Was the Apollo program a waste of money?

[Phil]

The Apollo program cost around 25 billion dollars (not adjusted for inflation) in 1969.

Was it all a waste? The Apollo program has inspired many famous astronauts, astronomers, and other scientists.

What about other programs funded by NASA or the government such as the Mars Rover project or the many telescopes such as the Hubble or James Webb space telescopes? How about the Voyager projects?

What are your opinions?

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/71/PaleBlueDot.jpg/300px-PaleBlueDot.jpg

[TheTexan]

I am fully confident it could have been funded by donations if we weren't indoctrinated to believe that these things require taxes.

[eduardo89]

waste of taxpayer funds.

[carclinic]

I think they should make a pyramid that is, like, 3 times the size of the pyramids in Giza and we should perform human sacrifices of "terrorists" and throw their heads down the side...ooops, I watched apocalypto on Sunday.

[jdmyprez_deo_vindice]

Total waste of money..

[NoOneButPaul]

Not a waste of money at all... everyone around here is always talking about how screwed the world is... why not put forth the resources to actually terraform planets or find a way to exist somewhere else in the solar system?

It's absolutely not a waste of money and contrary to popular belief here finding another planet to live on is not something that can be achieved through donations or incentives. Space projects are way too much money.

It's estimated that a Mars mission could cost half a trillion, no amount of donations or entrepreneurial spirit is going to find that kind of money to burn.

Space exploration is perhaps the only place where I'd like to see government money. If it's all funny money and we're going to destroy the dollar anyway I'd rather destroy it on exploring space.

Who knows what's out there...

[jdmyprez_deo_vindice]

Not a waste of money at all... everyone around here is always talking about how screwed the world is... why not put forth the resources to actually terraform planets or find a way to exist somewhere else in the solar system?

It's absolutely not a waste of money and contrary to popular belief here finding another planet to live on is not something that can be achieved through donations or incentives. Space projects are way too much money.

It's estimated that a Mars mission could cost half a trillion, no amount of donations or entrepreneurial spirit is going to find that kind of money to burn.

Space exploration is perhaps the only place where I'd like to see government money. If it's all funny money and we're going to destroy the dollar anyway I'd rather destroy it on exploring space.

Who knows what's out there...

So if a private entity cannot accomplish something either through lack of resources or apathy, it is ok to steal from me under threat of violence to pay for something that I really don't care about?

[WilliamC]

The Apollo Program was but a small example of what we could have accomplished (we being as a species, not just a nation) had not the vast majority of the worlds wealth been co-opted into funding useless wars and weapons systems by a small minority of religious apocalyptic parasites who truly believe themselves to be godlike compared to the rest of us .

No it was not wasted, but neither was it done with the intention to further the long term survival of human kind.

Believe it or not, there are actually religious wackos out there who don't want for mankind to survive and think that their god is going to come to Earth and punish us because we are all bad.

And some of them have taken upon themselves to hurry this along via nuclear war.

Fortunately this latter group really is a small minority, even most power-hungry people aren't actually evil so much as ruthless, and the vast majority of religious folks who believe in armageddon have no interest in causing it by their own actions.

It only takes a few evil people to pollute the goodness of millions since destruction is always so much easier than creation so that's why all of human history since the rise of civilization over 8,000 years ago has been about wars.

But now we have the internet and more of us right-thinking folks are waking up to this all the time, and we outnumber the parasites about 10,000 to one at least,.

Critical mass is fast approaching...

[TheTexan]

It's absolutely not a waste of money and contrary to popular belief here finding another planet to live on is not something that can be achieved through donations or incentives. Space projects are way too much money.

If it can't be funded without theft, it's almost by definition a waste of money

[sratiug]

The Saturn 5 rocket that sent Appollo to the moon was subcontracted and the plans lost after the contract expired. We can't build one now, so that was a little wasteful.

[John F Kennedy III]

Colossal waste of money.

[AdelaideGUy]

Absolutely not

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Xtly-dpBeA

[azxd]

Sad that so many can call it a waste of money, yet are not being specific about why.

Also sad that so few seem to see any benefit from the effort ... But what do I know, I'm in the minority, and the opposition obviously knows better.

[idiom]

Not a waste of money at all... everyone around here is always talking about how screwed the world is... why not put forth the resources to actually terraform planets or find a way to exist somewhere else in the solar system?

It's absolutely not a waste of money and contrary to popular belief here finding another planet to live on is not something that can be achieved through donations or incentives. Space projects are way too much money.

It's estimated that a Mars mission could cost half a trillion, no amount of donations or entrepreneurial spirit is going to find that kind of money to burn.

Space exploration is perhaps the only place where I'd like to see government money. If it's all funny money and we're going to destroy the dollar anyway I'd rather destroy it on exploring space.

Who knows what's out there...

A Private mission will cost $5-10 Billion. It is already under development. Two entire generations of rockets and capsules have been developed and launched for less than the cost of a single shuttle flight. No serious technology would be developed for a Mars mission, unlike the Apollo missions that required incredible advances in technology and brought us such things as relational databases and pre-emptive multi-tasking.

The Apollo mission got a huge amount of technology developed that may not have been attempted by the private sector for a very long time. In fact until now. So while in itself it was highly inefficient it spun out a huge amount of technology. Space technology has no reached the point where it is better off as a recipient of other industries advances.

[idiom]

Program Directive: Waste anything but time.
Program result: Money wasted.

Was all the money wasted? Probably not. The 60's were a really dark period for the world. Apollo 8 really was a momentus morale boost for humanity.

Is stealing from you worth it to save your sorry butt from nuclear destruction if it save mine too? Dunno. Its in self defence. The NAP is really great when it comes to involving third parties in self defence.

[Phil]

A Private mission will cost $5-10 Billion. It is already under development. Two entire generations of rockets and capsules have been developed and launched for less than the cost of a single shuttle flight. No serious technology would be developed for a Mars mission, unlike the Apollo missions that required incredible advances in technology and brought us such things as relational databases and pre-emptive multi-tasking.

