Humans need to go back to the Moon.

[Seventh Sama]

Costs too much money and no nation can claim it for themselves, Also Its beyond our current technology to go mining on the moon.

 

[Funky Tiger]

Brb guys, hopping on my space shuttle, gotta run a metal errand to the moon.

if things were only that simple. going there itself burns a huge hole in the budget, and we have nothing to know what to expect. and believe me, from all the apollo missions, no traces of feasible metals were found. we have no guarantee that the solution to all our problems exists magically in the moon.

 

[-Punk-]

It should be Mars first tho .

You must be registered for see images

 

[P3ĮÑ]

One Does Not Simply Fly To The Moon And Back On A Daily Basic

This nigga right here, do u want lebron to look like this?

You must be registered for see images

 

[EnDash]

so tell me how they flew threw it when the van allen belt is made of radiation???

i never heard of the van allen belt, but flying through radiation is pretty easy. just use a faraday cage, your microwave is able to block radiation :|

There is water in the moon.

The main thing is we DON'T know what ALL could be in the moon, but it's worth finding out.

no actully, we know exactly what is on the moon, and there certainly isn't any water on the moon.

We can't sustain mankind forever with just one planet.

You fail to see the bigger picture my friend.

well we don't have much choice, earth is the only planet with the resources we need. if you want to settle on the moon or on mars or something then you still need water and food, and where those will come from? earth.

the only planet that might have water besides earth is (if i remember correctly) one of the moons of neptune. there is a theory that the entire planet is an ocean and the top layer is frozen. the problem is that we are not sure and even if it is an ocean, it's probably not H2O (i.e. water), so we won't be able to live from it.

earth is the only place with the resources we need, thinking that colonizing the stars will solve all our problems just like that is fantasy.

 

[Funky Tiger]

actually, endash, traces of water have actually been found on the moon. although i think this is actually internal water, which i think is not possible to be used by humans in any way, at least in the foreseeable future. also what's this crap about the van allen belt made up of radiation being impenetrable? use freaking aluminium welded skin, and you're good to go. seriously, itachi4real, stop being an obnoxious ****.

 

[Uchiha Brothers]

if we can go then its simply good

 

[-S-]

You should watch the movie 'Moon'.

 

[Darthlawsuit]

Who wants to be first?

 

[Hunty]

This thread is a whole lot of nope.

 

[Hexuze]

lol we can't even take care of our own planet and you think it's a good idea to allocate resources/colonize there?

There's prob. alien life forms there and the government is hiding it from the public, if we go there we'd prob. start some war.

 

[FitzChivalry Farseer]

Nice sig ^^

 

[Nikes]

lol we can't even take care of our own planet and you think it's a good idea to allocate resources/colonize there?

There's prob. alien life forms there and the government is hiding it from the public, if we go there we'd prob. start some war.

You're stupid if you think it's not a good idea.

 

[KillerMongoose]

Ahhh... no, just no!

 

[Aim64C]

So you say mankind stays on Earth for however long we can last until we don't have enough to keep moving forward, or to even sustain life much less civilization??

Btw, that's the best part about it though, we have equipment.

We can live on this planet indefinitely. The only major limitation is our current energy supply - which is predominantly based on hydrocarbon combustion.

Though, again, this problem has been exacerbated by complete and total idiots who oppose the development of nuclear power and proper storage facilities for waste (because they think they know more than they do, and should not be allowed to make decisions).

Contrary to popular belief - there is very limited potential in 'renewable' energy sources. Small hydro systems work well for people with plenty of land in areas with decent rainfall and aquifer-driven springs... but most of the power is consumed by cities and industry. Solar and wind power simply cannot provide the amount of power necessary for that. Even combinations of it fall horribly short.

Transportation is another troubling area for power. Electric cars are still horribly primitive in their development. While efficient in operation (partly why hybrids get such good gas mileage is because they run electric drive trains rather than turning the drive shaft directly), electric cars lack the energy density to really make them practical for our transportation demands.

Which is why we will probably be using some form of hydrocarbon combustion for transportation long after crude oil supply has become economically unviable to exploit. Even if we must use nuclear reactors to catalyze a synthesis process - it would be done (and it could still be done more efficiently than 'green fuel' that requires more fuel to harvest and transport than it replaces) simply because the energy and power density of hydrocarbon fuels is immense compared to what is in batteries. With direct hydrocarbon-to-electric fuel cells a decade or so off (depending upon several pending breakthroughs) - there is the potential to almost double the gas mileage of current hybrids (though next-generation rotary combustion engines are seeing some huge improvements in efficiency, as well, with compression-driven combustion... like a diesel).

The material problems are not that big of an issue.

so tell me how they flew threw it when the van allen belt is made of radiation???

Because they put on their tinfoil hats.

And, also, because their exposure time was relatively brief and not all that significant in terms of radiation exposure.

That said - there has been work into developing plasma sheathing. Plasma, itself, is protected by intense magnetic fields and the particles in plasma, while very diffuse, are exceptionally effective at blocking cosmic radiation (among other forms of it). So concerns about cosmic radiation exposure can be mitigated if need be (though it would require considerable development, still).

