Space Policy: Why Mars should be our top priority.

Marvin the Martian wrote:
Tired of all the flame wars? Insane posts? Off topic postings?

Want to try a moderated forum?

Then Get your ass to Mars!

http://OnToMar.org/forum/

A new forum where you can discuss space policy, particularly if you
understand why Mars, and not the moon, should be our immediate goal of
our space program.
http://www.ontomars.org/blog/?m=200903

Why the Moon isn’t a Stepping Stone to Mars

Mars has an atmosphere however thin, the moon doesn’t. A Mars day is 24
hours and 40 minutes, a moon day is about 14 earth days. Temperatures are
different between Mars and the Moon. The new technologies needed to go to
Mars like the simulated gravity tether and large mass aerobraking to get
to the Mars surface, have nothing to do with the Moon. So, other than
they require totally different technologies, the moon has little to offer
in the way of Mars development.

The moon has one enormous advantage: three day return trajectory from Earth.

That means you can learn long-duration planetary surface operations on
the moon without it killing you like on Mars.

Crawl before you walk.

Walk before you run.

Those who work in spaceflight operations, as opposed to mere space
cadets, understand these concepts.

Others die.

The time for Mars will come. We must crawl first.

Jorge R. Frank wrote:

The moon has one enormous advantage: three day return trajectory from
Earth.

That means you can learn long-duration planetary surface operations on
the moon without it killing you like on Mars.

You get a major leak in your spacesuit and either place will be just as
fatal inside of ten minutes.
You seem to be suggesting that the majority of the major health problems
encountered will be serious enough to demand evacuation to Earth, but
not serious enough to kill you inside of three days.
You also have solar storms to contend with on either world, so you had
better bring shovels to bury your habitat if you are intending to spend
much time there.
Then there's spacesuit design... on the Moon, assuming you only go
exploring for the two-week Lunar day, the big problem is not getting
cooked by the heat of the sunlight; if you want to go out at night also,
now you need a suit that has a major ability to keep you warm. That
could well be two entirely different suit designs.
On Mars you will need a suit to keep you warm, not cool you down, but at
least you can probably get away with a single suit design for day and night.

Pat

"Pat Flannery" wrote in message
dakotatelephone...


Jorge R. Frank wrote:

The moon has one enormous advantage: three day return trajectory from
Earth.

That means you can learn long-duration planetary surface operations on
the moon without it killing you like on Mars.

You get a major leak in your spacesuit and either place will be just as
fatal inside of ten minutes.
You seem to be suggesting that the majority of the major health problems
encountered will be serious enough to demand evacuation to Earth, but not
serious enough to kill you inside of three days.
You also have solar storms to contend with on either world, so you had
better bring shovels to bury your habitat if you are intending to spend
much time there.
Then there's spacesuit design... on the Moon, assuming you only go
exploring for the two-week Lunar day, the big problem is not getting
cooked by the heat of the sunlight; if you want to go out at night also,
now you need a suit that has a major ability to keep you warm. That could
well be two entirely different suit designs.
On Mars you will need a suit to keep you warm, not cool you down, but at
least you can probably get away with a single suit design for day and
night.

While what you say is true, failures in spacecraft systems might be an area
where a three day return would keep you alive (e.g. Apollo 13) but a six
month plus return trip. The US is just now starting to learn how to do long
term life support aboard ISS. Given the Russian experience with their
equipment, there is reason to be leery of trusting such equipment on a Mars
mission.

The moon is like a weekend campout within an hour's walking distance of your
car while Mars is like hiking the Appalachian Trail over a period of months.
Note also that hiking the Appalachian Trail really wouldn't be possible
without frequent resupplies (buying supplies in towns or mail drops of
supplies).

Jeff
--
"Many things that were acceptable in 1958 are no longer acceptable today.
My own standards have changed too." -- Freeman Dyson

On Apr 12, 10:51*pm, Pat Flannery wrote:
Jorge R. Frank wrote:

The moon has one enormous advantage: three day return trajectory from
Earth.

That means you can learn long-duration planetary surface operations on
the moon without it killing you like on Mars.

