Moon Colonization

[revan7189]

Hmmm... I recently read an article stating that in the future moon bases and such would be possible. Do you think it could be a success or a complete failure?

[SilentScope001]

We discussed this long...long ago.

 

I know USA is planning on a moon base in the 2020's, and Russia is thinking of a moon base in 2030's. I'll try to dig up the links.

 

I think most people are for it. But of course, only for their nation to claim the Moon bases. After all, the Moon is international territory, but the bases, totally can be claimed.

[JediAthos]

I think that in order for colonization of the moon to ever work there would have to be international cooperation of some sort otherwise there would be squabbles over territory, and boundaries just like we have here on earth.

 

Those squabbles would lead to the development of weapons that could work on the moon, and that would lead to who the hell knows what, probably world war III if we haven't started it by then.

[Tommycat]

It's nothing new. I'll believe it when I see it. I guess I'm a little skeptical of it happening considering I was supposed to have a flying car, a jetpack, and an apartment on the moon by 2000. It would be nice, but the problem is viability. What would be the point of having a base on the moon? We still have large sections under our oceans that would be better for colonization than on the moon. And even better reasons. Underwater mining, drilling, wave current power generation, underwater military applications, testing, marine biology experiments, nuclear power generation, food, and a number of things I'm forgetting, are all things they could do underwater.

 

There are a few advantages of a moon base though:

Deep space craft launching point: The lower gravity could make it ideal for launching a heavier craft built for deep space exploration.

 

Experimental microchip manufacture: The vacuum of space can be used to make truly clean clean rooms. With virtually no particulates there is less chance of a contaminant ruining substrates...

 

Metal purification: Kinda same reason.

 

Refuel depot: Not sure about this one.

 

Scientific experiments: obvious reasons

 

Space Craft building: Lower gravity means less energy is used to build it...

 

man I wish I could remember the rest of the advantages, but lets just say it doesn't seem logical.

[Achilles]

Possible? Of course it's possible.

 

The larger question is will we. Many within NASA feel that modern society lacks the will to live with the same risks that were required for the Apollo missions. Having a base on the moon would make deeper space exploration easier, but if the future of space exploration is going to be conducted by robots, then...

 

As for the politics: I'd love to see it happen. The colonization of "the new world" allowed for a break with the past and a paradigm shift in liberty, human rights, etc. If a similar paradigm shift is possible/probable with a similarly significant form of colonization, then that alone might be worth it.

[Darth InSidious]

I fear that moon bases = international reaction of "zOMFG, u r t3h universal monarchying!", or something along those lines. And that, my friends, might well equal world war three. An international base, maybe, might be possible. But still, those countries left out would throw their toys out of the pram in a big way.

 

We should also think about the cost, and who will shoulder it. Also, imagine when, not if, something goes wrong. The worldwide tabloids will have a field-month.

 

Achilles, I'd have to disagree over what caused this 'paradigm shift'. If anything, the spread and rapid fracturing of Protestantism, and the large number of its adherents in the New World was part of the cause, but the resultant Enlightenment would probably be a more viable root, I think.

[Pho3nix]

It would definitely be one of the biggest accomplishments in human history.

 

I'm all for it.

[PoiuyWired]

ALL YOUR BASE ARE BELONG TO US.

 

I mean, use there can be a base, but what for? If its about utilizing the moon resources and as a test bed for planetary mases then sure. But really, while no doubt there will be Moon bases in the future, "when" would be the problem. I don't think it is likely that we would get it done by 2020.

 

Oh yeah, go to the dark side of the moon and dig out that big black monolith...

[Ctrl Alt Del]

As JediAthos stated, the advantages would have to be clear. I'm all for it, but the governments will think otherwise nless they have something tangible.

[Corinthian]

Moon Mine. 'nuff said, Ctrl. Who knows what kind of crazy metals we could find up there. Maybe even some alien artifacts. Wooo, Protheans!

[Achilles]

Iron and nickel for sure. I'm willing to bet that helium-3 would be the real draw though.

