Why haven't we been back to the moon?

[HalfLotus]

And why has no other country in the world been there? Referring to manned missions of course.

Two most common explanations I see are, "No reason to." and "Can't afford it."

Surely we didn't learn every useful detail of the moon in a handful of trips in the 60s/70s. Even if we did, many scientists spend their entire lives researching useless ****, and use a truckload of cash doing so.

Advances in technology, especially computers, ought to have driven the costs down significantly. And besides, going to the moon is super cool.

The U.S. government has spent approximately 483 zillion dollars (ballpark figure) since Apollo 17, but couldn't spare a few million for even one manned mission in the past ~40 years?

And no other country wants to hang their hat on the moon either?

Doesn't make sense.

[BlackCat]

Simple explanation : no reason to go there.

Tinfoilhat reason: It would expose the extraterrestial colonies placed there.

[HalfLotus]

No reason to climb Mount Everest either, but people still do it. Why? Because it's cool.

Surely one of the other rich nations of the world would want to impress their herd with a manned mission at some point in the last 37 years.

[BlackCat]

No reason to climb Mount Everest either, but people still do it. Why? Because it's cool.

Surely one of the other rich nations of the world would want to impress their herd with a manned mission at some point in the last 37 years.

No way. As you say, Mount Everest is climbed because it's cool, but the back of the moon is only interesting if extrateresstial bases can be exposed. Technically it's really not interesting - not even in the "my dick is so big" contest.

[Drake Tungsten]

Back? You don't actually believe the Americans landed on the moon, do you?

[BlackCat]

Of course they didn't - the chinese will prove that when they land there in a year or two.

[KrazyHorse]

Back? You don't actually believe the Americans landed on the moon, do you?

****. I forgot I posted this already.

[Whoha]

Back? You don't actually believe the Americans landed on the moon, do you?

perhaps he is asking why we haven't faked a second moon landing then.

[Drake Tungsten]

****. I forgot I posted this already.

Probably time to stop drinking.

[Thoth]

Nonsense. It's never time to stop drinking.

[HalfLotus]

Of course I'm not suggesting something as ridiculous as faked moon landings.

Everyone knows that anything believed to be true a significant majority of people is automatically entrenched as irrefutable scientific fact. To suggest otherwise would be social suicide. And no one wants that.

Curious, what's the expiration date on this perceived "fact"? What if no one's been to the moon in next 50 years? 75? 150?

Perhaps by then the herd will have shifted a bit (25% and growing, presently), and people's "thinking", to use the term very generously, will have moved with it.

[David Floyd]

I'd love to blame liberals, but instead I blame the ****ING IDIOTIC AMERICAN VOTERS! **** THOSE FOOLS!

Democracy is ****ing stupid, we should be investing heavily in space no matter what. And especially if poor people starve to death, because I hate them anyway.

In all seriousness though, space is much more important than health care, simply because the poor people don't contribute ****. Let them die, and let's get into space immediately. I goddamn hate poor people. Just die already, ****-kickers.

[MikeH]

And why has no other country in the world been there? Referring to manned missions of course.

Two most common explanations I see are, "No reason to." and "Can't afford it."

Two perfectly good reasons! What other reason could you possibly need?

Surely we didn't learn every useful detail of the moon in a handful of trips in the 60s/70s. Even if we did, many scientists spend their entire lives researching useless ****, and use a truckload of cash doing so.

The main point is that there's no reason to send manned missions. Unmanned are much, much cheaper and much, much safer. Manned missions could still only look at a tiny bit of the surface, you're better off sending lots of much cheaper unmanned missions with specific tasks to different parts of the moon.

But actually the moon is really quite boring, and we know a lot about it. So we're focusing our missions on planets and moons we know a lot less about. Sending more missions to the moon is a waste of money.

Advances in technology, especially computers, ought to have driven the costs down significantly. And besides, going to the moon is super cool.

The U.S. government has spent approximately 483 zillion dollars (ballpark figure) since Apollo 17, but couldn't spare a few million for even one manned mission in the past ~40 years?

And no other country wants to hang their hat on the moon either?

Doesn't make sense.

China have a moon program, aiming to go back 2025/2030. And if you think it'd cost "a few million" you are way off. Optimistic projections suggest it'd cost about $125 billion dollars to sent another manned mission, starting from where we are now.

[Drake Tungsten]

We?

[HalfLotus]

Good luck to China, but I wouldn't trust NASA to go "back", seeing as how they've 'lost' nearly the entire record of the moon landings, including all 700 boxes of video footage, 13,000+ reels of voice, biomedical data, and telemetry data, and blueprints for the lunar modules, the lunar rovers, and the Saturn V rockets.

Apparently the dumb bastards took out the trash one day and took the Apollo diary with it. Dumb bastards.

"The main point is that there's no reason to send manned missions."

No point in climbing Mount Ev. either, but people do it because it's cool.

Technology has advanced light years beyond the 60s, and you honestly believe no one has had the resources or the inclination to go to another celestial body? It defies common sense.