You get a major leak in your spacesuit and either place will be just as
fatal inside of ten minutes.
You seem to be suggesting that the majority of the major health problems
encountered will be serious enough to demand evacuation to Earth, but
not serious enough to kill you inside of three days.

Mechanical problems, not health problems. Long term presence on the
Moon - or travel to and from Mars - will require fairly closed loops
for life support. These systems are historically complex and
unreliable. When your water recycling system breaks down on the moon,
you can make it back with not much more than some lithium hydroxide
canisters for CO2 removal and some form of humidity control and
thermal control. When your water recycling system breaks down on
Mars, you die.

-jake

On Sun, 12 Apr 2009 21:40:33 -0500, Jorge R. Frank wrote:

Marvin the Martian wrote:
Tired of all the flame wars? Insane posts? Off topic postings?

Want to try a moderated forum?

Then Get your ass to Mars!

http://OnToMar.org/forum/

A new forum where you can discuss space policy, particularly if you
understand why Mars, and not the moon, should be our immediate goal of
our space program.
http://www.ontomars.org/blog/?m=200903

Why the Moon isn’t a Stepping Stone to Mars

Mars has an atmosphere however thin, the moon doesn’t. A Mars day is 24
hours and 40 minutes, a moon day is about 14 earth days. Temperatures
are different between Mars and the Moon. The new technologies needed to
go to Mars like the simulated gravity tether and large mass aerobraking
to get to the Mars surface, have nothing to do with the Moon. So, other
than they require totally different technologies, the moon has little
to offer in the way of Mars development.

The moon has one enormous advantage: three day return trajectory from
Earth.

Yes. The place where you have no reason to go is quick to get to. Reminds
me of the joke about the guy who lost his keys in a dark place but looked
for them in the light because it was easier.

That means you can learn long-duration planetary surface operations on
the moon without it killing you like on Mars.

The moon, last I checked, isn't a planet. Its a ... moon.

Mars has twice the gravity, an atmosphere, and a day which is about 24.5
hours long. The moon is quite different.

Crawl before you walk.

Walk before you run.

And spend money on projects with no pay back to maximize contractor
profits.


--
http://OnToMars.org For discussions about Mars and Mars colonization

Marvin the Martian wrote:

WE didn’t learn from Apollo and we are in danger of
making the same error.

Yeah, you're making the error Apollo did - promising the moon and
delivering dry science.

D.
--
Touch-twice life. Eat. Drink. Laugh.

http://derekl1963.livejournal.com/

-Resolved: To be more temperate in my postings.
Oct 5th, 2004 JDL

"Marvin the Martian" wrote in message
...

Tired of all the flame wars? Insane posts? Off topic postings?

Want to try a moderated forum?

Then Get your ass to Mars!

http://OnToMar.org/forum/

A new forum where you can discuss space policy, particularly if you
understand why Mars, and not the moon, should be our immediate goal of
our space program.
http://www.ontomars.org/blog/?m=200903

Why the Moon isn't a Stepping Stone to Mars

Mars has an atmosphere however thin, the moon doesn't. A Mars day is 24
hours and 40 minutes, a moon day is about 14 earth days. Temperatures are
different between Mars and the Moon. The new technologies needed to go to
Mars like the simulated gravity tether and large mass aerobraking to get
to the Mars surface, have nothing to do with the Moon. So, other than
they require totally different technologies, the moon has little to offer
in the way of Mars development.

The moon would be a good place to build telescopes. Better than Mars.
That's just about the only thing the Moon has going for it.



Right, and our military has already laid plans to use the moon as a base for
gathering intelligence for our missile defense shield. This is the true and only
justifiable reason for our plans to return to the moon, for military purposes.
"The moon is the ultimate high ground", according (to quote) our US Air Force.

Don't you realize we are being lied to? For national security reasons as we
don't wish to start a military space race to the moon with the Chinese.

Oops! That ship has sailed ...hasn't it?


Now, what does Mars have?
Climate Science.

