Nasa returning to the moon

[requiem]

They want to go and retrieve the tape recorder left behind by John Chrichton.

That is the only reason to return to the moon.

 

[carstensdj]

They want to go and retrieve the tape recorder left behind by John Chrichton.

That is the only reason to return to the moon.

Whats happened to the whole study they were doing about there possibly being water on the moon?

 

[Rkootknir]

Whats happened to the whole study they were doing about there possibly being water on the moon?

Ongoing. LCROSS found the spectral signature of hydroxyl (-HO) when it observed the ejecta from an impact in one of the Moon's craters. The impact was from the booster of the LCROSS launch vehicle.

Finding hydroxyl means that there's probably water or hydrates (salts, with chemically bound water). If it's water it would be very useful for human habitation, if it's hydrates, not so much.

 

[Devill]

Why send people when machines will do? Machines make less mistakes and can operate the same equipment humans would've, continuously, 24/7, for three months, without the need for food or water, not to even mention exercise requirements to cope with the effects of dealing with lack of gravity for such a long time, which you most certainly can't manage as cheaply with humans.
If you think humans are superior to machines with basic data gathering like this, you're sorely mistaken.

Because of this
http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/mars-rover-spirit-stuck-final-resting-place-nasa/story?id=9666907
/Joking


I believe it might be a tad easier to design and build the "rocket" if you do not need to take into account oxygen supplies, food, water, safety features for squishy internal things in humans like hearts and livers etc etc.

Also when things are simpler to design they usually cost less

 

[Kosmik]

I'll just re-quote myself here, no other reason is as paramount as this.

It is the ideal launch location for inner and outer solar system exploration.

 

[Jab]

Although still severe, the conditions on the moon are FAR LESS severe than on Mars, hence there is more chance of having equipment and suits that humans can use and operate in that environment as opposed to what they will experience on Mars...

My original point was that they HAVENT sent humans to the moon and that it was all staged as it's something that has NEVER happened since it allegedly did in the 60's... How did it happen ONCE and never again?

:erm: "Severe" like Mars having some atmosphere as to opposed to the Moons vacuum?
Severe like Mars's temperature range of −17.2 °C to −107 °C as oposed to the Moon's -173°C to 117°C?
This kind of severe?

 

[porn$tar]

:erm: "Severe" like Mars having some atmosphere as to opposed to the Moons vacuum?
Severe like Mars's temperature range of −17.2 °C to −107 °C as oposed to the Moon's -173°C to 117°C?
This kind of severe?

Welcome to the mind of a conspiracy theorist...

 

[unskinnybob]

I used to believe there was a moon. Then I watched the Trueman show.

 

[porn$tar]

Yea ofcourse machines can gather data, but can they be as descriptive in their findings?

Last time I checked, NASA were sending astronauts into space, not poets.

 

[porchrat]

Wow. I can't believe it. We actually have a moon landing conspiracy theorist here. Best of all he thinks human beings need to be up there for some reason and sending robots is somehow bad. Ironically it doesn't surprise me that he thinks the robots aren't better suited to this sort of thing than humans are. I mean... he thinks we can't send humans to the moon today and uses this as reasoning for why we didn't go there back in the day so he is clearly not all there. It isn't a big leap from that to believing humans are better off being up there than robots I suppose.

I take it you'd prefer it if computers didn't handle your bank calculations either carstensdj? You'd rather we went back to the days where humans did it? After all they're better at everything right?

What a muppet. Robots are better than humans at pretty much everything but creative thinking. A mission to the moon to collect data does not require creativity. It requires a monotonous recording of observations in terribly inhospitable conditions. Something robots are ideal for. Give the robot some sensors and send it up there. It will outperform the human every fscking time.

