Why havent we gone back to the Moon yet?

[synchronomy]

It offends me when people put words in a dead mans mouth. Neil saw nothing but lifeless desolation on the moon. You are confusing the terms "skeptic" and "discernment". Accept what he said and not what others claim he said.

Edited September 25, 2013 by synchronomy

[synchronomy]

If you don't like what the website say's disregard it. Isn't that standard skeptic policy?

Nuff said.

My previous post was intended as a reply to the one above. My apologies, a Windows smartphone, which I have been saddled with is less intuitive than the more popular models. Hence, I repeat:

It offends me when people put words in a dead mans mouth. Neil saw nothing but lifeless desolation on the moon. You are confusing the terms "skeptic" and "discernment". Accept what he said and not what others claim he said.

[synchronomy]

If they are telling lies and fabricating stories, please explain how you know.

Two people with a similar tale.

Over to you Jim.

Jim has more years experience than most of the astronauts. Many more years. He comes across strongly for good reason...many wannabees, conspiracy theorists, charlatans and all around know-it-alls give ufology a bad name.

You have been told and informed before that most of the "eye witness accounts" are by untrained observers. Space is vastly different from walking in your backyard. You need to know the lighting conditions and the exact time of the video before drawing any extrapolations.

For goodness sake educate yourself. You seem to think anyone disagreeing with you has a plot of coverup.

If NASA had evidence of intelligent life they would publicise it widely because it would result in funding and budget increases beyond our wildest dreams!

There is no coverup! Get it out of your head!

Edited September 25, 2013 by synchronomy

[DONTEATUS]

I heard that I did "sycnchronomy" ITs so strange that "some -z "people dont get it !

[Pheonix Cluster]

:This answer has been answered by Ex-Nasa Employees: It's because the moon is crawling with Agressive and Scary Alien Species

[Pheonix Cluster]

And "sycnchronomy'' That answer you gave, Is what Nasa wants you to Believe. So please Rethink or Review your answer

[psyche101]

:This answer has been answered by Ex-Nasa Employees: It's because the moon is crawling with Agressive and Scary Alien Species

That was a movie.

And "sycnchronomy'' That answer you gave, Is what Nasa wants you to Believe. So please Rethink or Review your answer

Not what Edgar Mitchell says, and I reckon he is more likely to know what NASA is up to than you are.

[S2F]

And "sycnchronomy'' That answer you gave, Is what Nasa wants you to Believe. So please Rethink or Review your answer

And who is it that is telling you what to believe? That's a two way street I'm afraid.

And welcome to UM.

[Sir Wearer of Hats]

:This answer has been answered by Ex-Nasa Employees: It's because the moon is crawling with Agressive and Scary Alien Species

Nonsense,we all know the moon is an egg.

[DONTEATUS]

Well Moon over Miami will settle the stomach, or Not !

[Shouldthisexist]

Talk about resurrecting i really wish that NASA or another private space company would take one more trip to the moon. Take all of our new equipment and a handful of top CTs and film and let them look. Then when they come on and say there was nothing there it can finally be put to rest.

[ShadowSot]

Except it won't. Either they will claim it was all stated by NASA or the ex-CT believers will be accused of being disinfo agents.

[Shouldthisexist]

Except it won't. Either they will claim it was all stated by NASA or the ex-CT believers will be accused of being disinfo agents.

This is true, I must admit CTs have a great set up. Believe whatever you want and the parts you don't like declare it a cover up.

[+Hammerclaw]

We haven't gone back to the moon because politicians equate it with "climbing the highest mountain" and see no political glory in climbing it twice. They won't wake up until the Chinese or Russians get there and then they'll be all over getting us back there, in a frantic, whiny way. Nothing like a little competition to stir the pot. Besides, NASA was given a choice of moonbase, space station or shuttle and we know how that turned out.

Edited June 29, 2015 by Hammerclaw

[Derek Willis]

We haven't gone back to the moon because politicians equate it with "climbing the highest mountain" and see no political glory in climbing it twice. They won't wake up until the Chinese or Russians get there and then they'll be all over getting us back there, in a frantic, whiny way. Nothing like a little competition to stir the pot. Besides, NASA was given a choice of moonbase, space station or shuttle and we know how that turned out.

