Provide me a one single benefit of going on moon ?

[Shadow Wolf]

And so you come here to this hornets' nest?

It would be fun to poke it once in awhile.

 

[oldbadger]

It should be made from bamboo. An equivalent plastic injection mold would be a 5 on on the richter scale every time we ran it. You see the irony right?

Errr.......... ummmmm........ nope.
Not really.
Scientists are designing space dust-carts at this time, just to wander around netting space trash. Give it a another century and anything we put up there will get battered by lost nuts or bolts doing about 30,000mph.

 

[Brickjectivity]

Errr.......... ummmmm........ nope.
Not really.
Scientists are designing space dust-carts at this time, just to wander around netting space trash. Give it a another century and anything we put up there will get battered by lost nuts or bolts doing about 30,000mph.

It suggests a way to keep people from leaving Earth doesn't it? 1. Get your own planet. 2. Put junk into orbit around Earth. 3. Remember to do step 1 before step 2.

 

[Revoltingest]

It shouldn't surprise me, but it's heartbreaking that even space exploration is becoming politicized. It used to unite us, it used to get us all excited, but now it's something we argue about.

I do believe you are correct. We were already looking at space exploration when Sputnik went up. That stirred fear. Star Trek has inspired generations into science, engineering, and computers.
The real contest comes down to did Gene Rodenberry or Carl Sagan inspire more people into science? Natural curiosity I suspect reigns supreme as the number one reason as to why people get into science, but it's undeniable our current state of technology and science would be very different (and perhaps a decade or so behind) had those two not inspired and influenced millions in during their lives.

Sagan was a great guy.
But Rodenberry had more influence.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Sagan was a great guy.
But Rodenberry had more influence.

Probably, as Sagan's influence is pretty much limited to science, whereas Roddenberry has also influenced people into medicine, entertainment, philosophy, and he pretty much predicted tablets and smart devices (which, from what I've heard, were largely influenced by Star Trek - even the US Navy has allegedly taken note of the layout of the bridge of the Enterprise).
Giving it some more thought, without doubt Roddenberry probably has motivated people into science more than anything or anyone else. Non-nerds won't get it or approve, but really we should be calling the Age of Information the Age of Roddenberry. As far as influencing the thought, ethos, sciences, and philosophies of our society, Roddenberry's influence truly is into the realms of the final frontier when compared to the influence of those read about in philosophy and humanities college courses. Of course those things did influence Star Trek makes them fun and not a laborious task to learn about (not until you start getting into studying medicine, ethics, or science - then it's all Star Trek's fault ).

 

[Bob the Unbeliever]

I see a different history there.
.

Of course. CONservitive lenses are always biased and cloudy.

But having worked in aerospace & other industries since the 70s, I've seen some things..

And I'm the first son of the Pope. So what? Anyone can claim anything they like-- and your earlier comments appear to belie the claims above..

 

[blü 2]

Its all wastage of time and money, nothing else.

Anything can be a waste of money. Buying food's a waste of money and eating it's a waste of time if you're on your way to kill yourself.

The benefit of going to the moon is the same benefit as going anywhere ─ until you've been, you don't know what you don't know. After you've been, you'll improve your chances of identifying some of the things you don't know, and maybe even some answers to things you knew you didn't know.

(But if you don't value knowledge, if you have no curiosity, then by all means don't bother.)

 

[Revoltingest]

Of course. CONservitive lenses are always biased and cloudy.

To insult is de classe.

And I'm the first son of the Pope. So what? Anyone can claim anything they like-- and your earlier comments appear to belie the claims above..

You queried me about my tech history background in your post #54.
So I responded with some minimal info, not claiming authority.
To dismiss my answer after soliciting it is snarky indeed.
When you can be civil again, we might talk.

 

[Revoltingest]

The benefit of going to the moon is the same benefit as going anywhere ─ until you've been, you don't know what you don't know. After you've been, you'll improve your chances of identifying some of the things you don't know, and maybe even some answers to things you knew you didn't know.

Despite some specious claims otherwise, we've had several
manned missions to the Moon already (the Apollo Program).
The question is whether it's worth doing again.

 

[Flame]

They've yet to bring me the cheese the moon is made out of! Back to the moon we go!

 

[Revoltingest]

They've yet to bring me the cheese the moon is made out of! Back to the moon we go!

The did bring some back, but the French took it.
Just ask @ChristineM....she knows much about cheese.