 

[h0ll0w]

Wow. I can't believe it. We actually have a moon landing conspiracy theorist here. Best of all he thinks human beings need to be up there for some reason and sending robots is somehow bad. Ironically it doesn't surprise me that he thinks the robots aren't better suited to this sort of thing than humans are. I mean... he thinks we can't send humans to the moon today and uses this as reasoning for why we didn't go there back in the day so he is clearly not all there. It isn't a big leap from that to believing humans are better off being up there than robots I suppose.

I take it you'd prefer it if computers didn't handle your bank calculations either carstensdj? You'd rather we went back to the days where humans did it? After all they're better at everything right?

What a muppet. Robots are better than humans at pretty much everything but creative thinking. A mission to the moon to collect data does not require creativity. It requires a monotonous recording of observations in terribly inhospitable conditions. Something robots are ideal for. Give the robot some sensors and send it up there. It will outperform the human every fscking time.

Wow. I can't believe it. We actually have someone here who, in this day & age, is still flabbergasted when he reads a post by a conspiracy theorist on a forum on the interwebs.

 

[porchrat]

Wow. I can't believe it. We actually have someone here who, in this day & age, is still flabbergasted when he reads a post by a conspiracy theorist on a forum on the interwebs.

The stupidity of people never ceases to amaze me. I think it is because I like to live thinking that most human beings are rational. I don't like thinking of the armies of idiots out there that don't vaccinate their children because they don't want them becoming autistic.

I have actually never met a moon landing conspiracy theorist before and I don't scour the Internet looking for their ramblings. So yea considering this is the first time I've seen one in action I'm pretty flabbergasted.

Heck before coming to this forum I didn't realise there were idiots out there that believed in a literal 6 day biblical creation either. I'm saddened every time I encounter people believing in stupid schit.

 

[porn$tar]

Wow. I can't believe that there are people here who actually believe that they know more about what the scientists and engineers do, than the scientists and engineers who devoted their entire lives to knowing what they know.

 

[biometrics]

... and 12 men have walked its surface during six landings.

Allegedly

/runs

 

[waynegohl]

have you guys seen Apollo 18, it's a freak out and I'm only halfway.

 

[Geriatrix]

Photo of Apollo 12 moon landing site for all you deniers

http://i.imgur.com/xXMoM.jpg

 

[porn$tar]

Photo of Apollo 12 moon landing site for all you deniers

http://i.imgur.com/xXMoM.jpg

That's not the Moon, it's the Mojave desert...

 

[Nick333]

We're in the Technology era now, and with so much being done at the moment about finding out whats actually happening out there, i can think of PLENTY of reasons why they would have sent people to the moon... My other argument is that we know NOTHING about the moon, so if we can "send man to the moon", why the hell are they sending robots??? To truly gauge whats happening, we need to send PEOPLE there, but they're sending robots because we CANT actually send man there. There is no logical explanation as to why it could be done in the 60's, when home PC's were not even around, but now with all that we have, we cant do it?!?!?! Agree, disagree?

Of course we can do it but why would we want to? The very fact that it is the technological age is why we send robots instead. They're more efficient and don't require life support. And really when your mission is to measure gravity effects, why on earth would you need a human? To read dials?

 

[boramk]

My question is, if we could land men on the moon in the 60's, why the hell has it taken 40years to go back??? Not sure if i believe the whole first moon landing story :erm:

You've learned of the Soviet Union and the Space Race in high school right?

Don't ask redundant questions.

 

[KleinBoontjie]

The robots will be circling the moon for 3 month's +. Good luck to get a human to do that with no food.
As for why wait 40 years: The moon is kind of a dead rock. So sending people back just for the sake of it is a real waste of money.

I know it was speculated that the Apollo 11 was fake but very few people argue the same about the other 5 that followed. And if you really want to test the theory build a laser and bounce it off the reflectors they left on the last 3 landings.



Try 6 times, with 12 unique individuals.

So the reflectors could only have been left by humans? If it were me, trying to hide something, I would've send reflectors over with rockets and robots and plant it there. Much easier.