Akhbar View Post
    He's cancelling investment into essential national assets.

    He's an idiot.



    So, you don't have any visions of the future, any concept of what can be done with a dead planet whose soil is made of titanium and aluminum and silicate dusts, and you're really not certain what use to manufacturing access to a solid foundation and a perfect vacuum can be for human technological progress?

    Well, a bunch of us are fully aware of the possibilities and the commercial potential for such a place, and many of us are also aware of the military threat presented by allowing potential enemies to establish primacy on the moon, also.

    Seriously, the potentials outweigh the costs. What's needed now to exploit the solar system, starting with the moon, is basic engineering applications, not scientific breakthroughs.



    So. Explain how that life is going to be found if we don't get our sorry asses out there looking for it?

    What is the first necessary step in getting out there to find alien life?

    Oh, that's right, the first necessary step is colonization of and exploitation of a major airless sterile rock orbiting the Earth.
    Supporting any sort of colony on a lifeless body such as the moon is a logistical nightmare. As far as carbon-based life within our reach, look around, this is it. We reside on the only hospitable planet that we know of. Any other such planet is in solar system beyond our reach.

    We have all we need here. Our only problems as a race are that our numbers are approaching carrying capacity of our planet and we will be running out of fossil fuels, probably in this century.

    The Chinese are limiting their numbers and are probably smart enough to be trying to come up with alternative fuels.

  6. #56
    Enemy Combatant
    Kandahar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Washington, DC
    Last Seen
    10-15-13 @ 08:47 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    20,688

    Re: Should the US ReCalim the Moon

    Quote Originally Posted by Scarecrow Akhbar View Post
    Natually. Of course.

    I wonder why Athens sent out colonies around the Mediterranean? And colonies were so damn bad the British never established any, right?
    I don't know about Greece, but the British colonies were certainly a financial drain on Great Britain.

    Quote Originally Posted by Scarecrow Akhbar
    The future is here, now.

    LCROSS proved the existence of H20 on the moon.
    So? We have plenty of H2O here too. Much more than there is on the moon.

    Quote Originally Posted by Scarecrow Akhbar
    Should the US claim the bits and pieces it can grab and hold onto, like areas with H20 and commercially viable ore deposits? You bet your ass it should.
    Why? How will these be commercially viable? Natural resources as a source of national wealth are grossly overrated anyway.

    Quote Originally Posted by Scarecrow Akhbar
    Because...we're not going there now, we're going there "a few decades hence"....but if that idiot Messiah stops the program, that few decades lost will make the difference and someone else (China) will grab the best real estate for themselves.
    Do you really think the Chinese are anywhere close to being able to send astronauts to the moon, let alone establish a base there, let alone defend that base with military force if necessary?

    Quote Originally Posted by Scarecrow Akhbar
    Know one of the reasons Germany felt inferior before WWI? France and Britain and the Dutch and Spain were centuries ahead of them and colonized all the good spots. By the late 19th Century, Germany made some forays into Africa, and that was about it. Germany never became a significant world power, and never will.
    Swell. You're forgetting how despite all those supposed disadvantages, Germany managed to devastate its "world power" neighbors on two separate occasions. It took the US (which had comparatively few colonies) to defeat them, with some help from Russia (which also had comparatively few colonies) the second time around.

    Quote Originally Posted by Scarecrow Akhbar
    The US is not a major world power, the US is THE major world power, and it won't stay there unless it's plans ahead and ACTS on those plans.
    Again, colonies are almost always a financial drain on the empire. Besides, I thought you were so opposed to socialism. If water on the moon is a commercially viable resource, why can't Dasani go to the moon and claim it? Why does the US government need to get involved?
    Last edited by Kandahar; 01-27-10 at 04:33 PM.
    Are you coming to bed?
    I can't. This is important.
    What?
    Someone is WRONG on the internet! -XKCD

  7. #57
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Last Seen
    09-22-10 @ 04:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    11,430

    Re: Should the US ReCalim the Moon

    Quote Originally Posted by Ikari View Post
    There's no military or commercial viability on the moon.
    Oh.

    Having the ability to destroy an enemy country from 250,000 miles out of his reach doesn't have any military potential?

    You sure about that one?

    Using lunar resources to explore the asteroid belt to convert a nickel iron asteroid into strain-free single-crystal, and hence superstrong iron cable has no commercial value? What about having access to a cubic mile of iron with zero environmental impact on the Earth? No commercial value there?

    What about using solar power to electrical separate the aluminum oxide in the lunar regolith, providing both aluminum for construction purposes and oxygen for both breathing and rocket propellant? No commercial value there?

    Quote Originally Posted by Ikari View Post
    First off, getting **** there is going to be damned expensive.
    Depends on how it's done. Will we be foolish enough to use man-rated vehicles to ship mass produced cargo to the moon? Will we continue to use the expensive disintegrating totem poles of the past, exemplified by both the Apollo program and the Shuttle?

    Quote Originally Posted by Ikari View Post
    Secondly, supporting life there is going to be damned expensive. There's not enough water,
    One shot, in one crater picked at random on the South Pole of the Moon, yielded definitive proof of water on the moon. There's enough water.

