Trump tells NASA to send Americans to Moon - Polidicks

[QUOTE]WASHINGTON: US President Donald Trump directed NASA on Monday (Dec 11) to send Americans to the Moon for the first time in decades, a move he said would help prepare for a future Mars trip."This time we will not only plant our flag and leave our footprint," Trump said at the White House as he signed the new space policy directive. "We will establish a foundation for an eventual mission to Mars and perhaps someday to many worlds beyond." The directive calls on NASA to ramp up its efforts to send people to deep space, a policy that unites politicians on both sides of the aisle in the United States. However, it steered clear of the most divisive and thorny issues in space exploration: budgets and timelines. Space policy experts agree that any attempt to send people to Mars, which lies an average of 225 million kilometres from Earth, would require immense technical prowess and a massive wallet. The last time US astronauts visited the Moon was during the Apollo missions of the 1960s and 1970s. On Jul 20, 1969, US astronaut Neil Armstrong became the first man to walk on the Moon. Trump, who signed the directive in the presence of Harrison Schmitt, one of the last Americans to walk on the Moon 45 years ago, said "today, we pledge that he will not be the last." Trump and Vice President Mike Pence, who heads the newly revitalised National Space Council, have previously vowed to explore the Moon again, but offered few details. 'WE'RE DREAMING BIG' Former US president George W. Bush also pledged to send Americans to the Moon as part of the Constellation program, which ran from 2005 to 2009. Constellation was projected to cost US$100 billion, and aimed to get boots on the Moon's surface by the late 2020s. In 2009, then president Barack Obama deemed it too costly and repetitive of missions already achieved, and cancelled the programme in order to focus on reaching Mars by the 2030s. Trump vowed his new directive "will refocus the space programme on human exploration and discovery," and "marks an important step in returning American astronauts to the Moon for the first time since 1972." The goal of the new Moon missions would include "long-term exploration and use" of its surface. "We're dreaming big," Trump said. [/QUOTE] Read more at [url]https://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/world/trump-tells-nasa-to-send-americans-to-moon-9490634[/url] One of the few good things to come out of the current administration.

I disagree with you. I am massively into space stuff, but sending people back to the moon is not worthwhile. I understand doing it to prepare for a future manned mission to Mars, but that technology isn't ready yet. NASA's budget can be spent far more effectively on unmanned missions like Curiosity. Not only does it yield more science, but they are relatively a lot cheaper than manned missions. I also think big investment in the Starshot mission would be better than going back to the moon.

What's the point though? Is there actually anything left to do on the moon?

Before reading the actual article and only seeing the title, I was scared for a second that Trump didn't know about our previous moon landings.

On one hand, Trump's kinda right. Investing in NASA is a good thing no matter what the goal. On the other hand... yeah, a Moon mission seems pointless. [quote]The goal of the new Moon missions would include "long-term exploration and use" of its surface.[/quote] What use is the Moon?

[QUOTE=meharryp;52968801]What's the point though? Is there actually anything left to do on the moon?[/QUOTE] Helium mining [editline]12th December 2017[/editline] Trump just wants to go coz he's a big kid though I know this because I too am a big kid, just a little less spoiled, cocain addled and grabby

I remember a thread a while back where people creamed over the idea of a base on the moon, now yalls hating on trump cause he wants to go there again?

[QUOTE=Lazore;52968818]I remember a thread a while back where people creamed over the idea of a base on the moon, now yalls hating on trump cause he wants to go there again?[/QUOTE] Yes because when Trump wants to do something it is most likely for the wrong reasons.

I'm surprised he didn't try to claim the moon landing was a hoax since he seems pretty susceptible to other conspiracy theories. [quote] THIS TIME WE WILL ACTUALLY LAND ON THE MOON, NOT STAGE IT!!! MAGA [/quote]

[QUOTE=Jeezy;52968842]I'm surprised he didn't try to claim the moon landing was a hoax since he seems pretty susceptible to other conspiracy theories.[/QUOTE] Honestly I think this might backfire a bit since his diehard fanbase are also probably flat earther types.

Wouldn't establishing a base on the moon be a good prototype for what we (hopefully) can do in the future on Mars?

