I'm in the middle of the arguement but i'm pulling towards hoex! Why has it been like 40 years since NASA has clamed to send someone up. If man landed on the moon we be send people up their at least every decade. But would NASA and the governement lie about something this big. Mabe so, they had to compete with the Soviets. How do the Soviets(Russians) fell on this issue.
2007-01-27 15:57:59 · 12 answers · asked by REV TEXAS 3 in Science & Mathematics ➔ Astronomy & Space
Check out your current events.... Bush wants to send us back! There's a moon base project in the works for 2020 - the idea is, with the lowered gravity of the moon, it would be much easier and safer to send people to Mars (less fuel for liftoff = more room for fuel for the return trip, or something like that....)
Anyway, most people are all up on Bush's case for wanting to give money to the Space program and moon landings.... which are cool.... but not really that important considering all the poverty and education issues and Iraq and the enormous debt we're in right now.
2007-01-27 17:53:40 · answer #1 · answered by Cedar 5 · 3⤊ 0⤋
First of all let me just say that the reason you don't see any stars is simple. They are drowned out. Kinda the same way you don't see stars during the daytime. There's just to much light from the sun shining around for you to be able to pick out other less bright objects. You would be hard pressed to see a star on a sunlit space walk either.
The $ thing is totally true in my opinion. Even though we did make it to the moon we were very primitive about it and were only advanced enough to visit, not stay. As the years wear on things have become prohibitively expensive. The potential gains must outweigh the costs. Thats harder and harder to do. Now we are looking at privatization of space travel and commercialism in space. Unbelievable amounts of revenue await those who get to that point first. We know a heck of a lot more now than we did then making it more of a possibility.
2007-01-27 16:39:29 · answer #2 · answered by mazaker2000 3 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Within a few years, anyone will be able to go to a powerful telescope somewhere, pay $5, point it at the Moon, and see allthe junk that the astronauts left behind. Or buy a 100 megapixel camera with 500x zoom ad take a photo of the flag up there. Hopefully all these conspiracy supporters will then shut up.
2007-01-27 16:38:21 · answer #3 · answered by Terracinese 3 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Real. Real. Real. (Sheesh.)
Why haven't we gone back? Here's an answer one character:
$
Specifically, it is *hugely* expensive just to put things in orbit ... going back to the moon makes that look like peanuts, and it just isn't part one of NASA's top priorities. The little we would learn just isn't worth that enormous expense ...
... especially when, 40 years from now, some clown is going to be asking whether it was all just a "hoex."
2007-01-27 16:11:31 · answer #4 · answered by secretsauce 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Both! I would say it was more of a scientific thing. It was referred to as a successful failure. It was political because we were competing with the Russians and didn't want to lose any astronauts. It was scientific because we had to use math to calculate how we could use the gravity of the moon to swing the ship around so it would head back to earth.
2016-05-24 07:42:03 · answer #5 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
If it was faked, something like 100,000 people who worked on the program (plus thousands of geologists who said the moon rocks were authentic) plus a dozen astronauts who supposedly walked there, plus several more who helped them get to the surface, plus two presidents all have kept a VERY big secret.
And wouldn't the Soviets have been the FIRST to call us on it if we'd tried to fake?
You really need to stop watching the Faux News Channel and get a life.
2007-01-27 16:04:53 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
What in the world is a "hoex"? A special tool for the garden?
2007-01-28 14:20:33 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Conspiracy theorists have been whipping this dead horse far too long--we did land on the moon. Why haven't we gone back? Because there is nothing there; it is a big, orbiting, dust covered rock.
2007-01-27 16:05:43 · answer #8 · answered by Jeremy B 2 · 4⤊ 0⤋
Are you serious?? I thought we were over this stupid hoax vs. reality thing...
Anyway, my Grandpa worked on the optics (cameras and lenses) for the space program. Yes, its real.
2007-01-27 16:06:17 · answer #9 · answered by Lisa the Pooh 7 · 4⤊ 0⤋
it's a hoax. Actually, you can get moonstones everywhere, as well as cosmic dust and comet dusts. They are usually faked as normal rocks. The geologists could just be faked, or they kept the lies. Why don't america choose a geologist from Russia then tell him to examine the rock.
2007-01-27 16:08:07 · answer #10 · answered by Chaille L 4 · 0⤊ 4⤋