Gingrich pledges moon colony during presidency

Discussion in 'Latest US & World News' started by SupremusVeritas, Jan 26, 2012.

  1. SupremusVeritas

    SupremusVeritas New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2012
    Messages:
    204
    Likes Received:
    9
    Trophy Points:
    0
    COCOA, Fla. — Newt Gingrich told a cheering crowd along Florida's Space Coast late Wednesday that he would establish a permanent colony on the moon, and develop a spacecraft that can get to Mars, by the end of his second term as president.

    REF: http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...ng-presidency/2012/01/25/gIQAmQxiRQ_blog.html

    Anyone that says they are against "human caused" global warming, and they do not support Newt, they are now a hypocrite.

    Anyone that says they are for an alternative to oil and gas as fuels and they do not support Newt, they are now a hypocrite.
     
  2. ian

    ian New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2008
    Messages:
    5,359
    Likes Received:
    52
    Trophy Points:
    0
    You cant even feed your people and he wants to spend trillions on this?
     
  3. SupremusVeritas

    SupremusVeritas New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2012
    Messages:
    204
    Likes Received:
    9
    Trophy Points:
    0
    It is the ONLY answer for all of mankind.

    Besides who says we can't feed our own people?
     
  4. skeptic-f

    skeptic-f New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2004
    Messages:
    7,929
    Likes Received:
    100
    Trophy Points:
    0
    The voyage to Mars is in the planning stages, so Newt is just saying he is going ahead. The base on the moon is a bad idea until technology develops more. We need assembler fabricators and nanotech (constructive and medical) to make such a base a success, but then it will have quite an impact. NASA and Newt are jumping the gun and will be spending a lot of money prematurely so that private firms will eventually benefit from the tech breakthroughs that will be required.
     
  5. moon

    moon Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2008
    Messages:
    33,819
    Likes Received:
    381
    Trophy Points:
    83
    The pursuit of Gingrich's lunar policy will take the heat off the failure off his economic policy, his social policy and his foreign policy. There will be- and I'm serious- those who are promised a vacation beside the Sea of Tranquility and pack their shorts.
     
  6. Panzerkampfwagen

    Panzerkampfwagen New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2010
    Messages:
    11,570
    Likes Received:
    152
    Trophy Points:
    0
    BAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! 8 years to do all that? HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

    May as well claim that he'll set up a colony on Titan by the end of his second term. May as well claim that he'll have an interstellar ship up and running by the end of his second term. May as well.............
     
  7. Leffe

    Leffe New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2009
    Messages:
    11,726
    Likes Received:
    139
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Humans living on the moon is our only chance for survival?
     
  8. Dayton3

    Dayton3 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 3, 2009
    Messages:
    25,312
    Likes Received:
    6,672
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    It took only 8 years to get to the moon the first time and that was with technology that is now 50 years old.

    And it will not cost "trillions" and one of the persons above claimed. Not even remotely closed.

    Finally, "not able to feed your people". No one in the United States goes hungry because of a lack of food or govt. support.
     
  9. Leffe

    Leffe New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2009
    Messages:
    11,726
    Likes Received:
    139
    Trophy Points:
    0
    It's like watching your neighbour buy a new Mercedes, meanwhile watching the bailifs knock at his door.
     
  10. Leffe

    Leffe New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2009
    Messages:
    11,726
    Likes Received:
    139
    Trophy Points:
    0
    How much will it cost? (US tax payers)
     
  11. Panzerkampfwagen

    Panzerkampfwagen New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2010
    Messages:
    11,570
    Likes Received:
    152
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Great, the only thing that's improved since the Moon landing is the computers. We're not talking about a day trip here. We're talking about developing everything needed to set up a colony and ship it there, at a cost of what, $10k per kg, or something like that. It'll take half the US budget.
     
  12. SupremusVeritas

    SupremusVeritas New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2012
    Messages:
    204
    Likes Received:
    9
    Trophy Points:
    0
    "We choose to go to the moon. We choose to go to the moon in this decade and do the other things, not because they are easy, but because they are hard..." JFK September 12, 1962

    Of course it will be hard, anything worth doing is.

    "To be sure, we are behind, and will be behind for some time in manned flight. But we do not intend to stay behind, and in this decade, we shall make up and move ahead." JFK September 12, 1962

    We Americans will do it. We've done it before, and people like you laughed. Funny how history doesn't remember your kind...
     
  13. snakestretcher

    snakestretcher Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2010
    Messages:
    43,996
    Likes Received:
    1,706
    Trophy Points:
    113
    More evidence he's a clueless imbecile.
     
  14. Dayton3

    Dayton3 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 3, 2009
    Messages:
    25,312
    Likes Received:
    6,672
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Using shuttle derived launch vehicles, probably no more than 3-5 billion a year at most.

    Remember that a huge amount of the Apollo program involved building most of the Kennedy Space Center infrastructure that did not exist when JFK committed the U.S. to putting a man on the moon.

