Why didn't the US return to the moon???
Was there really some mysterious reason why the US didn't return to the moon... or did i take the movie too seriously???
shareWas there really some mysterious reason why the US didn't return to the moon... or did i take the movie too seriously???
share[deleted]
I'm just trying to figure out if you were trying to make some kind of play on words when you said "looner" or if you don't know that it's spelled "lunar".
shareYou're dead wrong about that. America cared a great deal about beating the Soviet Union in the space race. The thing was that by the time Apollo 13 was launched we had already won by being the first to put men on the moon with Apollo 11 and with that race won were tired of the same old, same old. It would take two little ships called Enterprise (named after the most famous Enterprise of them all, the USS Enterprise NCC-1701) and Columbia to rekindle our national enthusiasm in the space program. Of course, after a while the space shuttle became commonplace and it took first Hubble, then the Mars Rover missions, to make us proud of the US space program once again. I myself hope for a manned mission to Mars, working in conjunction with China, Russia and Japan; it would be an event that would unite our countries in pride, crossing political and ideological boundaries, if only for a little while.
shareThe US didn't win the space race. Russia put the first satellite into orbit, and the first man in space. There was simply a transition from Russian dominance to American, which I'm sure will again be eclipsed by China or the ESA shortly.
shareWell mostly because Americans are preoccupied by other programs. But the china launches are interesting indeed.
--------------------------------------------------
If you want horror - tune in the news channel.
The US then went on the dominate and go to the moon. Winning the space race. Russia started it. We finished it. Winning the first battle does not mean you've won the war.
sharebut then, the russians sent dosens of missions to venus, while the us basicly did nothing until this curiosity on mars thing... even now all us astronauts use russian tech to go to the iss, etc... basicly the ruskies were first in everything, then the us put a man on the moon, then the ruskies did everything else and then its 2012 and all this talk about the space race is futile.
shareWhat about the Voyager or Pioneer probes?
The missions to all planets? Skylab? The Shuttle program?
And, even more remakeable, this alone was not enough to send the country to bankrptcy. It took many extra efforts from the Fed.
but then, the russians sent dosens of missions to venus, while the us basicly did nothing until this curiosity on mars thing...
[deleted]
Before you can declare a winner you must first agree on the race finish point!
shareI don't know if you realized this yet or not, but he's not dead wrong. In fact, your post agrees with his post. He wrote, "To be honest, there was no longer any point to any of this.". What he's obviously referring to is your point that the space race was eventually "won".
shareOh wow look at all these moon huggers on here. We've never been to the friggin moon and you'd have to be totally ignorant or a stunted drooling bed-wetter to think that we had the technology in 1969 to manage something we cant do today with all our modern design techniques, manufacturing technology, and advanced knowledge of the challenges.
And to the "manned Mars mission....." LMAO NASA still doesn't know how to deal with cosmic radiation, they don't know now and they they sure as hell didn't know in 1969. Its hilarious. Pull up the NASA video Destination Tomorrow Ep 25 and see for yourself...not a damn clue.
BTW, RIP Neil Armstrong...its a sure bet he didn't die of radiation poisoning. LOL
Good to see the ranting conspiracy theorist are being represented. Go back to your bomb shelter now. Adults are talking.
shareWere you born this stupid, or have you had professional training?
shareSame mentality that argues that the Egyptians and the Mayans and the Incans couldn't have built their pyramids and other massive architectural structures without alien assistance, and in fact that life could not have evolved on earth at all, that it had to be planted here by ... yep, those same pesky aliens. Which of course begs the question how did that alien life evolve, but apparently we don't follow through on our ideas, er, I mean opinions, that far.
Lethe
"working in conjunction with China, Russia and Japan;"
You missed out Europe, you know, the ESA built more than a third of the ISS...
But while we are working with the USA on space exploration (we're building the service module for your new space bus) the USA has a very stupid 'exclude China from anything space' policy, which means you'll be 2nd to Mars...
Russia, the ESA & China will work happily together towards a mars mission, I would not be surprised if we just used the same service module with a Chinese/Russian capsule on their missions... (although if I was the ESA, i'd be in serious chats with SpaceX on buying a few of their Dragon V2's slap that on top of an ATV derived service module and you can go to the moon....
That tin-foil hat nice and snug?
shareI hope it is.
For those who don't know, "zetatalk" is run by a woman named Nancy. Nancy claims to be in contact with an alien civilization on a planet orbiting the star Zeta Reticuli.
You may ask how they communicate with her--she says it's through the device they implanted in her brain.
I wish I was making that up.
