- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: What a national embarrassment that we haven’t been back to the Moon in nearly 50 years
Posted on 7/16/19 at 9:49 pm to OMLandshark
Posted on 7/16/19 at 9:49 pm to OMLandshark
NASA spent $28 billion to land men on the moon. In today’s dollars that would be $288 billion. There just isn’t enough ROI to justify a return to the moon. It was for the glory of winning the race. Nothing more.
1
Posted on 7/16/19 at 9:50 pm to OMLandshark
Not really embarrassing. There's no point in going on manned missions to the moon. Been there, done it. We know what's there.
Posted on 7/16/19 at 9:51 pm to OMLandshark
I agree, especially since computer generated special effects are light years beyond what was done back then.
There´s no excuse. The sequel has been a loooong time coming.
There´s no excuse. The sequel has been a loooong time coming.
Posted on 7/16/19 at 9:51 pm to Joshjrn
quote:
Explain why we need to go back to the moon? It’s a graphite colored rock that apparently smells like gunpowder. Other than giving you a chubby, what would it accomplish?
1) Helium 3 that we know is there.
2) A base to launch asteroid mining camps. A single asteroid has over a trillion dollars in materials to sell.
3) A training camp for Mars. Something goes wrong on the Moon, rescue is 2-4 weeks out. Not so for Mars.
4) A launch base for the cosmos. You can produce highly efficient fuel on the Moon itself, and it’s a very small fraction of fuel to launch from there compared to Earth. Not only is the gravity significantly lighter but there is no atmosphere to interfere with a launch.
5) To save humanity from extinction. Putting humans on another sphere is a great idea. Some variation of Interstellar is inevitable and we need to start working on it as soon as possible before it actually becomes a problem.
This post was edited on 7/16/19 at 9:52 pm
Posted on 7/16/19 at 9:51 pm to OMLandshark
Shut the frick up, pussy.
Posted on 7/16/19 at 9:53 pm to DustyDinkleman
quote:
Stop upvoting your own posts. It’s embarrassing.
Haven’t upvoted shite. If you want to give me a certain time to upvote my own post to prove that I haven’t, I’m more than happy to.
Posted on 7/16/19 at 9:56 pm to OMLandshark
Why on earth would we need to fake it twice?
Posted on 7/16/19 at 9:56 pm to ezride25
Because it would be easier to land there than to fake it. Do you really think the Russians wouldn’t have exposed this by now?
Posted on 7/16/19 at 9:57 pm to OMLandshark
I’d rather see more money invested in decent porn than going to the stupid moon
Posted on 7/16/19 at 9:57 pm to OMLandshark
We never landed on the moon.
Posted on 7/16/19 at 9:58 pm to OMLandshark
I think putting a man on the lunar surface and returning him safely to the Earth is the greatest thing man has ever achieved.
It's something that I would love to see in my lifetime.
But realistically there is no reason to go back to the Moon. There is no resource or new knowledge that can be obtained by returning to the Moon that's worth the trip.
It's something that I would love to see in my lifetime.
But realistically there is no reason to go back to the Moon. There is no resource or new knowledge that can be obtained by returning to the Moon that's worth the trip.
This post was edited on 7/16/19 at 9:59 pm
Posted on 7/16/19 at 9:59 pm to OMLandshark
quote:
1) Helium 3 that we know is there.
2) A base to launch asteroid mining camps. A single asteroid has over a trillion dollars in materials to sell.
3) A training camp for Mars. Something goes wrong on the Moon, rescue is 2-4 weeks out. Not so for Mars.
4) A launch base for the cosmos. You can produce highly efficient fuel on the Moon itself, and it’s a very small fraction of fuel to launch from there compared to Earth. Not only is the gravity significantly lighter but there is no atmosphere to interfere with a launch.
5) To save humanity from extinction. Putting humans on another sphere is a great idea. Some variation of Interstellar is inevitable and we need to start working on it as soon as possible before it actually becomes a problem.
Your overall premise is that we need to go to the moon to setup a base.
You realize how much that would cost? Probably close to a trillion dollars. Then add on the maintenance on top of that... I highly doubt the ROI is worth it.
I do support space research, but a moon base is likely not the ideal path forward. Obviously NASA doesn't think it's a priority either.
Posted on 7/16/19 at 9:59 pm to OMLandshark
Posted on 7/16/19 at 9:59 pm to OMLandshark
quote:
Interstellar
quote:
the Moon
Uhh
Posted on 7/16/19 at 10:02 pm to OMLandshark
I think it’s an embarrassment to every other country in the world that has NEVER been to the moon. We did it in 1969 and no one had done it since, I think that speaks for itself.
Aside from that, why do we need to spend billions of taxpayer dollars to go back? We went, checked it out, got some samples... cool. What great necessity requires us to go back?
Aside from that, why do we need to spend billions of taxpayer dollars to go back? We went, checked it out, got some samples... cool. What great necessity requires us to go back?
Posted on 7/16/19 at 10:05 pm to OMLandshark
quote:
You can produce highly efficient fuel on the Moon
Do tell
Posted on 7/16/19 at 10:06 pm to Corkfather
The moon mission was the crowning achievement of the Third Reich
Posted on 7/16/19 at 10:07 pm to OMLandshark
deceptacons told us not to come back, you want to start a robot war? 
seriously, we havent even explored half the ocean bottoms yet and until we can do that we arent in much condition to be exploring space.
going to the moon was just about a pissing contest with the russians as to who could get there first, no one GAF about the moon at all
seriously, we havent even explored half the ocean bottoms yet and until we can do that we arent in much condition to be exploring space.
going to the moon was just about a pissing contest with the russians as to who could get there first, no one GAF about the moon at all
Posted on 7/16/19 at 10:07 pm to Kentucker
quote:
NASA spent $28 billion to land men on the moon. In today’s dollars that would be $288 billion. There just isn’t enough ROI to justify a return to the moon
NASA’s budget during the Apollo program peaked at 4%. Today NASA gets around 0.4% and that includes all of the BS programs that do not have anything to do with space exploration or why NASA was established in the first place.
Now consider all of the BS programs that federal spending is allocated to. Social programs, welfare, free stuff! The US could easily provide funding if it were a true priority.
This post was edited on 7/16/19 at 10:11 pm
Posted on 7/16/19 at 10:07 pm to OMLandshark
God damn you are the most dramatic.
Page 2 of 5
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News