Jump to content




Welcome to Unexplained Mysteries! Please sign in or create an account to start posting and to access a host of extra features.


- - - - -

why havent we been back?


  • Please log in to reply
33 replies to this topic

#16    Cinders

Cinders

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,012 posts
  • Joined:09 Jan 2006
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Oregon

Posted 11 June 2006 - 06:19 PM

I thought we were going back soon.. something about it having to do with Helium 3 I think?

anyway...

@ MID & Waspie Dwarf, thank you for your valuable posts.. I learn quite a bit from them.  thumbsup.gif



"We are like butterflies who flutter for a day and think it's forever." ~Carl Sagan


#17    MID

MID

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 14,490 posts
  • Joined:06 Aug 2005
  • Gender:Male

  • ...The greatest error is not to have tried and failed, but that in trying, we did not give it our best effort.

Posted 11 June 2006 - 06:35 PM

Quote


I thought we were going back soon.. something about it having to do with Helium 3 I think?

anyway...

@ MID & Waspie Dwarf, thank you for your valuable posts.. I learn quite a bit from them.  thumbsup.gif



You're very welcome, Cinders.

And yes, the return to the moon is in the works (I think they're projecting 2018 as an operation time frame).  It has to do with lots of thing, but resources are definitely on the list.  Helium 3 research will assuredly be on the docket eventually.


#18    Waspie_Dwarf

Waspie_Dwarf

    Space Cadet

  • 34,221 posts
  • Joined:03 Mar 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Bexleyheath, Kent, UK

  • We are all in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars.

    Oscar Wilde

Posted 11 June 2006 - 09:53 PM

A pleasure Cinders.

The Russians have given Helium 3 mining as a reason for their interest in going to the Moon.

I believe Helium 3 is usefully (possibly necessary) in nuclear fusion reactors. As no one has yet produced a viable fusion reactor I suspect that commercial He3 mining is still someway off.

"Space is big. Really big. You just won't believe how vastly, hugely, mind-boggingly big it is. I mean, you may think it's a long way down the street to the chemist, but that's just peanuts to space." - The Hitch-Hikers Guide to the Galaxy - Douglas Adams 1952 - 2001

Posted Image
Click on button

#19    Raptor

Raptor

    Omnipotent Entity

  • Member
  • 9,086 posts
  • Joined:08 Apr 2005
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 11 June 2006 - 10:40 PM

Quote


Relatively it does as the going rate to join an expedition is over $50000 which would rise when time off work/equipment/training/sherpas etc were factored in i.e. the equivalent of an Average Joes yearly income. The American government could get back to the moon for less than its yearly taxation income I am sure



$50,000 is nothing compared to the $104 billion that the mission to the moon will cost.


#20    Moon Monkey

Moon Monkey

    Government Agent

  • Member
  • 3,884 posts
  • Joined:08 Jan 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Manchester or Israel

  • All I learnt at school was how to bend not break the rules

Posted 12 June 2006 - 07:03 AM

Quote


$50,000 is nothing compared to the $104 billion that the mission to the moon will cost.

ok, great post .Thats cleared that up. So 50000 is less than 104000000000? Thanks. RELATIVELY.
Many thanks to the guys above for their explainations.I have another if you dont mind. The flag that was stuck in the moon..is it still there and if so can it be seen?


#21    Mr Slayer

Mr Slayer

    Stay SLA

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,329 posts
  • Joined:28 Apr 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Stockholm

Posted 12 June 2006 - 10:18 AM

A simple answer to the thread's question would be:

because we can't and we never could.


#22    chaoszerg

chaoszerg

    Underpants Gnome

  • Member
  • 9,418 posts
  • Joined:11 Jun 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:somewhere in the universe

Posted 12 June 2006 - 10:33 AM

Quote


$50,000 is nothing compared to the $104 billion that the mission to the moon will cost.




