First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  Next  Last
America is Going to Bomb the Moon
17892 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
34 / M / Small Wooded town...
Offline
Posted 5/15/10 , edited 5/15/10

Cuddlebuns wrote:


Real_ZERO wrote:

If they found water, water pipelines would be extended from the moon to Africa's poor, let's be more patient!




The moon is not stationary, so building pipes connecting it to the Earth is impossible because it is always moving. Even if we attempted that, all of that added mass would no doubt seriously affect it's orbit and may even cause it to slow down enough to crash into the Earth. Even if we didn't have to worry about that, building a pipe from the Earth to the moon would be so insanely expensive that it would make much more sense to simply use all of that money to filter the sea water and polluted water and distribute that to not only Africa, but the entire world. There's so much water here that there's no need to bring any down from the moon, especially since we have no idea what is in the water on the moon, so it could be even more toxic than the dirty water that many people unfortunately have to live with today.

Finding water on the moon will not directly affect anyone on Earth.


Darkphoenix3450 wrote:

Anyhow Spreading out seeking new mineral deposits is very important. The amount of money this project could save us a lot of money, and bring i a lot of money from new sources of resources. But then your not looking at the big picture, your just looking at saving a pennies, that could have been used to invest in your future and well being.


You're not looking at the entire picture either. Do you realize we'd be creating a whole new world of issues by excavating the moon? I realize that there may be beneficial resources on there, but the main problem is, who owns those resources? Who owns the moon? What gives anyone any right to own the moon? This issue would no doubt cause many more wars, perhaps even another world war, since the moon arguably belongs to the entire world (it is in everyone's territory at some point in the day), and if one or a few nations decided to start exploiting it, then they'd technically be invading everyone's land. Then because we're violent and greedy we'd waste even more money developing weapons that can be used on the moon and training soldiers to fight on the moon, so all of that money earned from the moon's resources will just go to waste and create more problems than it solves (which is none).




What for if we do not invest in NASA where will are money go?


I'm all for supporting NASA, but I think that their projects should focus on benefiting people on Earth, whether it be something practical or simply pursuing knowledge about our universe. I don't think preparing to colonize the moon is going to benefit anyone, as I already explained earlier. It would be nice if all nations could cooperate and make use of the moon's resources together, but we know that won't happen.

If we stopped funding NASA (and I'm not saying we should), that money could go towards feeding and sheltering the millions of people who are suffering under our feet. But I know that since we're America that money would just go to the military.




Real_ZERO Is not far off.. the moon-dust on the moon is made up of all the raw materials needed to make solar panels. Being that the one side of the moon is always facing the sun. That means a constant power source. By making a very long field of solar panels we can gather enough power to run not only a city on the moon but also feed the power needs of earth. And yes their is a way to transfer power from the moon to earth... Its known as beaming the power by turning energy into another form and sending it through a Satellite to earth.

Air needs??? Ever hear of the RockAir device... It is a machine that takes rock and brakes them up an melts them down collecting h2o from the rocks... their it separates the oxygen from the hydrogen. So we can have a plant that makes air an water from rocks...

In the end starting a space community on the moon is a profitable and worth wile endeavor... Its to bad America is loosing out on this great possibility do to budget cuts on NASA.. But then NASA was slathering along any how.. Lucky for us I know of a few very rich people who just happen to be thinking of the profit that can be made from the moon, and have their own rocket plans and Scientist working on it right now.



now Cuddlebuns A City on the moon means Jobs, housing, and prophet. (the vacuum is the perfect atmosphere for a lot of product developments that cost millions to make on earth do to having to artificially produce the needed atmosphere to make the product there.) So their will be businesses wanting to put their plants/companies on the moon as well.