The Apollo mission got a huge amount of technology developed that may not have been attempted by the private sector for a very long time. In fact until now. So while in itself it was highly inefficient it spun out a huge amount of technology. Space technology has no reached the point where it is better off as a recipient of other industries advances.
SpaceX will only be making a profit because of a multi-billion dollar contract with NASA.

[awake]

The Apollo program cost around 25 billion dollars (not adjusted for inflation) in 1969.

Was it all a waste? The Apollo program has inspired many famous astronauts, astronomers, and other scientists.

What about other programs funded by NASA or the government such as the Mars Rover project or the many telescopes such as the Hubble or James Webb space telescopes? How about the Voyager projects?

What are your opinions?

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/71/PaleBlueDot.jpg/300px-PaleBlueDot.jpg

What did this en-devour produce for the masses? Do you have a rover of your own, or space trip to speak of? These were "New Deal" like grand schemes to distract and spend all of us into what we are living through today.

No one can buy the products or services of NASA. NASA ensured that the real private space industry could never be realized.

[Voluntarist]

xxxxx

[whippoorwill]

I've had a Telescope sence I was 9 years old and 25 years later the Night sky still calls to me. Being a part of or working with NASA had been my dream. Now that I've learned taxation is theft my veiws have changed some what. I see government as a large criminal gang with flags and music. No matter what program they may run that might pull on my heart strings it is still paid for with violence and theft. "Was the Apollo program a waste of money?" Yes,..more over it was a waste of Liberty. The Human race can do more in Liberty than it ever could in violence.

[Pericles]

What did this en-devour produce for the masses? Do you have a rover of your own, or space trip to speak of? These were "New Deal" like grand schemes to distract and spend all of us into what we are living through today.

No one can buy the products or services of NASA. NASA ensured that the real private space industry could never be realized.

A couple of examples:

(A) a fabric was needed for spacesuits that was flexible, yet could be made selectively impermiable for various gasses and liquids. Today, this fabric is known as Gore-Tex.

(B) on board nagigation calculations needed to be made rapidly, and not subject to human error. A computer was needed small and light weight enough to fit in the capsule, be programable without punch cards or 9 track tape. And that computer was a trend setter at 8K of RAM, and transistor operated ....

Unconstitutional - yes / Waste of money - no

[whippoorwill]

A couple of examples:

(A) a fabric was needed for spacesuits that was flexible, yet could be made selectively impermiable for various gasses and liquids. Today, this fabric is known as Gore-Tex.

(B) on board nagigation calculations needed to be made rapidly, and not subject to human error. A computer was needed small and light weight enough to fit in the capsule, be programable without punch cards or 9 track tape. And that computer was a trend setter at 8K of RAM, and transistor operated ....

Unconstitutional - yes / Waste of money - no

Dose this justify slavery and theft?

[Harald]

Broken Window falacy.

Those were resource taken from private market and spent at government directions. We don't know what were alternative uses for that money if not expropriated and spent by the government. Life saving drugs? Something else?

Visible part. Government takes money and builds X. X wasn't there before. X now exists, hence the money is not wasted
Unvisible part. What were people planning to use that money for. What hasn't happened because the money were taken from them.

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

[Phil]

Dose this justify slavery and theft?
The income tax is not the only way the government can get money to fund NASA.

[Pericles]

Broken Window falacy.

Those were resource taken from private market and spent at government directions. We don't know what were alternative uses for that money if not expropriated and spent by the government. Life saving drugs? Something else?

Visible part. Government takes money and builds X. X wasn't there before. X now exists, hence the money is not wasted
Unvisible part. What were people planning to use that money for. What hasn't happened because the money were taken from them.

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


Red Herring fallacy

You ever try to get a proposal past a bunch of risk averse (as if there is any other kind) MBAs? The business plan for FEDEX got a C in MBA school, where B- is the lowest passing grade.

Not every investment decision is the correct one, unless there are people who do not make errors.

[NoOneButPaul]

For how much pessimism pervades this forum I simply cannot believe that support for space exploration is not unanimous.

It is the one place where I wouldn't care how much the government spent. It's not just about exploration or discovery to the truth of our existence, it's about finding a way to get the hell off this rock before the tyrants devour it.

Much in the same way Europeans fled to America, we need to find a new place to migrate to, and the fact is this planet's shelf life is limited.

I look at funding for this as a survival mechanism not just for America but for the entire human race. Private donations and entrepreneurs can help build it up but it's impossible for them to carry the load completely, space travel is just too expensive.

Not to mention that all of this could end up paying for itself if we discovered ways to capture resources throughout the solar system and get them back to earth.

The possibilities with space exploration are limitless... we need to do everything we can to make sure it's funded to the fullest extent.

[bluesc]

No, it wasn't.

For those of you who are the "Yes, I agree with military spending!" (Like Ron Paul), the whole space program was essentially a military mission driven by the Cold War.

NASA spinoffs are interesting as well. Here are a few: http://pilotportalusa.atspace.com/top_ten_nasa_spin_offs.html

That said, I am in favor of SpaceX taking the lead now. The missions to the moon successfully inspired people and a billionaire decided to create a company to make private space flight a reality. The costs for them are much lower than they were for NASA directly. Read: http://www.spacex.com/usa.php

The founder of SpaceX cried when the original NASA astronauts disapproved of his company. His company wouldn't exist if it weren't for them, and they would be anonymous people if it weren't for NASA.

I guess I just lost my libertarian purity.

[The Free Hornet]

For how much pessimism pervades this forum I simply cannot believe that support for space exploration is not unanimous.

Seriously? The government was running into the hands of fiat money and all we have to show for it are some rocks many of which have been lost or "misplaced". Do you think some would prefer a more defense-oriented program with a stronger basis in the constition and less redundancy (Air Force + NASA)? Uananimity is not only rare, I would argue it is stupid and shows a lack of diverse thought.


It is the one place where I wouldn't care how much the government spent. It's not just about exploration or discovery to the truth of our existence, it's about finding a way to get the hell off this rock before the tyrants devour it.

The tyrants will have space carved up long before any of our asses goes up there. Flee or fight will be the only choices in space.


Much in the same way Europeans fled to America, we need to find a new place to migrate to, and the fact is this planet's shelf life is limited.

