Can we return man to the Moon?

Who cares about returning to the moon? Not even space geeks.

Can we get man off the sidewalk and into a home? Can we get man a decent education? Can we get man to stop needless wars? Can we get man _____________?

I'm not so sure we were there the first time.

The only reason I can think of making a base on the moon is using it as a military base, and that has already been internationally prohibited.
Resources would be better spent on Mars.

We are planning to but to meet those goals we need to increase budget. That is highly unlikely do to lack of interest.

@Dmitri Well, I believe I've also seen some speculation that a base on the moon could be used as part of a Mars mission.

Also, going to the moon isn't as risky and far less expensive.

I know one man I'd like to send there.

That would be a complete waste of time and money. And anyway there is no good reason why we should even go.

Space will always be the future. The moon will be our first stop on the way to other places in the universe. C'mon man free your mind!

I would like to see a colony there in the future... I mean if global warming keeps heating things up we may need to relocate, why not start now?

um,. well. conditions aren't great on the moon for humans.

Well I do realize that we can't just pitch tents and hangout in sleeping bags, but in this day and age it shouldn't be too difficult to devise a system to accommodate human life on the moon.

i totally want to go back to the moon. we need to find ways to live on it. you never know what we can find on its surface.

If it were up to Senator Obama he would rather spend the money on education.

If we do not go back to the moon, it would be like Christopher Columbus only coming to the New World once and never coming back.

If we choose to not go back to the moon other nations will go there and they will reap the rewards from that project and we won't.

Now, does that sound hopeful to you? It doesn't to me!

With all the benefits that came from the research in going to the moon the 1st time, improved medical techniques and electronics to name a few.

It is very short shighted to say that the money would be spent on other things.

Even though the steps necessary to build a permanent base on the moon have been very slow in coming (4 decades to make less progess than 1 we did in 1 decade) they have been taken in getting a space station in orbit to transfer from the gravity well to the moon.

It would be a lot easier and less costly now to go to the moon than before. Skipping ahead to Mars is not as feabile or as beneficial as getting a permanent base on the moon since the resource of a lower gravity enviroment for improved medicines and the minerals avaible there are much valuable that would provide the necessary motivation.

PatrickEdwardMurray, how do propose our country funds this exploration? If we realized our debt in bills we could put on space suits and climb that mountain to the moon.

Furthermore, if other nations are blowing funds on space exploration at least they won't be buying our country. I am of the opinion that it's time to balance our checkbook and do a little housekeeping. We still haven't figured out how to create a symbiotic environment on our home planet and we're ready to pile on more debt to head off to a place that doesn't even have an atmosphere let alone food and water.

Don't get me wrong. I am all for discovery. Perhaps one day we'll even be able to colonize Mars. But let's finish the home repairs before we go trekking off in search of greener pastures.

You know what the REALLY funny thing is? That most of the defense contractors are also aerospace companies.

The thing is that it seems to be a lot more profit in making fighters than shuttles and tanks instead of domes. I guess because the markup is so much higher on defense contracts and the quality has to be so much tighter on aerospace contracts that it cost them more


Don't kid yourself the money is there, we just have to be certain we spend it for something better that we'll get a lot more return on our investment.

This just in...It seems that America is too preoccupied with the downfall of certain countries to focus on anything else. More details 24/7...

It'll be pointless. Did we achieve anything from it?

-don't we have a war going on?

send Bush

Which do you want? Cynicism and defeatism, or optimism and constructionism?

The debt might be worse but don't expect anything to be done about it since no one in the government has done anything about that in the 50 years. Every time they even try to balance the budget, someone else comes along and ruins it.

If you want to "Follow the money" then doing something constructive to create jobs and services will do a lot more for that debt than worrying about how families are going to pay for it without any jobs.

Doing something positive towards a goal is going to help a lot more than stewing in all the mistakes that have been made to waste the money.

food. cant get food on the moon. unless it comes from earth.

we simply must conserve the ecosystem that we seem so keen to destroy.

In the upcoming issue of the Atlantic, Gregg Easterbrook argues that Nasa's priorities would be better focused looking for ways to protect Earth from asteroids that could potentially devastate all life.

Argon18, never cynicism or defeatism. Realism (mixed with a nice, healthy dose of optimism).

