On revisiting the moon
4 2018-01-31 by The_Noble_Lie
I was talking to some peers and none of them even knew we (USA) supposedly landed on the moon with manned operations 6 times. They all thought it was once, one of them thought twice. (Out of 6)
Hmm. That piqued my interest.
Of course my follow up is why havent any other countries done it if USA nailed it 6 times over 2 generations ago. Or even how come 6 times in a relatively short period for USA, and never again?
We get two cookie cut answers which surely may apply:
1) Its a ball of uninhabitable matter (the guy used "ball of dust" (i think rock/dirt may fit better but whatever. Theres also "officially" supposedly water)
2) Its a cash/funding problem.
Nothing there on the moon, eh? Funding problem? (Perhaps by design...)
Or maybe it's because they dont want 7 billion people (or any percentage of them) banding together to get off this corrupt shit hole of a planet filled with thieves, liars and immoral capitalists (edit: and other ideologies, thanks Mr. Grump) milking the planet and residents for more money and power, slowly destroying our potential to live here long term via pollution, radiation, explosions/bombs, scorched earth, depleted soil, pharmaceuticals making their way into our oceans and countless others.
It would make for less slaves on this planet, right? But hey lets just remain ignorant of the possibilities. (One of my peers claimed that it wouldnt affect him if we somehow proved it was fabricated. Another claimed shit(myth)busters completely debunked all considerations)
Personally, it makes a whole lot of sense there would be a lunar base funded and operated by black projects, operating chiefly robotically, especially in 2018. This project most probably began shortly after the "Space Race" movies/propaganda. "Look all, nothing to see here but us playing golf on a barren, utterly useless landscape. Oh we also brought a buggy and drove a few miles and it was the same!" ...
Nope! No need to figure out a lunar base which has a tiny gravitional well compared to earth and literally zero atmospheric drag: the two chief "geographical" issues we face when designing a space ship capable of leaving the surface of earth. Lets directly go to Mars and skip all that!
I call bullshit. My peers didnt like it very much. I expected that, but figured I'd dump the experience and fish for viewpoints in the year 2018.
29 comments
1 grumpieroldman 2018-01-31
Yeah ... it's the capitalist that are the problem.
1 The_Noble_Lie 2018-01-31
Well no, Mr. Grump. I said
Capitalism can be fine until disrupted by immorality and greed. You dont even need to be an old man to come to this obvious conclusion (not saying youre old, youre acting like you are in high school or college.).
Contribute or sincerely, please move on to the next thread. I also suppose you should know I edited the post for you.
1 DonnaGail 2018-01-31
We have never been to the moon.
1 The_Noble_Lie 2018-01-31
It's what I was hoping for my peers to at least consider.
Given a group of six, I was dealing with the momentum of the herd. But I noticed one of the ones I respect most for his intelligence, looking up things on his computer, and seemingly more engaged (listening, moving seat closer to the group) as the conversation went. Although he didnt contribute to the conversation much.
That's still indicative I got at least one of them possibly challenging their belief instead of dismissing valid concerns. (Our conversation was quite long and spanned many topics, for instance the "missing" Apollo telemetry tapes, possible CGI tells in modern launches and ISS and more)
1 DonnaGail 2018-01-31
It sounds like you planted a seed in the mind of the silent one in the group (that was looking things up on his phone). Hopefully he will continue to research on his own.
1 King_Thor 2018-01-31
We've been to the moon and beyond. Secret space program.
1 piisfour 2018-01-31
Well tell us more. This is the place.
1 metlblu 2018-01-31
We did but only under Richard Nixon, using guidance systems with less computing muscle than a pocket calculator! Astronauts withstood deadly radiation and managed to transport a moon buggy that was bigger than their lander, because americans were made of The Right Stuff in those days.
1 DonnaGail 2018-01-31
Yes, you are absolutely correct. I stand corrected. 🙂
1 The_Noble_Lie 2018-01-31
Thanks for this :-)
1 ostrichnest 2018-01-31
"why havent any other countries done it if USA nailed it 6 times over 2 generations ago"
?? there have been unmanned moon missions... possibly most notable being China.
1 Beaver7530 2018-01-31
but those 6 times USA did it was manned flights....
1 The_Noble_Lie 2018-01-31
My point was manned missions. Ideally, temporary moon bases. They got off the surface 6 times safely.
1 piisfour 2018-01-31
But nobody else put a man (or a woman, for that matter) on the moon (unless I missed something).
1 of_mendez 2018-01-31
Earth is flat
1 WadeWilsonforPope 2018-01-31
Earth is round.
1 of_mendez 2018-01-31
If it is round it is like Jupiter sized, and we live in a hole in the ice
1 WadeWilsonforPope 2018-01-31
It round like Earth sized.
1 of_mendez 2018-01-31
something like this https://qph.ec.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-c57828dc26b550ee91a3cc9ab42796a9
1 WadeWilsonforPope 2018-01-31
Why do storms have different rotations depending on hemisphere in your model?
Why can we measure rotation with pendulums or gyroscopes?
1 piisfour 2018-01-31
Are you trying to take Galilei's place?
1 piisfour 2018-01-31
Are you trying to take Giordano Bruno's place?
1 Pete_Castiglione_ 2018-01-31
I think they came to the conclusion that nobody should land on the moon at all. Ill bet one or two pioneers did land or hit the surface with something heavy and it didnt turn out as expected. Newton's second law potentially could affect the surface composure, slow/accelerate the rotation, or even adjust the orbit. Those options would of course be unacceptable.
1 Upupabove 2018-01-31
I thought they said they "lost the technology" to go back?
1 WadeWilsonforPope 2018-01-31
I think that was Petit who said that?
Taken completely out of context. He was referring to the large rockets from the space race. We dismantled all of them.
1 piisfour 2018-01-31
This doesn't imply the technology is lost, for crying out loud!
1 WadeWilsonforPope 2018-01-31
What does it imply?
He was talking about the saturn heavy lift rockets, we dismantled the infrastructure to build them
1 piisfour 2018-01-31
How can technology be lost in a mere few decades?
Over the course of millennia would be credible.
1 piisfour 2018-01-31
Me too, I wondered about the decades of standstill after NASA advanced with such phenomenal breakthroughs in the sixties and seventies (and early eighties I think).
In some way it doesn't add up very well. Lack of funds? Sounds ridiculous, for the most powerful nation on earth.
1 DonnaGail 2018-01-31
It sounds like you planted a seed in the mind of the silent one in the group (that was looking things up on his phone). Hopefully he will continue to research on his own.
1 of_mendez 2018-01-31
something like this https://qph.ec.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-c57828dc26b550ee91a3cc9ab42796a9
1 WadeWilsonforPope 2018-01-31
Why do storms have different rotations depending on hemisphere in your model?
Why can we measure rotation with pendulums or gyroscopes?
1 piisfour 2018-01-31
Well tell us more. This is the place.