I don't expect Uncle Sam to fund a plan that ends their sovereignty and begins mine somewhere near the Oort cloud and a trillion Earth-smacking asteroids. Maybe we can "fool" them.


I look at funding for this as a survival mechanism not just for America but for the entire human race. Private donations and entrepreneurs can help build it up but it's impossible for them to carry the load completely, space travel is just too expensive.

Space is still too expensive to be a survival mechanism. Caves would be orders of magnitude safer, cheaper, would hold more people, and could likely survive any known cataclysm. Maybe not zombie apocalypse but I doubt an independent space civililation is technically feasible yet. I would sooner have a full-time colony of breeding humans on antartica.


Not to mention that all of this could end up paying for itself if we discovered ways to capture resources throughout the solar system and get them back to earth.

I suspect that the resources found in space, will be best utilized in space. In other words, it would be cheaper to get minerals from space mining that rocket launching from Earth. Likewise, mining or buying somebody else's minerals on Earth may be cheaper. If it is the case that I am wrong and this is a feasible business plan, I don't think government should need to finance.


The possibilities with space exploration are limitless... we need to do everything we can to make sure it's funded to the fullest extent.

Everybody thinks their pet portion of the budget is most important and now we have a huge deficit because grownups act like children. I don't see how any Ron Paul supporter can have a budget-be-damned additude regarding anything.

[SpicyTurkey]

When people on this board consider it a waste of money, they mean that it could have been done in a much more efficient way. Just imagine if the government was not involved. In my opinion space exploration would enter its golden age if only the government would move out of the way, because the people would be much more heavily and personally involved.

[XNavyNuke]

No, it was defense spending. One of the few times DOD has managed to pull something off without leaving behind a trail of bloody non-caucasian bodies. The entire initiation of the various world space program was military driven. ARPANet started off in an organization dedicated to the development of space technology for defense purpose. Isn't in wonderful to use the internet to grumble about historical events that helped drive it?

Is private space the way to move forward? Absolutely.

XNN

[libertyjam]

No, it was defense spending. One of the few times DOD has managed to pull something off without leaving behind a trail of bloody non-caucasian bodies. The entire initiation of the various world space program was military driven. ARPANet started off in an organization dedicated to the development of space technology for defense purpose. Isn't in wonderful to use the internet to grumble about historical events that helped drive it?

Is private space the way to move forward? Absolutely.



There was a little venture down here called Beal Aerospace. I had friends that worked there. Read the comments of the founder as to the demise of the company:

"Unfortunately, development of a reliable low cost system is simply not enough to insure commercial viability. Several uncertainties remain that are totally beyond our control and put our entire business at risk. The most insurmountable risk is the desire of the U.S. government and NASA to subsidize competing launch systems. NASA has embarked on a plan to develop a “second generation” launch system that will be subsidized by U.S. taxpayers and that will compete directly with the private sector. In my capacity as founder and chairman of Beal Aerospace, I previously testified to a congressional subcommittee that government subsidies to competing launch providers constituted the private sectors biggest business risk. Nonetheless, NASA remains committed to such an effort, and congress last week approved an initial $290 million to begin an effort that NASA declares will result in the government funding of one or two human rated subsidized launch systems within 5 years. While Beal Aerospace recognizes the need for NASA to develop a human rated launch capability for space station and other human missions, we find it inexcusable and intolerable that NASA intends for these subsidized systems to additionally compete for non-human rated missions including cargo for the space station and commercial satellite missions.



We wonder where the computer industry would be today if the U.S. government had selected and subsidized one or two personal computer systems when Microsoft, Inc. or Compaq, Inc. were in their infancy.



Other significant and uncontrollable risks we face include (1) federal laws mandating our potential liability for pre-existing environmental contamination at the only available cape canaveral launch pads, and (2) uncertainty over U.S. government state department approval to launch from our own launch facilities in the foreign country of Guyana. In spite of these additional risks which we have faced for some time, we would have remained in business if the government would have simply guaranteed that NASA’s subsidized launch systems would never be allowed to compete with the private sector.



There will never be a private launch industry as long as NASA and the U.S. government choose and subsidize launch systems. While Boeing and Lockheed are private entities, their launch systems and components are derivatives of various military initiatives. Very little new effort takes place without significant government subsidy, control, and involvement. While we believed we could compete successfully against the government subsidized EELV launch vehicles, the characteristics and depth of subsidy for NASA’s new initiative as well as its ultimate performance are impossible to determine or evaluate.



Once it became clear that NASA and Congress intended to proceed with their new competing launch systems, our only remaining choice was whether to cease operations entirely, or to evolve into a government contractor role like Boeing and Lockheed and seek government contracts to assist the development of the NASA system. We have elected to cease operations.



Sincerely,



Andrew Beal"

"It is unfortunate that I continue to read ill-informed comments about the reasons for our demise (Space News 11-12-2001, page 24). The real damage from these commentaries is that they mask the real issues and instill a sense that only NASA and DOD funded efforts can succeed. Our program would have resulted in a well-conceived, technically absolutely achievable, large lower cost launch vehicle. Our plan always included an ultimate evolution to re-usable first and second stages. We correctly targeted the alive and well geo-stationary market and additionally hoped for some space station resupply missions. We were naively lured into business by NASA’s constant remarks about wanting to encourage privatization and new launch service providers.

When Congress and NASA targeted $10 billion to fund competing launch systems, we threw in the towel. We simply could not compete with such government funded boondoggles.

NASA has apparently fooled Congress into thinking that significant new technology must be developed by the government funded aerospace community to achieve reliable low cost access to space.

...

Asking NASA to develop low cost space access is analogous to asking Amtrak to develop new low cost locomotives or the US Postal Service to develop new low cost electronic mail systems. Let’s all be thankful that Congress didn’t fund NASA to develop low cost personal computers to compete with Dell and Compaq and new low cost operating software to compete with Microsoft. With enough money, NASA will always succeed. The consequence of NASA’s success would be that Microsoft and “Windows” would not exist and some clunky NASA software package written by IBM would be the industry standard.

