Moon Base

[Gamble]

At first when i saw the space shuttles were being retired i felt very sad and disapointed. But retiring the shuttles frees up cash to spend on alternative spacecraft that are capable of getting to the moon. Surely having a base/colony on the moon is a logical step forward on the road to getting to Mars and beyond? America put men on the moon years ago, i think its about time humanity get thier back sides back to the moon and start pushing the boundries of human space exploration which i think is probably one of the single most important advances humanity can make.

[Gnerphk]

I agree with your sentiment, but... no. NASA's budget has been diverted to keep the rest of NOAA (the umbrella group, which also does weather and fisheries) functioning in the budget crunch; coincidentally, this is the first time in history that the director of NOAA, appointed just after the previous administration left office, is not a former NASA chief.

--- NOTE: The political portion of this post has been intentionally left blank. ---

...and that's why I voted the way I did. But back onto more forum-appropriate topics...

Yes, we ought to have an orbital or lunar base. Earth is a closed system and is therefore logically doomed; for humanity to survive, we must escape. The accepted steps to this are as follows:
- regular and reliable service to a high-orbit base
- off-world resource mining and power supplies
- off-world food supplies
- other-world bases and possible colonization
- exploration outside the Solar System for other resource generation and colony sites
- colonize

"Downbelow Station" (Cherryh) and "The Man Who Sold The Moon" (Heinlein) are excellent fictionalizations of this theory put into practice; both show the governments as ineffective and private and public enterprise as the only way to make it happen. Of course, while brilliant works by brilliant people, neither is factual.

---
Edit: This has been my 666th post.

[Rota]

I'm sick of NASA wussyfooting around. They spend millions trying to figure out what materials would be "just enough" to do the job. What's wrong with overkill? The fact that the lunar module had portions of its skin as thin as a few layers of foil is a total joke. Stop treating space travel like delicate clockworks. Let's bring on the days of monster truck space travel. Stop researching the intricate balance of how to just barely do something... and DO something. Just get it done.

[Gnerphk]

With their current budget, a trip to the moon is really out of the question. Even using foil.

[Wildor]

Okay guys...

As a child of the sixties who was very much alive and aware when the Apollo landings took place, I am all for the sentiment expressed in this thread! I must point out that NASA, and the american people, shouldn't have to bear the cost on their own. An international effort would be best. Many countries have developed space capabilities and even specialties in research and applications (Canadarm comes to mind). Let this be truly an endeavour of all humankind, for all humankind.

[Nesterus]

there is no reason to go to the moon when solving the problems here on Earth far far outweigh the benefits of going to the moon

[Wildor]

there is no reason to go to the moon when solving the problems here on Earth far far outweigh the benefits of going to the moon

Yes, that is a point often made. And a valid one at that.

But problems will always remain on Earth, no matter if we go on exploring and possibly colonizing the solar system. Indeed, if humankind would set as a goal an ideal world to live in before trying to go anywhere else, then we'll be stuck on this planet forever...

Such is not human nature, nor should it be.

[Lucas101]

Maybe using a moon colony as a present day Australia (sp?) in terms of using convicts to colonize it would solve some of the problems on earth?

[Rodri]

The Earth sits at a fortunate (for us) distance from a fairly stable star that provides the warmth, light and energy to power organic systems that we know as life, which are also reliant upon the presence of water, an atmosphere and a greenhouse gas layer (that keeps us all from freezing at night). The Earth is also fortunate to have enough mass (gravity) to keep those vital requirements for life (as we know it) in place and not out-gassing into the void.

The Earth is not really a closed system. We recieve solar radiation every day, along with bits of rock occasionally in the form of meteorites, but it is the solar radiation that drives our systems of life and may even be responsible for the great genetic diversity that is present in life on Earth. We evolved here. We rely on the things that nature can provide for our survival. We evolved alongside the plants and animals that we eat. We are as reliant upon this planet for our future survival as we were when we first learned to walk upright.

Moonbases cannot be self-reliant. The Moon can never be terra-formed. Neither can Mars, if one is realistic and neither can any of the other planets in this Solar System. If they could sustain life, there is a good chance that there would be life there already but there's not. That isn't to say that we should give up on space travel but we cannot write off the Earth as doomed, just because we are rapacious little raptors who would consume every resource and destroy every ecosystem in our feeding frenzy.

I would suggest that until we learn how to live on this planet, we should be banned from going to any others, just to save them the grief of us.

[Bree Fletcher]

I think that the moonbase is something that definitely needs to happen. Maybe not immediately, if it would be too much of a burden on ourselves currently, but sometime soon.

If I could take a somewhat pragmatic approach to this, figure this:

In classical evolutionary theory, biological diversity tends to create a high chance for life-both in terms of a particular species, as well as life in general-to survive. The only reason behind this is pure probability. Maybe something could randomly wipe out one secies, or subgroup, but the odds are low it could get all of them. In the same way, spreading a species out over a large geographical area accomplishes much the same thing. A catastrophe could happen somewhere, but probably not everywhere.

Likewise, once we manage to safely spread our own species out over a larger space, the odds of the species surviving will go up by that much. Maybe it sounds paranoid, but that just means we shouldn't pursue this goal at all costs. Once we have some spare time and resources to divert, they should definitely start going there.