The primary thing Mars has that is ....scientifically....interesting is the
strong
possibility of microbial life in it's past or even the present.
We can fully study this question with robotic missions not only much much
cheaper, but even much faster. It might take five years to build and land
an advanced rover. Manned missions are still thirty of forty years off. By then
we'll know all we wish to know about Mars.

Even a casual analysis of our current space goal of using the moon as a stepping
stone
to Mars shows it's deliberately misleading. Meant to help the military gain the
ultimate high ground on the moon. With manned missions to mars being nothing
more than a straw man.




Many people are interested in the science of climate change. Mars is a
cold planet that once was much warmer. Further, like earth, the climate
of Mars is also changing. Ice core samples taken on Mars would advance
the science of climate change a great deal.

Since we WANT a warmer Mars, tinkering with greenhouse gasses on Mars
would not only help to terraform Mars, but provide a great deal of
science about climate change.

You don't get any of this by going to the Moon, the Asteroids, NEOs or
any other dead rock.


It's still an indirect means of learning about the climate of earth. And given
it's distance and expense, a very inefficient way of advancing earth science.
Not to mention the odd orbit of mars means it's climate of far more complex
than on earth, complex meaning harder to predict and understand.
Global warming on earth is an imminent crisis which requires the /most/
efficient ways of finding solutions. Not the most /diffucult/, slowest and
most expensive way.



Biology

The Moon, the Asteroids, and NEO are all dead, lifeless rocks. In the
past, Mars had an ideal environment for life with a warmer environment
and flowing water. What's more, gas releases from Mars suggest that life
may be there to this day. What a fantastic discovery it would be to find
fossil life on Mars. And the probability of finding extra-terrestrial
life on Mars would be the most significant scientific discovery since.
well, FIRE. You don't get this by going to the Moon.
A Home for Humanity.

Mars has carbon. Mars has oceans of frozen water.


Earth has more.


Mars can be
terraformed.


A concept or goal that spans centuries is 'pie-in-the-sky' science for the
simple reason it takes so long and so much effort only the most
pressing needs could possibly justify the huge effort and time span.
And pressing needs rarely spans centuries. This makes such concepts
a logical contradiction


The moon has no carbon, trace amounts of water. It makes no
sense at all for a carbon based life form made mostly of water to try and
colonize a world where there is no carbon and almost no water. What's
more, because there is no volcanic activity or water on the moon, there
are no ores. Materials like copper will be hard to gather on the moon.
You can build bases on the moon, only on Mars can you build a colony.

What's more, you can grow crops in greenhouses on Mars, as the Martian
day is close enough to an earth day that our plants can grow there in a
greenhouse with a low pressure atmosphere. On the moon, the nights are
two weeks long!

Mars is the Gateway to the inner solar system

Because Mars can support a colony and the moon can only support a base,
Mars will eventually become humanity's gateway to the inner solar system.
Once every two years, the energy required to go from Mars to the Moon is
much less than going from the earth to the moon! You can get much larger
payloads into space from Mars than you can from earth. A Mars
civilization would be a spacefaring civilization.


Why is it always ...assumed...humanity is destined to, or will need to colonize
the solar system??? I believe the first signs of an intelligent or civilized
life
is the ability to control it's environment in a sustainable way.

And once we learn to do so, we no longer need to expand. Hence the
logical contradiction with colonizing. If we don't know how to build
sustainable societies on earth, how could we possibly succeed in space
with the limited resources and unforgiving nature of space?

Once we have learned to build sustainable societies/colonies on earth, we no
longer need to expand to space. If we can't our colonies will fail.


The Danger of going to the moon

Most of you are too young to recall, but in the early 1970s, when the
Apollo program was returning bags of rocks from the moon, people were
saying things like "We can go to the moon but we can't cure the common
cold" or "We can go to the moon but we can't end poverty" and so one.
People saw the product of the moon program: Moon rocks, which appeared to
be ordinary earth rocks and were only of interest to scientist. The
payback for space programs seemed small. Many people could put together a
bag of rocks for far cheaper. Space programs seemed wasteful, and the
Mars program was convicted by guilt by association with the Moon program
in the eyes of public that didn't know better. There's a PAYBACK for
going to Mars.

