(Close Window)
Topic: Why don't we colonise the Moon?
Message: Posted by: Pakar Ilusi (Jan 25, 2014 02:17AM)
As a space station, it makes the most sense, for practise and ease of return, relatively of course.
Message: Posted by: Mehtas (Jan 25, 2014 05:58AM)
I'd like to know the cost of all before I can be certain.
Message: Posted by: Pakar Ilusi (Jan 25, 2014 06:40AM)
They'll be spending any way...

This makes more sense imho...
Message: Posted by: Daryl -the other brother (Jan 25, 2014 12:00PM)
MONEY

The cost for such a project would be out of this world. (Sorry, couldn't stop myself). :)

NASA did have a plan to put a telescope on the dark side of the moon. I think it was scraped in favor of planetary missions.
Message: Posted by: Chessmann (Jan 25, 2014 02:57PM)
For what purpose would we colonize the moon?

I suppose it could make going there and returning easier, as you say...but no one goes to the moon much, anymore (the Chinese are there, but unmanned, I believe).

Why do you think we should colonize the moon? To study the moon? Other? Would the required funds be best used there, do you think?
Message: Posted by: balducci (Jan 25, 2014 03:54PM)
"Why don't we colonise the Moon?"

It stinks of cheese.
Message: Posted by: Payne (Jan 25, 2014 05:00PM)
[quote]
On 2014-01-25 15:57, Chessmann wrote:

For what purpose would we colonize the moon?

[/quote]

Helium 3

http://www.wired.com/science/space/news/2006/12/72276?currentPage=all
Message: Posted by: magicfish (Jan 25, 2014 06:50PM)
Because we can't.
Message: Posted by: ed rhodes (Jan 25, 2014 09:02PM)
One of the major problems with a "moon base" is the dust. The astronauts on each mission complained about the dust which stuck to their boots and got everywhere on their ships. Imagine this on a highly technical base. Eventually it would get into something important and cause a siezure whereupon you can be pretty certain there would be casulties.

The other problem, as it's been suggested here, why? What would be the purpose of the base?
Message: Posted by: mastermindreader (Jan 25, 2014 09:23PM)
Haven't you heard? It's already been colonized but they are keeping it a big secret. As Criswell would say, "Your minds could not handle the horrible truth!"

:eek:
Message: Posted by: tommy (Jan 25, 2014 09:24PM)
Another problem is Stanley Kubrick is dead.
Message: Posted by: sammagic (Jan 25, 2014 09:41PM)
Just want the unmanned chinese vehicle to drive around the moon and settle the argument.........find the vehicles the appolo missions left up there!!

Did they get there, no! or we would have found the answer to clean and safe energy.
Message: Posted by: Chessmann (Jan 25, 2014 10:14PM)
[quote]
On 2014-01-25 22:23, mastermindreader wrote:
Haven't you heard? It's already been colonized but they are keeping it a big secret. As Criswell would say, "Your minds could not handle the horrible truth!"

:eek:
[/quote]

My first encounter with Criswell was shortly after college, some friends and I watching Ed Wood's "Orgy of the Dead". When I saw his eyes start darting between the cue cards and the camera, I knew I was in for a treat!
Message: Posted by: Pakar Ilusi (Jan 25, 2014 10:22PM)
Why?

Why did we go in the first place?

Because we can. ;)

Here are reasons for a base though...

First, to train for the colonies on Mars and future other planets. On the Moon at least, we know we can get back if there is a problem. Relatively safer than Mars.

That means it is a study of humans on a another celestial being in a station for a long period of time. Different than just the International Space Station, this is a Moon.

Second, laugh at this if you will, humanity needs this both on a scientific mindset level and a bonding level.

Third, a lookout for those meteors that might kill us.

Fourth, a great telescope location.

Fifth, in the future, the base can be the training baee are and launchpad for other projects.

Sixth, tourism in fifty years. Call Branson. ;)
Message: Posted by: balducci (Jan 25, 2014 10:25PM)
Excerpt from http://www.theglobeandmail.com/globe-debate/sex-in-the-serengeti-its-really-wild/article16490311/

"Of course, it’s wrong to anthropomorphize these creatures. As we know, humans are so much more evolved than antelopes and lions that any similarities between our society and theirs are completely coincidental. Still, I couldn’t help noticing that we, too, are plagued with more and more young males who seem to be surplus to requirements. We used to send our surplus off to sea, or war, or penal colonies in Australia. Now that those options are off the table, we really have no idea what to do with them."