[Ctrl Alt Del]

Right, bet on a month the private companies (History has shown that whenever a unsafe daring operation is announced, governments tend to turn on those companies for help) are demanding results.

 

Moon Mine. 'nuff said, Ctrl. Who knows what kind of crazy metals we could find up there. Maybe even some alien artifacts. Wooo, Protheans!

Iron and nickel for sure. I'm willing to bet that helium-3 would be the real draw though.

Poor Mass Effect addicts and Bioware pawns. The ruins are on Mars!

[Web Rider]

I'm all for moon bases and colonies. It'd give us a perfect place to be humans. We could be wanton, wasteful, and destructive, and save for blowing off a big chunk in the direction of Earth, we wouldn't be harming a darn thing. Space, or the moon in particular, is the perfect place to dispose of all our toxic and nuclear waste. Or from there we could shoot it into the sun.

 

Anyway, I think moon bases are a good idea for their various uses, so I definatly think we should look into building them. I don't know how people would deal with 2 weeks of night though.

[Det. Bart Lasiter]

Iron and nickel for sure. I'm willing to bet that helium-3 would be the real draw though.

Enough to warrant the high cost of a lunar base though? There's not exactly a shortage of iron or nickel.

[Ctrl Alt Del]

I'm all for moon bases and colonies. It'd give us a perfect place to be humans. We could be wanton, wasteful, and destructive, and save for blowing off a big chunk in the direction of Earth

And then accelerate the flood of coastal cities? The moon controls the ocean, you know.

 

I don't know how people would deal with 2 weeks of night though.

14 days of endlessy parties? Where do I sign?

[Achilles]

Enough to warrant the high cost of a lunar base though? There's not exactly a shortage of iron or nickel.

Helium-3 fusion would more than justify the cost (based on my limited understanding of the subject).

[Web Rider]

And then accelerate the flood of coastal cities? The moon controls the ocean, you know.

 

the moon controls the tides, if there's less moon there isn't more ocean. There's still a finite amount of water.

[John Galt]

Personally, I'd like to see space exploration made open to private companies, even if it means drastically reducing the scope of NASA. I think private enterprise will prove a more viable long-term alternative to government-controlled space exploration and colonization, considering that the private sector is only just getting into the space industry.

 

But in the long run, I think if moon colonies are established they should be treated as autonomous nations eventually.

[Ctrl Alt Del]

the moon controls the tides, if there's less moon there isn't more ocean. There's still a finite amount of water.

 

Okay, I confess I was shooting on the dark there. But Moon's influence over Earth is too big to be disconsidered. We can't just damage it.

 

But in the long run, I think if moon colonies are established they should be treated as autonomous nations eventually.

Autonomous? You mean, separated from Earth nations? I can't see that happening. Why would they want that? Because they would have this "Local governs locals" philosophy? Even if they traded minerals for the food they can't crop on the Moon, I don't think this would happen.

[Achilles]

the moon controls the tides, if there's less moon there isn't more ocean. There's still a finite amount of water.

...and we'd probably still have tides, however they'd be much less frequent (twice per year?)

 

Personally, I'd like to see space exploration made open to private companies, even if it means drastically reducing the scope of NASA.

Wasn't NASA originally private (before it was NASA)?

 

But in the long run, I think if moon colonies are established they should be treated as autonomous nations eventually.

Cue last paragraph of post #5

 

Okay, I confess I was shooting on the dark there. But Moon's influence over Earth is too big to be disconsidered. We can't just damage it.

Think of all the meteor strikes the moon has taken that would have seriously ruined our day (prehistorically speaking).

 

Autonomous? You mean, separated from Earth nations? I can't see that happening. Why would they want that? Because they would have this "Local governs locals" philosophy? Even if they traded minerals for the food they can't crop on the Moon, I don't think this would happen.

I'm sure the British didn't foresee the colonist eventually breaking away because they didn't want to be governed by people that lived an ocean away either.

 

PS: Artificial biosphere.

[MJ-W4]

All the moon really needs is an evil overlord.

[Web Rider]

Personally, I'd like to see space exploration made open to private companies, even if it means drastically reducing the scope of NASA. I think private enterprise will prove a more viable long-term alternative to government-controlled space exploration and colonization, considering that the private sector is only just getting into the space industry.

 

But in the long run, I think if moon colonies are established they should be treated as autonomous nations eventually.

 

To the first, space travel and exploration ARE open to private corporations, aside from requiring a business permit and an "astronaut" liscense, just like a driver does, there are no laws restricting space to government orginizations only.

 

To the second part, I do, and don't agree. They will be autonomous, but they don't have to be. Given that space travel to the moon is almost as simple as flying half way across the country, I think a moon colony can function fine under the State model, IE: it can be part of the US just like Alaska or Hawaii can, it's just further away. Remember it used to take a LONG LONG time to get to hawaii.

[John Galt]

To the first, space travel and exploration ARE open to private corporations, aside from requiring a business permit and an "astronaut" liscense, just like a driver does, there are no laws restricting space to government orginizations only.

 

To the second part, I do, and don't agree. They will be autonomous, but they don't have to be. Given that space travel to the moon is almost as simple as flying half way across the country, I think a moon colony can function fine under the State model, IE: it can be part of the US just like Alaska or Hawaii can, it's just further away. Remember it used to take a LONG LONG time to get to hawaii.

 

I think a better way to state my point is something to the tune of:

They should be allowed to form sovereign and autonomous nations, should they so desire.

 

but my idea with the NASA reference is that I think NASA itself should be downsized, so that experts that are in that organization could have a freer hand under private employment.

[Ctrl Alt Del]

Think of all the meteor strikes the moon has taken that would have seriously ruined our day (prehistorically speaking).

 

What Web Rider said was:

We could be wanton, wasteful, and destructive[...]

Now, I just can't agree. Using it as a gigantic trash disposal facility would be okay, but as a place to fight our nuclear wars or similar stuff wouldn't just do it. I think I've read somewhere about the effects Earth would suffer without our balancing moon. They weren't really positive.

 

I'm sure the British didn't foresee the colonist eventually breaking away because they didn't want to be governed by people that lived an ocean away either.

 

PS: Artificial biosphere.

That's what I meant by "Local governs locals". Still, they would be heavily depandant on everything they can't find on the moon, and I'm not just talking about food. Oxygen, non-mineral resources, beaches (Insert smilie here). The American colonies had the same (vital) resources the Old World had, even more. Luna isn't as same.

 

To the second part, I do, and don't agree. They will be autonomous, but they don't have to be. Given that space travel to the moon is almost as simple as flying half way across the country, I think a moon colony can function fine under the State model, IE: it can be part of the US just like Alaska or Hawaii can, it's just further away. Remember it used to take a LONG LONG time to get to hawaii.

I think a better definition of what would happen on those supposed Extra-Terretrial colonies, is something similar to what happens to the South Pole of today: Officially international, but many nations claim their territory via scientific bases.

 

Personally, I'd like to see space exploration made open to private companies, even if it means drastically reducing the scope of NASA. I think private enterprise will prove a more viable long-term alternative to government-controlled space exploration and colonization, considering that the private sector is only just getting into the space industry.

 

It's a venture just too similar to the new world discoveries to ignore the private companies indeed. Read my second post on this thread.

[Web Rider]

I think a better way to state my point is something to the tune of:

They should be allowed to form sovereign and autonomous nations, should they so desire.

personally, I would love to see the Moon just be one big nation.

 

but my idea with the NASA reference is that I think NASA itself should be downsized, so that experts that are in that organization could have a freer hand under private employment.

People aren't hiring, and downsizing NASA(right now), is only going to make people lose their jobs. When a private company wants to take up space stuff, they'll make some Nasa scientists better offers, and then the Nasa scientists can decide for themselves.