 

[blü 2]

Despite some specious claims otherwise, we've had several
manned missions to the Moon already (the Apollo Program).
The question is whether it's worth doing again.

It would be consistent for me to reply, We won't know till we get back there.

The alternative reply, It's all political bs, is less interesting.

 

[Revoltingest]

It would be consistent for me to reply, We won't know till we get back there.

The alternative reply, It's all political bs, is less interesting.

I like your alternative.

 

[Deeje]

Makes for some cool pictures? It has to be prestigious to tell your buddies you've been to the moon

I agree that we could invest the money in more important things though.

Are they just eying off our closest source of mining so that they can continue to profit after our resources here are depleted? Scuse my skepticism.....

What is the point of going into space when we can't live peacefully with each other down here?

Imagine how much good could be done on earth if the money was spent on solving human problems....like curing diseases and fixing the reasons for homelessness?

Look how much money could be saved if the nations all put down their weapons and made friends? No one in the world would have to live in poverty. People could live in peace and security.

Humans have weird priorities IMO.

 

[Revoltingest]

Are they just eying off our closest source of mining so that they can continue to profit after our resources here are depleted? Scuse my skepticism.....

What is the point of going into space when we can't live peacefully with each other down here?

Imagine how much good could be done on earth if the money was spent on solving human problems....like curing diseases and fixing the reasons for homelessness?

Look how much money could be saved if the nations all put down their weapons and made friends? No one in the world would have to live in poverty. People could live in peace and security.

Humans have weird priorities IMO.

NASA's budget wouldn't make even a dent in fixing social problems.

 

[Deeje]

NASA's budget wouldn't make even a dent in fixing social problems.

Says a lot about how much they care about earth's problems. I was thinking more along the lines of nations combining their budgets to tackle what is an increasingly global problem. How do we exist in a world so full of inconsistencies and inequality....and the problem is so huge that nations will just make sure their military has the firepower to blow the problems away without solving any of the causes.....or will just leave the problem ignored to fester and grow? That is a very typical human approach....but its shortsighted and stupid.

If humans ever made it to another planet...they would just end up doing it all again......

I am glad to know that the Creator has a universal plan that will see all problems solved before taking steps out there into the unknown.

 

[blü 2]

I like your alternative.

I was afraid that might happen.

 

[Deeje]

Here is some innovative thinking....treating the cause, not just the end result.

 

[Revoltingest]

Says a lot about how much they care about earth's problems. I was thinking more along the lines of nations combining their budgets to tackle what is an increasingly global problem. How do we exist in a world so full of inconsistencies and inequality....and the problem is so huge that nations will just make sure their military has the firepower to blow the problems away without solving any of the causes.....or will just leave the problem ignored to fester and grow? That is a very typical human approach....but its shortsighted and stupid.

If humans ever made it to another planet...they would just end up doing it all again......

I am glad to know that the Creator has a universal plan that will see all problems solved before taking steps out there into the unknown.

I'd rather not give up exploring the universe until social ills are cured.
It's a relatively small cost, & the benefits are great for the many who
enjoy the knowledge.

 

[gnostic]

To set up a permanent base to launch deeper space exploration. Breaking through the atmosphere is the hardest/most fuel consuming part of space travel. Build an outpost on the moon to refuel/repair then launch again from there will make getting to Mars and beyond exponentially eaiser.

But that would only be feasible if there were natural resources in which the outpost could somehow and some ways refuel, resupply, repair and manufacture parts.

And the only way that to happen is to ship everything (machinery and building materials) there in the first place, which would be time consuming and costly, and there are no guarantee that when you sent a giant drill to the moon, you would find any form of oil or gas.

Although hydrocarbon do exist in space, we don’t know if such thing exist under the moon’s surface.

And then there are matter of atmosphere and water.

What little atmosphere the moon has, there are no oxygen, nitrogen, and not even carbon-dioxide, so what could possibly outside? You cannot plant any vegetation on the moon, if there are no carbon-dioxide and no water.

Anyone who think it is possible to colonize the moon, is delusional.

Colonizing Mars is a better bet than colonizing the moon...but only marginally so.

The atmosphere on Mars has carbon-dioxide, the atmosphere still doesn’t provide protection and the lack of water on the surface is still a very big problem, for any vegetation to survive.

Colonizing either Mars or the moon with outposts are not realistic.