did we really land on the moon??
Senior Member
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 3,858
Likes: 0
From: Rohnert Park, CA
but how it going to the moon doing anything ? Its done, we got it, we can do it. Now its a waste of $$ IMO.
Hubble ? All for it
More sattelites ? I'm game. Exploring space ? Heck ya ! Going to the same damn rock over and over again to hit golf ***** off of ? Drive around in a special man made buggy ? Not so much. Lets focus on other aspects of space exploration. I don't consider it exploring with the amount of times we have been up there. Just me. Lets try landing on a much farther hunk of land, whichever the feel that should be. Maybe start thinking about ways to get probes and what not out the some of the different moons on different planets.
Senior Member
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 1,264
Likes: 0
From: Ocala/Orlando, FL
I agree with ya. If anything though, I would think another moon landing similar to the 60's would definitely build up some public support/funding for more space exploration. It would get people excited about space again.
Senior Member
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 4,121
Likes: 0
From: Hammer Lane
100%
but how it going to the moon doing anything ? Its done, we got it, we can do it. Now its a waste of $$ IMO.
Hubble ? All for it
More sattelites ? I'm game. Exploring space ? Heck ya ! Going to the same damn rock over and over again to hit golf ***** off of ? Drive around in a special man made buggy ? Not so much. Lets focus on other aspects of space exploration. I don't consider it exploring with the amount of times we have been up there. Just me. Lets try landing on a much farther hunk of land, whichever the feel that should be. Maybe start thinking about ways to get probes and what not out the some of the different moons on different planets.
but how it going to the moon doing anything ? Its done, we got it, we can do it. Now its a waste of $$ IMO.
Hubble ? All for it
More sattelites ? I'm game. Exploring space ? Heck ya ! Going to the same damn rock over and over again to hit golf ***** off of ? Drive around in a special man made buggy ? Not so much. Lets focus on other aspects of space exploration. I don't consider it exploring with the amount of times we have been up there. Just me. Lets try landing on a much farther hunk of land, whichever the feel that should be. Maybe start thinking about ways to get probes and what not out the some of the different moons on different planets.
Senior Member
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 1,090
Likes: 0
From: Eddyville, Ky
Yeah, it kinda freaked me out when you joined and started posting. But its no biggie.
Senior Member
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 1,090
Likes: 0
From: Eddyville, Ky
Yep, its easier to start the journey to Mars from the moon than earth. In fact I read somewhere that they hope to start building a moon base by 2024, assuming we can get back to the moon by the 2020 target date.
Senior Member
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 4,121
Likes: 0
From: Hammer Lane
I remember reading that they theorize using Rail Gun technology to move materials back and forth between the Earth and the Moon.
Senior Member
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 151
Likes: 0
From: Kansas
MY .02
1. He didn't really slice the ball, he just hit it to the right of straight because it was akward/hard to hit with a space suit on.
2. This footage was actually kind of a fluke. The camera was remote controlled from earth, with something like a 17 second delay. To get the LL taking off, the operator had to guess when to pan up, and how fast to go, 17 seconds before it actually happend. This is why the LL isnt centered in the frame.
-Challenger and Columbia did taint NASA's image, but it is also the fact that we have been going into space for so many years and so many people have been there. Where as there has only been 9 missions that landed on the moon.
-Two satellites are going to be launched by the end of the year that will map the surface of the moon. This means that by 2015 an autonomous vehicle will land on the moon, and by 2020, humans.
-The space station is a dead end. The Space Shuttle is being retired by 2010, and the U.S. will stop going to the ISS by 2015.
-You're right, there hasn't really been a need to go back to the moon. As of lately, NASA is trying to get Americans back interested into space. Another reason is that NASA has either given away, or tested on all of the rocks from the Moon, creating a demand for Moon rocks.
FOR EVERYONE BTCHING ABOUT WASTING MONEY ON GOING INTO SPACE, THERE'S SOMETHING THATS AN EVEN BIGGER WASTE, ITS CALLED WELFARE. IT PISSES AWAY MONEY TO PEOPLE WHO ARE TOO LAZY, OR TOO HIGH TO GET A JOB.
i found this.
1. Apollo 14 astronaut Allen Shepard played golf on the Moon. In front of a worldwide TV audience, Mission Control teased him about slicing the ball to the right. Yet a slice is caused by uneven air flow over the ball. The Moon has no atmosphere and no air.
2. A camera panned upwards to catch Apollo 16's Lunar Landerlifting off the Moon. Who did the filming?
1. Apollo 14 astronaut Allen Shepard played golf on the Moon. In front of a worldwide TV audience, Mission Control teased him about slicing the ball to the right. Yet a slice is caused by uneven air flow over the ball. The Moon has no atmosphere and no air.
2. A camera panned upwards to catch Apollo 16's Lunar Landerlifting off the Moon. Who did the filming?
2. This footage was actually kind of a fluke. The camera was remote controlled from earth, with something like a 17 second delay. To get the LL taking off, the operator had to guess when to pan up, and how fast to go, 17 seconds before it actually happend. This is why the LL isnt centered in the frame.
