Why has NASA never gone back to the moon?

reply to post by TheStev


If you ever come across this book, please read it.

www.amazon.com...

One of the main objectives of NASA's Clementine Project is to locate lunar ice deposits near the south pole. From these deposits, hydrogen and oxygen can be produced eliminating the need to boost large amounts of fuel into Earth orbit and then on to their destination. Until we could determine if ice existed on the Moon and we had the technology to produce fuel from these deposits, there was no reason to return. We had all the lunar rocks we could afford.

Since ice deposits do exist and we now have the technology to produce fuels from said deposits, a lunar base at the south pole will be built as soon as feasible.

This is a big deal to future space exploration of our solar system. On-site fuels, the ability to produce water for human consumption, on a body with only 1/6th of Earths gravity. Also, it never gets dark at the Moon's south pole. Almost too good to be true.

To fully understand what what NASA was dealing with in its Apollo Project, and why we need a base on the Moon, a few facts must be understood.

A completely fueled Saturn V had a gross weight of 7,754,634 lbs of which the empty vehicle weight was only 479,559 lbs. This means it took 7.2 million gallons of fuel, producing 7.5 million pounds of thrust, to propel the 479,559 lb Saturn V launch vehicle into Earth orbit and on to the Moon. Bottom line - Fuel made up 93.8% of the total launch weight.

The numbers for the LEM ascent stage departing the lunar surface makes it very clear why we will have a base on the Moon from which manned flights will explore our solar system.

The LEM ascent stage has a gross fueled vehicular weight of 10,300 lbs with onboard fuels at 5187 lbs. Fuel to vehicle weight ratio is 1:1. The LEM ascent stage produces only 3,500 lbs of thrust to put a 10,000 lb (Moon weight - 1717 lbs) spacecraft into lunar orbit. On Earth, the LEM's Thrust-to-Weight ratio at lift-off would be 0.34, but on the Moon, with its 1/6th gravity, the ratio is 2.06. This is the key.

With these facts taken into consideration, it's just a matter of time until a launch facility is built on the Moon. The physics, logistics, and especially economics, will make it so. As I said above, on-site source for fuel, potable water coupled with a 1/6 gravity will be too much for NASA to pass up. A lunar base is the next logical step in our exploration of our solar system.

"We would like to confirm that there is a Santa Claus."

Santa Claus -> S C

S C -> Space Craft ??


There is a Santa Claus

or

There is a Space Craft

?? doo doo doo doo, doo doo doo doo....

Maybe they're are aliens on the moon. Maybe all the holes/circles on the moon are from where previous UFOs have landed. Or maybe it's as simple as NASA knowing enough about the moon, and want to continue learning about other planets. Nobody will know for sure.

reply to post by CNRHKick


Actually, there are people who know for sure. There are geologists, astronomers, astrophysicists, aerospace engineers, astronauts, and scores of others who have education and first-hand knowledge of the mission of NASA.

The original poster's question has already been answered several times: Money. There were more missions planned for the moon, but funding was cut by the congress and 3 missions were scrapped. The assets that were already on-hand were repurposed for Skylab, which was used to study the long term effects of space on the human body, among other things. The cut of funding for the Apollo moon shots was hardly abrupt either.

After Apollo 12 the interest in the program began to wain. Apollo 13 brought back some interest because of the life and death situation, but 14 was mostly ignored by the public too, even with Alan Shephard as the commander. Keep in mind that these were taking place about every 6 months or so. By the time Apollo 15 splashed down, the ax was already falling on the budget for the moon landings. NASA's budget bills had been reallocated to other projects such as the shuttle.

Why does it require some sinister plot by aliens or the NWO? The public interest was low in the moon landings after it was proven that it could be done. If you're not an American, perhaps you don't understand the political structure but Congress has to approve the funding for things like NASA, so they have quite a bit of say about the programs they will fund. If the public isn't interested in the moon landings anymore, the politicians can't buy themselves votes by continuing to fund the moon landings. If they can't buy themselves any votes, they pull the funding and put it somewhere that WILL buy them some votes.

Actually, isn't that sinister enough? That's ACTUALLY what happened!