Incidentally, I was appalled that former NASA engineer Dennis Tito had to pay a foreign country to access the ISS. Let’s all be thankful that Congress never funded NASA to develop the automobile. If it had, I suspect that the use of these dangerous vehicles would be restricted to “autonauts” and we common citizens would revel that highly trained “autonauts” could operate these incredible high performance automobile machines.

I am sure that many will be offended by this letter. I expect an onslaught of opinions about how we could not possibly have succeeded and how only NASA and its contractors can build good rockets. Assertions that we closed our doors because of technical challenges or diminished demand are absurd. The fact is, there is plenty of business for a reliable low cost system. Low efficiency (but low cost) rockets are relatively easy to build and we would have demonstrated that.

NASA has changed the evolutionary process for new companies and tilted the playing field against private efforts. As a result there is no role for new launch service companies except as commodity subcontractors to NASA and its primes.


Andrew Beal "

http://www.bealaerospace.com/



XNN

http://www.bealaerospace.com/press.htm

"hese days, the front door of Beal Aerospace is locked, and knocks go unanswered. Three vehicles dot the otherwise empty parking lot, testifying that there is still life at the headquarters of the defunct satellite launch company. All but a handful of the 200-plus engineers, rocket scientists, and assorted staff have been laid off, and the vacant rows of their parking spaces seem like unmarked graves.

One of the vehicles belongs to a woman who finally comes through the lobby to unlock the front door. She leads you into a bright room dominated by a 20-foot-tall model rocket. Photos line the lobby, shots of a dogleg in a jungle river, a spectacled scientist peering at a machine part, and an aerial photo of Sombrero Island, bare rock surrounded by blue water. All bear the same gruff remark in the corner: "Details of the operations and items shown in this photo are proprietary and confidential and cannot be discussed."

The woman signs you in on a clipboard. The list of visitors is short. "It's so rare anyone comes out here," says the woman, one of the few people still employed at Beal Aerospace.

One of the other surviving employees at the empty facility is corporate counsel David Spoede, who moved his office from the executive upper floors to ground level. What was once his office now houses only file cabinets and loops of wiring unspooling from the ceiling like intestines. Framed maps of South American islands sit against cardboard boxes stuffed with a mix of legal documents and mementos. "

http://www.bealaerospace.com/articles/DallasObserver/index.htm

[heavenlyboy34]

No, it was defense spending. One of the few times DOD has managed to pull something off without leaving behind a trail of bloody non-caucasian bodies. The entire initiation of the various world space program was military driven. ARPANet started off in an organization dedicated to the development of space technology for defense purpose. Isn't in wonderful to use the internet to grumble about historical events that helped drive it?

Is private space the way to move forward? Absolutely.

XNN
ARPA was not a precursor to the internet. A lot of people like to make that claim, though.
http://www.nethistory.info/History%20of%20the%20Internet/beginnings.html
Many people have heard that the Internet began with some military computers in the Pentagon called Arpanet in 1969. The theory goes on to suggest that the network was designed to survive a nuclear attack. However, whichever definition of what the Internet is we use, neither the Pentagon nor 1969 hold up as the time and place the Internet was invented. A project which began in the Pentagon that year, called Arpanet, gave birth to the Internet protocols sometime later (during the 1970's), but 1969 was not the Internet's beginnings. Surviving a nuclear attack was not Arpanet's motivation, nor was building a global communications network.

Bob Taylor, the Pentagon official who was in charge of the Pentagon's Advanced Research Projects Agency Network (or Arpanet) program, insists that the purpose was not military, but scientific. The nuclear attack theory was never part of the design. Nor was an Internet in the sense we know it part of the Pentagon's 1969 thinking. Larry Roberts, who was employed by Bob Taylor to build the Arpanet network, states that Arpanet was never intended to link people or be a communications and information facility.

Arpanet was about time-sharing. Time sharing tried to make it possible for research institutions to use the processing power of other institutions computers when they had large calculations to do that required more power, or when someone else's facility might do the job better.

[WilliamC]

No, it was defense spending. One of the few times DOD has managed to pull something off without leaving behind a trail of bloody non-caucasian bodies. The entire initiation of the various world space program was military driven. ARPANet started off in an organization dedicated to the development of space technology for defense purpose. Isn't in wonderful to use the internet to grumble about historical events that helped drive it?

Is private space the way to move forward? Absolutely.

XNN

If Andy Griffith can do it anyone can.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-mR-gz9EFO8

[awake]

A couple of examples:

(A) a fabric was needed for spacesuits that was flexible, yet could be made selectively impermiable for various gasses and liquids. Today, this fabric is known as Gore-Tex.

(B) on board nagigation calculations needed to be made rapidly, and not subject to human error. A computer was needed small and light weight enough to fit in the capsule, be programable without punch cards or 9 track tape. And that computer was a trend setter at 8K of RAM, and transistor operated ....

Unconstitutional - yes / Waste of money - no

I guess you like the Hover Dam then?

The space race was initiated by the Soviet space program : its greatest successes—Sputnik. We were following in the footsteps of a monumental communist scheme to showcase socialism. 'Only socialism could achieve such great things'. We took the program of the greatest mass murder of recorded human history and gave him the distraction and credability he needed. While Stalin said 'lets go to space', he liquidated millions...In fact he "saved" the father of Sputnik from his meat grinder.

Yes useful things can come from epic government waste, but that is hardly justification for it. All the necessary discoveries that the wars of the 20th century realized prove the wars worth it?

I hear politicians and economists selling it that way under spurring innovation by government boondoggle.

[KingNothing]

Almost every other government expenditure has been worse than the Apollo Program.

That said, stealing from one group to finance the interests of another is not just. That doesn't, however, mean the money was wasted -- just that it was gained through immoral means.

[QuickZ06]

Yes it was a waste, why? B.c like everything else the government touches it cost $$$, taxpayers money. Which means they stole from someone for something.

[Sublyminal]

While many of you say that it's a waste because you consider it "stealing" I find that the Apollo program was a huge success. Let's face it, if it had never happened, we wouldn't have ever went to the moon of course the Russians love to say it was a hoax, which Mythbusters proved wasn't a hoax once and for all. But, enough of that.

