US plans permanent base on Moon
Banff @ Thu Dec 07, 2006 7:16 pm
Clogeroo Clogeroo:
$1:
Clogeroo wrote ...I wasn't trying to imply we own it
backpedaling coward ...we do so
How?
I'd rather not see anything which even resembles a space station or anything else on the moon and since the US thinks the arrogance for the benefit of mankind is their right well I'd say any country should own the moon and Canada sounds good enough for me ...oh I almost forgot "For the Benefit of all Mankind "
Yank-in-NY @ Thu Dec 07, 2006 7:58 pm
Indelible Indelible:
the US has the capability to help so many people yet they plan to blow a billion dollars on this?
might as well burn $100 bills in front of starving kids.
the arrogance amazes me.
might as well burn $100 bills in front of starving kids.
the arrogance amazes me.
Oh I dunno about that. Seems like it's money well spent in comparison to a $1 billion a year television network that barely anybody watches.
dog77_1999 @ Thu Dec 07, 2006 11:44 pm
Indelible Indelible:
the US has the capability to help so many people yet they plan to blow a billion dollars on this?
might as well burn $100 bills in front of starving kids.
the arrogance amazes me.
might as well burn $100 bills in front of starving kids.
the arrogance amazes me.
Shame on you for spending money on an internet connection. You really should send that money to the poor. And yes, eating anything else besides Ramon is decidence.
You could point out many places where we should spend our money, but new things would never get developed. Unlike alot of things, we'll actually get tangible technolgies from this.
dubyah @ Thu Dec 07, 2006 11:59 pm
Clogeroo Clogeroo:
$1:
Why, Canada owns the moon. Canada owns everything, afterall, including the US. Just ask Mr. Canada.
I wasn't trying to imply we own it. I'm just wondering does anyone have control over it? Or is it just whomever gets there has access to it? A McDonalds on the moon would be very expensive and wouldn't probably be worth it at least now. I could see the moon as a launching pad to mars and maybe build space ships there because of the lower gravity. Hopefully we don’t screw up space like this planet but knowing people we will.
And i was not implying that you were implying that Canada owns the moon. I was poking Mr. Canada, who is a douchebag, in the eye. Remember.
W.
Wada @ Fri Dec 08, 2006 7:25 am
Does Canada own the moon?
Well! Charles Thomas "Stompin' Tom" Connors (b.1936 in Saint John, New Brunswick) seems to think so and that's good enough for me. We (Canada) annexed it in 1949, obviously as my birthday present. 
You might think it's goofy,
But the man in the moon is a Newfie,
And he's sailing on to glory, away in the golden dory;
He's sailing on to glory, away in the golden dory.
Codfish Dan from Newfoundland,
He dreamt that he had three wishes,
And he took Mars and all the stars,
And he turned them into big fishes;
He said the sky was much too dry,
And he made a wavy motion,
And the moon, like a boat,
Began to float upon the starry ocean.
You might think it's goofy,
But the man in the moon is a Newfie,
And he's sailing on to glory, away in the golden dory;
He's sailing on to glory, away in the golden dory.
One night, he strayed to the Milky Way,
To cast his nets upon it,
He spied the tail of what he thought was a whale,
And he harpooned Halley's comet;
He never had a pot for the fish he caught,
So he had to use the big dipper,
And the Sun, by Jove, was a very good stove,
For cookin' up smelts and kippers.
You might think it's goofy,
But the man in the moon is a Newfie,
And he's sailing on to glory, away in the golden dory;
He's sailing on to glory, away in the golden dory.
Now, the Northern Lights that seemed so bright,
Like nothin' could be grander,
Well, they're just waves of the moon-boat,
Made by the Newfoundland Commander;
And don't you sigh and say, "Oh, my!
What gross exaggerations."
'Cause he'll tell you the dream was true,
When Codfish Dan awakens.
You might think it's goofy,
But the man in the moon is a Newfie,
And he's sailing on to glory, away in the golden dory;
He's sailing on to glory, away in the golden dory. 
G-prime @ Fri Dec 08, 2006 10:31 am
lol awesome. One of his best songs, classic!
MissT @ Fri Dec 08, 2006 11:27 am
Daily Mail Daily Mail:
Man must conquer other planets to survive, says Hawking
13th June 2006
We're used to seeing them as stars in the sky, but planets could soon be home to humans if Stephen Hawking has his way.
The world-renowned scientist believes humans must colonise planets elsewhere in the universe because of the risk a disaster will destroy the Earth.
Astrophysicist Professor Hawking insists the survival of the human race depends on it finding new homes on other planets. He believes global warming, nuclear war or a genetically engineered virus could wipe out the earth.
Speaking at a news conference in Hong Kong the 64-year-old scientist said humans could have a permanent base on the moon in 20 years and colony on Mars in the next 40 years.
He said: "We won't find anywhere as nice as Earth unless we go to another star system. It is important for the human race to spread out into space for the survival of the species.
"Life on Earth is at the ever-increasing risk of being wiped out by a disaster, such as sudden global warming, nuclear war, a genetically engineered virus or other dangers we have not yet thought of."
