It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: Soylent Green Is People
originally posted by: Hex1an
I would be more impressed with mining the Moon, Helium-3 would abolish nuclear waste - something that Mankind should be striving for.
Well, it would abolish nuclear waste once they successfully figure out how to make fusion power plants that use helium-3. Nuclear fusion cannot yet be done with any efficiency whatsoever, whether or not we had a large supply of helium-3.
originally posted by: Soylent Green Is People
originally posted by: intrptr
Going there is one thing. Actually getting there, something else.
Missions log
That log shows a history of many failures in the early years, then a mix of success and failure in the middle years, and then many more success in the later years.
It seems to me we are on the right track -- i.e., it's trending positively.
It seems to me that it takes long enough to get there that you may as well have the landing vehicle technology ready to go for any manned trip at all. It's not like the three-day Apollo 8 trip to the Moon (and three days back).
originally posted by: zandra
a reply to: Soylent Green Is People
from www.evawaseerst.be...
You become a mystery to us mister Musk if we read that you apparently don't see the need to colonize the moon, not even just a little bit. Believe us or not but all problems about lunar habitats could be solved according to many scholars and then we even don't mention the moon tunnels.
And when you said Mars is only 150 times further then our moon -every two years Earth and Mars reach their closest point- we even thought for a second that with your Tesla racing car you must have lost contact with the idea of distance.
ONLY 150 times? Is that your way of saying that reaching the moon must be -what all insiders probably know- just a piece of cake?
We need a moonbase to go to Mars. So what is wrong with our moon?
originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: greencmp
All aneutronic fusion is completely viable already.
So? Who's got the reactors?
Ummm…It seems that long term viability of colonization would depend initially on prepositioning…of supplies/vehicles equipment…etc...
Sure is something having a whole billion to lose!?! If I had a billion to lose, I don't think I would have any money problems, he's got more.. I'm sure.
originally posted by: lavatrance
a reply to: Soylent Green Is People
They should try and at least prove they can get the moon first. What they're doing is so stupid already. They haven't provided any real proof that humans have gone anywhere "far away", but they keep launching these fake long distance missions to waste and steal tax payer money. It's the use of hype to steal on a grande scale. Snake oil sales men. So invest in space x people becuase they're gonna do SUCH BIG THINGS. And it must be true because goof ball said so (who lost his whole billion fortune) . The guy couldn't even stay rich after getting a billion. He can't even control his money, or make good on his electric cars, but yet he's trustworthy? Anyone who can lose a billion is moron in my books. Sorry but that's just all wrong. Like seriously.
This is a good point, but the elite must have a vacation home.
originally posted by: korath
So after they spend billions getting there, what are they going to do? stick a flag in the dirt and bring back some rocks? Maybe they should spend that money taking care of the planet we got instead of wasting it on some ego trip.