After Challenger, and then Columbia, the "people" at least in Nasa's eye, have turned on them. people often argue that there is "no need" to risk astronauts lifes anymore. That this whole "space thing" is a joke and a waste of money.
We aren't going back to the moon (at least anytime soon) when we can send a machine that'll land on it and perform any experiment needed with out risk of human life.
Nasa has now become focused on both the different possibilities with the "Space Station" and with the new rover on Mars.
When it comes down to it, IMO, we haven't gone back simply because the "people" don't care for it, no one is pushing for it, and the cost is so astronomical, i think it would really become mind boggling, something we couldn't even wrap our little heads around.
We aren't going back to the moon (at least anytime soon) when we can send a machine that'll land on it and perform any experiment needed with out risk of human life.
Nasa has now become focused on both the different possibilities with the "Space Station" and with the new rover on Mars.
When it comes down to it, IMO, we haven't gone back simply because the "people" don't care for it, no one is pushing for it, and the cost is so astronomical, i think it would really become mind boggling, something we couldn't even wrap our little heads around.
-Two satellites are going to be launched by the end of the year that will map the surface of the moon. This means that by 2015 an autonomous vehicle will land on the moon, and by 2020, humans.
-The space station is a dead end. The Space Shuttle is being retired by 2010, and the U.S. will stop going to the ISS by 2015.
-You're right, there hasn't really been a need to go back to the moon. As of lately, NASA is trying to get Americans back interested into space. Another reason is that NASA has either given away, or tested on all of the rocks from the Moon, creating a demand for Moon rocks.
FOR EVERYONE BTCHING ABOUT WASTING MONEY ON GOING INTO SPACE, THERE'S SOMETHING THATS AN EVEN BIGGER WASTE, ITS CALLED WELFARE. IT PISSES AWAY MONEY TO PEOPLE WHO ARE TOO LAZY, OR TOO HIGH TO GET A JOB.
Last edited by kansasflareside; Jun 26, 2008 at 02:08 AM.
Senior Member
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 584
Likes: 0
From: Kentucky
the state of kentucky tried to start drug testing people on welfare about a year ago. it never passed but it would be great if it did.
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 752
Likes: 0
From: North of Dallas, South of Frisco
Finally, something BigMan and I agree on.
That's why we need to go to back to the moon. Escaping the moon's gravity isn't nearly the challenge that escaping earth's gravity is. Launching manned-missions (Mars) from the moon would be better. They might even make more sense than launching from Earth orbit.
Further, we'd have to have some sort of defense systems to shoot down any small rocks that could not be absorbed/deflected by the glass/steel/titanium enclosures that the people lived in, and that the equipment was stored in on the moon. Something like a CIWS that can fire in space, and Patriot (which could) for the really good-sized rocks. (They (the rocks) don't all move at 25,000 MPH)
But, that presents a whole different set of challenges, but they are challenges I think we need to embrace if we ever want to step beyond this blue/green/brown ball we call Earth.
Suspended
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 204
Likes: 0
From: Dallas Texas
Finally, something BigMan and I agree on.
That's why we need to go to back to the moon. Escaping the moon's gravity isn't nearly the challenge that escaping earth's gravity is. Launching manned-missions (Mars) from the moon would be better. They might even make more sense than launching from Earth orbit.
Further, we'd have to have some sort of defense systems to shoot down any small rocks that could not be absorbed/deflected by the glass/steel/titanium enclosures that the people lived in, and that the equipment was stored in on the moon. Something like a CIWS that can fire in space, and Patriot (which could) for the really good-sized rocks. (They (the rocks) don't all move at 25,000 MPH)
But, that presents a whole different set of challenges, but they are challenges I think we need to embrace if we ever want to step beyond this blue/green/brown ball we call Earth.
That's why we need to go to back to the moon. Escaping the moon's gravity isn't nearly the challenge that escaping earth's gravity is. Launching manned-missions (Mars) from the moon would be better. They might even make more sense than launching from Earth orbit.
Further, we'd have to have some sort of defense systems to shoot down any small rocks that could not be absorbed/deflected by the glass/steel/titanium enclosures that the people lived in, and that the equipment was stored in on the moon. Something like a CIWS that can fire in space, and Patriot (which could) for the really good-sized rocks. (They (the rocks) don't all move at 25,000 MPH)
But, that presents a whole different set of challenges, but they are challenges I think we need to embrace if we ever want to step beyond this blue/green/brown ball we call Earth.
Certified Goat Breeder
Joined: Feb 1999
Posts: 6,182
Likes: 19
From: the moral high ground
I'd just keep quiet, you would get credit for things you didn't even think or say.
Of course this situation doesn't bode well for (Big Man) at all.
Suspended
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 204
Likes: 0
From: Dallas Texas
Hey Hey Hey. At least I give people on here some entertainment. Isnt that what the GD section is all about?