To be fully set up and see the investment pay off will only take 4 years.. estimated. 4 years of getting the ground work on the moon, to see a return on the investment. 4 years. If I was president this would be one of my pet projects, and something that will put me in the history books. Not for only colonizing the moon, but creating a renewable power source for are world, and in the long term saving are country economically.
5231 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
22 / M / Mammago Garage, Y...
Offline
Posted 5/15/10

Darkphoenix3450 wrote:


Real_ZERO Is not far off.. the moon-dust on the moon is made up of all the raw materials needed to make solar panels. Being that the one side of the moon is always facing the sun. That means a constant power source. By making a very long field of solar panels we can gather enough power to run not only a city on the moon but also feed the power needs of earth. And yes their is a way to transfer power from the moon to earth... Its known as beaming the power by turning energy into another form and sending it through a Satellite to earth.

Air needs??? Ever hear of the RockAir device... It is a machine that takes rock and brakes them up an melts them down collecting h2o from the rocks... their it separates the oxygen from the hydrogen. So we can have a plant that makes air an water from rocks...

In the end starting a space community on the moon is a profitable and worth wile endeavor... Its to bad America is loosing out on this great possibility do to budget cuts on NASA.. But then NASA was slathering along any how.. Lucky for us I know of a few very rich people who just happen to be thinking of the profit that can be made from the moon, and have their own rocket plans and Scientist working on it right now.



now Cuddlebuns A City on the moon means Jobs, housing, and prophet. (the vacuum is the perfect atmosphere for a lot of product developments that cost millions to make on earth do to having to artificially produce the needed atmosphere to make the product there.) So their will be businesses wanting to put their plants/companies on the moon as well.



To be fully set up and see the investment pay off will only take 4 years.. estimated. 4 years of getting the ground work on the moon, to see a return on the investment. 4 years. If I was president this would be one of my pet projects, and something that will put me in the history books. Not for only colonizing the moon, but creating a renewable power source for are world, and in the long term saving are country economically.


I'm no economics expert and have no idea of what a reasonable estimate of the cost of this project would be, but in my mind it seems like it would cost an insanely large amount of money. It costs hundreds of millions just to build one spacecraft that transports humans to the moon (according to a brief Google search, which didn't give me any definite answers, but all of the numbers I found were in the billions and hundred millions). I know that there are plenty of rich people in the world who could easily pay enough to make 10 of those ships, but IMO it would be really hard to sell them this idea. Plus the transportation isn't the only cost, and I would imagine that it's not the most expensive either. Construction on the moon has never been done before, at least not to the extent you are proposing (buildings and solar panels), so it would not only be extremely expensive to pull off and train a bunch of people who are capable of doing it, there's a pretty high chance that many errors will be made that will end up costing a ton of money since it would basically be a huge experiment, which are always subject to error.

Then there's the whole issue of who gets the rights to profit from the moon's resources and what those business owners will do with that profit. I don't know if you've noticed, but pretty much every time new technology has been discovered throughout history, one of the first things humans do is try to find a way to use it to kill other people or give them advantages in wars. So if one nation does manage to build a city and factories up there, who's to say that they or some other nation won't use that newfound power to create missiles or some other weapon that could kill millions and billions of people? Who's to say that there won't be another World War over who gets the right to use the moon's resources for their own profit?

Even if you ignore my pessimistic attitude towards humanity, simply shipping supplies back and forth between the Earth and the moon would take a ton of money. Of course I'm sure there will be a cheaper and more effective means of travelling to and from the moon in the future, but I'm sure that would take more than 4 years.
17892 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
34 / M / Small Wooded town...
Offline
Posted 5/15/10 , edited 5/15/10

Cuddlebuns wrote:


Darkphoenix3450 wrote:


Real_ZERO Is not far off.. the moon-dust on the moon is made up of all the raw materials needed to make solar panels. Being that the one side of the moon is always facing the sun. That means a constant power source. By making a very long field of solar panels we can gather enough power to run not only a city on the moon but also feed the power needs of earth. And yes their is a way to transfer power from the moon to earth... Its known as beaming the power by turning energy into another form and sending it through a Satellite to earth.

Air needs??? Ever hear of the RockAir device... It is a machine that takes rock and brakes them up an melts them down collecting h2o from the rocks... their it separates the oxygen from the hydrogen. So we can have a plant that makes air an water from rocks...

