because that sound stage started being used to film the TV show Quincy starring Jack Klugman!
added later -----------------
Jeez, some of you need a sense of humor!
Alright you want a "serious" answer?
Because:
1. going to the moon was basically our attempt to show superiority to the Russians who were kind of our arch enemies at that time. Given the current state of the Soviet Union and our relatively agreeable relationship, this is currently un-necessary.
2. It was very expensive, and would be even more so today. Given how much GWB has run up our national debt on this riduculous war, it would be very foolish to add a few more hundred billion for the "wow factor" of going back to the moon.
3. It doesn't serve a real purpose. OK, so it was cool that we went there, and cool to see moon rocks in a museum, but we didn't really learn anything that changed our daily lives or improved conditions for the people of our planet. Factoring in #2 to #3 and it would be very silly to spend that much money on something that doesn't really gain us much.
2007-08-13 13:55:17
·
answer #1
·
answered by whiskeyman510 7
·
1⤊
6⤋
Many factors. One being that the reason we went to the moon was to demonstrate the US technological know how was better than the Russians. The US succeeded by going to the moon 6 times. The reason to go to the moon had been accomplished. We needed new reasons to continue going to the moon but the economy of the US was not good. It was the time of the oil crisis and the withdraw from Vietnam (wars are expensive). It was decided that a space plane should be developed to provide cheaper easier access to space (space shuttle). NASA couldn't do the shuttle and the moon. So, the moon program was stopped. And all resources went into the shuttle development. The US was the first to have a man walk on the moon and have a reusable space plane but the cold war is over and the need to go to space is now based on other reasons. The ISS is a multination exploration project. I think that if we can continue to cultivate that spirit it will take all of much farther than the moon. Mars is the next big step and it would be great if a multination crew were the first to go there.
2007-08-13 14:37:02
·
answer #2
·
answered by timespiral 4
·
1⤊
0⤋
Are you aware that Germany developed inter-continental ballistic missile capability back in the 1940’s and their V2 rockets hit London in 1944 and 1945.
Their rocket genius, Werhner Von Braun, escaped to the USA after WWII and was instrumental in developing America’s huge Saturn V rocket, the only rocket ever built capable of injecting humans out of Earth orbit.
Had Germany won the war, and had they had the urge to turn their rocket technology to space, rather than to war, there is little doubt they could have attained the moon way before 1969, perhaps even before 1960.
So, you see, it is completely ridiculous to wonder why we can’t do it now. The potential was there way before the Americans picked up the baton, and pulled the thing off. We could go to the moon with more technology now, but the finance isn’t there.
Another thing people who question the moon landings fail to understand is that for the cost of one manned moon mission, NASA can put about 20 probes into deep space to study the sun, comets, the outer planets. They can put incredibly successful robots onto Mars, and can make many trips to the International Space station, and continue to build on that technology.
The argument about how come we had that technology then and not now, also falls over by the fact that before 1970 we had a supersonic airliner, the Concorde. It used to fly Mach 2.2. Now, our fastest airliners fly less than mach 1. The dream of supersonic travel has given way to mass transport – jumbo jets. Air travel has never been so cheap, and never been so safe. Concorde was incredibly expensive to run, and a highly dangerous machine.
Space exploration has necessarily gone the same way as air travel – cost effective solutions. This is unfortunately, a world where many other serious matters require tax payers money.
2007-08-13 13:56:50
·
answer #3
·
answered by nick s 6
·
2⤊
0⤋
Hi,
All the other answers are very correct.
But some think that they found something that would have caused panic if revealed.
They have had the designs for a station for the moon or any other planet sent to them by me with the test sheets and photo of the test product. These designs included vehicles and oxygen producing areas so that the personal could live there for as long as needed.
The dark side of the moon has not been explored.
2007-08-17 10:37:36
·
answer #4
·
answered by specops@btinternet.com 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
Humans ARE going back to the Moon. The Chinese eventually plan to establish a permanent lunar base using their versatile Shenzhou spacecraft. The Russians originally designed their Soyuz spacecraft for lunar missions, and the vastly upgraded version they have now could easily reach the Moon with a Block DM upper stage. The planned replacement for NASA's aging Space Shuttle (which was not designed for interplanetary flight) is a large Apollo-style capsule called Orion that will be capable of flight to the Moon.
2007-08-13 16:11:22
·
answer #5
·
answered by 222 Sexy 5
·
1⤊
0⤋
Never went back???
2007-08-13 15:01:44
·
answer #6
·
answered by Dave_Stark 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
Probably because they never went there in the first place.I know you probably don't like my answer.Check out the theories about the Moon landing hoax.I believe they do some credibility.
We can see a 6' diameter on the moon with a telescope but we can not even see see the LEM on the surface of the Moon and that certainly bigger in size than 6'.
Think about it????
2007-08-17 09:13:06
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
There was no longer a sufficient impetus to justify the expense and effort involved. For all the legitimate scientitfc and technological benefits, the program didn't really need to be manned. As our space program gets closer to the point of contemplating long-term habitation in space, manned missions are becoming more likely.
2007-08-13 13:59:50
·
answer #8
·
answered by dukefenton 7
·
2⤊
0⤋
After Apollo 17, we decided we had lollygagged enough on the Moon at great expense, collecting rock samples and taking pictures. I mean, we had astronauts riding go-karts on the Moon and hitting golf balls. Enough is enough.
2007-08-13 13:56:23
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
0⤋
1. Cost.
2. Amount of knowledge to be gained offset by Dollars spent.
3. Construction of International Space Station.
When we do go back, we will build a permanent Base
2007-08-13 13:57:11
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
0⤋
There were several moon landings. Most of what is to be learned was already learned. It was decided that other aspects of space should be explored. Also, living in moon is too difficult.
2007-08-13 13:56:58
·
answer #11
·
answered by cidyah 7
·
2⤊
0⤋