Im not sure if we can still see the flag i would think it has probably fallen over by now. Also there was rumours that the mission to the moon was followed by other beings and that when they landed there they encountered different ufo's across a canyon i think someone said they looked menacing and that they did not seem to want the apollo team to be there. But i dont know if that is true or not but heres a link anyway.


http://www.ufos-aliens.co.uk/cosmicphotos.html


#23    Waspie_Dwarf

Waspie_Dwarf

    Space Cadet

  • 34,221 posts
  • Joined:03 Mar 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Bexleyheath, Kent, UK

  • We are all in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars.

    Oscar Wilde

Posted 12 June 2006 - 11:03 AM

Quote


A simple answer to the thread's question would be:

because we can't and we never could.


It would be both simple and wrong.

Quote


The flag that was stuck in the moon..is it still there and if so can it be seen?


There were actually 6 flags stuch in the moon. They are all still there and will remain there for countless millions of years. They are not visible to us on Earth because it would require a truely vast telescope to have the resolution to see them. In a few years, however, a spacecraft call Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter is scheduled for launch. This should be able to image the landing sites.

Quote


Im not sure if we can still see the flag i would think it has probably fallen over by now.


Why would the flags have fallen over? There is no atmosphere on the moon, so no wind. It is not very geologically active. All of the flags except Apollo 11s are probably still standing. As they took off from the moon Buzz Aldrin saw Apollo 11s flag fall over. The blast from the Lunar Modules engine knocked it over.

Quote


Also there was rumours that the mission to the moon was followed by other beings and that when they landed there they encountered different ufo's across a canyon i think someone said they looked menacing and that they did not seem to want the apollo team to be there. But i dont know if that is true or not but heres a link anyway.
http://www.ufos-aliens.co.uk/cosmicphotos.html


Just what this site needs, another link to Cosmic Dave's moronic moon site. No the rumours are not true. The site that is linked to is full of half truths and outright lies. His rubbish has all been thoroughly debunked in other threads.

Edited by Waspie_Dwarf, 12 June 2006 - 11:07 AM.

"Space is big. Really big. You just won't believe how vastly, hugely, mind-boggingly big it is. I mean, you may think it's a long way down the street to the chemist, but that's just peanuts to space." - The Hitch-Hikers Guide to the Galaxy - Douglas Adams 1952 - 2001

Posted Image
Click on button

#24    chaoszerg

chaoszerg

    Underpants Gnome

  • Member
  • 9,418 posts
  • Joined:11 Jun 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:somewhere in the universe

Posted 12 June 2006 - 11:10 AM

Quote


It would be both simple and wrong.
There were actually 6 flags stuch in the moon. They are all still there and will remain there for countless millions of years. They are not visible to us on Earth because it would require a truely vast telescope to have the resolution to see them. In a few years, however, a spacecraft call Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter is scheduled for launch. This should be able to image the landing sites.
Why would the flags have fallen over? There is no atmosphere on the moon, so no wind. It is not very geologically active. All of the flags except Apollo 11s are probably still standing. As they took off from the moon Buzz Aldrin saw Apollo 11s flag fall over. The blast from the Lunar Modules engine knocked it over.
Just what this site needs, another link to Cosmic Dave's moronic moon site. No the rumours are not true. The site that is linked to is full of half truths and outright lies. His rubbish has all been thoroughly debunked in other threads.




My appologies about the link i read the thing about the ufo's on the moon when they got there in a book about ufo's i just tried to search for something about it on the net. So again i am sorry. As for the flag i just thought it might have fallen over by now but since you explained it then there probably still standing up except for the one that was blown over.


#25    Waspie_Dwarf

Waspie_Dwarf

    Space Cadet

  • 34,221 posts
  • Joined:03 Mar 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Bexleyheath, Kent, UK

  • We are all in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars.

