No One Owns The Moon Says Scientist ! --- But Haven't We Already Claimed Rightful Possession?

reply to post by JadeStar

Wars and squabbles over resources happen on Earth because of scarcity (real or perceived). Once you're able to get to the Moon or Mars the scarcity of resources evaporates.

Sounds like something a Lunar supporter would say, off with your head.

JadeStar

Quarles
A nation may not be able to lay claim to the moon, but what is stopping an ordinary citizen or corporation claiming it?

A citizen of a nation is bound by the laws, statutes, conventions and treaties of the nation they are a citizen of. A corporation which operates within a nation, has its business license in a nation is also bound by the laws, statutes, conventions and treaties of the nation they are registered in.

Same as in maritime law basically.

Well, that blows. I already had my space ship and rockets ready to launch and go claim the moon for myself....

I guess I will have to find another celestial body to claim....

reply to post by ExoPatriotico


In my mind the USA own it as they were the first to get there and plant a flag. I'm not American, but I see it as theirs. However, as no one will be going back, the argument is all irrelevant isn't it, because the moon is of no use to anyone commercially or economically.

You're all are forgetting something...The aliens are already there. Although it would not be a bad idea to ship large chunks of the Moon back to Earth to stop it drifting away, you need to deal with the aliens who might have another agenda!
BTW, I'm damned if I pick another emoticon, one minute they're green the next they're orange. That could be life-threatening in this part of the world, please stop it septic overboard.

smurfy
You're all are forgetting something...The aliens are already there.

And much laughter ensues.

boncho
reply to post by JadeStar

 

Wars and squabbles over resources happen on Earth because of scarcity (real or perceived). Once you're able to get to the Moon or Mars the scarcity of resources evaporates.

Sounds like something a Lunar supporter would say, off with your head.

Yep. I'd want to lead such a rebellion. Gladly. Get me up there and bring it on!

JadeStar

dlbott
reply to post by Wrabbit2000

 

Our smart furry little friend once again hits on the key of ownership, possession. This is why you have seen all the major players have a continuous presence there. As for the moon we own it until such time until someone actually moves to have a presence there.
Then as with the poles you will see the major players insist on being part of it. Wars will eventually be fought over the resources of space.

Remember the saying possession is nine tenths of the law.

He who possesses owns by default.

The Bot

And yet, no one possesses the moon. Nations have sent things and people there. Like Antarctica.

Again that is why you have seen permanent presence there by several nations continuously. Yea yea it is science, bull chit, none of these countries want to leave and then have another country, like Russia, claim it by just building permanent colony there. It has been a game that has been played since the beginning.

Treaties smeaties, mean nothing once you possess the land. Ask the native Americans about your treaties. Space, the moon, mars, will be no different. He who continually possesses it own it by default. If the Chinese look for permanent colonies on moon or mars see how fast it becomes international. Lol

You kid yourself if you think it is any other way.

The Bot

MadMax9
reply to post by ExoPatriotico

 

In my mind the USA own it as they were the first to get there and plant a flag. I'm not American, but I see it as theirs. However, as no one will be going back

Says who?
(Fast forward to 14 minutes 30 seconds in the video below)


So when Japan, Brazil and France plant flags on the moon does that make it theirs?

What about Google? They put their logo on the moon, does that make it theirs? Nope.

International Law forbids it.

dlbott

Again that is why you have seen permanent presence there by several nations continuously. Yea yea it is science, bull chit, none of these countries want to leave and then have another country, like Russia, claim it by just building permanent colony there. It has been a game that has been played since the beginning.

Oh really? Then see my next question.

Treaties smeaties, mean nothing once you possess the land. Ask the native Americans about your treaties. Space, the moon, mars, will be no different.
He who continually possesses it own it by default.

So tell me genius.... who owns Antarctica?



Or....

What part of "No one can own the moon, just like no one can own Antarctica" do you not get?

Has any nation said, "screw you, we own this continent?" No. And that's not likely to happen despite its high scientific value because nations recognize it is a place for the benefit of all. It's big enough for everyone to do their science without interfering with another.

That's how grown ups act. That's how a Type 1 civilization will act. If you believe otherwise you've obviously not studied the issue or known anyone who goes to Antarctica. (My ex spent 6 months there every year).

reply to post by JadeStar


Yes you can laugh, many here discount things just because it was on that show. Point is this is a conspiracy site and despite the bias aliens on the moon is one of the most active and talked about conspiracies on the net.

I have to admit I find it strange you just abruptly give up on the moon. The scientists said the same thing. Why would not test colonizing space on the moon that is easily within our reach and go to Mars. You wouldn't. None of the reasons given justify taking this risk. Unless they really were told not to come back.

I think there is much more to the story myself believe we should go back. We should test our colonization technology on the moon where we at least have a chance to help if things were to go wrong. I don't buy allot the laughs and reasons.

Just saying the more we see push back on something it often turns out to be true.

