whts the real motive behind reaching the moon its not for travel or taking humans for a ride? whts the motive?
115997
A large part of the motive to put men on the Moon was political --- the space race with the former USSR.\n\nAs someone else pointed out in answering your question, mankind MUST develop the means to tap into the immense resources that exist on other bodies in our Solar System. If we don't our species is doomed---if we don't destroy ourselves first. Mankind can not stay locked on this planet forever and survive.\n\nThe lunar landings were our first baby steps away from home.
28933
Everything is a matter of necessity. The fact that mankind seemed perfectly content to drag a large case around simply meant that no one took the time to look at the problem. In the case of the moon America was in the space race (also the invention of the atom bomb) and spent billions of dollars, located the brightest scientist, and used the best resources to beat Russia, (who in all respects won). It was a matter of necessity in the minds of the people in power to solve that problem and they did. Just think, if the government would drive that much time and money into finding an alternative fuel source. The possibilities could be amazing!
727779
Did man really walk on the Moon ??? \n      \n   \nWeb Krishna.org \n \n\n\nDid man really walk on the Moon or was it the ultimate camera trick, asks David Milne? The greater lunar lie. In the early hours of May 16, 1990, after a week spent watching old video footage of man on the Moon, a thought was turning into an obsession in the mind of Ralph Rene. David Milne (04-07-06)\n\n"How can the flag be fluttering," the 47 year old American kept asking himself, "when there's no wind on the atmosphere free Moon?" That moment was to be the beginning of an incredible Space odyssey for the self-taught engineer from New Jersey. He started investigating the Apollo Moon landings, scouring every NASA film, photo and report with a growing sense of wonder, until finally reaching an awesome conclusion: America had never put a man on the Moon. The giant leap for mankind was fake. \n\nIt is of course the conspiracy theory to end all conspiracy theories. But Rene has now put all his findings into a startling book entitled NASA Mooned America. Published by himself, it's being sold by mail order - and is a compelling read. \n\nThe story lifts off in 1961 with Russia firing Yuri Gagarin into space, leaving a panicked America trailing in the space race. \n\nAt an emergency meeting of Congress, President Kennedy proposed the ultimate face saver, put a man on the Moon. With an impassioned speech he secured the plan an unbelievable 40 billion dollars. And so, says Rene (and a growing number of astro-physicists are beginning to agree with him), the great Moon hoax was born. \n\nBetween 1969 and 1972, seven Apollo ships headed to the Moon. Six claim to have made it, with the ill fated Apollo 13--whose oxygen tanks apparently exploded halfway--being the only casualties. \n\nBut with the exception of the known rocks, which could have been easily mocked up in a lab, the photographs and film footage are the only proof that the Eagle ever landed. And Rene believes they're fake. For a start, he says, the TV footage was hopeless. The world tuned in to watch what looked like two blurred white ghosts gambol threw rocks and dust. Part of the reason for the low quality was that, strangely, NASA provided no direct link up. So networks actually had to film "man's greatest achievement" from a TV screen in Houston--a deliberate ploy, says Rene, so that nobody could properly examine it. \n\nBy contrast, the still photos were stunning. Yet that's just the problem. The astronauts took thousands of pictures, each one perfectly exposed and sharply focused. Not one was badly composed or even blurred. As Rene points out, that's not all: \n\nThe cameras had no white meters or view finders. So the astronauts achieved this feet without being able to see what they were doing. \nThere film stock was unaffected by the intense peaks and powerful cosmic radiation on the Moon, conditions that should have made it useless. \nThey managed to adjust their cameras, change film and swap filters in pressurized clubs. It should have been almost impossible to bend their fingers. . \nAward winning British photographer David Persey is convinced the pictures are fake. His astonishing findings are explained alongside the pictures on these pages, but the basic points are as follows: \n\nThe shadows could only have been created with multiple light sources and, in particular, powerful spotlights. But the only light source on the Moon was the sun. \nThe American flag and the words "United States" are always brightly lit, even when everything around is in shadow. \nNot one still picture matches the film footage, yet NASA claims both were shot at the same time. \nThe pictures are so perfect, each one would have taken a slick advertising agency hours to put them together. But the astronauts managed it repeatedly. \nDavid Persey believes the mistakes were deliberate, left there by "whistle blowers", who were keen for the truth to on
467325
Thatguy said:\n\n"because the moon is in orbit (read: freefall) everytime the moon tries to fall to the earth, the earth backs away from it and the cycle continues" \n\nwhich is complete nonsense. The earth "backs away"? orbit is the same thing as freefall? what?\n\nGravity is an attractive force that exists between each and every object that has mass. Think of it as being like magnetism.  The reason things orbit (eg the moon) is because the pull downwards towards the earth is almost exactly balanced by the pull away from Earth exerted by the centrifigal force of going around the earth & the gravitational pull of all that other stuff out there.  Orbits work because these forces are not exactly equal, so the tendency of something to fly off into space is just overcome by the attraction towards the large mass below, and the moon is, in fact, getting a little closer over time.  Eventually, like various pieces of space junk, the earth's gravitational pull will overcome the orbital force and the moon will crash into a field in Nebraska, where a farmer will claim an alien came out of it.\n\nclear as mud
144996
Yes, I believe man has really visited the moon. Propaganda for what purpose? To beat the Russians? Please don't drink any kool-aid.
1002820
Because it was mostly for show. Remember, the Americans went to the moon in the times of the cold war. It was a show of power - getting there before the soviets. Once they did, it was decided after a few years that the money trown at each trip wasn't worth it. Congress doesn't exactly go giddy with the possibility of great scientific discovery and they're the ones who give out the money.\nNASA has plans of going back to the moon in about 10 years time, including possibly building a permanent station there in the (relatively) near future. But a long time has been lost. Also, given the world situation these days hte best to do this is with joint internation efforts. If everybody can just keep their own personal interest out of it, so it can remain purely scientific, everything will be just peachy.