While I do agree the fact that we haven't went back to the moon is a little unsettling, it's also understandable, especially after Apollo 13. To be honest, if you had taken all the trillions of dollars we have spent on countless wars and funneled that into the space program, we'd probably have colonies on both the moon and mars, with terra-forming going on.

I do agree with the guy who said that this planet is at the end of it's life cycle. 7+ billion people, all of us fighting for fossil fuels, if we don't do something we're destined to extinction just like the Dino's.

[RonRules]

Apollo, not a waste.
The space shuttle, with 1/2 bil for each launch, definitely.

The space shuttle withheld private enterprise from doing it's job.

[KingNothing]

Absolutely not

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Xtly-dpBeA

That video is absolutely remarkable. AWESOME stuff.

[KingNothing]

I do agree with the guy who said that this planet is at the end of it's life cycle. 7+ billion people, all of us fighting for fossil fuels, if we don't do something we're destined to extinction just like the Dino's.

The planet is fine. The people living on it are messed up and crazy, more often than not.... but they've also accomplished many amazing things, and continue to do so at increasing rates.

I've got confidence in us. The world grows more prosperous and free every day. Technology advances unabated. If the past is any indication of the future, we'll overcome our petty squabbles and material scarcities in time. And it will be people like most of us Ron Paul supporters who make it happen --- the undeterrable few, who work tirelessly to set fires of freedom in the minds of man and lead lives of virtue and excellence setting standard for others to emulate.

[idiom]

SpaceX will only be making a profit because of a multi-billion dollar contract with NASA.

A. It will Still cost them only a few billions to visit Mars
B. They would have gotten there without Nasa Contracts, it just speed things along.

[RickyJ]

Are you kidding? The CIA made a bundle selling cocaine to the junkies at NASA which was bought and paid for with the Apollo money. See, no waste, NASA employees get high and the CIA gets the money in the end to fund to more drug take over operations.

[farreri]

Well since we didn't go to the moon, total waste. :p

[Sublyminal]

The planet is fine. The people living on it are messed up and crazy, more often than not.... but they've also accomplished many amazing things, and continue to do so at increasing rates.

I've got confidence in us. The world grows more prosperous and free every day. Technology advances unabated. If the past is any indication of the future, we'll overcome our petty squabbles and material scarcities in time. And it will be people like most of us Ron Paul supporters who make it happen --- the undeterrable few, who work tirelessly to set fires of freedom in the minds of man and lead lives of virtue and excellence setting standard for others to emulate.


I'm going to steal a quote from an awesome movie "Everytime I have seen the world change, it has been for the worse" It makes you wonder why we haven't been back to the moon or ventured even further. I was watching a show on NOVA which comes on PBS and scientist have already managed to develop a rocket that can get us to mars in five months. Normally it would have taken years. The problem always is funding, you have the billionaires out there that want to keep every last cent they have, and then you have our governments, notice I said governments and not just government, wants to spend trillions on wars.

Imagine if the 4 trillion that Odumbo ran up was put to good use, such as researching for cures for aids and cancer and putting more into the space program, as I said, we could be terra-forming other planets and further exploring the galaxy. This is a four minute clip, that shows just how insignificant we as humans are, and what more we can learn, if we'd learn to live in peace instead of wanting to kill each other.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_IVqMXPFYwI&feature=related

[Sublyminal]

Well since we didn't go to the moon, total waste. :p


Wanna bet? Look up the mythbusters episode on youtube and you'll see that we did indeed land there.

there ya go

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2z2l123FM3Q

[RickyJ]

Well since we didn't go to the moon, total waste. :p

+ rep

Everyone knows that government lies to us now, but golly gee, they just couldn't have lied then too, could they? LOL!

[RickyJ]

Wanna bet? Look up the mythbusters episode on youtube and you'll see that we did indeed land there.

Mythbusters is a joke, they make lame straw man arguments up and then shoot them down and in the process prove nothing.

[Sublyminal]

Mythbusters is a joke, they make lame straw man arguments up and then shoot them down and in the process prove nothing.

Yet they completely demolished the fake moon landing conspiracy theory, don't be mad when someone brings in proof that proves that not only did we goto the moon once, but 12 different men walked on it.

[farreri]

Wanna bet? Look up the mythbusters episode on youtube and you'll see that we did indeed land there.

there ya go

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2z2l123FM3Q
Go look at the first press conference of the astronauts after they supposedly returned from the moon. They all acted like they were being interrogated!!!

[Sublyminal]

Go look at the first press conference of the astronauts after they supposedly returned from the moon. They all acted like they were being interrogated!!!


I can imagine that if I got bombarded with questions over and over and over again about the same subject, I'd feel as if I were being interrogated too. I mean damn, clear proof, that the US did land on the moon. Conspiracy theory of fake moon landing has been debunked. The bad thing about conspiracies are they're most often proven false.


Armstrong: 1

Conspiracy Theorist: 0

[RickyJ]

Yet they completely demolished the fake moon landing conspiracy theory, don't be mad when someone brings in proof that proves that not only did we goto the moon once, but 12 different men walked on it.

Those jokes demolished their own reputation. It is not liked they cared, after all NASA was paying them to produce that garbage.

[Sublyminal]

Those jokes demolished their own reputation. It is not liked they cared, after all NASA was paying them to produce that garbage.


Wow, you conspiracy theorist will stop at nothing. Just admit you're wrong and we can all move on.

[farreri]

I can imagine that if I got bombarded with questions over and over and over again about the same subject, I'd feel as if I were being interrogated too.
Then why hasn't any professional sports team who won the championship acted interrogated at their first post team press conference?

You're explanation falls flatter than people once thought the earth was.



Armstrong: 1

Conspiracy Theorist: 0
Your immaturity is starting to show.

[RickyJ]

Wow, you conspiracy theorist will stop at nothing. Just admit you're wrong and we can all move on.

Sublyminal, I use to think that anyone that thought man did not go to the moon was just plain nuts. But then NASA "lost" the original high definition moon landing tapes and I looked into it further. I am 100% convinced now that NASA didn't send a man to the moon after looking at the evidence. Man didn't go to the moon, that is why we have never been back, we can't get a man there today alive.

[Sublyminal]

Then why hasn't any professional sports team who won the championship acted interrogated at their first post team press conference?