Send them to the moon, I say!
Message: Posted by: Dougini (Jan 25, 2014 10:41PM)
Seriously? You really wanna know? Why haven't we been back? Ask NASA. However, you'll never get the truth! ;)

Doug
Message: Posted by: Dannydoyle (Jan 25, 2014 10:47PM)
Oh Lord Doug you must be the keeper of a greater truth. LOL.

Why don't we? Physics.
Message: Posted by: S2000magician (Jan 25, 2014 11:20PM)
No local supply of exploitable labour.
Message: Posted by: Chessmann (Jan 25, 2014 11:48PM)
[quote]
On 2014-01-25 23:22, Pakar Ilusi wrote:
Why?

Why did we go in the first place?

Because we can. ;)

[/quote]

Haha. Well, that's true :) But since we've done it, the question here is much different.

[quote]

First, to train for the colonies on Mars and future other planets. On the Moon at least, we know we can get back if there is a problem. Relatively safer than Mars.

[/quote]

Hmmm.... Gotta start somewhere. True!

[quote]

That means it is a study of humans on a another celestial being in a station for a long period of time. Different than just the International Space Station, this is a Moon.

[/quote]

Ok.

[quote]

Second, laugh at this if you will, humanity needs this both on a scientific mindset level and a bonding level.

[/quote]

Not sure on this one, but ok. Not laughing, though :)

[quote]

Third, a lookout for those meteors that might kill us.

Fourth, a great telescope location.

[/quote]

I'm assuming this is based on a telescope not going through the earth's atmosphere sees more/better? Gotcha, no problem there.

[quote]

Fifth, in the future, the base can be the training base are and launchpad for other projects.

[/quote]

At first blush, it seems launchings could be done more efficiently and with better risk/emergency services here on earth. OTOH, if you're going to land on the moon you'll need to launch from the moon - same with from other (future) locations.

[quote]

Sixth, tourism in fifty years. Call Branson. ;)

[/quote]

Yup, only a matter of time. We should form up a list of young country stars and comedians and project which will be playing on the moon in 50 years! :P

Have you been to Branson?

Here's another thing that just crossed my mind...a future Botany Bay.
Message: Posted by: Pakar Ilusi (Jan 26, 2014 12:13AM)
Thanks for going through my list Chessman... ;)

And I think you're kidding but I meant Sir Richard Branson...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Branson

;)
Message: Posted by: Pakar Ilusi (Jan 26, 2014 12:14AM)
[quote]
On 2014-01-26 00:20, S2000magician wrote:
No local supply of exploitable labour.
[/quote]

I said we, and I'm not American, meaning the international community as a whole. ;)
Message: Posted by: Pakar Ilusi (Jan 26, 2014 12:17AM)
[quote]
On 2014-01-25 23:41, Dougini wrote:
Seriously? You really wanna know? Why haven't we been back? Ask NASA. However, you'll never get the truth! ;)

Doug
[/quote]

Seriously, I want to know but you are not going to tell so I have to ask NASA who are not going to tell me the truth, right?

So all bases are covered regardless of what NASA says, right?

Nice... :ohyes:
Message: Posted by: Chessmann (Jan 26, 2014 12:26AM)
[quote]
On 2014-01-26 01:13, Pakar Ilusi wrote:

Thanks for going through my list Chessman... ;)

And I think you're kidding but I meant Sir Richard Branson...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Branson

;)

[/quote]

OMg, that's funny! No, I wasn't kidding. Branson, in the state of Missouri, is a huge tourist and entertainment town. I've been there many times. Mainly caters to "family style" entertainment. There's a lot of country music and comedy, and many of the more famous country singers there are older. Didn't make the connection with the "other" Branson, at all!
Message: Posted by: Pakar Ilusi (Jan 26, 2014 12:29AM)
[quote]
On 2014-01-26 01:26, Chessmann wrote:
[quote]
On 2014-01-26 01:13, Pakar Ilusi wrote:

Thanks for going through my list Chessman... ;)

And I think you're kidding but I meant Sir Richard Branson...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Branson

;)

[/quote]

OMg, that's funny! No, I wasn't kidding. Branson, in the state of Missouri, is a huge tourist and entertainment town. I've been there many times. Mainly caters to "family style" entertainment. There's a lot of country music and comedy, and many of the more famous country singers there are older. Didn't make the connection with the "other" Branson, at all!
[/quote]

Haha, I know of Branson from the movies. That you really thought I was referring to the town, makes that hilarious. :P
Message: Posted by: Dennis Michael (Jan 26, 2014 06:54AM)
The biggest problem is water. Can't colonize without it.
Message: Posted by: landmark (Jan 26, 2014 07:26AM)
...and some oxygen would be pleasant as well.
Message: Posted by: magicfish (Jan 26, 2014 07:59AM)
[quote]
On 2014-01-25 19:50, magicfish wrote:
Because we can't.
[/quote]
Message: Posted by: Jonathan Townsend (Jan 26, 2014 08:41AM)
[quote]
On 2014-01-26 07:54, Dennis Michael wrote:
The biggest problem is water. Can't colonize without it.