    Using shuttle derived launch vehicles to put 4-6 man crews permanently on the moon on a six month rotating basis (most people consider permanent occupancy to be effectively a "colony") will not cost that much.
     
  15. Panzerkampfwagen

    Panzerkampfwagen New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2010
    Messages:
    11,570
    Likes Received:
    152
    Trophy Points:
    0
    The US sent 12 men to the Moon and hasn't been back. Why? Too expensive to send just 2 people at a time and a tiny craft. Now imagine the costs of sending entire buildings, etc.

    People laughed at your kind when they imagined Moon bases by the end of the 1970s.
     
  16. snakestretcher

    snakestretcher Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2010
    Messages:
    43,996
    Likes Received:
    1,706
    Trophy Points:
    113
    If the Moon is so important then why haven't you been there again in the 40 years since the last landing?
     
  17. Leffe

    Leffe New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2009
    Messages:
    11,726
    Likes Received:
    139
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Can you provide links, or assurances that you work in the NASA accounts department?
     
  18. Dayton3

    Dayton3 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 3, 2009
    Messages:
    25,312
    Likes Received:
    6,672
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    It would've been more than doable if NASA had not made several huge tactical errors (the space shuttle program) and the Nixon Admin. had not gutted the NASA budget.

    In Astronomy magazine, a former NASA official admitted that the agency should have insisted on the Apollo program been kept alive instead of investing in the shuttle.

    the official pointed out that with what NASA spent on the shuttle there was enough money for two missions to the moon every year, two orbital missions each year, and establishing and expanding the Skylab space station with money left over.

    See above.
     
  19. Til the Last Drop

    Til the Last Drop Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 14, 2010
    Messages:
    9,069
    Likes Received:
    384
    Trophy Points:
    83
    "I will cure aids and cancer by the end of my 2nd term!"

    "I will make everyone winning the lottery, at least once in their lives, mandatory!"

    "I will eradicate mosquitoes!"

    "I will put chemicals in the water to add 5" to every penis, and 3 cup sizes to breasts!"

    When will people realize presidents aren't half as powerful as they are hyped up to be? Who the CEOs of major corporations are impacts far more lives. And we don't even get to vote for them.

    Let me tell you all what you will get with Newt, Romney or Obama.
    A whole bunch of the same.
     
  20. snakestretcher

    snakestretcher Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2010
    Messages:
    43,996
    Likes Received:
    1,706
    Trophy Points:
    113
    So what are you going to do with this 'colony' of a few dozen people?
     
  21. SupremusVeritas

    SupremusVeritas New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2012
    Messages:
    204
    Likes Received:
    9
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Good question, and the answer is:

    But helium-3 isn't the only resource the moon might have to offer. It could also be a source for rare earth elements, such as europium and tantalum, which are in high demand on Earth for electronics and green energy applications (solar panels, hybrid cars), as well as being used in the space and defense industries.

    REF: http://news.discovery.com/space/this-moon-was-made-for-mining-helium-3.html
     
  22. snakestretcher

    snakestretcher Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2010
    Messages:
    43,996
    Likes Received:
    1,706
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Uh huh; so he wants to spend billions of your tax dollars looking for something which may or may not be there, and when the globe is on the brink of a 1930s-style depression? That makes sense...maybe he should go back to the planet he came from.
     
  23. Dayton3

    Dayton3 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 3, 2009
    Messages:
    25,312
    Likes Received:
    6,672
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    We have over 800 lbs. of samples form the lunar surface.

    The existence of Helium-3 and other rare earths is pretty much a given.
     
  24. Leffe

    Leffe New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2009
    Messages:
    11,726
    Likes Received:
    139
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Table 1. Development Costs

    Altair lander - $12 billion

    Universal lander module - $2 billion

    Lunar base (habitation and support modules) - $17 billion

    2 Ares V launches for base modules - $2 billion

    Orion safety margin - $2 billion

    Total - $35 billion

    Table 2. Annual Operating Costs

    2 Ares V launches with 2 Altair landers - $2 billion

    2 Ares I (or equivalent) and Orion launches - $0.6 billion

    15 medium launches with universal cargo lander - $3.75 billion

    Support services and equipment - $1 billion

    Total - $7.35 billion per year

    However, NASA projects have an average 50% overspend (shocking and would get any US social programme closed down).

    Which would mean:

    Total - $52.5 billion

    Total - $11.025 billion per year

    These numbers are for a 4 man station. Now Grinch wants to build something for tourism, which would neccessitate a significantly larger station.

    http://csis.org/publication/costs-international-lunar-base
     
  25. Dayton3

    Dayton3 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 3, 2009
    Messages:
    25,312
    Likes Received:
    6,672
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    So worst case isn't even far off my estimates.

    And it amounts to less than a fraction of farm price supports or federal (and largely useless) education spending per year.

    This is affordable even in the worst of budget situations easily.
     

Share This Page