In the end starting a space community on the moon is a profitable and worth wile endeavor... Its to bad America is loosing out on this great possibility do to budget cuts on NASA.. But then NASA was slathering along any how.. Lucky for us I know of a few very rich people who just happen to be thinking of the profit that can be made from the moon, and have their own rocket plans and Scientist working on it right now.



now Cuddlebuns A City on the moon means Jobs, housing, and prophet. (the vacuum is the perfect atmosphere for a lot of product developments that cost millions to make on earth do to having to artificially produce the needed atmosphere to make the product there.) So their will be businesses wanting to put their plants/companies on the moon as well.



To be fully set up and see the investment pay off will only take 4 years.. estimated. 4 years of getting the ground work on the moon, to see a return on the investment. 4 years. If I was president this would be one of my pet projects, and something that will put me in the history books. Not for only colonizing the moon, but creating a renewable power source for are world, and in the long term saving are country economically.


I'm no economics expert and have no idea of what a reasonable estimate of the cost of this project would be, but in my mind it seems like it would cost an insanely large amount of money. It costs hundreds of millions just to build one spacecraft that transports humans to the moon (according to a brief Google search, which didn't give me any definite answers, but all of the numbers I found were in the billions and hundred millions). I know that there are plenty of rich people in the world who could easily pay enough to make 10 of those ships, but IMO it would be really hard to sell them this idea. Plus the transportation isn't the only cost, and I would imagine that it's not the most expensive either. Construction on the moon has never been done before, at least not to the extent you are proposing (buildings and solar panels), so it would not only be extremely expensive to pull off and train a bunch of people who are capable of doing it, there's a pretty high chance that many errors will be made that will end up costing a ton of money since it would basically be a huge experiment, which are always subject to error.

Then there's the whole issue of who gets the rights to profit from the moon's resources and what those business owners will do with that profit. I don't know if you've noticed, but pretty much every time new technology has been discovered throughout history, one of the first things humans do is try to find a way to use it to kill other people or give them advantages in wars. So if one nation does manage to build a city and factories up there, who's to say that they or some other nation won't use that newfound power to create missiles or some other weapon that could kill millions and billions of people? Who's to say that there won't be another World War over who gets the right to use the moon's resources for their own profit?

Even if you ignore my pessimistic attitude towards humanity, simply shipping supplies back and forth between the Earth and the moon would take a ton of money. Of course I'm sure there will be a cheaper and more effective means of travelling to and from the moon in the future, but I'm sure that would take more than 4 years.



Bzzz wrong to build solar panels on the moon is cheap and can be done right their on the spot by a computer operated machine with no need of person being their at all. 'they can melt down the top layer of dirt known as moon-dust turning it into the glass wile they pass over it... then lay down the other components.. making the hole process cheap and fast. Do to the fact the vacuum is the most costly part of making solar panels and looky looky we have a vast open vacuum.

Supplies after a year will not be needed. . . why because we can mas produce air, water, and other devices needed. We have already developed space building that get blown-up... so they take little space to store. so most of the building sent are fully intact, yet can be compacted into a non-man operated rocket. That includes a green house that filters out air that people breath with what they exhale than filter it in with the plants that produce more air and feed of are wast product we produce. Also this is what supplies us with most of are food... no need for food supplies after a year.. Yes a self sustaining base.. of operation, that allows us to expand later into a city.
An their are working prototypes of this. (so we know it works.)

And yes this investment is worth 100 times the investment placed into it.. And I do not need to have them buy into it... Its already a pet project for a lot of them as we speak... including a 10 years project that NASA was just starting before they got there cut backs.

I really do not think we will turn the moon into a death star so stop fearing that.. in long run its a power source that will eliminate are dependence on fossil-fuels.


Also look how much we are spending on cleaning up are Oil messes in the ocean. over 480 mil a week. Still think it is not worth the investment? We as a country can afford this with using the amount of money we invest in are Drug War against marijuana. Shows how America throws money away but you do not like using are thrown away money for better uses. Such as things that would benefit us 100 fold in 4 to 10 years time. Mattering what hiccups we might run into.
5231 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
22 / M / Mammago Garage, Y...
Offline
Posted 5/15/10

Darkphoenix3450 wrote:


Bzzz wrong to build solar panels on the moon is cheap and can be done right their on the spot by a computer operated machine with no need of person being their at all. 'they can melt down the top layer of dirt known as moon-dust turning it into the glass wile they pass over it... then lay down the other components.. making the hole process cheap and fast. Do to the fact the vacuum is the most costly part of making solar panels and looky looky we have a vast open vacuum.