For me you are saying there is no ET. Cus if there is why couldn't they have base on moon, or out in the desert and like to go to Vegas for that matter. Lol.... If you been around Vegas late at night chances are you saw a tall white hair alien and did not even know it lol....

Are you sure they are not there, how.......

The Bot

"Ownership" is a function of anyone's ability to defend against anyone and everyone else's ability to take something away by whatever means or cost.

In other words, you only "own" something so long as there's no one around that can, will, or wants to take it away from you for their own and/or your own ability to defend against such.

As to the Moon; according that, no one "owns" it.

I hate to say treatys only last as long as they are convienent.

Thats a rule. A horrible one but one none the less thats been repeated throughout history.

If treatys were 100% fool proof we would have no wars, no disputes.

If claiming the moon or mars became in a nations best intrests they would do it.

So far its not in anyones intrests or at least not worth the risk so the treaty holds.

I just dont trust treatys or put any faith in them to be honnest.

reply to post by JadeStar

Awesome... "Lunar Time-Share"

reply to post by JadeStar

Has any nation said, "screw you, we own this continent?" No. And that's not likely to happen despite its high scientific value because nations recognize it is a place for the benefit of all. It's big enough for everyone to do their science without interfering with another.

In all seriousness (for the first time in this thread). I must point out that while I applaud your take on current dealings with the Antarctica and the moon, and your appreciation of scientific value… I'm not sure how exactly things will unfold say, if, nuclear fusion becomes a reality and mining he3 from the moon, would the climate shift?

(For arguments sakes let's presume this is all possible)

Treaties and agreements are all dust in the wind when money is involved. How many times did people explore only for the fruits of their exploration turn into exploitation?

Whether or not a fusion industry could be developed and of course transport/mining and EROI of something like this is up for debate, but if the moon became the most profitable mining source on and off the world I sense science taking a back seat.

Thoughts?

Something to keep mind here when thinking and talking about the concept of possession and/or ownership of celestial bodies is the fact that there's an agreed upon perception that NASA had landed several human beings on the moon. Whether or not men actually DID walk on the moon is irrelevant to the discussion because the international community has agreed that they did.

That said - actual possession can only come about by the presence of a real live person - a living breathing human being. Remote unmanned space vehicles having landed certain scientific experimental objects on the surface of the moon will not do with regard to actual possession.

So, be it said that a scientific object cannot "stake a claim" nor can an abstract entity such a a digital transmission etc. Only a person can accomplish what we are talking about, and until such time as another nation or commercial/corporate entity puts a person there the USA can claim rightful possession in the manner that I have described in my opening post that starts the thread.

No one really knows what words were spoken by Neil Armstrong and his confreres, nor do they know what secret agreements - legal or otherwise - were made between parties on the moon and back at Houston control. As stated - NASA, in collusion with the PTB, were able to just make things up as they went along, and then claim that it was 'real' in the same manner as the Congress of the United States makes things up as they go along - usually in secret - and then just make the claim that that's the law - period.

Note - I have tried to not allow my personal beliefs enter into the discussion about whether or not people really did land on the moon, because if I were to do so then I'm sure the tone of the thread would go in a very different direction, which is something I would like to avoid. Besides, I think the notion of a 'perception' of an actual Apollo spacecraft having landed on the moon suffices for the sake of this discussion since so many throughout the world are in agreement much in the same way they are in agreement on the US governments version of 9/11.

maybe nobody 'owns' the moon but some people 'own' the rights to mine the moon

www.abovetopsecret.com... my thread from waaaay back in 2007

www.abovetopsecret.com... another thread from 2010

www.thelivingmoon.com... people who may own some mining rights on the moon..


when you think about it...we cant even get good info about whats goin on on the earth...we are a society that lives untruthfull times....

bottom line - any entity can declare " I own the moon " the trick is-getting every one else to accept the claim

reply to post by JadeStar


YOU are getting really personal there my man. I take offense at the tone. I hit reply but did not direct anything in my post at you nor call you genius or any other names. Perfect example of how small you are. Someone says anything not agreeing with your position and you attack their intelligence.

To me that just shows a weak position and instead of putting up pictures go back and read the entire history of not just Antarctica but the rest of the world. Your pretty picture just made my point, all the major players have had a presence there and they will continue because no matter what your worthless piece of paper says, who possesses the land takes control of the resources.

Maybe Taiwan a better example for you or the fauklands. Both are claimed by others despite what pieces of paper say. In the end they belong to who possesses the land and hold it. This is history, everywhere on earth. Paper, treaties mean nothing.... Look no further than here, you may live on land that by piece of paper belongs to a native tribe. In essence it is so for most of the whole united states. Paper means nothing and I trying to be restrained after you were so small and rude.

History, world wide bares out paper is only worth a countries ability to back it up with force. Whether it be the kings of England, France or Spain, or the Hitler, Stalin and on and on. Treaties mean nothing. China has signed several but continue to flood markets with knock offs and stolen technology. Are you saying the most controlled society on earth is not aware lol...

You should be able to disagree without getting petty about it....