History repeats itself. Today, it is very much like it was in the 1960s.
We have a plan to return to the moon in 15 years or so. However, in 15
years , the people are once again going to see bags of rocks coming back
from the moon. They will not see the discovery of extraterrestrial life.


Robots will have discovered it long before then. And given us millions of high
res
color pics on the surface of mars. So many it's as if we already live there.
By the time men set foot on mars, it'll be ho-hum. We need a space
goal that becomes more justifiable over time, not less.

They will not see new discoveries in climate science.


By the time men walk on the moon, where I live will be thirty feet underwater.
I'm not exaggerating, for South Florida the most recent and respected
projections
show the entire south of the state underwater in .....forty years. Those
projections
came out last spring, a few months later the real estate market in South Florida
bubbled, setting off a nationwide real estate panic and world wide recession.

The effects of global warming are here already. It's too late to fix it.

We need to 'circle the wagons' so to speak and start using our scientific
abilities and resources as if our national existence were at stake.

To the moon and mars define the antithesis to what is practical, logical and
needed.


And they will not
see an exciting new self supporting colony.


What we ....need....and need desperately is to create a new self supporing
colony.....HERE ON EARTH.

Unless of course you intend to move SIX BILLION PEOPLE to a space colony.
How will the public respond to the notion of devoting our entire national
science goal
just so a few selected people can abandon the earth just before all hell breaks
loose?

Lucky few eh? I bet the public would embrace that notion with all the derision
it can muster. At best to the moon and mars is a Guilded Safari for those
living in Ivory Towers ...to milk ...at the expense of our national survival
and the future of the planet.


WE didn't learn from Apollo
and we are in danger of making the same error.


The lesson of Apollo, according to Neil Armstrong in his address to Congress,
was
that Apollo as a goal had too much emphasis on pure science and exploration, and
not balanced with the tangible needs of society. Hence the short term support.

Long term support, which is CRUCIAL requires clear, massive and easily
justifiable
tangible returns for society. Our /primary national science program/ should
be
oriented around our greatest national needs and problems. Such as global warming
and energy etc. Not some fancy safari for the rich and famous.

We used to have such a goal, remember ssto? Remember space ports? Remember
space solar power? Bush killed /it all/ for a military oriented goal. A small
base on the
moon for our missile defense sensors.


Instead of building the true infrastructure we need to exploit space, single
state to orbit
space ports ect, we building another one-shot deal. Instead of solving global
threats
like climate change and energy shortages, we spend all our dough kicking around
some moon rocks and drilling little holes for bacteria.

If we do that, we deserve what we likely to get from Nature. Another hundred
thousand
year long ice age that kills off just about all life on earth.

Cheers!


Jonathan

s






--
http://OnToMars.org For discussions about Mars and Mars colonization

On Apr 12, 12:12*pm, Marvin the Martian wrote:
Tired of all the flame wars? Insane posts? Off topic postings?

Want to try a moderated forum?

Then Get your ass to Mars!

http://OnToMar.org/forum/

A new forum where you can discuss space policy, particularly if you
understand why Mars, and not the moon, should be our immediate goal of
our space program.http://www.ontomars.org/blog/?m=200903

Why the Moon isn’t a Stepping Stone to Mars

Mars has an atmosphere however thin, the moon doesn’t. A Mars day is 24
hours and 40 minutes, a moon day is about 14 earth days. Temperatures are
different between Mars and the Moon. The new technologies needed to go to
Mars like the simulated gravity tether and large mass aerobraking to get
to the Mars surface, have nothing to do with the Moon. So, other than
they require totally different technologies, the moon has little to offer
in the way of Mars development.

The moon would be a good place to build telescopes. Better than Mars.
That’s just about the only thing the Moon has going for it.
Now, what does Mars have?
Climate Science.

Many people are interested in the science of climate change. Mars is a
cold planet that once was much warmer. Further, like earth, the climate
of Mars is also changing. Ice core samples taken on Mars would advance
the science of climate change a great deal.