Supplies after a year will not be needed. . . why because we can mas produce air, water, and other devices needed. We have already developed space building that get blown-up... so they take little space to store. so most of the building sent are fully intact, yet can be compacted into a non-man operated rocket. That includes a green house that filters out air that people breath with what they exhale than filter it in with the plants that produce more air and feed of are wast product we produce. Also this is what supplies us with most of are food... no need for food supplies after a year.. Yes a self sustaining base.. of operation, that allows us to expand later into a city.
An their are working prototypes of this. (so we know it works.)

And yes this investment is worth 100 times the investment placed into it.. And I do not need to have them buy into it... Its already a pet project for a lot of them as we speak... including a 10 years project that NASA was just starting before they got there cut backs.

I really do not think we will turn the moon into a death star so stop fearing that.. in long run its a power source that will eliminate are dependence on fossil-fuels.


Even if all of this is true (which seems unlikely to me, but I'm in no place refute most of it), there's still the issue of who gets the rights to do all of this. Maybe we won't turn the moon into a death star, but if NASA sets all this up and some other country decides that it's not our right to exploit the moon's resources, then it would most likely lead to another war. To me it seems like one of those things that works well in theory but not in practice due to the human factor.
17892 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
34 / M / Small Wooded town...
Offline
Posted 5/15/10

Cuddlebuns wrote:


Darkphoenix3450 wrote:


Bzzz wrong to build solar panels on the moon is cheap and can be done right their on the spot by a computer operated machine with no need of person being their at all. 'they can melt down the top layer of dirt known as moon-dust turning it into the glass wile they pass over it... then lay down the other components.. making the hole process cheap and fast. Do to the fact the vacuum is the most costly part of making solar panels and looky looky we have a vast open vacuum.

Supplies after a year will not be needed. . . why because we can mas produce air, water, and other devices needed. We have already developed space building that get blown-up... so they take little space to store. so most of the building sent are fully intact, yet can be compacted into a non-man operated rocket. That includes a green house that filters out air that people breath with what they exhale than filter it in with the plants that produce more air and feed of are wast product we produce. Also this is what supplies us with most of are food... no need for food supplies after a year.. Yes a self sustaining base.. of operation, that allows us to expand later into a city.
An their are working prototypes of this. (so we know it works.)

And yes this investment is worth 100 times the investment placed into it.. And I do not need to have them buy into it... Its already a pet project for a lot of them as we speak... including a 10 years project that NASA was just starting before they got there cut backs.

I really do not think we will turn the moon into a death star so stop fearing that.. in long run its a power source that will eliminate are dependence on fossil-fuels.


Even if all of this is true (which seems unlikely to me, but I'm in no place refute most of it), there's still the issue of who gets the rights to do all of this. Maybe we won't turn the moon into a death star, but if NASA sets all this up and some other country decides that it's not our right to exploit the moon's resources, then it would most likely lead to another war. To me it seems like one of those things that works well in theory but not in practice due to the human factor.


SO you believe we should not evolve. we should not explore.. we should keep drinking up are planets resources, then go extinct.

You believe people should no expand and probe new avenues.. because of fear people will hurt you somehow...

Is that not the same as placing your self in a box do to fear of the what ifs.

The information I posted is all modern scientifically proven facts.. from powering earth, to Air from rocks..
http://www.nature.com/news/2009/090810/full/news.2009.803.html
http://www.sciencenetlinks.com/sci_update.php?DocID=144
http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn18607-nasa-turned-on-by-blowup-space-stations.html

See I don't just run my mouth I gather the facts first.
Then make my own report from the facts.
5231 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
22 / M / Mammago Garage, Y...
Offline
Posted 5/15/10 , edited 5/15/10

Darkphoenix3450 wrote:

SO you believe we should not evolve. we should not explore.. we should keep drinking up are planets resources, then go extinct.