The author of the global best seller "A Brief History of Time" added if humans can avoid killing themselves in the next 100 years, they should have space settlements that can continue without support from Earth.
Professor Hawking is wheelchair-bound and communicates with the help of a computer because he suffers from motor neurone disease. He is due to give a sell-out lecture in Hong Kong today.
The scientist is teaming up with his daughter to write a children's book about the universe, aimed at the same age range as the Harry Potter books.
They aim to explain theoretical physics in an accessible way to youngsters.
His daughter Lucy said it would be aimed at people like her eight-year-old son, "a bit like Harry Potter but without the magic".
She said: "It is a story for children, which explains the wonders of the universe." She did not provide any further details, nor a likely publication date.
In 'A Brief History of Time' Professor Hawking attempted to simplify cosmology, the Big Bang and black holes. it has sold more than 10 million copies since it was first published in 1988.
Professor Hawking can only talk by blinking as his muscle-wasting disease worsens.
He once used a handoperated computer to control his synthesised voice. But Britain's longest surviving sufferer of motor neurone disease, now uses a system which monitors changes in his cheek muscle as he blinks, allowing him to select words on a screen.
Professor Hawking has become increasingly frail since he was diagnosed with motor neurone disease in his early twenties.
In 1985 he caught pneumonia in Geneva and doctors wanted to turn off his life-support machine.
His first wife, Jane, with whom he has three children, refused and had him flown back to Britain where a tracheotomy saved his life but took away his voice.
They separated in 1990 and Professor Hawking married his former nurse, Elaine Mason, in 1995.
So Hawking apparently sees Global Warming, Nuclear War and Genetic Egineering as a threat to Humanity's survival. Does this mean that the Bush administration see it all as par for the course with their policies, and are they planning ahead?
I'll bet Cheney's bagged the penthouse suite... Ha, I can just see him cackling and taking off in his plush uber-jet, leaving the rest of us suckers to deal with the mess those those assholes have left us...
MissT @ Fri Dec 08, 2006 11:33 am
Oh God, can you imagine if Bush and Cheney were the Noah and his wife of the Human race? That future generations would descend from those two...
Indelible @ Fri Dec 08, 2006 12:49 pm
dog77_1999 dog77_1999:
Indelible Indelible:
the US has the capability to help so many people yet they plan to blow a billion dollars on this?
might as well burn $100 bills in front of starving kids.
the arrogance amazes me.
might as well burn $100 bills in front of starving kids.
the arrogance amazes me.
Shame on you for spending money on an internet connection. You really should send that money to the poor. And yes, eating anything else besides Ramon is decidence.
You could point out many places where we should spend our money, but new things would never get developed. Unlike alot of things, we'll actually get tangible technolgies from this.
that argument is stupid. it doesn't even apply because it's comparing apples to oranges. who says that i'm not generous simply because i have an internet connection? i wasn't saying that the US should only spend money on the poor, that's stupid, and it's why your argument is dumb. nor would that eliminate any kind of development like you seem to suggest. everyone knows that a country, especially one like the US has many slices to its budget pie.
dog77_1999 @ Fri Dec 08, 2006 6:38 pm
Indelible Indelible:
dog77_1999 dog77_1999:
Indelible Indelible:
the US has the capability to help so many people yet they plan to blow a billion dollars on this?
might as well burn $100 bills in front of starving kids.
the arrogance amazes me.
might as well burn $100 bills in front of starving kids.
the arrogance amazes me.
Shame on you for spending money on an internet connection. You really should send that money to the poor. And yes, eating anything else besides Ramon is decidence.
You could point out many places where we should spend our money, but new things would never get developed. Unlike alot of things, we'll actually get tangible technolgies from this.
that argument is stupid. it doesn't even apply because it's comparing apples to oranges. who says that i'm not generous simply because i have an internet connection? i wasn't saying that the US should only spend money on the poor, that's stupid, and it's why your argument is dumb. nor would that eliminate any kind of development like you seem to suggest. everyone knows that a country, especially one like the US has many slices to its budget pie.
You were using the same arguement about spending that money elseware. In any case the US does spend money on the poor and there is enough pie to go around.
Indelible @ Fri Dec 08, 2006 10:37 pm
and yet starvation still kills off uncounted people. if i had a billon dollars right now i'd do something about it for sure. but i don't.
what you don't seem to understand is that when you have the potential that the US does the obligation to help is also much larger.
dog77_1999 @ Sat Dec 09, 2006 4:25 am
Indelible Indelible:
and yet starvation still kills off uncounted people. if i had a billon dollars right now i'd do something about it for sure. but i don't.
what you don't seem to understand is that when you have the potential that the US does the obligation to help is also much larger.
what you don't seem to understand is that when you have the potential that the US does the obligation to help is also much larger.
But we do help. We help alot, more than anyone as a matter fact. It isn't like we are diverting resources from aid programs or that people decided to give their charity money to NASA. Again, should we sacrifice the moon program because we aren't giving enough money to people?
Don't get me wrong, there should be programs to help feed the starving, but I don't think NASA should bear the brunt of this. There are other programs(like pork barrel projects) that should be cut.
PS-The moon program won't be an added expense to the budget. The funding will come the shuttle program, ending in 2010.