Really guys? A Moon National Park?

[Red October1984]

LINK (http://foxnewsinsider.com/2013/07/10/how-lawmakers-plan-turn-moon-national-park)

Another great use of Tax Money I'm sure.

Why make this a National Park? They say because of future commercial landings...but there isn't enough traffic to the moon to even have a use for something like this.

:dead:

[HW3]

Can I be the park ranger? I promise I'll go up the next time they go to the moon! (twenty or thirty years from now I would guess.) I should be dead by then, and have collected a nice salary for doing nothing.:nope:

:subsim:

[Red October1984]

Can I be the park ranger? I promise I'll go up the next time they go to the moon! (twenty or thirty years from now I would guess.) I should be dead by then, and have collected a nice salary for doing nothing.:nope:

:subsim:

You know what the best part is?

It'll come out of our pockets. :03:

[BrucePartington]

Quote:
"The act would also create a Visitor Services and Administrative Offices location, which would be in "reasonable proximity" to the moon."

I think it's self evident what they're trying to do: the Morlocks are cooking up yet another excuse to get more of Eloi's hard earned money.

[Wolferz]

Just another camp ground for the uber rich. Roasting weenies is going to be problematic.:haha:

[TarJak]

They'll have to deal with the existing owners: http://www.moonestates.com/p1/One_acre_parcel_of_land_on_the_Moon/product_info.html

http://www.lunarregistry.com/land/index.shtml

[AndyJWest]

A clearer version of what is proposed here: http://www.space.com/21921-moon-bill-protects-apollo-lunar-landings.html

It seems to be the equipment left on the Moon by the Apollo missions that is being defined as a 'national park', and the US isn't actually making territorial claims. Though as things stand, they don't have any internationally-recognised jurisdiction at all, and consequently the proposed law would be hard to enforce.

I'd hope that by the time comes that this is a practical issue, international agreements will be in place to protect the Apollo sites.

[STEED]

Welcome to the Moon..NO PLEBS.

[Oberon]

Perhaps they should actually try funding NASA, then they could actually go to the moon.

[Red October1984]

Perhaps they should actually try funding NASA, then they could actually go to the moon.

NASA?

Ah..

You must mean RUSA

We pay the Russians to take us into space now. :O:

[Oberon]

NASA?

Ah..

You must mean RUSA

We pay the Russians to take us into space now. :O:

My point exactly. If they actually put a bit more of the money they take from you in to NASA then you might well have had a base on Mars by now... :/\\!!

[Red October1984]

My point exactly. If they actually put a bit more of the money they take from you in to NASA then you might well have had a base on Mars by now... :/\\!!

Ah...they're too busy infringing on the Bill of Rights to think about that.

Budget cuts ya know?

No more Space...no more White House tours...no Blue Angels or Thunderbirds...

Everybody has to make cuts right? Seems we've basically done away with NASA and given the power away. It's like we think we "have people" for everything.

[Oberon]

Ah...they're too busy infringing on the Bill of Rights to think about that.

Budget cuts ya know?

No more Space...no more White House tours...no Blue Angels or Thunderbirds...

Everybody has to make cuts right? Seems we've basically done away with NASA and given the power away. It's like we think we "have people" for everything.

Well, the private sector is supposed to be the saviour of America and the free market, so let's see how well it does I guess.

[Red October1984]

Well, the private sector is supposed to be the saviour of America and the free market, so let's see how well it does I guess.

Well it won't be that way if they keep up the regulations. :doh:

[Jimbuna]

Well, the private sector is supposed to be the saviour of America and the free market, so let's see how well it does I guess.

Shouldn't be much worse than it is in the UK I suppose :hmm2:

[Oberon]

Shouldn't be much worse than it is in the UK I suppose :hmm2:


I have no idea what you're talking about:

http://cdnl.complex.com/mp/620/400/80/0/bb/1/ffffff/4fc73300d01416d038f59fd571e95c63/images_/assets/CHANNEL_IMAGES/TECH/2011/04/wile-coyote-rocket-fail.jpg

[Jimbuna]

I doubt we are even at the Chinese lantern stage yet :)

[eddie]

Whatever became of the UK's Blue Streak Program?

[STEED]

Let the Rich have the Moon us Plebs are off to Mars. :D

In your face you rich gits. :O:

[Jimbuna]

Whatever became of the UK's Blue Streak Program?

Too expensive :-?

[Nippelspanner]

NASA?

Ah..

You must mean RUSA

We pay the Russians to take us into space now. :O:

Space X!
American private space agency that already did 2 resupply missions for the ISS. Their Dragon capsule is also able to carry 9 persons - but is not yet ready to do so.

However, soon Space X will be able to conduct crew transfer missions as well. Also, Elon Musk (CEO of Space X) will probably be the one who brings mankind to Mars... soon.

[razark]

Elon Musk (CEO of Space X) will probably be the one who brings mankind to Mars... soon.
SpaceX makes a profit by running supply missions to ISS and getting paid by the government.

SpaceX is going to [the moon|Mars|the asteroid belt] and making a profit by getting paid by <?>

That's why we need two different space programs. We need a space exploration program that is funded by the government, to do the things that push the frontiers further, but don't have a direct return on investment reflected on the balance sheet. We need a space exploitation program run by private industry, to do things that can make a profit, such as launching satellites, supplying ISS, mining asteroids/the moon/Mars. If Apollo had been run as a private company, there would have been no moon landing, because no one was going to make a profit doing it.

[Wolferz]

Go ahead and buy a chunk of lunar real estate (scam)

As soon as one government or the other lays claim to it, they'll invoke imminent domain and void your deed. Good luck fighting it in court.:hmmm: But but I paid $40.00 for that acre of lunar dust!

[Nippelspanner]

SpaceX makes a profit by running supply missions to ISS and getting paid by the government.

SpaceX is going to [the moon|Mars|the asteroid belt] and making a profit by getting paid by <?>

That's why we need two different space programs. We need a space exploration program that is funded by the government, to do the things that push the frontiers further, but don't have a direct return on investment reflected on the balance sheet. We need a space exploitation program run by private industry, to do things that can make a profit, such as launching satellites, supplying ISS, mining asteroids/the moon/Mars. If Apollo had been run as a private company, there would have been no moon landing, because no one was going to make a profit doing it.

Uhm, Space X top goal is Mars and by now, LAUNCH is settled for 2018, which is "tomorrow" in relation to space exploration.

I think Musk and his gang have a pretty decent idea about financing their projects. It is not that I made the Mars thing up or so...

[Oberon]

I just wish that someone could get the IAEA into space so we can get to work on Orion drive engines, that would do so much to help us provided they were built in space, they would be a bit messy launched from the ground.

[nikimcbee]

Perhaps they should actually try funding NASA, then they could actually go to the moon.

I thought that was our muslim outreach program? (nasa)

[soopaman2]

This is illegal.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Outer_Space_Treaty

The treaty explicitly forbids any government from claiming a celestial resource such as the Moon or a planet, claiming that they are the Common heritage of mankind (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_heritage_of_mankind).[3] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Outer_Space_Treaty#cite_note-3) Art. II (http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Outer_Space_Treaty_of_1967#Article_II) of the Treaty states that "outer space, including the Moon and other celestial bodies, is not subject to national appropriation by claim of sovereignty, by means of use or occupation, or by any other means". However, the State that launches a space object retains jurisdiction and control over that object.[4] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Outer_Space_Treaty#cite_note-4) The State is also liable for damages caused by their space object.[5] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Outer_Space_Treaty#cite_note-5)

All the usa owns is the crap we left up there, covered in the treaty as well, but cannot take any land.