Since we WANT a warmer Mars, tinkering with greenhouse gasses on Mars
would not only help to terraform Mars, but provide a great deal of
science about climate change.

You don’t get any of this by going to the Moon, the Asteroids, NEOs or
any other dead rock.
Biology

The Moon, the Asteroids, and NEO are all dead, lifeless rocks. In the
past, Mars had an ideal environment for life with a warmer environment
and flowing water. What’s more, gas releases from Mars suggest that life
may be there to this day. What a fantastic discovery it would be to find
fossil life on Mars. And the probability of finding extra-terrestrial
life on Mars would be the most significant scientific discovery since…
well, FIRE. You don’t get this by going to the Moon.
A Home for Humanity.

Mars has carbon. Mars has oceans of frozen water. Mars can be
terraformed. The moon has no carbon, trace amounts of water. It makes no
sense at all for a carbon based life form made mostly of water to try and
colonize a world where there is no carbon and almost no water. What’s
more, because there is no volcanic activity or water on the moon, there
are no ores. Materials like copper will be hard to gather on the moon.
You can build bases on the moon, only on Mars can you build a colony.

What’s more, you can grow crops in greenhouses on Mars, as the Martian
day is close enough to an earth day that our plants can grow there in a
greenhouse with a low pressure atmosphere. On the moon, the nights are
two weeks long!

* *Mars is the Gateway to the inner solar system

Because Mars can support a colony and the moon can only support a base,
Mars will eventually become humanity’s gateway to the inner solar system.
Once every two years, the energy required to go from Mars to the Moon is
much less than going from the earth to the moon! You can get much larger
payloads into space from Mars than you can from earth. A Mars
civilization would be a spacefaring civilization.
The Danger of going to the moon

Most of you are too young to recall, but in the early 1970s, when the
Apollo program was returning bags of rocks from the moon, people were
saying things like “We can go to the moon but we can’t cure the common
cold” or “We can go to the moon but we can’t end poverty” and so one.
People saw the product of the moon program: Moon rocks, which appeared to
be ordinary earth rocks and were only of interest to scientist. The
payback for space programs seemed small. Many people could put together a
bag of rocks for far cheaper. Space programs seemed wasteful, and the
Mars program was convicted by guilt by association with the Moon program
in the eyes of public that didn’t know better. There’s a PAYBACK for
going to Mars.

History repeats itself. Today, it is very much like it was in the 1960s.
We have a plan to return to the moon in 15 years or so. However, in 15
years , the people are once again going to see bags of rocks coming back
from the moon. They will not see the discovery of extraterrestrial life.
They will not see new discoveries in climate science. And they will not
see an exciting new self supporting colony. WE didn’t learn from Apollo
and we are in danger of making the same error.

--http://OnToMars.org*For discussions about Mars and Mars colonization

Truth is, we obviously can't seem to deal with Eden/Earth, much less
afford to take on Mars, and we certainly can't put any physical claims
or extract benefits from our Selene/moon, which makes this a highly
bogus topic.

And the great mutual ruse/sting of their mutually perpetrated cold-war
century continues, as though a white Zionist god and all of his
kingdom were on the same side of the USSR/USA coinage.

We’re seeing such bogus topics posted that even a failing 5th grader
can easily interpret as to what a total crock of mainstream infowar
tactics is going on. Too bad that BHO is going to have little option
but to cut our NASA budget sown to the bone (eliminating most
everything except the most pressing terrestrial related matters),
thanks mostly to their corrupt politics and their SEC approved Ponzi
Madoff and Big Mother Ponzi AIG, it’s all in the nearest toilet.

Just checked GM stock, and lo and behold it's almost worth as much a
toilet paper, along with a number of other public bailout investments
going onto the nearest toilet. That's OK, because what's another
million of middle and upper class unemployed, plus at least another
half million of preexisting UAW retirements and seeing everyone’s
medical benefits trashed, all because of our corrupt and greedy UAW
and faith-based corrupted government agencies of loot and benefit
hording era. Chances of UAW and GM survival are looking grim, as
though now they got next to nothing outside of whatever chapter 7
manages to liquidate. Way to go warlord republicans and faith-based
puppet masters.