You're explanation falls flatter than people once thought the earth was.



Your immaturity is starting to show.


Uhh you do realize that sports teams hire people who have specific jobs on how to coach these people on all the PR that they're gonna go through?

I'm immature for saying you conspiracy theorist are retards that shouldn't breed? Please, for the love of the gene pool, keep yours out of it. Conspiracy Theorist are some of the most immature people out there. Bet you believe 9/11 was an inside job too.

[farreri]

Man didn't go to the moon, that is why we have never been back, we can't get a man there today alive.
Bingo, and no other country has been able to send man to the moon, ever.

[bluesc]

Okay, if it was faked.. Why did they fake it? To get more funding?

Okay. But it is easily confirmed that they launched into orbit. The same rocket launched into orbit and went through the typical sequence before returning to earth. That would cost the same amount of money as going into orbit and then the moon.

So.. They faked something that cost the same amount of money as doing that thing would to get more funding. Right?

Unless you don't believe that the rocket even launched? Because the mission was prepped for a return trip to the moon whether you believe it actually went there or not, and returned in the same condition as it would have if it did land on the moon.

[Sublyminal]

Sublyminal, I use to think that anyone that thought man did not go to the moon was just plain nuts. But then NASA "lost" the original high definition moon landing tapes and I looked into it further. I am 100% convinced now that NASA didn't send a man to the moon after looking at the evidence. Man didn't go to the moon, that is why we have never been back, we can't get a man there today alive.


Sure we can, but after the last man went up, American's got bored with the moon. Then we became involved in countless wars, etc etc. You don't go through something that elaborate to fool the American public. Or the rest of the world for that matter. Watch the video, get educated and then come back with a clearer argument.

[bluesc]

Bingo, and no other country has been able to send man to the moon, ever.

Oh god. You must be a troll.

[RickyJ]

Uhh you do realize that sports teams hire people who have specific jobs on how to coach these people on all the PR that they're gonna go through?

I'm immature for saying you conspiracy theorist are retards that shouldn't breed? Please, for the love of the gene pool, keep yours out of it. Conspiracy Theorist are some of the most immature people out there. Bet you believe 9/11 was an inside job too.

Are you serious? Anyone that has half a brain KNOWS that 9/11 was an inside and outside job for the benefit of Israel. You are showing your true colors now.

[Sublyminal]

Okay, if it was faked.. Why did they fake it? To get more funding?

Okay. But it is easily confirmed that they launched into orbit. The same rocket launched into orbit and went through the typical sequence before returning to earth. That would cost the same amount of money as going into orbit and then the moon.

So.. They faked something that cost the same amount of money as doing that thing would to get more funding. Right?

Unless you don't believe that the rocket even launched? Because the mission was prepped for a return trip to the moon whether you believe it actually went there or not, and returned in the same condition as it would have if it did land on the moon.


Don't try to use logic with conspiracy theorist, it doesn't work.

[James Madison]

I'd rather have a fully-functional fusion reactor.

[Sublyminal]

Are you serious? Anyone that has half a brain KNOWS that 9/11 was an inside and outside job for the benefit of Israel. You are showing your true colors now.


You can't honestly believe that whole there was a bomb crap.

[Sublyminal]

I'd rather have a fully-functional fusion reactor.


Power of the sun, not possible, not with our technology. Check back in a few hundred years, if we haven't killed ourselves off by then.

[farreri]

Uhh you do realize that sports teams hire people who have specific jobs on how to coach these people on all the PR that they're gonna go through?
Oh, so they have to teach all the team members to be happy, joyful, giddy, smile, joke, appreciative, and all other normal celebratory actions, or else all these sports teams would act like the stiff joy-less astronauts?!!! :eek:

Man, what idiotic reasonings you come up with.


I'm immature for saying you conspiracy theorist are retards that shouldn't breed? Please, for the love of the gene pool, keep yours out of it. Conspiracy Theorist are some of the most immature people out there. Bet you believe 9/11 was an inside job too.
Your immaturity stock keeps growing with responses like that.

[Sublyminal]

Oh, so they have to teach all the team members to be happy, joyful, giddy, smile, joke, appreciative, and all other normal celebratory actions, or else all these sports teams would act like the astronauts?!!! :eek:

Man, what idiotic reasonings you come up with.


Your immaturity stock keeps growing with responses like that.


Are you acting retarded or were you born that way? If you're acting the part, kudos to you sir, you trolled me good. Again, look at what I'm typing -- These PR people all coach these guys so they don't say anything stupid. They are conditioned from the time they're drafted until the day they retire. Also, who the hell wouldn't be happy about winning say the world series or the super bowl, of course they're going to be giddy. BUT you have to also realize that winning the super bowl or world series doesn't compare anywhere near the stress of fielding hundreds of thousands of questions about the same damn thing, in this case the moon landing.

[James Madison]

Power of the sun, not possible, not with our technology. Check back in a few hundred years, if we haven't killed ourselves off by then.

We're a bit closer than you think. I sat-in on a presentation of nuclear scientists that are constructing a prototype reactor in France. It's called ITER, if I remember correctly. Side issue.

Unfortunately, the government pumps all the money and scientist into building nukes instead of making things that would actually help people.

[Sublyminal]

We're a bit closer than you think. I sat-in on a presentation of nuclear scientists that are constructing a prototype reactor in France. It's called ITER, if I remember correctly. Side issue.

Unfortunately, the government pumps all the money and scientist into building nukes instead of making things that would actually help people.


That's why I said check back in a few hundred years, maybe by then if we haven't nuked ourselves into extinction, we'll have this. Sad thing is, even if this is ever accomplished, some government is gonna try to weaponize it.

[Hospitaller]

Not a waste of money at all... everyone around here is always talking about how screwed the world is... why not put forth the resources to actually terraform planets or find a way to exist somewhere else in the solar system?

It's absolutely not a waste of money and contrary to popular belief here finding another planet to live on is not something that can be achieved through donations or incentives. Space projects are way too much money.

It's estimated that a Mars mission could cost half a trillion, no amount of donations or entrepreneurial spirit is going to find that kind of money to burn.