[/quote]

IIRC there's water.

AFAIK it's the cost to move (*even a pound) of matter from the surface of the Earth into space that limits our travel plans.
Message: Posted by: landmark (Jan 26, 2014 09:15AM)
[quote]
On 2014-01-26 00:20, S2000magician wrote:
No local supply of exploitable labour.
[/quote]
No problem, outsource to Mars.
Message: Posted by: Frankie (Jan 26, 2014 09:34AM)
[img]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/c/c4/Moonbase_alpha.jpg[/img]
Long live Moonbase Alpha (15 years overdue)! ^_^
Message: Posted by: Magnus Eisengrim (Jan 26, 2014 09:36AM)
[quote]
On 2014-01-26 00:20, S2000magician wrote:
No local supply of exploitable labour.
[/quote]

Ouch! Very near the bone.
Message: Posted by: Dennis Michael (Jan 26, 2014 10:19AM)
[quote]
On 2014-01-26 08:26, landmark wrote:
...and some oxygen would be pleasant as well.
[/quote]

O2 can be extracted from water, as well as hydrogen (H2O)
Message: Posted by: Dougini (Jan 26, 2014 10:41AM)
[quote]
On 2014-01-26 01:17, Pakar Ilusi wrote:
[quote]
On 2014-01-25 23:41, Dougini wrote:
Seriously? You really wanna know? Why haven't we been back? Ask NASA. However, you'll never get the truth! ;)

Doug
[/quote]

Seriously, I want to know but you are not going to tell so I have to ask NASA who are not going to tell me the truth, right?
[/quote]

I [i]have[/i] told you. I got shot down like a bad plane. I have NO cred here. NASA KNOWS the truth. I only [i]hear things[/i]... :rolleyes:

Doug
Message: Posted by: tommy (Jan 26, 2014 10:53AM)
The moon is a spy satellite?
Message: Posted by: mastermindreader (Jan 26, 2014 10:55AM)
[quote]
On 2014-01-25 22:41, sammagic wrote:
Just want the unmanned chinese vehicle to drive around the moon and settle the argument.........find the vehicles the appolo missions left up there!!

Did they get there, no! or we would have found the answer to clean and safe energy.
[/quote]

Just checking- are you kidding or do you seriously believe that we never landed on the moon?
Message: Posted by: lunatik (Jan 26, 2014 12:49PM)
I'd be bored to death! No internet to access the Café, what on Earth (errr, moon) would I do??
Message: Posted by: longhaired1 (Jan 26, 2014 01:27PM)
One of the problems with "us" colonizing the moon is that here on our home planet we can't even agree on who "we" are. I love the idea of "we", the human race, doing things, but we may have to give up our obsession with nationalism, race and arbitrary lines in the sand first.
Message: Posted by: Pakar Ilusi (Jan 26, 2014 02:11PM)
[quote]
On 2014-01-26 14:27, longhaired1 wrote:
One of the problems with "us" colonizing the moon is that here on our home planet we can't even agree on who "we" are. I love the idea of "we", the human race, doing things, but we may have to give up our obsession with nationalism, race and arbitrary lines in the sand first.

[/quote]

We did it with the International Space Station. :ohyes:
Message: Posted by: rockwall (Jan 26, 2014 02:13PM)
It would cost too much to complete the environmental impact studies.
Message: Posted by: longhaired1 (Jan 26, 2014 02:14PM)
[quote]
On 2014-01-26 15:11, Pakar Ilusi wrote:
We did it with the International Space Station. :ohyes:
[/quote]

Excellent point. 15 of us did. :)

It would be interesting if we determined which of "us" were more responsible for environmental problems, make them build the colony, and populate it with the "us" that were least responsible for those problems.
Message: Posted by: Pakar Ilusi (Jan 26, 2014 02:22PM)
No, it would be a scientific endeavour first. Like the space station.

Just a few astronauts.