How many chapter 7s per business day are averaging?
~ BG

"BradGuth" wrote in message
...
Just checked GM stock, and lo and behold it's almost worth as much a
toilet paper, along with a number of other public bailout investments
going onto the nearest toilet. That's OK, because what's another
million of middle and upper class unemployed, plus at least another
half million of preexisting UAW retirements and seeing everyone’s
medical benefits trashed, all because of our corrupt and greedy UAW
and faith-based corrupted government agencies of loot and benefit
hording era. Chances of UAW and GM survival are looking grim, as
though now they got next to nothing outside of whatever chapter 7
manages to liquidate. Way to go warlord republicans and faith-based
puppet masters.

How many chapter 7s per business day are averaging?
==========================

Article by Sidley Austin's Financial Institutions Regulatory Practice Group
This article was originally published 19 March, 2009

On March 17, 2009, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation ("FDIC") issued
an interim rule (the "Interim Rule") which extends its Temporary Liquidity
Guarantee Program ("TLGP") from June 30, 2009 to October 31, 2009 for all
insured depository institutions participating in the debt guarantee program
of the TLGP ("IDIs") and other participating entities; however other
participating entities that have not issued senior unsecured debt guaranteed
by the FDIC under the TLGP ("TLGP debt") before April 1, 2009 are required
to submit an application to and obtain approval from the FDIC to participate
in the extended TLGP. The Interim Rule imposes a surcharge on all TLGP debt
with a maturity of one year or more issued on or after April 1, 2009. The
Interim Rule also permits IDIs and other entities participating in the
extended TLGP to apply to the FDIC to issue non-FDIC-guaranteed senior
unsecured debt ("non-TLGP debt") during the extension period.

The FDIC's stated intent for extending the TLGP is to facilitate an orderly
transition period for participating institutions to return to
non-FDIC-guaranteed funding, and to reduce the potential for market
disruption when the program ends; enhance bank liquidity while the elements
of the Treasury's proposed Financial Stability Plan are implemented; and
address potential competitive disparities with similar programs in other
countries. The FDIC's extension is consistent with extensions of other
liquidity programs recently announced by the Board of Governors of the
Federal Reserve System.

Extension of the TLGP
The Interim Rule extends the period during which TLGP debt may be issued
from June 30, 2009 to October 31, 2009. The extension applies to all IDIs
and to other participating entities (such as bank holding companies) that
have issued TLGP debt prior to April 1, 2009.

On Apr 12, 12:12*pm, Marvin the Martian wrote:
Tired of all the flame wars? Insane posts? Off topic postings?

Want to try a moderated forum?

Then Get your ass to Mars!

http://OnToMar.org/forum/

A new forum where you can discuss space policy, particularly if you
understand why Mars, and not the moon, should be our immediate goal of
our space program.http://www.ontomars.org/blog/?m=200903

Why the Moon isn’t a Stepping Stone to Mars

Mars has an atmosphere however thin, the moon doesn’t. A Mars day is 24
hours and 40 minutes, a moon day is about 14 earth days. Temperatures are
different between Mars and the Moon. The new technologies needed to go to
Mars like the simulated gravity tether and large mass aerobraking to get
to the Mars surface, have nothing to do with the Moon. So, other than
they require totally different technologies, the moon has little to offer
in the way of Mars development.

The moon would be a good place to build telescopes. Better than Mars.
That’s just about the only thing the Moon has going for it.
Now, what does Mars have?
Climate Science.

Many people are interested in the science of climate change. Mars is a
cold planet that once was much warmer. Further, like earth, the climate
of Mars is also changing. Ice core samples taken on Mars would advance
the science of climate change a great deal.

Since we WANT a warmer Mars, tinkering with greenhouse gasses on Mars
would not only help to terraform Mars, but provide a great deal of
science about climate change.