You believe people should no expand and probe new avenues.. because of fear people will hurt you somehow...

Is that not the same as placing your self in a box do to fear of the what ifs.

The information I posted is all modern scientifically proven facts.. from powering earth, to Air from rocks..
http://www.nature.com/news/2009/090810/full/news.2009.803.html
http://www.sciencenetlinks.com/sci_update.php?DocID=144
http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn18607-nasa-turned-on-by-blowup-space-stations.html

See I don't just run my mouth I gather the facts first.
Then make my own report from the facts.


There's nothing wrong with exploration and expansion, but it seems like you were talking more about making monetary profits, which is what I believe would be the downfall of this endeavor. We can be self-sustaining and delay our extinction without going to the moon (at least not immediately), we have the ability and the resources to do so, we just don't have the will because people would rather make money, and that is what I believe would happen in this scenario as well. People would focus more on making money than trying to help benefit humanity.

I personally believe that we should learn to take care of Earth and the people on it before we go out colonizing and destroying other celestial bodies.

The Wise Wizard
74898 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
53 / M / U.S.A.
Online
Posted 5/15/10

Cuddlebuns wrote:
I personally believe that we should learn to take care of Earth and the people on it before we go out colonizing and destroying other celestial bodies.

It would be rather difficult to "destroy" the moon, since it has no biosphere. The universe itself has been harder on it than humans could be.

I put "destroy" in quotes, since when most people refer to humans destroying the earth, they are talking about the possibility of wiping out all life on it. After all, even if we deliberately tried to destroy the earth itself (much less by accident or neglect), our technology is simply inadequate to do so.

5231 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
22 / M / Mammago Garage, Y...
Offline
Posted 5/15/10

TheAncientOne wrote:


Cuddlebuns wrote:
I personally believe that we should learn to take care of Earth and the people on it before we go out colonizing and destroying other celestial bodies.

It would be rather difficult to "destroy" the moon, since it has no biosphere. The universe itself has been harder on it than humans could be.

I put "destroy" in quotes, since when most people refer to humans destroying the earth, they are talking about the possibility of wiping out all life on it. After all, even if we deliberately tried to destroy the earth itself (much less by accident or neglect), our technology is simply inadequate to do so.



In that scenario I would define"destruction" of the moon and Earth as completely draining their resources.
The Wise Wizard
74898 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
53 / M / U.S.A.
Online
Posted 5/15/10

Cuddlebuns wrote:
In that scenario I would define"destruction" of the moon and Earth as completely draining their resources.

In the case of the Earth, that problem would be resolved within at most a few millenia after humans disappeared. In geological terms, that is like the blink of an eye.

On the moon, with no plate tectonics, atmosphere or biosphere (except for what we may introduce), resources extracted from the moon would likely be in the same a million years later. Even so, they would still be there, and with no biosphere to be damaged, what harm would they do?

Talking about "using up resources" is similar to talking about "wasting" money, except the former actually makes more sense.

For example, when we extract oil from the earth, refine it, burn most of the components, and use others, all of the original elements are there, although some have been combined with other elements and/or broken down (i.e, fuels) or locked up in forms that are not readily broken down (i.e., plastics).

By contrast, the only way one can "waste" money is either by destroying it (i.e., lighting cigars with $100 bills), or not using it (i.e., burying it in your backyard or stuffing it in your mattress). Even if one spent a billion dollars on the most frivolous thing imaginable, that money does not disappear. It simply transfers to other person(s), who can then use it as they see fit.

4053 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
M / Yo Mommas House
Offline
Posted 5/15/10

Cuddlebuns wrote:

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=nasas-mission-to-bomb-the-moon-2009-06

Yes I realize the article is from June, but at the bottom it said that it was rescheduled to today, and apparently it's been rescheduled again to tomorrow (October 9).