Not colonizing like terraforming.
Message: Posted by: slowkneenuh (Jan 26, 2014 02:38PM)
We only do things when we are forced, and since we haven't finished destroying our earth yet, there's no rush. :)
Message: Posted by: tommy (Jan 26, 2014 03:38PM)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=73ks2TPPyho

Or would you rather be a fish?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fjQNoXWBWaM

Or

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L_jgIezosVA
Message: Posted by: Pakar Ilusi (Jan 26, 2014 04:50PM)
[quote]
On 2014-01-26 15:38, slowkneenuh wrote:
We only do things when we are forced, and since we haven't finished destroying our earth yet, there's no rush. :)
[/quote]

There is truth there. Sadly.
Message: Posted by: Dougini (Jan 26, 2014 05:13PM)
Tommy! Thanks for that! Jonathan King, "Everyone's Gone To The Moon"! I played that song on Oldies 95 back in 1995-2001! I never saw that vid! He looks totally different from what I imagined!

And besides Helium 3, there are a LOT of valuable resources that could be mined. Let alone Mars. Rumor has it that's already being done...but that's pure fantasy, right? Absolutely. We know this for a fact. Right. We have a lot to learn...

Doug
Message: Posted by: NYCTwister (Jan 26, 2014 05:16PM)
I think a better question is why aren't we trying to mine the moon.
Message: Posted by: mastermindreader (Jan 26, 2014 05:34PM)
[quote]
On 2014-01-26 18:16, NYCTwister wrote:
I think a better question is why aren't we trying to mine the moon.


[/quote]

Wouldn't mines be dangerous for the rovers, etc? They could blow up! :eek:
Message: Posted by: tommy (Jan 26, 2014 06:36PM)
Cool song but King, well lets just say, not cool.
Message: Posted by: rockwall (Jan 26, 2014 08:08PM)
[quote]
On 2014-01-26 00:20, S2000magician wrote:
No local supply of exploitable labour.
[/quote]

I'm not so sure about that. We should probably ask Dougini.
Message: Posted by: rockwall (Jan 26, 2014 08:19PM)
[quote]
On 2014-01-26 16:38, tommy wrote:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=73ks2TPPyho

Or would you rather be a fish?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fjQNoXWBWaM

Or

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L_jgIezosVA
[/quote]

I'm kinda surprised you missed this one.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l2S4GTD-AAw
Message: Posted by: tommy (Jan 26, 2014 08:43PM)
:)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zPwMdZOlPo8
Message: Posted by: Cliffg37 (Jan 26, 2014 08:54PM)
There are exactly two reasons to build and maintain a base on the moon; one is illegal according to the united nations.

The good reason is for further space exploration. Gravity on the moon is one sixth that of Earth, and as such, launching a deep space rocket becomes far less expensive, using far less fuel on a larger ship if we launch from the moon and not from Earth.

This is a good reason for a base, but a bas only, not colonizing. The lack of resources make the moon a foolish place to build a city, also, lacking atmosphere there is no meteor protection. Just look at the moon and see what that result is. So lets build a base and launch our Mars missions from there.

The other reason is that anyone who builds a missile base on the moon has an unrestricted view of every country in the world. I think it is better to face the missles the other way in case of asteriod strike or invasion. Most governments will not agree with me.

Homework: What are the chances of stopping an asateroid coming to earth with nuclear missiles?

Class Dismissed
Message: Posted by: Pakar Ilusi (Jan 27, 2014 04:18AM)
[quote]
On 2014-01-26 21:54, Cliffg37 wrote:
There are exactly two reasons to build and maintain a base on the moon; one is illegal according to the united nations.

The good reason is for further space exploration. Gravity on the moon is one sixth that of Earth, and as such, launching a deep space rocket becomes far less expensive, using far less fuel on a larger ship if we launch from the moon and not from Earth.

This is a good reason for a base, but a bas only, not colonizing. The lack of resources make the moon a foolish place to build a city, also, lacking atmosphere there is no meteor protection. Just look at the moon and see what that result is. So lets build a base and launch our Mars missions from there.

The other reason is that anyone who builds a missile base on the moon has an unrestricted view of every country in the world. I think it is better to face the missles the other way in case of asteriod strike or invasion. Most governments will not agree with me.

Homework: What are the chances of stopping an asateroid coming to earth with nuclear missiles?

Class Dismissed
[/quote]

Thanks, I knew that about the military. ;)

Asteroid?