Space exploration is perhaps the only place where I'd like to see government money. If it's all funny money and we're going to destroy the dollar anyway I'd rather destroy it on exploring space.

Who knows what's out there...

You must first look at the morality of the way the money was obtained before you can argue the effective use of that money.

[bluesc]

That's why I said check back in a few hundred years, maybe by then if we haven't nuked ourselves into extinction, we'll have this. Sad thing is, even if this is ever accomplished, some government is gonna try to weaponize it.

Quick search got me this:


A scenario has been presented of the effect of the commercialization of fusion power on the future of human civilization.[46] ITER and later Demo are envisioned to bring online the first commercial nuclear fusion energy reactor by 2050. Using this as the starting point and the history of the uptake of nuclear fission reactors as a guide, the scenario depicts a rapid take up of nuclear fusion energy starting after the middle of this century.

Of course, it being science, that prediction will be over optimistic. Like this:


Despite optimism dating back to the 1950s about the wide-scale harnessing of fusion power, there are still significant barriers standing between current scientific understanding and technological capabilities and the practical realization of fusion as an energy source. Research, while making steady progress, has also continually thrown up new difficulties. Therefore it remains unclear whether an economically viable fusion plant is possible.[47][48] A 2006 editorial in New Scientist magazine opined that "if commercial fusion is viable, it may well be a century away.".[48] This pessimistic view is in contrast to the optimism of a pamphlet printed by General Atomics in 1970s stated that "By the year 2000, several commercial fusion reactors are expected to be on-line."

It's not outside of the realm of possibility that the development of a new power source for long-range space travel will contribute to any new form of energy. Then the new big weapons will come.

[farreri]

Are you acting retarded or were you born that way?
And your immaturity stock keeps on rising.


BUT you have to also realize that winning the super bowl or world series doesn't compare anywhere near the stress of fielding hundreds of thousands of questions about the same damn thing, in this case the moon landing.
Um buddy, it was their first "post moon landing" press conference.

You should quit before you dig yourself any deeper.

[Sublyminal]

And your immaturity stock keeps on rising.


Um buddy, it was their first "post moon landing" press conference.

You should quit before you dig yourself any deeper.


You try traveling 251,968 miles and then being constantly hounded by reporters, the same reporters that saw you walking on the moon just like everyone else did and you tell me how peachy you would be. I can imagine, after getting back they wanted to spend time with their family but ended up having to go through all types of physical therapy to regain muscle that was lost in zero gravity. Now, put a ton of reporters in their faces and of course, they're going to be very defensive and feel like they're being interrogated.

[bluesc]

Um buddy, it was their first "post moon landing" press conference.

You should quit before you dig yourself any deeper.

Is that seriously the best argument you can come up with?

Those men had just accomplished something that no man had ever done before. Something that you can never comprehend. There was a constant threat of a pretty terrifying death.

And your best argument is that they didn't act like a sports team that just won a championship? Really?

[farreri]

You try traveling 251,968 miles and then being constantly hounded by reporters, the same reporters that saw you walking on the moon just like everyone else did and you tell me how peachy you would be. I can imagine, after getting back they wanted to spend time with their family but ended up having to go through all types of physical therapy to regain muscle that was lost in zero gravity. Now, put a ton of reporters in their faces and of course, they're going to be very defensive and feel like they're being interrogated.
:rolleyes:

Believe we went to the moon 5 times eons ago and no other country has since, even though technology is light-years ahead since then, if it makes you sleep better. I'm done arguing with you. Peace out.

[James Madison]

Those men had just accomplished something that no man had ever done before. Something that you can never comprehend. There was a constant threat of a pretty terrifying death.



How incredible would it have been to be among those men with the honor to walk on the moon. Must have been the ultimate exercise in humility.

[Sublyminal]

:rolleyes:

Believe we went to the moon 5 times eons ago and no other country has since, even though technology is light-years ahead since then, if it makes you sleep better. I'm done arguing with you. Peace out.


You're done arguing because you know that deep down, I am right. It's okay, it was a decent debate on your part.

[farreri]

Those men had just accomplished something that no man had ever done before. Something that you can never comprehend. There was a constant threat of a pretty terrifying death.
Yeah, let's show no signs of celebration. :rolleyes:

[farreri]

You're done arguing because you know that deep down, I am right. It's okay, it was a decent debate on your part.
:rolleyes:

Keep flattering yourself.

[bluesc]

Yeah, let's show no signs of celebration. :rolleyes:

Like I said, you can't comprehend what they were feeling at the time.

[bluesc]

How incredible would it have been to be among those men with the honor to walk on the moon. Must have been the ultimate exercise in humility.

There are many more moons in the solar system for a manned landing, maybe we'll be the lucky ones :D.

[farreri]

Like I said, you can't comprehend what they were feeling at the time.
I'm surprised one of you moon landing believers haven't said due to being in weightlessness for so long, it temporarily made them all emotionless.

[Sublyminal]

:rolleyes:

Keep flattering yourself.


Yes, we went to the moon five times. But toward the end of the final moon mission, there was no reason to really go back. We had explored the surface, what else was there to do? When they finally canceled out the moon missions they said it was starting to cost too much money and that the American people weren't as inspired by it as they were when the space race was hot and heavy.

Sure you can argue about putting a lunar base up there, but back then we really didn't have the technology to do so. And before Oblamer officially called it off, Bush had commissioned NASA to return and put a base on the moon, around 2020. But, again we have Oblamer to blame for that not happening.

[Sublyminal]

I'm surprised one of you moon landing believers haven't said due to being in weightlessness for so long, it temporarily made them all emotionless.


Really... and you say that I was saying some idiotic crap...

[bluesc]

I'm surprised one of you moon landing believers haven't said due to being in weightlessness for so long, it temporarily made them all emotionless.

Their souls trapped in the vast empty space!

[farreri]

Their souls trapped in the vast empty space!
:p

[Black Flag]

waste of taxpayer funds.

Exactly.

It would not be a waste of money ... if it was a free man's money that was spent.

[KingNothing]

Yeah, let's show no signs of celebration. :rolleyes:

Plenty of people who weren't the exhausted astronauts did celebrate, you know. Have you seen clips of how the NASA engineers and scientists reacted?