It is roughly a quarter of the size of Earth, but even with that, we won't get anything presently useful from it seeing as how the moon isn't a habitable satellite (no oil).

We might find iron though!

There's surprisingly little iron up there. Quite a bit of Titanium and other light metals and non-metals, though. Which is great - because you can work in the vacuum of space - where the shit doesn't have enough oxygen to burn with. Since it's a metal you'd want to build space craft out of (high strength, low mass) - that's a good thing.

just the fuel to send a rocket to the moon on a regualr basis (let's say once a month) would cost more then the metal we would mine up there. we have plenty of metal and magnets on earth, what we need is water, food and oxygen. the only valuable resource on the moon will be the lack of atmosphere and proximity to the sun, electricity harvesting from the sun will be more efficient on the moon then on earth, but then how will you send it back to earth?

Returning the materials to the Earth would be a pointless venture. While there would, potentially, be a market for the manufacturing of advanced materials that require large investments in inert gasses - the main benefit of getting materials from the moon is this:

You can hit a golf ball into orbit from the moon.

A simple mass accelerator (think one of those roller coasters with magnetic acceleration) can launch entire assemblies into orbit where they can be moved into place for assembly.

Of what?

Space stations.

Corporations would pay huge amounts of money to rent out laboratory space.

Further, you have a decent staging point for human activity. The mines where metal veins have been exploited can be easily reinforced and sealed for an atmosphere. These spaces could also be rented out for various purposes, and a long-term sustainable structure is possible (particularly with nuclear power... especially once fusion power becomes viable).

I would expect to see considerable spending on the development of new propulsion technologies at those areas - and there is plenty of area available to do it (and to test many things that cannot be easily tested with people crawling everywhere). Though there would also be a lot of research done on vacuum-tolerant organisms (particularly for agricultural purposes).

If you wanted to see America's economy boom - give NASA the task of paving the way for these things to happen. Free up restrictions on space travel while stimulating the development of launch capability with the programs to begin mining operations. Then, after that has been accomplished - jump-start those industries with a space station construction process. Tax investment can be partially recovered from leases on research space - but the real return will be on the industry that has been massively invested in - and America would be one of the only providers of that capability (which allows us to relinquish some of our hold on other industries and allow them to go to areas with lower costs of living while providing a new service/product to the world).

Our industry stagnated - which is a large reason behind our current slump.

 

[Hypemaster]

^ the thread slayer has spoken

 

[danksy]

Aliens told us to never come back, youtube it.

pretty interesting even if it isn't true

 

[EnDash]

actually, endash, traces of water have actually been found on the moon. although i think this is actually internal water, which i think is not possible to be used by humans in any way, at least in the foreseeable future. also what's this crap about the van allen belt made up of radiation being impenetrable? use freaking aluminium welded skin, and you're good to go. seriously, itachi4real, stop being an obnoxious ****.

well i never said i am an expert, but it sounds really wrong that the surface is a wasteland and internally there is water. but if it is true (and there is sufficent amount) then it's probably a good idea to go there one day.

lol we can't even take care of our own planet and you think it's a good idea to allocate resources/colonize there?

There's prob. alien life forms there and the government is hiding it from the public, if we go there we'd prob. start some war.

if there are aliens on other planets, i can assure you that there are enough people on govermants around the world that want to to go war with them. for control or resources or technology, they want it to themselves. and likely they want to keep it from other countries to have.

Returning the materials to the Earth would be a pointless venture. While there would, potentially, be a market for the manufacturing of advanced materials that require large investments in inert gasses - the main benefit of getting materials from the moon is this:

You can hit a golf ball into orbit from the moon.

A simple mass accelerator (think one of those roller coasters with magnetic acceleration) can launch entire assemblies into orbit where they can be moved into place for assembly.

Of what?

Space stations.

Corporations would pay huge amounts of money to rent out laboratory space.

Further, you have a decent staging point for human activity. The mines where metal veins have been exploited can be easily reinforced and sealed for an atmosphere. These spaces could also be rented out for various purposes, and a long-term sustainable structure is possible (particularly with nuclear power... especially once fusion power becomes viable).

I would expect to see considerable spending on the development of new propulsion technologies at those areas - and there is plenty of area available to do it (and to test many things that cannot be easily tested with people crawling everywhere). Though there would also be a lot of research done on vacuum-tolerant organisms (particularly for agricultural purposes).

If you wanted to see America's economy boom - give NASA the task of paving the way for these things to happen. Free up restrictions on space travel while stimulating the development of launch capability with the programs to begin mining operations. Then, after that has been accomplished - jump-start those industries with a space station construction process. Tax investment can be partially recovered from leases on research space - but the real return will be on the industry that has been massively invested in - and America would be one of the only providers of that capability (which allows us to relinquish some of our hold on other industries and allow them to go to areas with lower costs of living while providing a new service/product to the world).