I'm guessing one in a thousand.
Message: Posted by: critter (Jan 27, 2014 05:16AM)
I think maybe they're hoping there's more "stuff" they can use on Mars. The moon is basically just dirt and rocks, isn't it? I know very little about outer space and other planets and stuff. That and advanced math type stuff (except statistics) might be the two biggest gaps in my knowledge base.
Message: Posted by: Pakar Ilusi (Jan 27, 2014 05:19AM)
[quote]
On 2014-01-27 06:16, critter wrote:
I think maybe they're hoping there's more "stuff" they can use on Mars. The moon is basically just dirt and rocks, isn't it? I know very little about outer space and other planets and stuff. That and advanced math type stuff (except statistics) might be the two biggest gaps in my knowledge base.
[/quote]

As a launchpad, I think the moon is great.

Like a big space station satellite all ready there... ;)

But the start will always be difficult.
Message: Posted by: critter (Jan 27, 2014 05:24AM)
I just hope we start expanding sometime soon. One of these millennia the sun is going to go all supernova and stuff. If there's still a human race by then we'll need somewhere to bring our dogs, cards, and books.
Message: Posted by: Pakar Ilusi (Jan 27, 2014 05:41AM)
[quote]
On 2014-01-27 06:24, critter wrote:
I just hope we start expanding sometime soon. One of these millennia the sun is going to go all supernova and stuff. If there's still a human race by then we'll need somewhere to bring our dogs, cards, and books.
[/quote]

I worry we nuke ourselves trying to prove whose belief is more loving and peaceful, way before that... ;)
Message: Posted by: rockwall (Jan 27, 2014 07:57AM)
[quote]
On 2014-01-26 21:43, tommy wrote:
:)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zPwMdZOlPo8
[/quote]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6lFxGBB4UGU
Message: Posted by: ed rhodes (Jan 27, 2014 08:48AM)
[quote]
On 2014-01-25 22:41, sammagic wrote:
Just want the unmanned chinese vehicle to drive around the moon and settle the argument.........find the vehicles the appolo missions left up there!!

Did they get there, no! or we would have found the answer to clean and safe energy.
[/quote]

I'm not quite certain how going to the Moon would give us the secrets to clean and safe energy.
Message: Posted by: Dannydoyle (Jan 27, 2014 09:52AM)
How about we clean our own room first before we are allowed to go play outside?
Message: Posted by: Pakar Ilusi (Jan 27, 2014 10:08AM)
[quote]
On 2014-01-27 10:52, Dannydoyle wrote:
How about we clean our own room first before we are allowed to go play outside?
[/quote]

No one really follows that rule.

Look at all the wars and colonisations.
Message: Posted by: EsnRedshirt (Jan 27, 2014 12:05PM)
We can't colonize the moon- that's where The Watcher lives.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uatu
Message: Posted by: rockwall (Jan 27, 2014 12:20PM)
[quote]
On 2014-01-27 10:52, Dannydoyle wrote:
How about we clean our own room first before we are allowed to go play outside?
[/quote]

why?
Message: Posted by: Dougini (Jan 27, 2014 03:40PM)
The Watchers are not fantasy. Do you sincerely want to know about The Watchers? This will tell you all you need to know. This book was taken OUT of the Bible:

http://www.ancienttexts.org/library/ethiopian/enoch/

Doug
Message: Posted by: sammagic (Jan 27, 2014 06:09PM)
[quote]
On 2014-01-27 09:48, ed rhodes wrote:
[quote]
On 2014-01-25 22:41, sammagic wrote:
Just want the unmanned chinese vehicle to drive around the moon and settle the argument.........find the vehicles the appolo missions left up there!!

Did they get there, no! or we would have found the answer to clean and safe energy.
[/quote]

I'm not quite certain how going to the Moon would give us the secrets to clean and safe energy.
[/quote]


It's all to do with an extract of helium that is found in the moon's crust called HE-3. Scientists have been researching this for years as an alternative to uranium in nuclear reactors. It is currently being tested on reactors in certain countries. We all know what can happen when nuclear power station leak, just think about Chernobyl. HE-3 produces around the same amount of radioactivity as x-ray machines in your local hospital.

They estimate that a commercial power reactor will be could be produced within the next 20years, however, there is not enough available on earth, it is virtually absent. They estimate there are millions of tonnes of it available on the moon. 20 tonnes of it is enough to power the whole of the electrical supply of the USA for a year and could be brought back in one shuttle. So if you look at it cost wise, in that it costs billions to power the US for a year, you can see the potential value of HE-3.

So why haven't we been up there and brought some back if it's value is potentially billions, not to mention producing clean energy?