[QUOTE=WhichStrider;52968803]Before reading the actual article and only seeing the title, I was scared for a second that Trump didn't know about our previous moon landings.[/QUOTE] These 'previous moon landings' you speak of were just a hoax set up by the lizard people in a futile attempt to demoralize Russian astronauts

[QUOTE=Spetsnaz95;52968866]Wouldn't establishing a base on the moon be a good prototype for what we (hopefully) can do in the future on Mars?[/QUOTE] Was watching a drama-documentary about Mars on Netflix. What they reckon (based of research done by giga nerds and space x) is the bases will be build below the surface to avoid radiation. Find extinct lava tunnels with ice and literally inflate the hab modules down there. No lava tunnels on the moon, so probably only temporary/short term habitation.

[QUOTE=mdeceiver79;52968811]Helium mining[/QUOTE] Have there actually been any successful uses of Helium-3 as a power source in nuclear reactors? I know that there are prototypes but so far as I am aware there is not any power gain only loss.

[QUOTE=mdeceiver79;52968872]Was watching a drama-documentary about Mars on Netflix. What they reckon (based of research done by giga nerds and space x) is the bases will be build below the surface to avoid radiation. Find extinct lava tunnels with ice and literally inflate the hab modules down there. No lava tunnels on the moon, so probably only temporary/short term habitation.[/QUOTE] Nah they got lava tunnels on the moon: [url]https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lunar_lava_tube[/url]

Wow there are lava tunnels on the moon Winner winner chicken dinner Edit: sorry didn't see your post, this reads like its sarcastic but it's not, was legit surprised about this [editline]12th December 2017[/editline] [QUOTE=Solid_Karat;52968875]Have there actually been any successful uses of Helium-3 as a power source in nuclear reactors? I know that there are prototypes but so far as I am aware there is not any power gain only loss.[/QUOTE] Can still be used for other important things like suicide hoods, birthday balloons and squeaky voices [editline]12th December 2017[/editline] Probably boring medical stuff too

I always thought meteor impacts would be a bigger risk than radiation for a surface moonbase.

Not a terrible idea, just send Trump and his cabinet on a one-way ticket.

get ready for the world's first moon base to be a fully functioning trump hotel™

[QUOTE=Solid_Karat;52968875]Have there actually been any successful uses of Helium-3 as a power source in nuclear reactors? I know that there are prototypes but so far as I am aware there is not any power gain only loss.[/QUOTE] My very primitive understanding is that Helium-3 is for an as yet uninvented fusion reactor. Trust Trump to want to nick Helium from the Moon rather than actually do something worthwhile... I hope I don't just seem pessimistic, as I am very keen for us to try landing people on Mars when we are able. The new Orion craft is supposedly capable of doing it with a periapse refuel in LEO. Make the Moon Ache Again, etc. etc.

[QUOTE=Dan The Man;52969037]My very primitive understanding is that Helium-3 is for an as yet uninvented fusion reactor. Trust Trump to want to nick Helium from the Moon rather than actually do something worthwhile... Make the Moon Ache Again, etc. etc.[/QUOTE] Trump made no mention of helium, thats just one of the legit reasons to go to the moon. It's useful for more than just a reactor. Helium is a finite resource on earth currently, any we accidentally release is never seen again and its super necessary for a bunch of science stuff using super conductors. [editline]12th December 2017[/editline] Trump's a turd but going to the moon is something we're gonna have to get round to sooner or later. Unless we go back to being hunter gatherers, which sounds p neato, 15 hour work week and the rest of the time playing in nature, having sex and sitting in circles beating drums.

[quote]Constellation was projected to cost US$100 billion, and aimed to get boots on the Moon's surface by the late 2020s. [B]In 2009, then president Barack Obama deemed it too costly and repetitive of missions already achieved, and cancelled the programme in order to focus on reaching Mars by the 2030s.[/B] Trump vowed his new directive "will refocus the space programme on human exploration and discovery," and "marks an important step in returning American astronauts to the Moon for the first time since 1972." The goal of the new Moon missions would include "long-term exploration and use" of its surface.[/quote] Why do I get the feeling this is the primary driving factor behind Tinyhands' motivation here

[QUOTE=Lazore;52968818]I remember a thread a while back where people creamed over the idea of a base on the moon, now yalls hating on trump cause he wants to go there again?[/QUOTE] He just kept saying jobs jobs jobs the whole time which leads me to believe he is totally uninterested in it Also he wants to slash and burn nasa's budget.