You don’t get any of this by going to the Moon, the Asteroids, NEOs or
any other dead rock.
Biology

The Moon, the Asteroids, and NEO are all dead, lifeless rocks. In the
past, Mars had an ideal environment for life with a warmer environment
and flowing water. What’s more, gas releases from Mars suggest that life
may be there to this day. What a fantastic discovery it would be to find
fossil life on Mars. And the probability of finding extra-terrestrial
life on Mars would be the most significant scientific discovery since…
well, FIRE. You don’t get this by going to the Moon.
A Home for Humanity.

Mars has carbon. Mars has oceans of frozen water. Mars can be
terraformed. The moon has no carbon, trace amounts of water. It makes no
sense at all for a carbon based life form made mostly of water to try and
colonize a world where there is no carbon and almost no water. What’s
more, because there is no volcanic activity or water on the moon, there
are no ores. Materials like copper will be hard to gather on the moon.
You can build bases on the moon, only on Mars can you build a colony.

What’s more, you can grow crops in greenhouses on Mars, as the Martian
day is close enough to an earth day that our plants can grow there in a
greenhouse with a low pressure atmosphere. On the moon, the nights are
two weeks long!

* *Mars is the Gateway to the inner solar system

Because Mars can support a colony and the moon can only support a base,
Mars will eventually become humanity’s gateway to the inner solar system.
Once every two years, the energy required to go from Mars to the Moon is
much less than going from the earth to the moon! You can get much larger
payloads into space from Mars than you can from earth. A Mars
civilization would be a spacefaring civilization.
The Danger of going to the moon

Most of you are too young to recall, but in the early 1970s, when the
Apollo program was returning bags of rocks from the moon, people were
saying things like “We can go to the moon but we can’t cure the common
cold” or “We can go to the moon but we can’t end poverty” and so one.
People saw the product of the moon program: Moon rocks, which appeared to
be ordinary earth rocks and were only of interest to scientist. The
payback for space programs seemed small. Many people could put together a
bag of rocks for far cheaper. Space programs seemed wasteful, and the
Mars program was convicted by guilt by association with the Moon program
in the eyes of public that didn’t know better. There’s a PAYBACK for
going to Mars.

History repeats itself. Today, it is very much like it was in the 1960s.
We have a plan to return to the moon in 15 years or so. However, in 15
years , the people are once again going to see bags of rocks coming back
from the moon. They will not see the discovery of extraterrestrial life.
They will not see new discoveries in climate science. And they will not
see an exciting new self supporting colony. WE didn’t learn from Apollo
and we are in danger of making the same error.

--http://OnToMars.org*For discussions about Mars and Mars colonization

Truth be told, we obviously can't seem to deal with Eden/Earth, much
less afford to take on Mars, and we certainly can't put any physical
claims or extract benefits from our highly unusual Selene/moon, which
makes this another highly bogus topic.

And the great mutual ruse/sting of their mutually perpetrated cold-war
century continues, as though a white Zionist god and all of his
kingdom were on the same side of the USSR/USA coinage, the other side
depicting an unmentionable private body part at full erection.

We’re seeing such bogus topics posted that even a failing 5th grader
can easily interpret as to what a total crock of mainstream infowar
tactics is going on. Too bad that BHO is going to have little
budgetary option but to cut our NASA budget sown to the bone
(eliminating most everything except the most pressing terrestrial
related matters), thanks mostly to their corrupt politics and their
SEC approved Ponzi Madoff and Big Mother Ponzi AIG, because it’s all
situated in the nearest toilet.

Just checked GM stock, and lo and behold it's almost worth as much a
toilet paper, along with a number of other public bailout investments
going onto the nearest toilet. That's OK, because what's another
million of middle and upper class unemployed, plus at least another
half million of preexisting UAW retirements and seeing everyone’s
medical benefits trashed, all because of our corrupt and greedy UAW
and faith-based corrupted government agencies of loot and benefit
hording era. Chances of UAW and GM survival are looking grim, as
though now they got next to nothing outside of whatever chapter 7
manages to liquidate. Way to go warlord republicans and faith-based
puppet masters.

Besides chapter 11s, how many chapter 7s per business day are we
averaging?
~ BG