The first thing that came to mind was that billions of dollars went into these machines. Billions of dollars is being launched into space in hopes of finding water under the moon's surface. Billions of dollars are going to explode with a chance that it will all be for nothing, and even if all does go well, the water will simply allow astronauts to be able to set up a base on the moon for scientific research. They never mentioned exactly how they would extract the water, which is definitely frozen. But it's not like that kind of stuff matters.

Anyway, I hope that I'm not the only one who is outraged by the fact that billions of dollars is essentially going to waste when it could be used to do something more pragmatic, like maybe filtering the water that's already on Earth so more people can have clean water, or provide aid to the hundreds of thousands of people who die every day due to preventable causes. I'm all for scientific advancement and study, but I don't think that it should take priority over people who are suffering right under our noses. We shouldn't worry about colonizing the moon when we have plenty of problems to take care of on Earth, especially since trying to colonize the moon would most likely cause more problems than it solves.

Just another reason why the rest of the world hates us.


Yea I have to agree with you I am all for scientific advance as well but it just seems to me it is a waste of time and money to be traveling to the moon much less blowing it up. Lol so what if there is water on the moon? Are we trying to live on the moon in the future? Seriously it is a waste of time now Mars is a different story. Hopefully in my lifetime we can have a human sent to mars.
17892 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
34 / M / Small Wooded town...
Offline
Posted 5/15/10 , edited 5/15/10

drizza wrote:


Cuddlebuns wrote:

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=nasas-mission-to-bomb-the-moon-2009-06

Yes I realize the article is from June, but at the bottom it said that it was rescheduled to today, and apparently it's been rescheduled again to tomorrow (October 9).

The first thing that came to mind was that billions of dollars went into these machines. Billions of dollars is being launched into space in hopes of finding water under the moon's surface. Billions of dollars are going to explode with a chance that it will all be for nothing, and even if all does go well, the water will simply allow astronauts to be able to set up a base on the moon for scientific research. They never mentioned exactly how they would extract the water, which is definitely frozen. But it's not like that kind of stuff matters.

Anyway, I hope that I'm not the only one who is outraged by the fact that billions of dollars is essentially going to waste when it could be used to do something more pragmatic, like maybe filtering the water that's already on Earth so more people can have clean water, or provide aid to the hundreds of thousands of people who die every day due to preventable causes. I'm all for scientific advancement and study, but I don't think that it should take priority over people who are suffering right under our noses. We shouldn't worry about colonizing the moon when we have plenty of problems to take care of on Earth, especially since trying to colonize the moon would most likely cause more problems than it solves.

Just another reason why the rest of the world hates us.


Yea I have to agree with you I am all for scientific advance as well but it just seems to me it is a waste of time and money to be traveling to the moon much less blowing it up. Lol so what if there is water on the moon? Are we trying to live on the moon in the future? Seriously it is a waste of time now Mars is a different story. Hopefully in my lifetime we can have a human sent to mars.


Yeah because a renewable clean non wasteful power source that could power all of earths power needs, is a bad idea... Lets not do it. Lets instead burn up all are non-renewable resources on earth than die out. Wen the moon it self can solve most of the problems, you have us not go just so you can hide from advancement and evolution of are species.
The idea of change scares you, and that is the only thing your able to hold onto..

Drizza sounds like a female name to me.
8742 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
24 / M / Scotland, Aberdeen
Offline
Posted 5/15/10
We have the resources to supply a great number of people with nearly everything that they need, as we have demonstrated and keep on demonstrating. The solution to the whole 'Oh noes, this could be better spent elsewhere!' problem is to stop breeding so vehemently. Our short term goals affect our long term ones adversely.
5231 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
22 / M / Mammago Garage, Y...
Offline
Posted 5/15/10 , edited 5/15/10

Darkphoenix3450 wrote:

Yeah because a renewable clean non wasteful power source that could power all of earths power needs, is a bad idea... Lets not do it. Lets instead burn up all are non-renewable resources on earth than die out. Wen the moon it self can solve most of the problems, you have us not go just so you can hide from advancement and evolution of are species.
The idea of change scares you, and that is the only thing your able to hold onto..

Drizza sounds like a female name to me.


