Godlike Productions - Conspiracy Forum
Users Online Now: 1,813 (Who's On?)Visitors Today: 924,285
Pageviews Today: 1,242,662Threads Today: 298Posts Today: 5,219
01:15 PM

Rate this Thread

Absolute BS Crap Reasonable Nice Amazing

The Moon: Seriously, no Revisitations in 4+ decades?

nomuse (not logged in)
User ID: 2380183
United States
03/05/2013 02:23 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: The Moon: Seriously, no Revisitations in 4+ decades?
Explain why marine biologists are still arguing with Picard, then, if there is nothing to discover in the Challenger Deep. And explain why Amundsen-Scott was established in IGY 1956 and has been continuously inhabited since then if there is no useful science that can be done at the South Pole.
 Quoting: nomuse (not logged in) 2380183

I think comparing the moon to Antarctica and the Deep Sea trench is off base.

Would there be any need to falsify exploration of either? But the moon...ah yes.

Think how long it took just to trek through Antarctica. Discovered in the 1700s, not really properly explored until the advent of Industrial-era tools in the latter 19th century. An ongoing challenge.

Somehow, we went from having ZERO technology to put man on the moon to actually doing it in only a few years. It took 200 years and an ongoing process to learn of Antarctic. In the 1960s, we went from NO moon know how to doing it successfully.

How many men perished in Antarctica? Yet we send men far away from earth 6 times without a hitch?

And unlike Antarctica, where so many nations sent expeditions, only one nation has done the moon thing and it's been 40 years.

Yeah, BS analogies.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 17773174

The Chinese were making rockets in the 1700's. Writers were sending men to the Moon in the 1800's (Cyrano de Bergerac, for one). It had been a dream for a very long time.

And the technologies are not isolated from the rest of human science. It required the specifics of liquid-fueled rocketry, yes (Goddard shot the first one off in 1926. Tsiolkovsky worked out the general principles and the underlying math before the turn of the century. Rocketry was of course developed heavily during World War II, reaching a zenith with the liquid-fueled, self-guiding V2. But it didn't stop there; well before the Apollo program kicked off there was Ranger and Surveyor and the Titan program and a host of other rockets.)

Going to the Moon was also about a host of other sciences, from cybernetics to telecommunications, from materials science to project management. It is ridiculously blinded to think that the space program started on nothing and related to nothing. It would not have even happened without, say, the astronomy and astrophysics (which goes back as far as you are willing to argue about -- I could point to a Pueblo cave painting and call it a recorded astronomical observation. But you would be really hard-pressed to NOT include the ancient Greeks who figured out how to measure the size and distance of the Moon using nothing but geometry, simple observations, and brains.)