Given who runs it, you can judge how reliable the info there is.
hahahaha people
shareYou know, that brings up an interesting point. So - certain types of mentally disturbed people have a long history of this tin-foil-hat practice, hence the stereotype you reference. My question is this. Metal deflects certain energy waves. Is it possible that these mentally disturbed people have some sort of biological vulnerability to certain pervasive energy waves (microwaves, whatever) that the rest of us don't have (or to phrase it differently, that the rest of us have some sort of built-in defense that they don't have), and the tin foil hats actually DO help? I mean, there is plenty of evidence that they tend to self-medicate (substance abuse), probably in an unconscious attempt to bring their biochemistry up to speed; this could be a similar thing. People tend to dismiss the obvious, maybe it's a case of Occam's razor.
Yeah, whatever. Back to the moon.
Lethe
Money.
Juliet Parrish: You can't win a war if you're extinct!
There were really two reasons:
Money and willpower
Even before the first landing, NASA's budget was being cut back to pay for the Great Society and the war in VietNam.
The second reason was willpower. The stated aim of going to the moon was to beat the Soviets. We'd done that. To a lot of people who don't understand how geology tells you about a place, rocks are rocks. They wondered why we were going back to the moon to pick up more rocks, when we already had "plenty".
And even NASA was becoming skittish about what was an incredibly dangerous undertaking. Everybody knows about what happened on Apollo 13, but during the program, we lost one crew in a pad fire (Apollo 1), had a lightning strike during launch that by some miracle, didn't blow out the power that would have been needed to deploy the parachutes for splashdown (Apollo 12), and had another that developed a problem with the wiring to the service module engine (Apollo 16). If there hadn't been a backup wiring circuit, or if it had the same problem, they might not have been able to get back home.
And since the '60's, we've become a much more "risk-adverse" society. If you tried to do Apollo today, with the tech they had back then, you wouldn't find support for the program if it cost $5 and promised a cure for the common cold.
Excellent post. Agree completely, especially that last paragraph.
shareWe need to go back to the moon. It would be a benefit to science and humanity. I guess some things are a matter of monetary perceptions.
But man oh man, can a political representative raise funds left and right in an attempt to reach a political office. The millions and millions of dollars spent for the endeavor.
Our only hope is with private investors and space tourism.
shareMoney was a key factor, it was expensive to begin with. However, after some accidents and malfunctions they started looking at ways to make the program safer and more secure, and found out it would cost them much more. Also simple invest and return just wasn't adding up. They would spend so much money, and get little in return to offset the cost. Also a lot of expensive equipment would only be able to be used once before becoming useless.
Another problem was America was loosing interest. NASA would make money off of the television broadcasts as networks would pay them money to air them. Once America stopped caring networks didn't see the point, so they stopped paying to get the rights to air the moon landings. Hell I forget what network had the rights for Apollo 13, but in the end still didn't air it, and bumped it for something else.
The Cold War also played a small part in it. America was considering putting surveillance equipment on the moon. However, once they did something like that, then so would Russia. Then they would try and top each other, and America didn't want to start a war over the moon.
So for a variety of reasons that's why America stopped going to the moon.
Never been at the first place!
If opportunity doesn't knock, build a door!
You really have to be nuts to think we didn't go to the moon, sorry but keep your tinfoil hat on and stay off the internet (they're watching you).
We gave up on the moon because of the Saturn V rockets. They weren't the most reliable, the were extremely expensive, and there was no way to reuse or recycle any part of it. The space shuttle we've been using was reusable and didn't have the ponies to make it back to the moon. That and there was really no good reason at the time to keep going back. (risk vs reward) We get all the research we need from space missions and the space station. With the technology we have now, we could colonize the moon and that's why the space program was retired for the next generation of rockets that our wonderful president canned.
[deleted]
Not sure if I would suggest tin foil hats for people that don't believe we landed on the moon.
I don't know if we did or didn't. I know the governments love to lie... I konw there is evidence we might have and evidence we might have faked it... But I don't know what the real truth is... I would like to have some of the observatory on earth preferably one owned by the Russians show me a photo of a flag or the base of the landing craft... that would be very solid evidence we actually did land there... until that time... I'll simply say its possible.
I think the most succinct way of putting it is this.
There were two reasons for not returning. Money and Politics.
It was very expensive and it was originally done to beat the Soviets.
They succeeded in what they (the congress) wanted to do and left it there.
By the way, I thought this movie succeeded in what it wanted to do. It asks you to suspend reality and for just 86 minutes and believe in the possibility.
It was a fun one, even though in the end it was horse$#!t.
[deleted]
[deleted]