Our industry stagnated - which is a large reason behind our current slump.

goddamn you why do you drag me into this?

yes, everything you said is true and i agree with it. there are definitly benefits for setting up a station or something on the moon, mainly in scientific research and solar power. but metal is of very little concern, i don't think anyone will build a rocket just to start a mining operation on the moon. at least not while we still have enough metal here on earth.

about the USA and NASA, even though your plan will probably work it still has risks, and it's understandable why when the economy is not at best the govermant doesn't really like taking risks. but if enough corporations would give promises that they will buy research stations in space (i don't know the economical term for promises, just proof that US can actully get money back from this) they will be more willing to fund it.

 

[Craziie]

We can't sustain cilvization?....

Oh my god..my prayers have been answered.

We bout to die off soon... PRAISE THE LAWD!

OT:
Soon..my friend soon. ...sadly.

 

[Aim64C]

Aliens told us to never come back, youtube it.

pretty interesting even if it isn't true

*shrug*

Look at it from their perspective. Their technology has been pretty stagnant since the days we were running around as cavemen.

The last time they stopped by to check on us in the late 1800s (look up Aurora, Texas) - we had barely started dicking around with electricity and magnetism and the printing press. That's considerable improvement, considering we had only started working with steel in substantial quantities about four hundred years before that.

Then, 60 years after one of their drunks crashed his ship during a thunderstorm, and we'd barely started the industrial revolution... they detect a gamma ray burst.

"Well... WTF was that?"

They return to find us zipping around in jet powered aircraft, refining uranium, building particle accelerators, and are well on our way to figuring out solid state devices. The existence of vacuum tubes might have even come as a surprise to them (perhaps no records of such technology exists in their own history - or their own history failed to produce vacuum tube technology).

Further, we'd started hammering out a concept of genetics (even though the cause was still suspected to be proteins or enzymes), immunization, epidemiology, organ transplants and even rudimentary experiments in cloning.

Holy ****. These crazy chimps just went from being creative survivors and social hunters to packs of raving engineers unraveling the secrets of the universe in a little more than a generation.

In all likelihood - we'd kick the unholy shit out of any alien we ran across. In the long run.

Short-term - we'd get caught off-guard and take a lot of losses. Through attrition-ensured dumb luck, ingenuity, or downright creative genius - we'd come up with counters to their technology and tactics.

Just because they are advanced doesn't mean they are superior. It wouldn't surprise me, in the slightest, if humanity is a sort of petri-dish experiment where intelligent species in various environments are subjected to stressors to analyze how they develop to various challenges.

In this case - they might have bit off more than they can chew. The capability to eliminate our existence would come at a very steep cost in terms of 'man'power, industry, and energy. No single 'attack' could eliminate all of us - and it would take a multitude of different strategies to make it work - and we're to a point, now, where we can develop reactionary defenses to many avenues they might use for an attack.

Meaning it'd just make us aware of their presence and piss us off.

I, also, doubt the population sizes of such an advanced civilization. We are approaching, in our own line of technological and industrial development, an era where individuals have an exceptional amount of capability. CAD-to-part systems exist that can build a stunning array of structural and functional parts with very little secondary machine support. Do-it-yourself genetic engineering is getting up there, as well (though it's not advertised, since any fool can play around with pox viruses and potentially make nasty things).

Extrapolated over a few hundred or even thousand years at even a dimutive pace (for us), that will easily lead to the point where many individuals will be able to make just about anything their mind and the properties of the universe will allow. That places a lot of power into the individual - and that will force population density to decrease, considerably. Too many people with too many differing opinions will not stand to live under strong governmental structures for very long. Commuting and commerce are fine - but when you can deconstruct the atoms of someone you don't like, everyone needs a little more elbow-room.

So organizing the kind of response necessary to eliminate us is likely pretty difficult, and 'hyper-advanced' civilizations likely have very diffuse populations with loose structures of governance. The attempt to organize it might very well trigger a war amongst themselves. (If ancient texts and stories are to be read into - 'the gods' used to wage war in the sky through certain eras).

It's quite possible that several wars have been fought amongst relatively small groups (a few thousand individuals on each side) over how our existence is to be handled.

Even if they were shocked at our recent developments and could build much of a consensus in favor of our elimination - it would probably be a century or more before they could even begin acting on that consensus (presuming they are still limited to 'reasonable' violations of our current laws of physics - mostly involving relativity - and haven't so mastered the universe as to be capable of truly commanding it... at which point you're effectively god of this tier of existence).

Which is why I'm horribly skeptical of the notion that we've been contacted in any direct or official capacity (and it is unlikely that 'aliens' would recognize our governments or respect the authority of institutions that rarely last more than a few centuries). Merely revealing their existence and intent to ward us would throw away their greatest advantage. Any display of weapon capabilities would, also, be a horribly bad idea (so following up on any threats to give the illusion of superiority would backfire) - we'd analyze the hell out of it and engineer a counter. Even if we dropped the 'let's go into space' idea, we'd have the solution waiting on the ground.

It's in their best interest to stay enigmatic and to observe. They likely descend from predators, as well - so their behavior should not be nearly as alien to us as some might expect.