Yes there are other factors involved in extracting HE-3 from helium, including the mining of it. But what I don't understand is, if we could send man to the moon over 40 years ago with the technology that was available back then, how can't we with the advancement in technology that we have had over the last few decades work out how to bring it back?
Message: Posted by: sammagic (Jan 27, 2014 06:19PM)
Maybe another reason we haven't brought some back is to do with ownership of the moon. The Apollo missions weren't stopped due to budget cuts, it was to do with not being able to negotiate a sensible fee for mining up there with the little people who live on the dark side of the moon, and transferring the cash would have been a nightmare! Think we should go back up as they probably take Paypal these days!!!
Message: Posted by: LobowolfXXX (Jan 27, 2014 06:59PM)
I think it's a great idea, especially if I get to pick the colonists.
Message: Posted by: mastermindreader (Jan 27, 2014 07:23PM)
I think that bit coins would be the way to go- or any virtual currency. They do have Internet up there, right?
Message: Posted by: Pakar Ilusi (Jan 27, 2014 08:24PM)
[quote]
On 2014-01-27 19:09, sammagic wrote:
[quote]
On 2014-01-27 09:48, ed rhodes wrote:
[quote]
On 2014-01-25 22:41, sammagic wrote:
Just want the unmanned chinese vehicle to drive around the moon and settle the argument.........find the vehicles the appolo missions left up there!!

Did they get there, no! or we would have found the answer to clean and safe energy.
[/quote]

I'm not quite certain how going to the Moon would give us the secrets to clean and safe energy.
[/quote]


It's all to do with an extract of helium that is found in the moon's crust called HE-3. Scientists have been researching this for years as an alternative to uranium in nuclear reactors. It is currently being tested on reactors in certain countries. We all know what can happen when nuclear power station leak, just think about Chernobyl. HE-3 produces around the same amount of radioactivity as x-ray machines in your local hospital.

They estimate that a commercial power reactor will be could be produced within the next 20years, however, there is not enough available on earth, it is virtually absent. They estimate there are millions of tonnes of it available on the moon. 20 tonnes of it is enough to power the whole of the electrical supply of the USA for a year and could be brought back in one shuttle. So if you look at it cost wise, in that it costs billions to power the US for a year, you can see the potential value of HE-3.

So why haven't we been up there and brought some back if it's value is potentially billions, not to mention producing clean energy?

Yes there are other factors involved in extracting HE-3 from helium, including the mining of it. But what I don't understand is, if we could send man to the moon over 40 years ago with the technology that was available back then, how can't we with the advancement in technology that we have had over the last few decades work out how to bring it back?

[/quote]

Never knew that, thanks. ;)
Message: Posted by: Pakar Ilusi (Jan 27, 2014 08:24PM)
[quote]
On 2014-01-27 19:59, LobowolfXXX wrote:
I think it's a great idea, especially if I get to pick the colonists.
[/quote]

:P
Message: Posted by: Pakar Ilusi (Jan 27, 2014 08:25PM)
[quote]
On 2014-01-27 20:23, mastermindreader wrote:
I think that bit coins would be the way to go- or any virtual currency. They do have Internet up there, right?
[/quote]

Of course they have Internet. How else would they watch porn?
Message: Posted by: Dannydoyle (Jan 27, 2014 08:27PM)
[quote]
On 2014-01-27 16:40, Dougini wrote:
The Watchers are not fantasy. Do you sincerely want to know about The Watchers? This will tell you all you need to know. This book was taken OUT of the Bible:

http://www.ancienttexts.org/library/ethiopian/enoch/

Doug
[/quote]

Seriously Doug stop watching ancient aliens and listening to those morons.
Message: Posted by: Steve_Mollett (Jan 27, 2014 08:29PM)
Whe the going gets tough, the tough get going!
Let's go!!!!
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA....!
Message: Posted by: Pakar Ilusi (Jan 27, 2014 08:30PM)
[quote]
On 2014-01-27 21:27, Dannydoyle wrote:
[quote]
On 2014-01-27 16:40, Dougini wrote:
The Watchers are not fantasy. Do you sincerely want to know about The Watchers? This will tell you all you need to know. This book was taken OUT of the Bible:

http://www.ancienttexts.org/library/ethiopian/enoch/

Doug
[/quote]

Seriously Doug stop watching ancient aliens and listening to those morons.
[/quote]

I think he has been this way long before that show.

