D
Donald R
Guest
should spend money on it? i say yes
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
L
Lunar_Heart
Guest
We've already done it once. We could send robots and it would be cheaper.
I don't think its worth it.
I don't think its worth it.
S
Shelly B
Guest
YOU NEED SPELL CHECK.
R
Raven
Guest
Though I think future visits to study the moon itself are futile, trips to the moon have been considered to help further space travel. Some people think that the moon would serve as a good place to set up a base to use as a pit stop while going on a mission to Mars or other locations. If this is the case, I say go for it!
T
tick tock
Guest
maybe if we forgot something the first time.
i am always leaving things behind, its embarrassing, my Mom mails me stuff, like I am 18 or something.
so, if NASA left a toolbag or something, I say "Let's go!"
i am always leaving things behind, its embarrassing, my Mom mails me stuff, like I am 18 or something.
so, if NASA left a toolbag or something, I say "Let's go!"
N
notyou311
Guest
No. We can't afford it. Don't you know anything about the economy?
B
Brant
Guest
If anyone comes up with a reason to go to that risk and expense, then yeah, let's go. But since the Apollo missions, no one has been able to come up with a reason.
M
Marvin25
Guest
George Bush announced plans that he and NASA were intending to create a permanent base on the Moon and use this as a catalyst for a Mars expedition. The thing about being in such a low gravity situation is that it is detrimental to the human body. Not only does it weaken muscles and distort bone density but the radiation alone is enough to irreversibly damage physiological components of the human body.
So I say no because we do not have the technology.
So I say no because we do not have the technology.
A
Ashurbanisirpal
Guest
Spell check won't work with your question, technically, every word you typed is really a correctly spelled word.
As far as what I think about this topic, I'm sort of in limbo on the topic. I beleive Human Space Flight is an important part of our exploration of the universe, but also understand that, most of the stuff we can learn from sending humans to the moon (again), could be learned just as easily by sending robotic missions instead. These would be much more cost efficient, the robots are "expendable" (well, more so than a human life), and don't have to worry about the stresses on the human body during long term exposures to a zero-gravity / low gravity environment. The robots can stay until their power supply runs out, or they malfunction. This would far exceed the amount of time a manned mission could spend on the lunar surface.
So, all that said, I truly haven't made up my mind yet.
As far as what I think about this topic, I'm sort of in limbo on the topic. I beleive Human Space Flight is an important part of our exploration of the universe, but also understand that, most of the stuff we can learn from sending humans to the moon (again), could be learned just as easily by sending robotic missions instead. These would be much more cost efficient, the robots are "expendable" (well, more so than a human life), and don't have to worry about the stresses on the human body during long term exposures to a zero-gravity / low gravity environment. The robots can stay until their power supply runs out, or they malfunction. This would far exceed the amount of time a manned mission could spend on the lunar surface.
So, all that said, I truly haven't made up my mind yet.