    Quote Originally Posted by Ikari View Post
    we don't have the tech to set up all the **** we'd need yet, you'd continually have to be receiving shipment from Earth.
    The word you're looking for is "investment".

    Quote Originally Posted by Ikari View Post
    The moon is a barren dust ball.
    No, it's a barren rock.

    With potential.

    Quote Originally Posted by Ikari View Post
    It's not like you can run up there, throw down a tent, and be all good to go. There's no protective atmosphere, you have to deal with extreme changes in temperature,
    The word you're looking for here is "troglodyte".

    Quote Originally Posted by Ikari View Post
    there's no fertile soil
    Oh, ****.

    There will be fertile soil, given time.

    The word is "investment".

    Quote Originally Posted by Ikari View Post
    or large source of water
    Wrong.

    Quote Originally Posted by Ikari View Post
    so it's impossible to independently support life there.
    "Impossible"?

    And you're a member of an equatorially evolved species that has colonies of people living in the highest latitudes? Who didn't so much acclimate to these environments as much as they used technology to survive in them?

    Shame on you. Believing something is impossible is often the only reason it becomes impossible.

    Quote Originally Posted by Ikari View Post
    And all for what?
    national security, interplanetary resources that don't damage the Earth environment, wealth, and freedom.

    Quote Originally Posted by Ikari View Post
    Minimal gains at best, when all the money, scientists, and research which would have to go into this could be better utilized elsewhere.
    Where? What? 120" TV screens? Flying cars? Better football helmets?

    Quote Originally Posted by Ikari View Post
    I really don't think some of you think this through.
    But I have.

  8. #58
    Guru
    Skateguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Houston/Heights
    Last Seen
    02-07-12 @ 08:01 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    2,571

    Re: Should the US ReCalim the Moon

    I enjoy the statement, "that Man was meant to explore"--well pack up your Kellty, and grab yer walking stick, and head on out.---Just don't expect tax payers to fund your venture. We have serious pressing matters here at home, that need out full attention. No time for star gazing. Keep your feet on the ground, and lets get this thing straightened out. Then in 30 or 40 years, you still think it is such a good idea, space and all it's emptiness, will still be there. We have enough Velcro to last us awhile I believe.
    Last edited by Skateguy; 01-27-10 at 04:48 PM.
    "Don't be particular bout nothin, but the company you keep"

  9. #59
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Last Seen
    09-22-10 @ 04:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    11,430

    Re: Should the US ReCalim the Moon

    Quote Originally Posted by Kandahar View Post
    I don't know about Greece, but the British colonies were certainly a financial drain on Great Britain.
    OF COURSE they were. I mean the US declared it's independence and the British said, "thank good those rubes are gone".


    Quote Originally Posted by Kandahar View Post
    So? We have plenty of H2O here too. Much more than there is on the moon.
    Right.

    The problem with it is that it's DOWN here, not up there.

    Should you be entering this discussion if you dont know the economic value of gravitational potential energy?

    But I'll explain....with today's primitive technology it costs over $50,000 a lb to put something on the moon. Water is heavy, and if water is already there, we don't have to pay to get it there. A gallon of water weighs over 8 lbs, which means it costs over $400,000 to put a gallon of orange juice on the moon.....but shipping Tang and using local water drastically cuts the cost of doing business.

    Quote Originally Posted by Kandahar View Post
    Why? How will these be commercially viable? Natural resources as a source of national wealth are grossly overrated anyway.
    Not so for water.

    Water monopolies have historically created some of the most stable societies ever.

    Also, there's the He3 asset...that does not exist on Earth.

    Quote Originally Posted by Kandahar View Post
    Do you really think the Chinese are anywhere close to being able to send astronauts to the moon, let alone establish a base there, let alone defend that base with military force if necessary?
    The Chinese are working towards that goal. I'm not going to insult their intelligence, or yours, by claiming they can't do something in 2020 we can do today with current technology.

    Quote Originally Posted by Kandahar View Post
    Swell. You're forgetting how despite all those supposed disadvantages, Germany managed to devastate its "world power" neighbors on two separate occasions.
    I am?

    I don't think so.

    Nor is it relevant.

    Destruction is easy.

    What has Germany created, cuckoo clocks and gas chambers?

    Quote Originally Posted by Kandahar View Post
    Again, colonies are almost always a financial drain on the empire. Besides, I thought you were so opposed to socialism. If water on the moon is a commercially viable resource, why can't Dasani go to the moon and claim it? Why does the US government need to get involved?
    Becuase I am opposed to socialism, especially when the threat of it being imposed from the outside is so great. The colonization of the moon would be a principally military venture disguised as a commercial process to bootstrap the finances. Ensuring the national security of the US, by preventing the establishment of a military monopoly on the moon by another nation, is the goal.

    And hence, it's Constitutional.

  10. #60
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Last Seen
    09-22-10 @ 04:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    11,430

    Re: Should the US ReCalim the Moon

    Quote Originally Posted by Skateguy View Post
    We have serious pressing matters here at home, that need out full attention.
    Like what?

    And explain how much money spent on space will be spent in space, ie, not in the global economy.

Page 6 of 14 FirstFirst ... 45678 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •