NASA goes back to moon

[satpak77]

http://www.cnn.com/2005/TECH/space/09/19/nasa.moon/

103 BILLION dollar pricetag. Supposed to occur 2018.

I am sure Iraq, Afghanistan, Katrina will all be paid for by then...

 

[viper548]

I heard _______(insert your least favorite regional) offered to do it for $102B

 

[jetexas]

Eagles contract expires in 2013. Maybe they will use that for leverage on our new one then? "Sign this or you won't be able to go to the moon".

 

[FN FAL]

I heard _______(insert your least favorite regional) offered to do it for $102B

The bad news is, next day air don't do anybody any good on the moon.

 

[minitour]

so...we're going to the moon to look for ice and to find out how to make water?

...I can do that right here and save you 102.99B

"why" are we going back?

-mini

 

[Pugh]

I'm all for NASA and space exploration, but when we go back to places we've already been and at the same time spend $103 billion dollars on it, I am lost trying to find a reason to back to the moon. Is it really so hard to believe that the moon is just a big rock and nothing else? Is it really worth $103 billion to go back to a rock using nearly the same technology we used in the '60s? Food for thought.

 

[PaulThomas]

In the 60's we did pure exploration, this time arround it's more about research, and probably some classified defence/attack stuff.

Most of the things NASA does in space end up being used down here, so everything is not lost.

 

[FN FAL]

so...we're going to the moon to look for ice and to find out how to make water?

...I can do that right here and save you 102.99B

"why" are we going back?

-mini

That's funny, because water is the stuff I spill on the floor when I remember the recipe for making ice cubes...just ask Mrs. FAL! Maybe the NASA dudes should come on over...I'll show em life on another planet!