Watching the news this morning I was informed that Newt Gingrich will put a base on the moon during his SECOND term.  I think this is the only thing he has ever said that I approved (except for the second term part).

How long before it becomes a theme park! lol 

Newt Gingrich unveils plan to build permanent base on the moon by 2...

Views: 125

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Hmm... A low gravity roller coaster, water slide or something does sound awesome. Ah, to dream.

Rover rides!

The rovers would be needed for retrieving the golf balls on the 4 mile long fairways.

fk newt

haha! please tell us how you really feel :)

Yeah and he accuses everyone who disagrees with him of living in a fantasy. It occurs to me, when someone thinks everyone with an opposing viewpoint is living in a fantasy, it is a pretty good sign that it is the accuser who dwells in a fantasy. Newt fits that description perfectly.

 

Having a permanent base on the moon is a good idea, one day. But that day is far from "within a decade". There are no resources to mine on the moon that I am aware of, no water to supply a base, and it would take an extreme amount of resources to begin and sustain such a project. It is hard enough finding the funds to support the ISS, so where does a Republican get off talking about a massive spending program with no strategic upside to it when, in the same breath, he talks about reducing government spending and waste? No Newt, you will not be President except in your fantasies, there will be no moon base any time soon, and we would be much better off trying to create a permanent colony on Mars, where there is ice which could supply the colony, perhaps vast mineral resources which could be mined to create a financial incentive (and perhaps windfall) for such a mission, and a whole world to terraform for future human inhabitation, which could even help solve our population problems and would create a safeguard against the destruction of humanity by spreading us out across not one but two planets. The moon is hazardous, the dust on the moon is anathema to machines, and any base there would be completely dependent on Earth for resupply and sustenance. Newt is just doing what he does best, pander to the unsophisticated minds of his base with ludicrous ideas of conquest and space warfare. He is insane and he truly makes me sick.

Yeah and he accuses everyone who disagrees with him of living in a fantasy. It occurs to me, when someone thinks everyone with an opposing viewpoint is living in a fantasy, it is a pretty good sign that it is the accuser who dwells in a fantasy.

I would be careful about talking like this.  It isn't a universal rule that the majority is correct.  What about that lone atheist in a church community?  It may very well be that the one person is delusional, but the focus should be on the belief and not the number of people who hold it, as tempting as it can be.

Tenken, you misunderstood me. Newt accuses people of living in a fantasy if you disagree with him on any subject. Don't agree with him in religion? Fantasy. Don't agree with him in politics? Fantasy. Don't agree with him on the price of tea in China? Fantasy. If it was just one subject, then it would just happen to be a strong belief on his part (doesn't make him right). But thinking that anyone who disagrees with him in any way must be living in a fantasy is like the psych ward patient who thinks that its everyone else who's nuts.

Does he have an actual plan for a moon base?  How would it work?  How much would it cost?  How would we pay for it?

It sounds expensive.  The idea that private industry is going to pony up billions or even trillions seems unlikely.  Usually when Republicans talk about turning things over to the private sector they mean giving taxpayer money to corporations that financed their campaigns.

I don't think this "proposal" was very well thought out.  Like most of Gingrich's campaign.

There are no resources to mine on the moon that I am aware of, no water to supply a base, and it would take an extreme amount of resources to begin and sustain such a project.

Actually there are plenty of resources to mine on the moon. Platinum and Helium 3 being the two of the most valuable I can think of off the top of my head. Helium 3 can be used to fuel fusion reactors and is rare on Earth, but abundant on the moon.  There's also water/ice on the moon in large enough deposits that could be exploited. Getting to the moon and building a base would be much easier and more lucrative than trying to get to Mars. It would be the stepping stone to getting to the Mars.

Wiley, that's pretty interesting. I didn't know that, thanks! I am not convinced, however, that the moon would be a good stepping stone to Mars. Would we have to build fusion reactors on the moon to take advantage of the helium 3? That would seem an impossibility, just considering the need to get technicians to the moon to operate these reactors, not to mention asking how much need would a moon base have for power... In the future, that might make sense. But it would seem like bringing the helium 3 back to earth for use in reactors here would make more sense. Even considering the water deposits there, wouldn't such a project be extremely costly? You seem to be suggesting building launch pads on the moon, along with a base with some sustainable features, like the ability to grow their own food or create their own air. Wouldn't it make more sense skipping the moon and just going straight to Mars, where resources are far more abundant and bases would be easier to sustain? It seems a bit much to go to the moon and create a base there just for getting to Mars when the moon project would be so expensive. In any case, we are definitely talking about things that won't be happening for a long time, right? Say we decided on a moon base first. Wouldn't it take decades to get such a project completed, counting from when we actually get started on it?

There really isn't any good reason for the jump to a Mars base despite all the pushing Zubrin has been doing. Going to Mars is grandstanding move when used as a single step mission. Mars is two years away by the fastest method and other than wondering around looking for fossils.

The Moon as a first step makes much more sense if you are planning a long term presence in space. There are many materials available on the moon and the low escape velocity would make it easy to get those materials off. Having a base on the Moon would give us more experience with dealing with vacuum which is the prime condition in space.

Working on the Moon would give us experience with vacuum, mining and producing without an atmosphere and provide a good launching position for where we really need to go next which are the asteroids. Asteroids are full of the things we actually need like Iron, Platinum, Rare Earths and similar materials.

Of course, this doesn't eliminate the idea for a base on Mars. However, we need an actual presence in space instead of a quick trip to another body like we did with the earlier trips to the Moon.

There hasn't really been a good plan which is better than the ones created by Oberth and Tsiolkovsky.  Stations in Earth orbit while simultaneously developing a lunar presence. Once a presence is established with the Moon's orbit then you move to the Asteroids and to Mars.

RSS

Support Atheist Nexus

Donate Today

Donate

 

Help Nexus When You Buy From Amazon

Amazon

 

© 2014   Atheist Nexus. All rights reserved. Admin: Richard Haynes.

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service