Is there any reason we continually have humans in Earth orbit? Don't get me wrong, I am not against having humans in orbit. But do they do anything that can't be done by satellites or other machines? I know in the past that certainly was the case. But machines are getting pretty sophisticated these days.

[Mr.United_Nations]

Is there any reason we continually have humans in Earth orbit? Don't get me wrong, I am not against having humans in orbit. But do they do anything that can't be done by satellites or other machines? I know in the past that certainly was the case. But machines are getting pretty sophisticated these days.

Because space technology takes years and years to devlop, plus if a machine breaks down, whos going to fix it? or spend more years to build a replacement

[Derek Willis]

Because space technology takes years and years to devlop, plus if a machine breaks down, whos going to fix it? or spend more years to build a replacement

Well, yes. But humans can only go into space using space technology. What I am saying is, once they are in space are there any specific things they can do - are doing - that machines can't do?

[+Hammerclaw]

Is there any reason we continually have humans in Earth orbit? Don't get me wrong, I am not against having humans in orbit. But do they do anything that can't be done by satellites or other machines? I know in the past that certainly was the case. But machines are getting pretty sophisticated these days.

Either humanity is serious about becoming a multi-planet space faring species--or it is not. If it is, the tiny baby steps we are taking by long term exposure to space--even in low Earth orbit--are necessary. Yes, we went to the moon, ill equipt with 1960s technology under the impetus of political whim, and met the engineering challenge of getting there. Our solutions for protecting the human element of the missions were precarious, at best, however. There was so much we didn't know, but political expediency trumped all other considerations. We had the heavy lift capabilty for a Mars mission in our grasp in the '60s. Giving up the SATURN 5 for the shuttle program was the worst decision NASA ever made.

[seeder]

Talk about resurrecting i really wish that NASA or another private space company would take one more trip to the moon. Take all of our new equipment and a handful of top CTs and film and let them look. Then when they come on and say there was nothing there it can finally be put to rest.

China went there, landed a rover few years back, the Japanese and Indians sent probes too, and took much better resolution images/maps, China has plans for a moonbase, possibly with the Russians, Japan also wants a future moonbase

[Shouldthisexist]

China went there, landed a rover few years back, the Japanese and Indians sent probes too, and took much better resolution images/maps, China has plans for a moonbase, possibly with the Russians, Japan also wants a future moonbase

Hmmm i like earth way to much to volunteer for a moonbase. I'm a oxygen junkie don't judge me!

[Shouldthisexist]

Well, yes. But humans can only go into space using space technology. What I am saying is, once they are in space are there any specific things they can do - are doing - that machines can't do?

I thought one of the pluses was to observe how we do in space. I mean I know that's not the only reason it was built. I think though that is a reason to put people in orbit, to study it's effects on the human body to see if prolonged space trips are even feasible.

[seeder]

Is there any reason we continually have humans in Earth orbit? Don't get me wrong, I am not against having humans in orbit. But do they do anything that can't be done by satellites or other machines? I know in the past that certainly was the case. But machines are getting pretty sophisticated these days.

One of the most interesting things about men/women on the space station...is how the lack of gravity/space radiation affects the human body, we know for example, that we dont really do that well in space for long periods of time and we must find ways to overcome that if we were ever to travel deep into space

Have a read

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_research_on_the_International_Space_Station

[ShadowSot]

Part of the reason for the shuttle was essentially the DOD thought that a space plane was cool. Nevermi d it handles like a brick, it was such a cool brick!

With NASA having to adopt such inspiration, it's amazing they get things done like they do.

[Derek Willis]

One of the most interesting things about men/women on the space station...is how the lack of gravity/space radiation affects the human body, we know for example, that we dont really do that well in space for long periods of time and we must find ways to overcome that if we were ever to travel deep into space

Have a read

https://en.wikipedia...l_Space_Station

I'm not against human space travel - quite the opposite! But I am interested in the motivations. I am old enough to remember that much - perhaps all - of the motivation behind the US going to the moon was to beat the Soviet Union. And of course, the technical spin-offs from the moon program were immense, so it was well worth the effort. I am just wondering what the motivations are now. Are we kind of treading water until some big new motivation comes along? Is the scientific benefits of humans being in orbit a bit of a red herring, albeit a necessary red herring?

[+Hammerclaw]

If you're researching the science of humans in space, having humans in space furthers that goal and the term "red herring" is non sequitur, and a fallacy of distraction.