Non-renewable resources aren't the only resources on Earth, so when they run out it does not mean that humans will die out, although life will become difficult if we are still dependent on them by then. But the U.S and China and a few other developed nations are the only ones who would be severely affected by that, since the rest of the world isn't as dependent on fossil fuels as we are. When they do run out, worst case scenario is that the human population will decline significantly, which isn't such a bad thing. Plenty of people around the world live well without fossil fuels or other non-renewable resources, and we got along fine for millions of years without them, so humanity won't go extinct without them. Having more energy just means that our population will grow more, which isn't necessarily a good thing.

It may hinder the "advancement" of our species (or our bank accounts, which I'm sure is what you're more worried about), but it will not hinder the evolution of our species since we will just adapt to our new circumstances, which is evolution. Using the moon's resources wouldn't necessarily change anything, but it would definitely produce more money and resources to start wars over.


TheAncientOne wrote:


Cuddlebuns wrote:
In that scenario I would define"destruction" of the moon and Earth as completely draining their resources.

In the case of the Earth, that problem would be resolved within at most a few millenia after humans disappeared. In geological terms, that is like the blink of an eye.

On the moon, with no plate tectonics, atmosphere or biosphere (except for what we may introduce), resources extracted from the moon would likely be in the same a million years later. Even so, they would still be there, and with no biosphere to be damaged, what harm would they do?

Talking about "using up resources" is similar to talking about "wasting" money, except the former actually makes more sense.

For example, when we extract oil from the earth, refine it, burn most of the components, and use others, all of the original elements are there, although some have been combined with other elements and/or broken down (i.e, fuels) or locked up in forms that are not readily broken down (i.e., plastics).

By contrast, the only way one can "waste" money is either by destroying it (i.e., lighting cigars with $100 bills), or not using it (i.e., burying it in your backyard or stuffing it in your mattress). Even if one spent a billion dollars on the most frivolous thing imaginable, that money does not disappear. It simply transfers to other person(s), who can then use it as they see fit.



I guess it's just the tree-hugger (or rather moon-hugger) side of me that believes that we shouldn't exploit nature just for monetary gain, which is what I fear would be the ultimate result of such a project. It may not be rational, but feelings never are.
55157 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
52 / F / Atlanta GA
Online
Posted 5/20/10
It better spent there than most government pork. But I remember when astronauts had guts and gave there all. Now it is so full of bureaucrats very little gets done. Help the privet sector and fire half those clowns. We need men and women to get out there do stuff. You know your siting on a some what controlled explosion Liquid hydrogen and oxygen and a whole lot of sparks to set it off. All the poor teacher that died sorry it happens.
17892 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
34 / M / Small Wooded town...
Offline
Posted 5/21/10

Cuddlebuns wrote:


TheAncientOne wrote:


Cuddlebuns wrote:
I personally believe that we should learn to take care of Earth and the people on it before we go out colonizing and destroying other celestial bodies.

It would be rather difficult to "destroy" the moon, since it has no biosphere. The universe itself has been harder on it than humans could be.

I put "destroy" in quotes, since when most people refer to humans destroying the earth, they are talking about the possibility of wiping out all life on it. After all, even if we deliberately tried to destroy the earth itself (much less by accident or neglect), our technology is simply inadequate to do so.



In that scenario I would define"destruction" of the moon and Earth as completely draining their resources.

Well the moons resources is a constant on restricted solar power that give enough power to not just run a city or moon base but all the power on earth as well, eliminating the need of fossilize fuels all together.

Its a power source that does not deplete till the sun it self goes red giant. at that time moon base will not be needed anymore. Because we all be dead. So will the moon!

Think how much we spend on fuel. For everyday life. Do you really think this cheaper yet cleaner power source in space is such a bad investment. It also makes for a good base for space exploration. after that we could start a base/city on mars. Not for a power source needs, but for a expanding populations, and exploration needs. (some day we will reach those other 50 earth like planets that we have spotted so far. 25 to 150 light years away. )

Sometimes steps and risk must be taken. In order for new advancements to take place, to better man kind.
First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.