619943
Why Not?\nBecause we can.\nBecause the moon is more interesting than tv.\nLife is about challenge,\nThought is about questions.\nBecause Neil Armstrong woke up one morning put his Nikes on and just did it.
757355
we never went there in the first place it was a hoax to show the world that the USA was Superior to the USSR . they cant do a hoax  now because the technology the public have is to good . if we did go and it was possible to resist the radiation on the moon we would have company's sending people there all the time look at all the money they would make . where there is money there is a will . but if it is not possible then no one will try.
522877
Like the others who have responded, Buzz Aldrin was the second man to walk on the moon. He was so effected by the experience and also having completed such a long sought after goal that he had to have some emotional guidance from a counselor after his return. I'm not saying that he had a breakdown he just needed help to get his mind all the way around what had happened to him.
545080
I'm going to make the (probably correct) assumption that you're talking about the US manned missions to the moon. We have gone to the moon and people who think we haven't are just very paranoid and naive. People who attempt to convince others that we didn't rely on people's ignorance and mistrust of the US and it's government. What they mainly do is present a lot of situations that you and I can readily test here on Earth that is "proof" that we didn't go to the moon. The problem is that things don't exactly work the same way in a low-gravity, zero-atmosphere, moon. The usual arguments and their debunkings can be found at a lot of sites but i particularly like this one:\n\nhttp://www.badastronomy.com\n\nOne of my personal favorite reasons why it probably wasn't a hoax was becaues of the Soviet Union. The Soviets had satellites, lots of satellites. They also had lots of observatories and lots of spys in the US government. If it was a hoax, they would have easily caught us and had proof. The spacecraft would have had to orbit earth while the "hoax" played out and the Soviets would have easily caught it. \n\nBut theres no convincing some people.
63217
My personal opinion is much less optimistic. My feeling is that manned space flight has already peaked. It is too expensive. The economic benefits are there, energy, mining and the like, but only if there is a sufficient infrastructure already in orbit.\n\nIn my opinion it is making that infrastructure during the time before space is economically useable - which is certainly the case now - is the critical time.\n\nIt would be very easy (unfortunatetly) for the US to let manned space travel go on a haitus...and then a a vacation...and then forget about it. The US nows owes a tremendous amount of money (and we know whoses fault that is).\n\nAs for other countries I am not optimistic that, say, China will leap to the forefront. They will encounter the same problem. Human space travel is very expensive, dangerous, and there is a lot left to learn.\n\nSo I am afraid that the hurdle needed, the jump from where we our now to something even moderately self-sufficient in space, may be too high.\n\nThose who watched the moon landings (as I did as a kid) may have seen the farthest extent of humans in space.\n\nI hope I am wrong, but I just don't see a great future for humans in space.
1109626
Oh, yes, I would love to go. Although I would be very nervous, I think that going to the moon would make me feel like I was a part of something bigger, in life. All we know, here, is the earth that we live on. To travel into space, and look back at the earth, would give me such an amazing feeling. I would feel very small, and yet, very large. It would be so beautiful to gain a new perspective on life...life here on earth, and life as it exists in the whole of reality. Space; time; life; tranquility.
1036865
Still human being cannot determine simpler and safer way to get to the local orbit, let alone Mars together with long haul voyages, nowadays human's intellect is only good to sell the Moon's 'lands' for the future-based villas and finding idiotic 'smiles' on the Martian surface, unfortunately.   \ncheers
941580
If you have ever taken a trip to a new place you would understand.  If your passion is Geology and you enjoy going in the field to see and touch the different formations, or if you enjoy Biology and you enjoy collecting new samples to perhaps see an animal that no person has ever seen, or if you are an adventurer who climbs a mountain just because it is there, then you can imagine the lure of space and interplanetary exploration.  This is the passion that drives NASA and our Astronaut corps.  Live to pursue the goals of your dreams, let them drive YOU!\nI would go to where other sentient being are.  I would want to learn about how they see their own social issues and share how we approach ours.  I do believe that one day Humankind will live just like Gene Roddenberry foresaw and portrayed in Star Trek.
1066791
Its just all a bit pointless.\n\nI mean, its cheaper to find the resources it has on Earth (shipping costs from the moon would be horrendous, even at bulk rate).\n\nIts a lousy holiday destination.\n\nAnd the weather is lousy - always close to absolute zero.\n\nSeriously, on Earth people colonised lands rich in life and almost always with existing human populations (which were duly displaced). Survival was trivial compared to the moon and the riches - in terms of new commodities to export - huge.\n\nWhy oh why oh why would you colonise a barren lump of ice cold lifeless rock?
770921
Actually, I think it would be more appropriate for us to send all the moon landing conspiracy theorists on an all-expenses, one-way trip to the heart of the Sun.\n\nIt would surely raise the average IQ of the planet to get rid of some of those nitwits.
164879
There are a lot of reasons that the moon landings were not hoaxes:\n\n1. We have a lot of photographic and video evidence. \n2. We have many pounds of unique rocks from the lunar surface\n3. We left a corner cube reflector on the surface of the moon to reflect laser light (for measuring distance to the moon) that is still there and still being used.\n4. There would have to be a uniquely successful coverup, given the thousands and thousands of people involved\n5. All of the reasons that people quote to support a hoax theory have been addressed conclusively\n\nFor all these reasons, and many more, there is very little chance that the moon landing was a hoax.