The Bot

dlbott
reply to post by JadeStar

 

Yes you can laugh, many here discount things just because it was on that show. Point is this is a conspiracy site and despite the bias aliens on the moon is one of the most active and talked about conspiracies on the net.

Fair enough. ATS has this cool place called the Aliens & UFOs forum for that though. You might want to check it out.

I have to admit I find it strange you just abruptly give up on the moon.

I didn't personally. Or do you mean the US since I'm American?

The scientists said the same thing. Why would not test colonizing space on the moon that is easily within our reach and go to Mars.

Because the Moon makes for a lousy version of Mars. The read Robert Zubrin's books to understand why. The moon is the moon, Mars is Mars. Both have their own challenges which are quite different from each other.

You wouldn't. None of the reasons given justify taking this risk. Unless they really were told not to come back.

How about the fact that Apollo was a series of POLITICAL space missions. Once the political reason for it passed (first with the Soviets giving up on a manned moon mission, then with the breakup of the Soviet Union) then there was no more political reason to go. There always have and always will be scientific reasons to go but unfortunately Joe Six Pack didn't care about them then, doesn't care about them now and only supported Apollo because it allowed the US "to show those commies whose boss."

It has nothing to do with ETs warning us off the moon.

I think there is much more to the story myself

That's fine but there is as much evidence for ETs on the moon as there is for green cheese on the moon.

believe we should go back.

So do I. And I suspect that Golden Spike, China and a bunch of other countries probably will go there in the next 20-30 years.

There might even be a hotel on the moon for space tourists in the not too distant future. Stay healthy and you'll live to see it.

We should test our colonization technology on the moon where we at least have a chance to help if things were to go wrong.

Do you understand that Mars is a very, very different place than the moon?


The moon has 1/6th the Earth's gravity. Mars is about 1/3rd Earth's gravity.

Mars has weather, storms and it has very fine dust, it has seasons, it has a bunch of things the moon does not have.

In some ways Mars is a more forgiving environment than the moon in terms of temperature extremes. In other ways its a more harsh environment in terms of the damage and wear and tear dust can do on equipment.

People who study this stuff like Zubrin can tell you all the reasons why the moon is not a good surrogate for Mars.

And in a way they are going to test out a lot of the rocket stuff by sending it around the moon before they go to Mars.

For me you are saying there is no ET.

I'm not saying there is no ET. I'm saying there is no evidence for ET on the moon. I'm pretty confident that somewhere else in our galaxy ET life and even intelligence exists but that is speculation on my part with no evidence. That doesn't make it true.

Cus if there is why couldn't they have base on moon,

Well there is no reason other than the vast distances it would take to get from there to here. And even if they did, why come all this way to hide? Obviously they'd have nothing to fear from our primitive technology. This is way off topic but its a valid question people who put forth this idea never seem to answer to anyone's satisfaction but their own.

[quote[
or out in the desert and like to go to Vegas for that matter.

And dress up like nuns?

So which is it? Paul Hellyer's regurgitated stories or "Escape to Witch Mountain"? Both are great works of fiction.

Lol.... If you been around Vegas late at night chances are you saw a tall white hair alien and did not even know it lol....

I live in Seattle. Around here they have existed for ages. We're a bit more politically correct so we don't call them aliens. We call them Scandinavians.

Are you sure they are not there, how.......

You're asking me to prove a negative while you're the one making the claim without evidence. The burden of proof that there are aliens on the moon and in Las Vegas is on you.

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence and you just made two without either. Adding on to the claims does not add onto the evidence. It just gives you something else you have to back up with more evidence than the last two crazy claims.

boncho
reply to post by JadeStar

 

Has any nation said, "screw you, we own this continent?" No. And that's not likely to happen despite its high scientific value because nations recognize it is a place for the benefit of all. It's big enough for everyone to do their science without interfering with another.

In all seriousness (for the first time in this thread). I must point out that while I applaud your take on current dealings with the Antarctica and the moon, and your appreciation of scientific value… I'm not sure how exactly things will unfold say, if, nuclear fusion becomes a reality and mining he3 from the moon, would the climate shift?

(For arguments sakes let's presume this is all possible)

Treaties and agreements are all dust in the wind when money is involved. How many times did people explore only for the fruits of their exploration turn into exploitation?

Whether or not a fusion industry could be developed and of course transport/mining and EROI of something like this is up for debate, but if the moon became the most profitable mining source on and off the world I sense science taking a back seat.

Thoughts?

edit on 11-1-2014 by boncho because: (no reason given)

There's likely oil underneath the ground in the Antarctic:

If predictions about Antarctica's 200 billion barrel oil capacity prove correct, the continent's reserves would be third largest in the world, according to the Lowy Institute.

www.theguardian.com...

Yet, everyone seems content to get on with their own scientific work and no one is claiming the Antarctic because of the Antarctic Treaty they signed on.

The world's current appetite for oil is more vociferous than any appetite for Helium-3 anytime in even the distant future, yet we have not had a war over the Antarctic, have we?