    Oscar Wilde

Posted 12 June 2006 - 11:18 AM

No need to appologise chaoszerg, I have no issue you with you. It is the lies spread by Dave Cosnette on his site, and others like him that I have a problem with

"Space is big. Really big. You just won't believe how vastly, hugely, mind-boggingly big it is. I mean, you may think it's a long way down the street to the chemist, but that's just peanuts to space." - The Hitch-Hikers Guide to the Galaxy - Douglas Adams 1952 - 2001

Posted Image
Click on button

#26    chaoszerg

chaoszerg

    Underpants Gnome

  • Member
  • 9,418 posts
  • Joined:11 Jun 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:somewhere in the universe

Posted 12 June 2006 - 11:45 AM

Quote


No need to appologise chaoszerg, I have no issue you with you. It is the lies spread by Dave Cosnette on his site, and others like him that I have a problem with






Lol yes i should appologise for adding his link but thank you for being kind enough not to bite my head off lol. I think they dont want to waste all that money to travel over there again when the money can be used on other projects which would be more important. And for any of you out there try getting hold of a book called who built the moon.


#27    Raptor

Raptor

    Omnipotent Entity

  • Member
  • 9,086 posts
  • Joined:08 Apr 2005
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 12 June 2006 - 11:50 AM

Quote


ok, great post .Thats cleared that up. So 50000 is less than 104000000000? Thanks. RELATIVELY.
Many thanks to the guys above for their explainations.I have another if you dont mind. The flag that was stuck in the moon..is it still there and if so can it be seen?


Your point was completely irrelevant. Why does it matter if going to Everest is 'relatively' expensive? Literally speaking, the two sums of money are incomparable, which is one of the reasons it will take a while to get back to the moon.

Edited by Raptor X7, 12 June 2006 - 11:53 AM.


#28    Waspie_Dwarf

Waspie_Dwarf

    Space Cadet

  • 34,221 posts
  • Joined:03 Mar 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Bexleyheath, Kent, UK

  • We are all in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars.

    Oscar Wilde

Posted 12 June 2006 - 12:01 PM

Let's not get stuck on the Everest analogy, the thread is moving on.

"Space is big. Really big. You just won't believe how vastly, hugely, mind-boggingly big it is. I mean, you may think it's a long way down the street to the chemist, but that's just peanuts to space." - The Hitch-Hikers Guide to the Galaxy - Douglas Adams 1952 - 2001

Posted Image
Click on button

#29    Guardsman Bass

Guardsman Bass

    Poltergeist

  • Member
  • 2,222 posts
  • Joined:02 Sep 2005

  • Don't spam me, but feel free to drop a line.

Posted 12 June 2006 - 04:51 PM

To put it bluntly, there is no real politically, economically, or socially pressing short-term need to develop manned space travel beyond what it already is. Notice that I said short-term; this means that giving great funds to space exploration will not solve any pressing social problems in the short run.

It's a dying shame, because the current program costs peanuts compared to the Federal budget, and designating only $10 billion more to the program, along with some imperatives (get moon colony established), would seriously be a shot in the arm for human space exploration.

"You say that it is your custom to burn widows. Very well. We also have a custom: when men burn a woman alive, we tie a rope around their necks and we hang them. Build your funeral pyre; beside it, my carpenters will build a gallows. You may follow your custom. And then we will follow ours." -Sir Charles Napier

"The essential American soul is hard, isolate, stoic, and a killer. It has never yet melted."   D.H. Lawrence

#30    DamienPriest

DamienPriest

    Ectoplasmic Residue

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 244 posts
  • Joined:06 Jan 2005
  • Location:Long Island, New York ( USA )

  • Exploit the truth, it's our destiny!

Posted 12 June 2006 - 05:11 PM

If I'm not mistaken, didn't Bush annouce we we're making a plan to go back soon? As it stands the U.S. has no means to go back due to its interest in global terror right now, and its spending most of its fund in the war on terror. Basically in my own opinion it boils down to money ans right now Bush is pleading for it, so I don't see us going back until the war on terror simmers down. On top of that, with the immigration problem the U.S. has, the Bush administration is focusing on that now too.

If it happens, it won't be till like 2010 or 2012...

Or even later...  hmm.gif

Posted Image




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users