![]() |
|
Landing on Moon? - Printable Version +- Sinisterly (https://sinister.ly) +-- Forum: General (https://sinister.ly/Forum-General) +--- Forum: The Lounge (https://sinister.ly/Forum-The-Lounge) +---- Forum: Serious Discussion (https://sinister.ly/Forum-Serious-Discussion) +---- Thread: Landing on Moon? (/Thread-Landing-on-Moon) |
RE: Landing on Moon? - latex_op - 12-27-2013 Ok lets think they landed on Moon. Why dont they do it again? After 50 years no one landed on the moon. Why dont they go and research on the moon?
RE: Landing on Moon? - Feat - 12-27-2013 (12-27-2013, 09:51 AM)latex_op Wrote: Ok lets think they landed on Moon. Why dont they do it again? After 50 years no one landed on the moon. Why dont they go and research on the moon? Congress cut NASA's funding after the sixth lunar landing in 1972 because the public seemed to have lost interest in the Moon and the "space race" with the Soviet Union had been won. RE: Landing on Moon? - latex_op - 12-27-2013 (12-27-2013, 09:53 AM)ABC Wrote: Congress cut NASA's funding after the sixth lunar landing in 1972 because the public seemed to have lost interest in the Moon and the "space race" with the Soviet Union had been won. But wouldnt anyone be interested into researching moon for water (I read somewhere that there is frozen water) and try to get some life on it? Why not go and set some equipment for researching weather or earth behaviour? I think they cant even go to the moon.
RE: Landing on Moon? - Feat - 12-27-2013 (12-27-2013, 09:56 AM)latex_op Wrote: Firsts things first, stop putting those fucking winks in your posts. They're annoying, seriously. Also, " adsorbed water is calculated to exist at trace concentrations of 10 to 1000 parts per million." - Do you understand how minimal that is? It is terribly small. And on top of that, do you understand how much money that it costs just to get one ship up there? Plus, we cannot just "get" life on the moon, it'd take YEARS(and I mean it). RE: Landing on Moon? - latex_op - 12-27-2013 (12-27-2013, 10:03 AM)ABC Wrote: Firsts things first, stop putting those fucking winks in your posts. They're annoying, seriously. Winks are mine signature in a post. And if it has some kind of small amount water then it can have lots of it!? I think money is not a problem for the American goverment so that is out of discussion.
RE: Landing on Moon? - Feat - 12-27-2013 (12-27-2013, 10:11 AM)latex_op Wrote: Winks are mine signature in a post. Do you understand how much debt we're in and on top of that our money is going through inflation. RE: Landing on Moon? - latex_op - 12-27-2013 (12-27-2013, 10:13 AM)ABC Wrote: Do you understand how much debt we're in and on top of that our money is going through inflation. I am not currently informed about american money situation but I know they had it. I would personally like to see another landing on the moon to know it was true. And do you take in consederation the amount of radio active waves that astronauts need to go trough to get to the moon?
RE: Landing on Moon? - Feat - 12-27-2013 (12-27-2013, 10:17 AM)latex_op Wrote: They know what they sign up for. RE: Landing on Moon? - Saikou - 12-28-2013 There is no way that the moon landing can be a hoax whatsoever. There are too many people to have witnessed that for nobody to come out say that it didn't really happen. RE: Landing on Moon? - Tr@ck3d - 12-28-2013 I'm pretty sure that Neil Armstrong actually walked on the moon. |