I disagree, Goldline.
We've been to the moon. End of story.
Yep, intelligent ones.
Nope, I'm a retard.
Yep, but non-intelligent ones.
Not sure. I haven't taken any time to think about it
Not that old biscuit again. This is where different groups of conspiracy-theorists must surely come to blows...
If man did not step on the moon, then they can't have found structures to explore, and over which to have the conversations listed in the link I provided above (post #116).
The two theories are mutually exclusive.
Unfortunately, while there is still plenty to question, most theories about the moon landings being faked are easily debunked. One should not confuse sheer weight of misinformation for proof of conspiracy.
I disagree, Goldline.
We've been to the moon. End of story.
I've seen loads of people go on the moon.
Well, on tv anyway.![]()
I'm not certain that its been proven, but there have been many theories that there may be many rare and exotic materials to be found on the moon. "it's entirely possible" that it would be difficult for any given nation to stake a claim there though.
Yup. There are some interesting discoveries that show we have a lot to learn about the resource potential of the moon - from minerals unlikely ever to form in Earth's environment (eg), to vast solar-wind deposits of Helium-3 that could provide ready fuel for fusion reactors here on Earth - or even be an abundant source of power for moon settlers. Helium-3's value "in today's dollars is $5.7 million per kilogram" according to Direct.ca(2004).
With the help of Hubble, according to National Geographic, scientists discovered large volumes of this oxygen-rich mineral that could even make the production of breathable air a tantalising reality on the moon.Scientists estimate there are about 1 million tons of helium 3 on the moon, enough to power the world for thousands of years. The He3 is mainly imbedded in an ore called ilmenite.
A space vehicle with a payload bay the size of a space shuttle could bring back enough helium-3 to generate the electricity to satisfy the United States’ needs for a full year.
Regarding mining rights, Direct.ca mentions:
...a loophole in Space Law allows individuals and companies to hold Mineral Rights on the Moon, Mars and other celestial bodies. Growing concern from Scientists that these rights may be held hostage have been alleviated by a three man North American team; Dr. Joseph Resnick, Dr. Timothy R. O'Neill and Guy Cramer (ROC-Resnick/O'Neill/Cramer team) who have acquired the mineral rights for 95% of the side of the moon that faces Earth, the polar regions and 50% of the far side of the moon.![]()
Well you kinda made it so people would have to choose yes, by putting "im a retard" on the no option.
I chose no.
why not?!?!?!?
I question the physics of mining the moon though. What happens when we begin strip mining the moon? Can it be assured that this would never alter the moons gravitational pull on our oceans.
Its been proven "as far as I know" that the moons gravity is the force that gives us high and low tide. If the moons gravity where altered "even faintly". It could have a devastating impact on Microbial life in our oceans.
I'll grant you, im no physicist, So its far beyond my scope to say that mining the moon could effect its gravitational pull. Still as important as it is to life on earth, I would fear to do such a thing.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Bookmarks