Oh yeah? Who needs to go to the moon when you have armadas of ships that can scour this solar system for remnants of the past? You really meant to ask when NASA's next publicity stunt is. Just go check out the Phoenix Lander and have a good laugh. It's a perfect example of wasted money and time. Yeah sure glitches and failed communications for the remote controlled pooper scooper. And where are the rovers?


And why would you want NASA to goto the moon anyway? What for more coverups and hidden agendas? More blotched photos? Oh wow rock samples? Rock dust? Yeah that's it. Goto the moon to collect rocks. Give me a break. The only seriousness of racing to the moon was to confiscate relics and artifacts before anyone else on earth could at the time.


NASA are the biggest deceivers of the world. They should be shutdown. They should all be rounded up and annihilated. Demolition teams should be sent in to obliterate their infrastructure. Their secret underground bases. Their offices. Their data centers. So much has been kept behind doors there's no point of picking up the pieces. Blow it all up. Drop the bomb on Cape Canaveral. Abolish Mission Control. That will leave those other bastards of the far out ranks heading home.


Guess who's going to be waiting for their arrival?

Originally posted by umigo
reply to post by kadara_dk

 

why haven we seen them with the presiden or overtaken a T.V channel and speake too all on the World ??? Your point of views are so weak, you want to be a star trek geek and think that they will overtaken a T.V channel and speak too all on the World your in a dream.

Thousands of years old proofs, they dont need to lie or be on drugs and certainly don't look like any rock, its another spices us humans have named them "aliens"
"

That is a vase with two flowers in it. A ritual thing or whatever that was very common in that day and age. Someone went to the exact location of that depiction and took high res photos. It's out there somewhere on the net. You'll find it if you look.

Originally posted by unite_life
reply to post by TheStev

 

If you ever come across this book, please read it.

www.amazon.com...

I would love to, I've read Ingo Swann's Remote Viewing story from his website, but that book is very hard to come by. Perhaps you could briefly outline how it relates to this subject? I'd be fascinated to know.

Originally posted by StudioGuy
reply to post by CNRHKick

 

If you're not an American, perhaps you don't understand the political structure but Congress has to approve the funding for things like NASA, so they have quite a bit of say about the programs they will fund. If the public isn't interested in the moon landings anymore, the politicians can't buy themselves votes by continuing to fund the moon landings. If they can't buy themselves any votes, they pull the funding and put it somewhere that WILL buy them some votes.

Actually, isn't that sinister enough? That's ACTUALLY what happened!

You are absolutely correct. Apollo funding was curtailed to gather more votes through funding the military action in Vietnam. It's hard to fund a project like Apollo when you're throwing everything, including the kitchen sink, into Vietnam.

Waning interest in Apollo did not surprise me. It was tough to support Apollo when son's, husbands and fathers were dying in the jungles of Vietnam at an ever increasing rate. Not many here at ATS seem to remember that.

Originally posted by WISHADOW
Oh yeah? Who needs to go to the moon when you have armadas of ships that can scour this solar system for remnants of the past? You really meant to ask when NASA's next publicity stunt is. Just go check out the Phoenix Lander and have a good laugh. It's a perfect example of wasted money and time. Yeah sure glitches and failed communications for the remote controlled pooper scooper. And where are the rovers?

LOST IN A LOST WORLD!!

And why would you want NASA to goto the moon anyway? What for more coverups and hidden agendas? More blotched photos? Oh wow rock samples? Rock dust? Yeah that's it. Goto the moon to collect rocks. Give me a break. The only seriousness of racing to the moon was to confiscate relics and artifacts before anyone else on earth could at the time.

Got any pictures or documentation on all the relics and artifacts brought back to Earth. C'mon just 1 picture, 1 document, 1 anything other than your opinion!!. You should have something to support your position/comments.

NASA are the biggest deceivers of the world. They should be shutdown. They should all be rounded up and annihilated. Demolition teams should be sent in to obliterate their infrastructure. Their secret underground bases. Their offices. Their data centers. So much has been kept behind doors there's no point of picking up the pieces. Blow it all up. Drop the bomb on Cape Canaveral. Abolish Mission Control. That will leave those other bastards of the far out ranks heading home.

If this is the best your mind can do? I'd laugh but this makes me want to cry!! I have many friends that have or are currently working for NASA. One of them was a member of the "Close-out Crew" for the Gemini and Apollo flights and is a inductee into NASA's Hall of Fame. They are some of the finest our country has to offer. The last thing they deserve are comments you have posted above.

