But who wants to spend months in cramped quarters on the ISS when you have a heck of a lot more room (and potential staff) in a moon base?
I’d also think you would have less problems repairing equipment on the moon (no space walks) and less of the muscle weakness (deterioration…also wasn’t there something about bone density?) associated with long stays in zero gravity.
Moneywise it could depend on what kind of mineral deposits they can find up there. Maybe some diamond asteroid hit it a million years ago.
The US government already seems determined to pour money into aerospace through space based missle defense. It seems to me a moon base would be a little less dangerous overall. Hey the same people would get the money, so everyones happy right?
The benefits that Chinese industry would gain from further Chinese inroads to space would be incalculable. It would certainly help China go up the value added industry.
To set the recond straight, there are two UN agreements in effect at present that may be relevant:
The Outer Space treaty(1967),
and the Moon agreement(1979).
As exciting as these documents may be, I got distracted by another issue:
Why were the Apollo missions to the moon named after the god of the sun?
Everyone knows that the Apollo missions were originally to go to the sun. However, since they’d have to go at night, they would have to have spotlights for the video cameras, and that would add too much weight. So they compromised and decided to land on the moon. Landing on the moon is also advantageous as it is about twenty miles closer, so the trip was fifteen minutes shorter.
I believe Eugene Cernan was the last man on the moon, not Schmitt. Since Cernan was the commander, I believe he got back into the LEM last.
Schmitt got shotgun because he called it.
BobT is right. Cernan was last to leave the moon. Autobiography.
Guess you never read Heinlein’s The Moon is a Harsh Mistress or saw Destination: Moon both of these works spell out in pretty specific detail why a Lunar base would be a dangerous thing for a hostile power to have. (Not claiming that the Chinese are a hostile power, mind you, but even the best of allies can have conflicts every now and again.)
The Chinese want to establish a Moon base in order to blow it up. The Earth is being slowed down by the Moon’s tidal forces, and they don’t want us freedom-loving Americans to have any more length in a day to achieve our destiny. That’s the way the communist mind works, they’re trying to get our hours. That and precious bodily fluids.
As BobT stated, Harrison Schmitt was the last scientist on the moon. Cernan had a masters in Aeronautical Engineering.
Close, but not quite – after all, if the days got longer for the U.S., then the days would also get longer for China. And since there are more Chinese than Americans, a longer working day means more Chinese man-hours available.
No, see, the Chinese want to get rid of the moon so there will be no more tides. No more tides means no more surfing, which would be such a demoralizing effect that the U.S. will collapse into a state of utter inertia, allowing the non-surfing Chinese to overtake us. 
Of course, the Chinese would also lose the Lunar Equinox festival, but I suppose there could be a new TV program as a substitute. As long as we can still eat those yummy little moon cakes… 
It is a lot more expensive to send things to the moon than to send it into orbit.
First of all, you need to achieve a higher escape velocity when going to the moon instead of just establishing orbit.
Secondly, you need fuel to slow down when landing on the moon.
Thirdly, still more fuel is needed to overcome the Moon’s gravity.
Also it seems that the Moon’s surface is actually more dangerous, just because it has a gravitational field to pull in meteors.
If anyone is going to build a permanent base on the moon, they had better not do it on the acre plot that belongs to me; I have a framed certificate proving it you know.
Mining is what will force human settlements in space. I don’t know if the moon is suitable for mining, but plenty of asteroids sure are. The moon may make a good place for processing the minerals before they get used on earth.
IIRC, it rains diamonds on Pluto or Neptune.
Why don’t you claim that the Chinese are a hostile power? The PRC is frequently belligerent in both speech and actions. That belligerence is often directed toward the U.S. and it’s allies. I would say that makes the PRC a hostile power.
Hell, the U.S. is frequently hostile to other countries, and those countries do not hesitate to point it out. Let’s say it - the PRC is a hostile power.
I think it would be a bad idea to let the Chinese go unchecked in their plans for the moon. Of course, it’s hard to tell if this moon base plan is more than just talk, but let’s beat them to it anyway. It would be fun!
Speaking out of turn (since I have absolutely no basis to go on for the following statemetn), but aren’t we going to have to eventually go out into space in search of more resources? And that being the case, wouldnt the first one to set up bases on the moon (where you can go absolutely nuts with the mining and to hell with environmentalists) get a really good head start?
That is part of the conspiracy. However, the reason they want to have no tides is so that the US will build cities ever closer to the shore. Then they’ll do that trick where everyone in China jumps off a table at the same instant, flooding us with a huge tidal wave. That’s the way the communist mind works.
At least according to television, there’s an ongoing debate between Schmitt and Cernan as to who was the last man on the moon. It’s undisputed that Cernan got out, then Schmitt, then (later, on their last EVA) Schmitt went in, and then Cernan went in, and no one has set foot on the moon first. The question (one of semantics) is whether Cernan was the last man on the moon because no one has stood on it since he left, or whether Schmitt was the last man on the moon because, on a chronological list of every person who’s set foot thereon, his is the last name.
But yeah, Schmitt was the first, last, and only scientist on the moon. (Although several other astronauts had science degrees, their profession was typically test pilot.)
–Cliffy
I think its unsafe for EVERYONE if ANY country is to have a lunar base that is unchecked. I think something like whats happening with Antarctica should occur, and, come to think of it, will occur.
Basically, with Antarctica, in order to have a say in how its natural resources WILL be used, you have to have a base present. Otherwise, you are out. Antarctica may or may not be mined in about 48 years when the current “treaty” expires. However, technically, there is nothing to stop a country which does not belong to the treaty from just sending a boat there with equipment/crew and start going at it.
Same thing with the moon. Yeah, there are UN treaties, etc. But, really, if you have a base up there, who is going to stop you from doing whatever you want? Plus, you will be established up there, so, technically in a way, you have more say. Plus, as others have said, the first choice of where to go. Set-up on a nice and primo piece of property, no matter how small the base is, and it’s there.
P.S.: The REAL reason why we did not go back to the moon was we found out it was not made of cheese. We’ve never been back.
That must be one HUGE table. :eek: