A Space & astronomy forum. SpaceBanter.com

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » SpaceBanter.com forum » Space Science » Space Station
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

..New Space-Race to the Moon..History is (Tragically) Repeating Itself



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #41  
Old November 1st 07, 02:46 AM posted to sci.space.history,sci.space.policy,sci.space.station,soc.culture.china,soc.culture.taiwan
BradGuth
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 21,544
Default ..New Space-Race to the Moon..History is (Tragically) Repeating Itself

On Oct 27, 7:06 pm, "Jonathan" wrote:
First Bush and his Vision to the moon, then Japan, India
and now China all gearing up to go back to the moon.

WHY?

The same reason for Apollo, we were in a ....military...race
with the Soviets. The Cold War. Now....the reason everyone
is going back to the moon???

MISSILE DEFENSE.

So, I guess after another FIFTY GODDAMMED YEARS
we'll end up with nothing more to show than the last
FIFTY YEARS IN SPACE.

Lots of really cool..very..expensive weapons we'll probably
never use. And a bunch of completely useless hardware
lying about on the moon.

Just like the ISS, the Grand Accomplishment of the last
FIFTY YEARS in space.

What a ****ing... excuse my lanquage, but it's so incredibly
infuriating to think about, no other word will do....
..what a ****ing waste.

We should demand NASA return to the plan it had
for the future of space BEFORE BUSH.

Space Solar Power...

Executive Summary
NASA'S SPACE SOLAR POWER EXPLORATORY RESEARCH
AND TECHNOLOGY (SERT) PROGRAMhttp://books.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=10202&page=1

And we should do so...times ten.

But then, maybe I'm the only one that thinks we should
use NASA to pave the way solutions to global warming
and diminishing fossil fuels INSTEAD of paving the way
for friggin ...space ships with laser beams attached.

I mean, it can't be possible no one else sees the absolute
LUNACY of current policy??
Shirly it can't be the Iranians or N Koreans that frighten
us so much we need to militarize the moon?

Must be China eh?

****ing communists need to go, once and for all.

s


Where's all of the warm and fuzzy usenet love and affection these
days?

Since our NASA doesen't give a freaking crapolla; what's wrong with
China and India owning our moon, and the moon's L1?
- Brad Guth -

Ads
  #42  
Old November 4th 07, 07:59 PM posted to sci.space.history,sci.space.policy,sci.space.station,soc.culture.china,soc.culture.taiwan
Sloppy Joe
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 18
Default ..New Space-Race to the Moon..History is (Tragically)Repeating Itself

On Mon, Oct 29, 2007 at 04:16:40AM -0000, BradGuth wrote:
On Oct 28, 6:06 pm, Neil Gerace wrote:

[going to the moon]
30 years ago, in 1977, the US would have found it utterly
impossible :-)


That's the whole truth and nothing but the truth. (utterly impossible,
even as of today it is not human DNA friendly, nor do we have a viable
lander)
- Brad Guth -


That's not a bad thing, really, in the short term. If they were doing it
today, Haliburton would be out there on the surface of the Moon, drilling
for oil and natural gas while debate raged over whether or not building a
pipeline to Earth would have adverse environmental impact. (How's that?)

At least the way were're currently doing it ensures that when we go we'll
have much better tools. Some are frustrated at the wait, but contemporary
politics in these matters moves slowly. NMF, I wasn't born in the
baby-boom era.



  #43  
Old November 4th 07, 08:05 PM posted to sci.space.history,sci.space.policy,sci.space.station,soc.culture.china,soc.culture.taiwan
Sloppy Joe
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 18
Default ..New Space-Race to the Moon..History is (Tragically)Repeating Itself

On Tue, Oct 30, 2007 at 03:30:56AM +0000, Brian Thorn wrote:
[snip]
It's all a ruse, I tell you! We're not going back to the Moon at all,
that's just a smokescreen for...

OUR SECRET PRISON ON MARS!

We're going to round up all those innocent Muslim jihadists and send
them on big LockMart spaceships that will take them to the
LockMart-run prison at Olympus Mons. China and India know what we're


I have some intel from my usually reliable sources that indicates it will
be a mining prison. Prisoners will work in deep 2/3atm pressurized mines
using such heavy-industry tools as can be shipped from Urth. The Marines
will be running it in concert with Space Command forces. There may be a
scientific mission added once the prison is operating.

up to, so they're sending their own spy satellites to Mars (you don't
really think all this money is being spent just to go BACK to the MOON
do you?) to get better intel.


Everyone wants better intel...

Yes! It's obviously TRUE! What's wrong with all of you that you just
can't see THE TRUTH? All your arguments that prisons on Earth are a
lot cheaper are just BALONEY!


I don't know where you get this stuff. Obviously the prison is meant to
run at a profit once it's large initial capital costs are paid off a bit.


  #44  
Old November 4th 07, 08:28 PM posted to sci.space.history,sci.space.policy,sci.space.station,soc.culture.china
Sloppy Joe
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 18
Default ..New Space-Race to the Moon..History is (Tragically)Repeating Itself

On Tue, Oct 30, 2007 at 07:50:04AM -0600, kT wrote:
Rand Simberg wrote:

[the moon and missle defense]
No one who is familiar with physics, and sane, thinks that.


Actually, now I'm growing kind of fond of Jonathan's idea of raining
gigantic lunar boulder's down upon the world's cities. Consider it to be
an 'improvement' over the existing cities. Call it 'urban renewal'.


This should only be done if the boulders are painted bright yellow with
big black smiley-face markings. The launcher should be staffed by
professional mimes.

  #45  
Old November 13th 07, 10:08 PM posted to sci.space.history,sci.space.policy,sci.space.station,soc.culture.china,soc.culture.taiwan
BradGuth
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 21,544
Default ..New Space-Race to the Moon..History is (Tragically) Repeating Itself

On Oct 27, 7:06 pm, "Jonathan" wrote:
First Bush and his Vision to the moon, then Japan, India
and now China all gearing up to go back to the moon.

WHY?

The same reason for Apollo, we were in a ....military...race
with the Soviets. The Cold War. Now....the reason everyone
is going back to the moon???

MISSILE DEFENSE.

So, I guess after another FIFTY GODDAMMED YEARS
we'll end up with nothing more to show than the last
FIFTY YEARS IN SPACE.

Lots of really cool..very..expensive weapons we'll probably
never use. And a bunch of completely useless hardware
lying about on the moon.

Just like the ISS, the Grand Accomplishment of the last
FIFTY YEARS in space.

What a ****ing... excuse my lanquage, but it's so incredibly
infuriating to think about, no other word will do....
..what a ****ing waste.

We should demand NASA return to the plan it had
for the future of space BEFORE BUSH.

Space Solar Power...

Executive Summary
NASA'S SPACE SOLAR POWER EXPLORATORY RESEARCH
AND TECHNOLOGY (SERT) PROGRAMhttp://books.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=10202&page=1

And we should do so...times ten.

But then, maybe I'm the only one that thinks we should
use NASA to pave the way solutions to global warming
and diminishing fossil fuels INSTEAD of paving the way
for friggin ...space ships with laser beams attached.

I mean, it can't be possible no one else sees the absolute
LUNACY of current policy??
Shirly it can't be the Iranians or N Koreans that frighten
us so much we need to militarize the moon?

Must be China eh?

****ing communists need to go, once and for all.

s



The honest to God space race to our moon is nearly a done deal, as a
lunar based Chinese take-out franchise is likely to open soon,
starting with the moon's L1 and working their way down to that nasty
surface with those rad-hard androids leading the way.

What part of our NASA/Apollo LLPOF worth of their supposed missions to/
from that highly electrostatic charged, as naked anticathode gamma+X-
ray+UV+IR(by day) saturated, and otherwise of such fluffy crystal dry
worth of an extremely low surface tension environment, of our somewhat
salty and PHYSICALLY DARK moon is still all that believable?

Of course China is most likely to takeover the primary control of our
moon, as well as of its most valuable L1. (wouldn't you, if you only
could?)

Here's a couple of little extra astronomy and hard core physics truth
worthy kinds of news that we can all use:

Comet Holmes Bigger Than The Sun
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.a...5fd77608e6cc36

http://www.ifa.hawaii.edu/faculty/jewitt/holmes.html

Secondly, the book "Dark Mission" is actually a darn good name for
most any lunar kind of mission, and our good old Richard C. Hoagland
is clearly one of them pesky insiders that can obviously get away with
publishing almost anything, as long as it directly or indirectly
supports their NASA/Apollo ongoing ruse/sting of the century.

As per the usual Zion Third Reich plan of their global domination
actions, it seems these faith-based and thus incest mutated and
otherwise borg like folks of our NASA/Apollo disinformation ****ology
are right as rain, as we outsider kind of honest village idiots do in
fact suffer rather badly from the "specific type of mental disorder"
called the WTANBTTD (whole truth and nothing but the truth disorder).

In third place is "Japan First Back To The Moon!" / kT
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.s...8a85929879b6a0

That's absolutely right, however China is not exactly sitting on their
extremely wise old butts, are they.
http://www.jaxa.jp/press/2007/11/20071113_kaguya_e.html

BTW, notice how extremely dark and otherwise somewhat average coal
like 0.11 or actually of a slightly sooty darker kind of soft albedo,
that which our extremely dusty old and electrostatic charged moon
really is, as having been so clearly JAXA/HVTV imaged within the very
same FOV, as well as having been illuminated by the very same raw
solar spectrum that's unavoidably skewed by the excess amount of those
violet and UV photons.

Do we see anything of that naked lunar terrain that's looking the
least bit NASA/Apollo 0.65~0.075 albedo worthy, like a certain guano
island as xenon arc lamp spectrum illuminated and otherwise physically
modified to suit their hocus-pocus landings? (silly question, as I
didn't think so)

Now try to imagine how much brighter than Earth the little violet
color skewed pixel(s) worth of Venus are going to look. Actually the
likes of Mars, Jupiter and Saturn should also become part of those
future JAXA/KAGUYA(SELENE) obtained images, along with a few of those
most bright of background stars unless having been intentionally
spectrum filtered out or PhotoShop removed.

And to think that there's so much more of the truth to come via JAXA/
KAGUYA(SELENE), as well as from whatever China can uncover is just
around the next corner.
--
Brad Guth

  #46  
Old November 28th 07, 01:16 PM posted to sci.space.history,sci.space.policy,sci.space.station,soc.culture.china,soc.culture.taiwan
Jonathan
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 705
Default ..New Space-Race to the Moon..History is (Tragically) Repeating Itself


"Joe Strout" wrote in message
...
In article ,
"Jonathan" wrote:

First Bush and his Vision to the moon, then Japan, India
and now China all gearing up to go back to the moon.

WHY?

The same reason for Apollo, we were in a ....military...race
with the Soviets. The Cold War. Now....the reason everyone
is going back to the moon???

MISSILE DEFENSE.


Is it just me, or is everyone else's kook meter starting to swing harder
at Jonathan's postings too?




I neglected to link to the article my post was based on.
Perhaps the loon you're referring to is the expert from
the Naval War College? Or perhaps you folks are
unable to comprehend a rather simple statement?

The space race to the moon isn't about us, it's
about power. It's a military race. Are you folks
that ignorant about politics? Or are you just
afraid to think for yourself?

Which is it? If you disagree with my characterization
of our space policy, how so, and why?

I mean can't anyone here even put forward a
coherent rebuttal? Even a simple-minded one?

Simply replying ..."you're full of it" is what children do
in the playground. Tell me someone here is above
that level. Because I don't see it.


China now part of space race
BY TIM JOHNSON
McClatchy News Service

"Fifty years after the first space race pitted the United States
against the Soviet Union, the three Asian nations are locked
in their own space race of sorts. The competition isn't only
about scientific achievement; it's also about regional
dominance."

''Technology is being used to convince other countries in
the region of who is the regional leader,'' said Joan
Johnson-Freese, an expert on China's space program
at the Naval War College in Rhode Island"
http://www.miamiherald.com/news/world/story/286321.html



Let's see, based on the responses to this post so far
I expect the next replies to be along the lines of...
....I smell bad, my mommie is stupid, sticks and stones
and oh yes, taking their bat and ball and going home.

Bunch of children...sheez. As usual, unable to
distinquish between meaning and form.


s










--
"Polywell" fusion -- an approach to nuclear fusion that might actually

work.
Learn more and discuss via:

http://www.strout.net/info/science/polywell/

  #47  
Old November 28th 07, 01:19 PM posted to sci.space.history,sci.space.policy,sci.space.station,soc.culture.china,soc.culture.taiwan
Jonathan
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 705
Default ..New Space-Race to the Moon..History is (Tragically) Repeating Itself


"Fred J. McCall" wrote in message
...
Joe Strout wrote:
:
:Is it just me, or is everyone else's kook meter starting to swing harder
:at Jonathan's postings too?
:

It's just you. Jonathan pegged most people's loon meters long, long
ago...



Only because you're mind is unable to grasp the concepts
I'm talking about. You do know everything I say is from
established courses taught at almost every respectable
university in the world. You DO KNOW THAT RIGHT?

Because ridiculing science because you can't understand it
is generally the domain of the religious and ignorant.

Which are you?





--
"Ordinarily he is insane. But he has lucid moments when he is
only stupid."
-- Heinrich Heine


  #48  
Old November 28th 07, 01:23 PM posted to sci.space.history,sci.space.policy,sci.space.station,soc.culture.china,soc.culture.taiwan
Jonathan
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 705
Default ..New Space-Race to the Moon..History is (Tragically) Repeating Itself


"macruzq" wrote in message
ps.com...


Hey, hey! Calm down! Moon is TOO FAR to launch a missile. It is not
practical. Missiles or any weapons installed on the Moon is simply a
stupid idea.



Who said anything about launching missiles from the moon???
What do our military satellites in orbit do for the most part?
Fire weapons, or observe and target etc?

Is there anyone that can even read a sentence here?
I've long known no one here can put together a
proper idea, but I at least thought most here
could read.




  #49  
Old November 28th 07, 01:32 PM posted to sci.space.history,sci.space.policy,sci.space.station,soc.culture.china,soc.culture.taiwan
Jonathan
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 705
Default ..New Space-Race to the Moon..History is (Tragically) Repeating Itself


"Matt Wiser" wrote in message
...
"Jonathan" wrote:

(mindless drivel snipped)

Boy, your wacko-meter is pretty high, I'd say. Did you escape out of the

same lunatic
asylum that the Guthball fled? If so, their security has a lot to be

desired. Join the other
conspiro-wackos, 9-11 "truthers", cheerleaders for the enemy, and other

assorted crazies in
my killfile, if you don't mind. PLONK.



So you don't think going back to the moon is
about missile defense....or military objectives?
As that is my point. Being unable to distinguish
between form and content is the sign of a weak
or lazy mind.

You should try reading the news once in a while
so you don't continue embarrassing yourself.


''Of course we can sometime in the future decide that
some anti-missile defense system should be established
somewhere on the moon,'' Putin said. ``But before we
reach such arrangements, we will lose the opportunity
for fixing some particular arrangements between us.''


No headway in U.S.-Russia missile talks

Frosty relations between the United States and Russia
continued as a meeting aimed at resolving a missile
defense dispute made little progress.

Posted on Sat, Oct. 13, 2007
BY NANCY A. YOUSSEF
McClatchy News Service

MOSCOW -- A much anticipated meeting Friday between
Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, Secretary of Defense
Robert Gates and top Russian officials made no progress
toward resolving the disputes over missile defense and other
issues that have sunk relations between the two nations to
their lowest level since the end of the Cold War.

Instead, the meeting exposed how the high hopes that
Russia and America would cooperate on missile defenses,
international arms control treaties and counterterrorism
have given way to fear that their differences over those
issues and others, such as Iran, have recharged the
rivalry between the two countries.

The day began on a sour note. When asked by reporters
whether the talks could lead to a breakthrough, Russian
Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov replied: ''Breaks definitely,
[but] through or down, I don't know.'' Russian President
Vladimir Putin then kept Gates and Rice waiting for
40 minutes and mocked some of the U.S. proposals
on missile defense as the two looked on, at times
appearing to be taken aback.

''Of course we can sometime in the future decide that
some anti-missile defense system should be established
somewhere on the moon,'' Putin said. ``But before we
reach such arrangements, we will lose the opportunity
for fixing some particular arrangements between us.''

Gates and Rice tried to reassure the Russians that the
U.S. proposal to deploy ballistic missile defenses in the
Czech Republic and Poland is intended to protect
Europe from a possible Iranian threat, not to counter
Russia's nuclear missiles.

''It would have no impact on Russia's strategic deterrent,''
Gates said. In an effort to assuage Russian concerns,
he and Rice proposed that observers and a system
of ''transparency'' accompany the new missile defenses.

But the Russians' problem was geography, not transparency.
Lavrov called on the United States to freeze its deployment
plans, which he and Russian Defense Minister Anatoly
Serdyukov called ''anti-Russian.'' The Russians also
threatened to respond to any deployments, but didn't
suggest how they might do so.

The United States also proposed adjustments to the
Conventional Forces in Europe treaty, which limits key
categories of conventional weapons and forces. Lavrov
called the latest U.S. proposals nothing new, saying
that although they're a step in the right direction,
``this step is insufficient.''

U.S. officials traveling with Rice and Gates rejected
suggestions that the meeting was a failure, calling the
agreement to discuss these issues again and to consider
the U.S. proposals progress.

''I don't think we expected the Russians to agree with
these proposals today,'' said a senior administration
official, who spoke only on the condition of anonymity.

The United States also introduced specifics of a ''Joint
Regional Missile Defense Architecture,'' or missile
defense cooperation, with their Russian counterparts,
who agreed to consider the proposal. If embraced, the
plan could take relations between the two countries
''to quite a new level,'' the official said.

The Kremlin leader also said that the Cold War-INF
treaty, which limits Russian and U.S. short- and
medium-range missiles, was outdated because other
nations are acquiring those weapons. He said it should
be updated.

''If we are unable to make such a goal of making this
treaty universal, then it will be difficult for us to keep
within the framework of such a treaty, especially
when other countries do have such weapons systems,''
Putin said.
http://www.miamiherald.com/news/world/story/270162.html




  #50  
Old November 28th 07, 06:57 PM posted to sci.space.history,sci.space.policy,sci.space.station,soc.culture.china,soc.culture.taiwan
Jonathan
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 705
Default ..New Space-Race to the Moon..History is (Tragically) Repeating Itself


"Brian Thorn" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 28 Nov 2007 07:23:05 -0500, "Jonathan"
wrote:



Observe from the moon? Look at the best Earth-based images of the
moon. That sort of resolution is useless, militarily, and that
resolution comes from huge observatories on Earth far in excess of
anything humans will be able to build on the moon in the next 50
years. There is no military rationale for a base on the moon. None.
Zip. Nada. No matter how many "Bush is Evil" and "China is about to
take over the world" nutjobs try to say there is.



You're not keeping up with the news. Our military advertizes
it's desire to militarize space as rapidly, and in every way
possible. It's not even a close question. You don't know
what our military policies are. Just read their own
statements. This statement is from just last week.....
and is on the front page of their web site.

It's not like their keeping is secret for crying out loud.

"The sky is no limit'; AFSPC welcomes new leader

PETERSON AIR FORCE BASE, Colo. -- "Space capabilities
have shaped the American way of warfare in the 21st century,
just like airpower did in the 20th," said Gen. C. Robert Kehler
as he assumed command of Air Force Space Command in
a ceremony here Oct. 24 presided over by Air Force Vice
Chief of Staff Gen. Duncan J. McNabb.
http://www.afspc.af.mil/


And read on, from their Stategic Statememt for '07.


"Americans have come to rely on the unhindered use of
space-they will demand no less in the future. To protect
the space domain and deliver effects, Air Force Space Command
is pursuing investments in an array of capabilities. The United
States is committed to supporting the peaceful use of space
by all; however, prudence demands we ensure our Nation, Allies
and coalition partners have unobstructed access to space
capabilities."

"We know we will be challenged in the future-both by those who wish
to do us harm and by our own resource limitations. It no longer takes a
sophisticated adversary to impact space and ground systems..."

"We have a duty to secure the entire space domain.not just for
our own military.but for our Nation and for the benefit of the
free world. To do this, we must focus our efforts on two
objectives - improved space situational awareness and
enhanced command and control. First, we must achieve true
space situational awareness.the ability to not only track
and catalog any object, but also to determine its capabilities,
purpose and intent. Only when we've obtained a clear picture
of the entire space environment will we fully realize our
second objective - enhanced command and control over
space assets.
http://www.afspc.af.mil/shared/media...070412-128.pdf

And on and on it goes, the gloves are off since the China asat
test that militarizing space is a top priority. Combine statements
like that which this new and otherwise useless race back to the
moon and it becomes pretty clear what's going on.



Everyone is going to the moon because it is relatively cheap and easy
to do, and has a quick payoff.



What payoff is that? Moon rocks? Why go there?

Everyone seems to forget, no one in NASA has
yet to make a reasonable argument for going
there. Tell me /exactly/ how society will benefit.
What is the plan once we get there? A moon
base will do what for our economy...exactly?
It will help lower costs to orbit how....exactly?
It will help with our domestic or foreign policy
issues in ...exactly...which way?
You can't answer these questions.

However, the military is quite excited about moving
out into space.

When the NASA administrator stated his case, it
came down to Faith, that somehow going to the
moon will enable...something....great.
The same empty promises given for the ISS.
And we see how that is turning out, a make-work
program designed to do nothing but keep
aerospace jobs.

At best the vision is another make-work program
At worst an incredibly wasteful new cold war-like
race.

Either way, those are the two worst reasons
to go back one can find. There are better
uses for our space program.

Combine that with Putin's recent statement
that missile defense ...is..the reason.


Three or four days, and your probe is
there. Politicans are happy.

Sorry, Jonathan. I have to agree with the crowd here. You've totally
lost it. Step away from the computer. Put down the Loony Conspiracy
Theory book. Stop drinking the Military Industrial Complex Is Out To
Get Us koolaid. Turn off the Art Bell Show. Go outside, walk around
the block a few times. Go see a movie. Let your brain filter out all
that crap that's in there. :-)




Sorry, but this project is Lockheeds show, it's their baby.
And Lockheed IS the military industrial complex.
Why are such simple facts and reasoning beyond you?






Brian


 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
FS: Two Sides of the Moon: Our Story of the Cold War Space Race Gareth Slee History 0 September 21st 05 03:53 PM
History Channel: Apollo: The Race Against Time Damon Hill History 9 August 16th 05 01:51 AM
History Channel: Apollo: The Race Against Time Damon Hill Space Shuttle 4 August 16th 05 01:51 AM
History Channel: Apollo: The Race Against Time Brad Guth Space Shuttle 0 August 16th 05 01:31 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 08:34 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2019 SpaceBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.