[whippoorwill]

Red Herring fallacy

You ever try to get a proposal past a bunch of risk averse (as if there is any other kind) MBAs? The business plan for FEDEX got a C in MBA school, where B- is the lowest passing grade.

Not every investment decision is the correct one, unless there are people who do not make errors.

Investment fallacy. I use a gun to take money from every person I see for 1 year and then use it to find a cure for the common cold. To error is human. To steal and spend is not investing its theft.

[The Free Hornet]

:rolleyes:

Believe we went to the moon 5 times eons ago and no other country has since, even though technology is light-years ahead since then, if it makes you sleep better. I'm done arguing with you. Peace out.

Hi farreri,

I appreciate the enthusiasm but understand that not returning is not for a lack of technology. The necessary equipment doesn't exist. For very practical reasons, we would not simply recreate the Apollo missions or what we think they did. Whether the Apollo technology is lost or not, there would be no interest in that much as Ford would rather not rebuild the Model T.

The Space Shuttle despite having much, much, much more technology, lacks the range and lift capacity for a moon mission. Our smart phones have more technology than Apollo but that matters not. Fake or not, the reasons for not returning are logical.

I take the Occam's razor position that faking the moon landings would entail more work than actually going there:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moon_landing_conspiracy_theories#Examination_of_th e_hoax_claims

[PaulineDisciple]

Since it was funded with stolen money, it was a waste. If it would have been funded through the free market system, it would have produced better products and much more efficiently.

[pcosmar]

Power of the sun, not possible, not with our technology. Check back in a few hundred years, if we haven't killed ourselves off by then.

Bullshit.
Photon drive is known technology. We have had the technology for 40 years.

[pcosmar]

The entire "space Program" was a huge waste of money.
In fact we had already been into space before mercury. There is a much better way and it was proven with the X15.

The whole NASA program was about missile technology,, not space exploration.

[Chrysamere]

The Apollo program is the greatest achievement of humanity by far, it may be unconstitutional wasteful spending, but it's the best unconstitutional wasteful spending any government has ever done.

[idiom]

:rolleyes:

Believe we went to the moon 5 times eons ago and no other country has since, even though technology is light-years ahead since then, if it makes you sleep better. I'm done arguing with you. Peace out.

This actually relates to the reason Apollo was a waste. It was ahead of its time, by about 60 years, of what the private industry would naturally achieve. The technology is all extant now, but the physics are just as hard as they ever were. Our fuel and oxidizer choices are the same as in 1940. They math is the same as in 1890.

To get to the moon and back your rocket is 99.9% fuel. That is incredibly hard engineering. We can only just now begin to build that sort of rocket efficiently with Li-AL alloys and friction stir welding. Apollo solved it with brute force and a tonne of cash.

The Space Shuttle set-back the private industry decades by mandating all US public and private payloads would be carried by the shuttle. All the private alternatives in development were instantly bankrupted.

The next big reason is the business case is still extremely hard to close. Space anything is high risk, long term, low return. Basically the opposite of Venture Capital targets. So the only way it will happen is billionaires spending their own money, which is what we see happening now.

[Phil]

The entire "space Program" was a huge waste of money.
In fact we had already been into space before mercury. There is a much better way and it was proven with the X15.

The whole NASA program was about missile technology,, not space exploration.
The past or now was about missile tech.?

[Phil]

:rolleyes:

Believe we went to the moon 5 times eons ago and no other country has since, even though technology is light-years ahead since then, if it makes you sleep better. I'm done arguing with you. Peace out.
You know a light-year is a unit of distance, yes?

[Pericles]

This actually relates to the reason Apollo was a waste. It was ahead of its time, by about 60 years, of what the private industry would naturally achieve. The technology is all extant now, but the physics are just as hard as they ever were. Our fuel and oxidizer choices are the same as in 1940. They math is the same as in 1890.

To get to the moon and back your rocket is 99.9% fuel. That is incredibly hard engineering. We can only just now begin to build that sort of rocket efficiently with Li-AL alloys and friction stir welding. Apollo solved it with brute force and a tonne of cash.

The Space Shuttle set-back the private industry decades by mandating all US public and private payloads would be carried by the shuttle. All the private alternatives in development were instantly bankrupted.

The next big reason is the business case is still extremely hard to close. Space anything is high risk, long term, low return. Basically the opposite of Venture Capital targets. So the only way it will happen is billionaires spending their own money, which is what we see happening now.

BTW, I gave this post a +rep because this is a well reasoned argument. This is becoming a rarity at RPF.

[Sublyminal]

Bullshit.
Photon drive is known technology. We have had the technology for 40 years.


Are we even talking about the same thing? Are you talking about the photonic rocket or what?

[RickyJ]

:rolleyes:

Believe we went to the moon 5 times eons ago and no other country has since, even though technology is light-years ahead since then, if it makes you sleep better. I'm done arguing with you. Peace out.

Facts like this are completely overlooked by those that don't want to think events they have believed to be true their whole lives are nothing more than giant lies.

[Sublyminal]

Facts like this are completely overlooked by those that don't want to think events they have believed to be true their whole lives are nothing more than giant lies.


Even after presenting definitive proof, you moon landing was faked conspiracy nuts, still think that we didn't go. I'm beginning to see what people see all RP supporters as conspiracy nuts. We haven't went back to the moon since then, because there is no longer an interest in exploring it.

[RickyJ]

Even after presenting definitive proof, you moon landing was faked conspiracy nuts, still think that we didn't go. I'm beginning to see what people see all RP supporters as conspiracy nuts. We haven't went back to the moon since then, because there is no longer an interest in exploring it.

You did not present any proof. You presented some clowns that knew the result they were looking for (paid to produce) before starting the "experiment." Setting up a straw man argument then knocking it down is only proof to those that don't think.

[idiom]

The moon landing hoax, literally the Fox News of conspiracy theories.

[Sublyminal]

You did not present any proof. You presented some clowns that knew the result they were looking for (paid to produce) before starting the "experiment." Setting up a straw man argument then knocking it down is only proof to those that don't think.


Wow... dude, go back to the nut hut, it's where all you conspiracy theorist belong.