I like that show, but they just connect EVERYTHING to ancient aliens now that it has become funny... :P
Message: Posted by: Dannydoyle (Jan 27, 2014 08:36PM)
Yea it really is.
Message: Posted by: Dougini (Jan 27, 2014 09:51PM)
[quote]
On 2014-01-27 21:30, Pakar Ilusi wrote:
[quote]
On 2014-01-27 21:27, Dannydoyle wrote:
Seriously Doug stop watching ancient aliens and listening to those morons.
[/quote]

I think he has been this way long before that show.
[/quote]

You're absolutley right! :)

Doug
Message: Posted by: Pakar Ilusi (Jan 27, 2014 09:55PM)
[quote]
On 2014-01-27 22:51, Dougini wrote:
[quote]
On 2014-01-27 21:30, Pakar Ilusi wrote:
[quote]
On 2014-01-27 21:27, Dannydoyle wrote:
Seriously Doug stop watching ancient aliens and listening to those morons.
[/quote]

I think he has been this way long before that show.
[/quote]

You're absolutley right! :)

Doug
[/quote]

See, I told you so. ;)
Message: Posted by: sammagic (Jan 28, 2014 06:54AM)
Mining on the moon was probably deemed impossible when they sent up the Apollo missions, and as nuclear fusion using HE-3 was being investigated back then, it was not possible to produce, even to this day they haven't worked out how use it for longer than a few seconds to produce the energy that would be needed to power the reactors.

Did the US Govt and NASA think that it was a waste of money returning??

As I mentioned above HE-3 is virtually absent on earth, and for what is available it costs $16 million per kilo.

It's the reason that private companies are now getting involved with space exploration and developing ways to mine on the moon and are already arguing on mining rights. Why do you think that China are up there? And India have even sent up unmanned craft to orbit the moon to map it out for potential mining.

My tip, buy some shares in the companies that are researching and developing the mining techniques.
Message: Posted by: Pakar Ilusi (Jan 28, 2014 08:45AM)
[quote]
On 2014-01-28 07:54, sammagic wrote:
Mining on the moon was probably deemed impossible when they sent up the Apollo missions, and as nuclear fusion using HE-3 was being investigated back then, it was not possible to produce, even to this day they haven't worked out how use it for longer than a few seconds to produce the energy that would be needed to power the reactors.

Did the US Govt and NASA think that it was a waste of money returning??

As I mentioned above HE-3 is virtually absent on earth, and for what is available it costs $16 million per kilo.

It's the reason that private companies are now getting involved with space exploration and developing ways to mine on the moon and are already arguing on mining rights. Why do you think that China are up there? And India have even sent up unmanned craft to orbit the moon to map it out for potential mining.

My tip, buy some shares in the companies that are researching and developing the mining techniques.
[/quote]

How long more before you think they are up there, those companies?

20 years?
Message: Posted by: sammagic (Jan 28, 2014 09:26AM)
Well if the Chinese keep on going the way they are with the development of they're space programme, who know's? I can see the chinese putting man back on the moon within the next 10 years though.

It's probably do-able now to mine on the moon, or will be in the next few years. They've got the technology available now to extract HE-3, but doing it up on the moon is a different story, it takes a bit more than just putting a few mining rigs up there.

I can't understand why the western world is not pumping billions into this, as it's not our generation we've got to think about, it's the next and the one's after that. Fossil fuels are running out and using them is basically destroying our earth.
Message: Posted by: Pakar Ilusi (Jan 28, 2014 09:38AM)
[quote]
On 2014-01-28 10:26, sammagic wrote:
Well if the Chinese keep on going the way they are with the development of they're space programme, who know's? I can see the chinese putting man back on the moon within the next 10 years though.

It's probably do-able now to mine on the moon, or will be in the next few years. They've got the technology available now to extract HE-3, but doing it up on the moon is a different story, it takes a bit more than just putting a few mining rigs up there.

I can't understand why the western world is not pumping billions into this, as it's not our generation we've got to think about, it's the next and the one's after that. Fossil fuels are running out and using them is basically destroying our earth.
[/quote]

Wow, there's a Hollywood movie for you... ;)
Message: Posted by: tommy (Jan 28, 2014 03:41PM)
We could break earth up into 49 bits and then we would have 50 moons to colonise.
Message: Posted by: george1953 (Jan 28, 2014 05:16PM)
I was going to open a bar on the moon, then I thought nah, no atmosphere :)
Message: Posted by: Russell Davidson (Jan 29, 2014 06:39AM)
[quote]
On 2014-01-26 11:55, mastermindreader wrote:
[quote]
On 2014-01-25 22:41, sammagic wrote:
Just want the unmanned chinese vehicle to drive around the moon and settle the argument.........find the vehicles the appolo missions left up there!!