We most certainly need to get back to producing in this country. But we also need to tighten up the coffers. We need to put a halt to the Federal Reserve's long tradition of robbing our country blind. We must have a sound currency and the ongoing trend of borrowing from future generations needs to cease immediately. How can we fund these adventures if we stop borrowing? More taxes I would assume. The average American already has to work 113 days to pay for state and federal taxes http://www.taxfoundation.org/taxfreedomday/ and the government's share of our economy is already an alarming 44%! Are we ready to tip that scale and tread further into the realm of socialism?

Should we allow the government to subsidize the aerospace/defense industry who already receive hefty sums of our tax money through no-bid contracts etc., bolstering the already mighty military industrial complex? Or should we funnel those dollars towards government programs like NASA that really know how to get the most out of a dime?

By focusing our efforts on a particular industry then we are always naturally taking away from another industry (or potential industry). Is it not true that we have pressing humanitarian issues here at home such as education, healthcare and poverty?

I agree that focusing on a goal is better than "stewing in all the mistakes." But what should that goal be? We must always remember the hardships and crises of earlier generations like the Roman empire during Dioclecian, 18th century France, Weimar Germany, post WWII Hungary and present day Zimbabwe who devalued their currencies. As George Santayana warned, "Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it."

WTF do we want to go to the moon for....to F*ck that up too!?!

"We still haven't figured out how to create a symbiotic environment on our home planet ............."

A "symbiotic" relationship is sometimes described as 'parasite/host' which seems to me is exactly the relationship that humans have with this planet.

The United States can choose to remain the leader in science, technology and exploration or we can sit back and watch as other nations take the lead.

Our interests are not well served by taking a back seat.

seeker561, if we don't address the troubles with our economy then we might not have a choice. Humans/Earth as parasite/host? I would definitely have to agree with you on that one.

it took almost an entire decade for us to finally do it, 40 years ago, our technology today is ridiculously better than what we had at our disposal last time. if humans can get to the moon once, there is no doubt in my mind it can be accomplished again.

There are far more important things to worry about than a trip back to the moon. Frankly, I believe that we are already investing too much money in a futile enterprise known as NASA.

The next person to visit the moon will not be from a government agency. Privatization of space is the new space race... there are many resources we can get from the moon most notably helium 3 the fuel of the future.

http://www.googlelunarxprize.org/
http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/helium3_000630.ht...

Sure we can. I think that Hollywood set is still open and ready for an elaborate space theme. Load the cameras up with film and BLAST off ..

Hey lets spend a shitload of money to go to the moon. And when we get there, lets pick up some rocks and send them back to earth.

oh, and maybe lets end world hunger.

Population growth anyone? Do you really think we will just keep breeding and not run out of space on this planet?! Imagine ourselves in say 300 years. Water and food and the environment are already a concern. The earth has limited resources. We need to stop being so shortsighted and at least entertain the idea that the earth won't be able to sustain our species forever.

I say we blast Bush off to the moon in a dress-up space suit on Inauguration Day, 2009. Now *that* would deserve a "Mission Accomplished" banner...

there is no gravity on the moon so i doubt it is possible to land there

menmykoko has a good point, since it's either reduce the population as it has always been done in the past, by catastophic means with a fairly large number of people dying of starvation and disease.

Isn't that what George Santayana warned? Are we going to let an epidemic like The Black Plague correct it? Are we going to let fight for power and resources do it like the Romans?

Or give futher evolution and growth one last chance before dwindling resources force us to lose the ability to expand and replenish them with new sources.

At the very least it would act as a filter like spreading across the continents did to improve the species. From the shortsighted views and distortions included in some of the responses here, it could certainly use it.

No one seems to be considering the most urgent and important point, "The Earth is too fragile a basket to keep all our eggs in" That has never been more true than in these times.

It's interesting how so many people equate space exploration with ignoring or not solving problems on Earth. The two don't have to be in opposition to each other.

A mission to return to the moon--a serious mission--would provide more benefits. During the first space race, scientific research yielded solutions to multiple problems, both connected to the space program and independent from it, and there's no reason to believe that a second moon mission wouldn't accomplish the same thing. It also pushed America, as a nation, to strive for something larger, helped promote education (particularly emphasizing math and science) and also created a collective goal, all things we could use right now.