Bah! You just wanted to get rid of me so you could have Gretel all to yourself.

Oh... So it wasn't Schrodinger's kitty you were petting after all...

Attached Thumbnails

 

"Great!!"

So, let's now spend the money to send non-manned robotic probes to each and every one of those "sites." Let's collect 360º photo strips, maybe pick up a few nearby golf balls, whatever. "Let's make very sure," before we ever send a new crop of humans there." Surely, this is not too much to ask.

After all, "robotic probes are very cheap, compared to brave human life." The worst thing that can happen to a robot is that it "goes permanently off-line." The same cannot be said for a human.

Remember: our objective is not "to prove that we were right," but merely "to confirm that we were never wrong." Because, that's really the only thing that "a biological human astronaut in the same physical location" really cares about. (So far as I am aware, none of them are suicidal ...)

(If you don't want to pick up the golf-ball, just photograph it.)

Today, we should shove-aside "any possible hint of '1960's politics.'" Instead, we should be scientifically and objectively obsessive: "trust, but verify!"

No human astronaut – here in the 21st century – should now ever be asked to go anywhere, unless several dozen 21st century, verifiable, probes have "gone before."

"1960's 'science' is not good enough. Do it all over again." Y'know ... "just to be certain."

We're already "amazingly good" at sending probes to the very [known ...] limits of our solar system. The Moon is therefore "easy peasy." Let's get started. Once we work out the logistics, it should be trivial to send an arbitrary number of probes down the same path – and maybe, "back again."

Prove once again, "just for good measure," every single thing that you think you know. "Is that too much to ask? I think not."

Having then objectively(!) established that, by all means: "To the Moon, and beyond!!"

This part of this thread is a re-run of an LQ thread from 5 years ago (and that was probably a re-run too).
Popcorn went stale.

I posted about "The US Government Accountability Office (GAO) a released a 76-page report on July 21, 2021 that ruled in favor of NASA choosing SpaceX as the sole winner of the $2.9 billion Human Landing System contract (HLS)."

If you've seen this movie before, post a link from when you saw it 5 years ago. Then turn the channel.

See, enorbet? I no sooner try to show forgiveness and a little humility and let you out of the box than I'm seen in another thread as being increasingly aggressive. It's always this way.

I'll let you make the call on whether you thought I was being aggressive during what I saw as banter. It's has nothing else to do with you.

I didn't see you as disrespectful but by all means answer with brutal honesty and verbosity. Anything else will get you put back in.

I have a quasar driven moral compass so I can never tell... And a Morally Ambiguous Doctorate so rarely ever care.

Dr. Trihexagonal MAD.

Gee, Trihexagonal, I thought the grin would have been a clue that it was, in fact, playful banter on my part. If I were aggressive and brutal would I have playfully side-stepped a dominance posture ? I think people tend to project what they are and I took your words as playful and responded in kind. It seems to me only insecure paranoids see enemies everywhere. I think that's an unhealthy way to view life in general and individuals specifically. I'll always start with a handshake until I'm slapped in the face with obvious intent to harm. Quid pro quo.

Frankly, and back On Topic, Bezos suing NASA reminds me of the joke about the flea floating down a river with an erection yelling "Raise the drawbridge!"

Space stuff is good economics out here.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corn_Ranch

May not be Musks territory but nice just the same.

Things are ramping up. Not only on the Moon and Mars, but next year a SpaceX Super Heavy will launch toi send an exploratory mission to an asteroiud on the far side of The Belt, called Psyche. Studies show it is maybe a metallic core left over from a collsion-killed planet. It looks like it's possibly as little as 30% metal but could be as much as 90% and it's the size of the State of Massachusetts but in 3D.

And how do you think they're going to get all that metal back here? It's totally impractical. They haven't even started mining the manganese nodules on the sea floor properly yet, and they are far more accessible than something in the asteroid belt.

Yeah, mining asteroids (and being able to use what was mined) will remain sci-fi for still many years to come...

Why did cathedral builders begin building what would take 150 years to complete... or the various pyramids and monuments... or any long term project? The initial goal though is not to mine it, that may come much later, but what is useful now is to know more about asteroids and planet formation, all the while placing another stepping stone on the path to the future. I really don't understand the viewpoint that acts as if the gathering of knowledge is a competition. The simple fact is, the people that drive advances are interested in exploring what THEY are interested in, not necessarily that which has the biggest or quickest payoff, and they tend to make the plans and solicit support. Others just idly dream. That is the nature of Exploration and Explorers.

It will still be a very long time before we can mine on our Moon and it can be effectively argued that Elon Musk has moved that timeline substantially shorter even if we only consider reusable boosters. So why shouldn't Elon be spending his brain power and wealth to pursue desalination of sea water, food production, disease prevention etc.? I'm guessing he simply chooses what fascinates him and figures others will hopefully be motivated in those ares, possibly even by his drive, risks, and successes.

I'd like to point out that despite the Space Race actually being largely motivated by military strategies, the inestimable impact on all our lives of that competition has been substantially less about how to kill people than communication, medicine, etc. he raw pursuit of knowledge is IMHO one of the highest values in Homo Sapiens. After all, isn't that what "sapiens" means?

I really don't want to hear about a "$2.9 billion dollar 'Human Lander System' Contract," when I know that we haven't figured out how physically to do any such thing ... and likely cannot advance our physics understanding by "throwing money at it."

(How the hell did you come up with that 'big number,' anyway?)

Yeah, it doesn't take me long at all to realize that "they are just 'throwing money.'" $2.9 billion dollars, to be exact.

Pigs sit out there in the feed lot, maybe looking up at the moon, but knowing nothing about what will eventually happen to their bodies in the grocery store. However, I do. I know that all of this really has nothing to do with the moon, and everything to do with pork.

So – is it really unreasonable for me, before I sign such a prodigious check, to require you to "show me the science?" Also, why shouldn't I dole out the money to you, a few hundred million dollars at a time? "Y'know, just in case ..."

Step one: I'll write a check – actually, five checks – for you to send five probes out along your proposed lunar course, each one containing instruments enclosed in each one of your proposed "human space suits." Because we obviously cannot proceed any further until we have a suit. If you haven't succeeded by the fifth time, the deal is off.

I'm happy to speculate, in the targeted interest of actually designing such a suit, but: "I was not born yesterday, and neither were you." And so, with all of that fully understood ... Yes, I've got the money – but of course you can't have it all yet. Shall we do science?

sundialsvcs we knew one, albeit rather dangerous way, to land men on the moon by the late 1960s and our knowledge and expertise has advanced considerably since then. However that doesn't amount to anything solid to those who continue to assert the Apollo Missions were all a hoax. Do you still believe that?