Did they get there, no! or we would have found the answer to clean and safe energy.
[/quote]

Just checking- are you kidding or do you seriously believe that we never landed on the moon?
[/quote]

And what makes you think you did Bob? Seems strange no-one ever did it again don't you think?
Message: Posted by: Mehtas (Jan 29, 2014 06:44AM)
[quote]

On 2014-01-28 18:16, george1953 wrote:

I was going to open a bar on the moon.... :)

[/quote]


With McDonalds and KFC already in the queue, you've got no chance.
Message: Posted by: ed rhodes (Jan 30, 2014 04:43AM)
[quote]
On 2014-01-29 07:39, Russell Davidson wrote:
[quote]
On 2014-01-26 11:55, mastermindreader wrote:
[quote]
On 2014-01-25 22:41, sammagic wrote:
Just want the unmanned chinese vehicle to drive around the moon and settle the argument.........find the vehicles the appolo missions left up there!!

Did they get there, no! or we would have found the answer to clean and safe energy.
[/quote]

Just checking- are you kidding or do you seriously believe that we never landed on the moon?
[/quote]

And what makes you think you did Bob? Seems strange no-one ever did it again don't you think?
[/quote]

Nope. People got bored with moon travel after six times. Congress, always more concerned with getting re-elected than with scientific progress, cut funding for NASA and forced it to cancel the last two missions. (I read somewhere that the astronauts were actually glad the missions got cut. They'd had some problems with some of the successful missions (On 11, they snapped off a switch from the control panel, luckily, not a vital switch.) They said they felt the missions were going on borrowed time and eventually something big (bigger than 13) was going to happen and someone was going to die up there.) I've looked through the information that "proves" we didn't go to the Moon (I own a copy of "A Funny Thing Happened on the Way to the Moon") it's hokum!
Message: Posted by: mastermindreader (Jan 30, 2014 06:16AM)
I find it hard to believe that any rational person would actually believe that the moon landings never happened.
Message: Posted by: Russell Davidson (Jan 30, 2014 08:38AM)
[quote]
On 2014-01-30 07:16, mastermindreader wrote:
I find it hard to believe that any rational person would actually believe that the moon landings never happened.
[/quote]

Well, there were some pretty rational reasons for faking it no? In the same ball park as claiming that someone had a bunch of WMD's isn't it?
Message: Posted by: mastermindreader (Jan 30, 2014 11:31AM)
No. Not in the same ballpark at all. (Although it did make for a nice sci-fi movie plot. But, then again, so did Day of the Triffids.)

But to follow your analogy to its logical conclusion. The fact that there were no WMDs in Iraq came to light rather quickly as the war progressed. Too many people were involved in the search and everything was being spilled to news organizations. Hundreds of thousands would have had to have been in on a conspiracy to prevent the truth from eventually coming out.

Same with the moon landings.
Message: Posted by: EsnRedshirt (Jan 30, 2014 12:12PM)
[quote]
On 2014-01-29 07:44, Mehtas wrote:

[quote]

On 2014-01-28 18:16, george1953 wrote:

I was going to open a bar on the moon.... :)

[/quote]


With McDonalds and KFC already in the queue, you've got no chance.




[/quote]
On the other hand, you might want to open it on a space station. Think of all the new ways you could mix drinks in zero gravity. Layering shots would be a whole new art when you're not as concerned about density.
Message: Posted by: Magnus Eisengrim (Jan 30, 2014 12:29PM)
[quote]
On 2014-01-28 18:16, george1953 wrote:
I was going to open a bar on the moon, then I thought nah, no atmosphere :)
[/quote]

Nice. I'll be repeating that one.
Message: Posted by: Pakar Ilusi (Jan 30, 2014 04:27PM)
[quote]
On 2014-01-30 12:31, mastermindreader wrote:
No. Not in the same ballpark at all. (Although it did make for a nice sci-fi movie plot. But, then again, so did Day of the Triffids.)

But to follow your analogy to its logical conclusion. The fact that there were no WMDs in Iraq came to light rather quickly as the war progressed. Too many people were involved in the search and everything was being spilled to news organizations. Hundreds of thousands would have had to have been in on a conspiracy to prevent the truth from eventually coming out.

Same with the moon landings.
[/quote]

:ohyes:
Message: Posted by: rockwall (Jan 30, 2014 06:48PM)
NASA to make water on Moon and oxygen on Mars

http://www.ndtv.com/article/world/nasa-to-make-water-on-moon-and-oxygen-on-mars-477374
Message: Posted by: balducci (Feb 3, 2014 08:57PM)
US ready to return to moon

The moon is back in fashion triggering a new space race among countries keen to exploit its commercial opportunities

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/10614953/US-ready-to-return-to-moon.html