[QUOTE=mdeceiver79;52969043]Trump made no mention of helium, thats just one of the legit reasons to go to the moon. It's useful for more than just a reactor. Helium is a finite resource on earth currently, any we accidentally release is never seen again and its super necessary for a bunch of science stuff using super conductors. [editline]12th December 2017[/editline] Trump's a turd but going to the moon is something we're gonna have to get round to sooner or later. Unless we go back to being hunter gatherers, which sounds p neato, 15 hour work week and the rest of the time playing in nature, having sex and sitting in circles beating drums.[/QUOTE] I was referring to one of the other posters who said that Trump wanted to use the Moon's resources, or something to that effect. As Trump once said: "I love nuclear. The devastation, it's very important to me." As for the rest of your post... whilst funny, I fail to see how skipping the Moon and instead using that money to get to Mars more quickly is the same as forfeiting thousands of years of technical advancement and evolution.

[QUOTE=Lazore;52968818]I remember a thread a while back where people creamed over the idea of a base on the moon, now yalls hating on trump cause he wants to go there again?[/QUOTE] I would believe him if he actually put money to NASA instead of just talk shit he doesn't know like always. I'm not a gullible person. Just saying he wants something isn't enough for me. He has to show it. Otherwise it's just among one of his many empty promises.

[QUOTE=Sitkero;52969049]Why do I get the feeling this is the primary driving factor behind Tinyhands' motivation here[/QUOTE] I guess now in theory it could be done much cheaper with the development of the commercial space sector. Using Falcon Heavy for the rocket, would probably have to develop a new lander vehicle though.

[QUOTE=meharryp;52968801]What's the point though? Is there actually anything left to do on the moon?[/QUOTE] Trump just wants to brag about putting a man on the moon, he doesn't give a shit about anything that doesn't puff up his ego.

[QUOTE=meharryp;52968801]What's the point though? Is there actually anything left to do on the moon?[/QUOTE] The moon actually could provide a lot of beneficial uses, if it's used correctly. I'm relatively certain Trump just wants someone to carve a giant T into the side of it, though.

Remember when Newt Gingrich said we should colonize the moon and make it the 51st state? I bet that was a slap in the face to Puerto Rico

[QUOTE=Dan The Man;52969106]I was referring to one of the other posters who said that Trump wanted to use the Moon's resources, or something to that effect. As Trump once said: "I love nuclear. The devastation, it's very important to me." As for the rest of your post... whilst funny, I fail to see how skipping the Moon and instead using that money to get to Mars more quickly is the same as forfeiting thousands of years of technical advancement and evolution.[/QUOTE] Not the only alternative but it is an alternative. People are happier as hunter gratherers, they work less hours per week, are more egalitarian and are, surprisingly, less likely to suffer from famines (since their diet is diverse, based on diverse ecosystems). None hunter gatherer societies are linked to the following problems: Inequality - hunter gatherers do not create stockpiles so all members tend to be more equal Chattal Slavery - hunter gatherers have no need for chattal slaves Over population - hunter gatherers, by necessity, cannot outgrow their environment Warfare - hunter gatherers have violence sure but warfare is generally over resource stockpiles, slaves or rulership. Disease epidemics/plagues - Generally only arise from areas with high populations (usually animals) Long work hours - 40 hours a week say wwhhhhhaaaaatttt Depression/suicide - Obesity - Sure we got it good with internet and the likes, technology and medicine is cool but we (as individuals/members of a developed society ie top 20% of total pop) are very privileged and we (as humanity) have given up a lot on our journey of discovery. If humanity and all its achievements does, as it will, eventually fade into obscurity then why are we making those sacrifices? Then we, as a species, are making big sacrifices in the present for a future none of us will enjoy and which is only temporary anyway.