Guess who's going to be waiting for their arrival?

Yo mama! (sorry mods)

NASA--and capitalism--actually HAVE fully answered the question of why they never returned to the moon. Of course, their reasoning only holds water with a public that believes that there was no clear financial benefit (and great financial downfall); that the novelty of the original political benefits ebbed; and that there was a widespread public apathy after the original landings...
If you can believe that stuff.

Originally posted by Oldnslo
One of the main objectives of NASA's Clementine Project is to locate lunar ice deposits near the south pole.

The main objective of Clementine was to map the moon for "High ground" for the DoD Starwars program... Clementine was NOT a NASA spacecraft it was military NASA only ran mission control

The discovery of a frozen lake 100 sq kilometers 50 feet deep was announced by the Pentagon in Apr 1996, but that 'press release' only made the internet Oct 2006

Clementine also passed by the Earth again in 2005

We had all the lunar rocks we could afford.

Your forgetting HE3

Since ice deposits do exist and we now have the technology to produce fuels from said deposits, a lunar base at the south pole will be built as soon as feasible.

Why waste the water when you can extract the oxygen from the rocks with a simple solar furnace and get a byproduct of glass for making fiberglass structures, titanium and iron as well as thorium for power... All this is on the surface as oxides...

The term use is ISRU In other words "what is found on the Moon, Stays on the Moon

The released oxygen can then be combined with Hydrogen to make water, or used for fuel... or to BREATHE

A lunar base is the next logical step in our exploration of our solar system.

A lunar base was built in 1962 by the Army Apollo project was a media circus

[edit on 26-6-2008 by zorgon]

Originally posted by TheStev
I would love to, I've read Ingo Swann's Remote Viewing story from his website, but that book is very hard to come by.

Easy to come by but costs a few buck I saw one going cheap on Amazon for 450.00

Better grab it while ya can...

Or... you could beg and grovel and get a pdf version

reply to post by zorgon

A lunar base was built in 1962 by the Army Apollo project was a media circus

Nice to see nothing has changed in the imaginary world of John Lear's merriest man.

I would ask if there is ANY sort of actual evidence you could provide for the JL fantasy of a secret military base on the moon, but there wouldn't be much point. The scariest part is that the imaginary claim you keep parroting has been written by you and others so many time that soon enough you'll be able to start quoting YOURSELF as proof that it's true!

It would be great for somebody to explain how water can be used as a fuel. Water is a byproduct, not a fuel. It actually takes more energy to break the bond between hydrogen and oxygen than would be yielded. Oh wait, the aliens have some technology for extracting energy from water, right?

haha i got an idea - lets end this right here right know.. Somebody ring NASA up and ask them why they never went back.. See what they say, then post their answer here...

We never went to the moon. Period.

Not possible in 1969. Not possible now. Probably never will be.

The moon hoax is propaganda..pure & simple. It was born in the era of propaganda by nazi scientists who are experts in the field.

Watch 'a funny thing happened on the way to the moon'. If you still believe we went to the moon then your self-deluded.

[edit on 26-6-2008 by Nonchalant]

reply to post by Nonchalant


Nonchalant, If you have been taken in by, and bamboozled by, the 'A Funny Thing Happened on the Way to the Moon' video, then I feel very sorry for you.

Because, your lack of critical thinking skills seem to have been dumbed down, by Hollywood. Or maybe just that horribly inaccurate 'film'....I I have to grind my teeth when I give it that moniker...."film".

It is a piece of trash, full of lies.....and baloney.

reply to post by Nonchalant


You're completely right. There's this other video that is pretty convincing too.

Not possible? Ok So why is it possible to go to Mars?

Think.........

reply to post by Nohup


"not worth the cost"
I was just watching a show and they ran through some of the prices for a trip to the moon, mars, and I forget what else. It WAS alot..
but right away I thought why does it even have a "cost"?
I dont know how all the funding works, and im sure its from taxpayers pockets and what not, but this isnt like buying a pair of shoes that were made in another country.
I think the problem is if it is just the costs, maybe theres alot of people in the world that could use a hefty pay cut for whatever they might be calling a profession.