Absolute truth exists about as much as a loyal partner does ... theories are being disproved on a regular basis with the advances in science as we are starting to become "to smart for our own good", and Einsteins theory will be rewritten soon as well.

Don't ever put anything past the fucking government that they don't tell anyone about. It's kind of hard to go snooping around the moon to expose what might really be on the dark side of the moon.

 

Newt was simply pandering to Florida voters...unsuccessfully as it turns out, because Floridians evidently aren't that stupid.

It is quite possible from a technical standpoint to establish a permanent base on the moon. The problem is that it is too expensive and has too high a cost-benefit ratio.

 

I think it's something that's been in the pipeline for a while now and Newt is just piggy backing on it while pandering for votes.

A moon base is the first step in mankind's journey to the far reaches of our solar system and one day beyond.

It's much more economical to launch a space craft from the moon that from earth. The moon has much less gravity so the amount of fuel needed to achieve escape velocity is significantly less.

 

Notice that he did not say anything about how to pay for it. Republicans like to pretend that the programs they want to spend money on somehow do not cost tax money.

 

But it's takes even less to launch one from a space station.

 

In all (somewhat) seriousness, if Humanity plans on surviving we're gonna have to leave this rock and move on to another one to exploit. We're like a virus on nature. A permanent large scale space station with an adequate shuttle system would be a good start. From there we could branch out to the moon and beyond. Just hope an alien civilization doesn't have an inoculation for us!

 

But how would you get the ship there in the first place? The moon has space and a solid surface. It's possible to build the ship on the moon base with the components coming in from earth and launch the ship from the moon itself. The provisional material we'd need like water, can be sourced and process from the moon rather than shipping it in from earth.

All these things would be much too complicated to arrange on an orbiting laboratory like the IST.

 

How can you be sure there is a moonbase ?

 

I don't think that's true. It's easier to get all those components up to an orbiting station and to assemble them there than it would be to get them all to the moon and assemble them there. Gravity is not an advantage in manufacturing. In fact, quite the opposite. And who says consumables like water and oxygen exist on the moon in the quantities needed?

 

I think gravity helps when you are manufacturing an orgasm. Imagine having to work your down it as well as up it.

Sorry lowered the tone a bit.

thinskin

 

Sorry, but that should not be allowed, it is not a word, what you were looking for was ridiculed.

As for you question, it all comes down to how cost effective it will be, the Kennedy inspired race for the moon was just that, a race with the Russians. There was no reason for going there other than US jingoism after Sputnik and Gagarin.

Leave the moon alone until they can discover/invent a propulsion system that is viable, and space craft that can take of and land under their own power and not rely on gravity to return them, because until they can do that then anything they move up there is going to be in piecemeal and will take years to achieve a base to support around a dozen people, who will spend more time servicing said base instead of expanding and experimenting. In short we just haven't the technology yet.

If we are as you say a virus then this will just spread the sickness elsewhere, do they deserve us arriving?

 

reading this should help explain:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colonization_of_the_Moon#Advantages_and_disadvantages

 

They can't build a Moon Base yet. There's no Wal*Mart or McDonald's there.

 

problems:
in your plan, you have to pay to launch the components to the Moon, plus whatever rocket stage you'll need to land them on the surface. that adds to your total costs.
most rockets do NOT like dirt, yet lunar regolith is one of THE most easily-spread materials anyone has ever encountered(the Apollo astronauts could NOT keep it out of the lunar modules, no matter how hard they tried). does this sound like a recipe for disaster?
worst problem of all: you have to sink ALL the costs of the lunar base, AND the launch facilities, BEFORE you can even begin to assemble the first booster. a huge investment, and all the while some nitwit somewhere is going to be b*tching loud-and-long about "wasteful gubbermint spending" while they try to kill the whole program.
sorry, I would love to see a lunar base happen, I just do not see it happening anytime soon.

 

We need a bit more research on the carbon nanotubes yet. Then the whole discussion will become moot.

 

But we could kill all the other country's military satellite's from there..
High ground.

 

Is this sarcasm or stupidity? It's hard to tell with no smilies.

 

ha ha ha puled that thought right out of my brain stem! move senate, congress, and the White House to the moon-they might make better decisions with nothing to do every day but survive after we cut the supply ships bringing escorts, coke, caviar, viagra, heart medicine, Dom, and money to them!