Is there any reason to go back to the moon?

Factual Questions
1

Is there any reason to send a manned mission back to the moon?

Will they do a test-run there before a manned mission to Mars?

MtM

2

There are two reasons right off the top of my head. The first is the energy and mineral resources available without messing up an ecosystem (no eco (life), no eco system). Lots of stuff there just for digging up. Also makes a jump-off point for space stations, solar power satellites, etc. A deliberate exploitation of lunar resources would probably be at least as big as the development of the internal combusion engine.

The second reason is one of prestige, for America, anyway. The Chinese government has stated it wants to establish a station on the moon for the reasons (roughly) above. For the country that actually has actually been to the moon before to be beat in exploitation would be a real kick in the ego.

If any nation is going to develop lunar and presumably other extraterrestrial resources, I’d much rather it be the US/West than China - China’s environmental record is frightful. I’m not saying the US has left pristine wilderness everywhere, but they’re WAAAAY better than the Chinese.

3

There are any numbers of reasons to go to the moon.

  1. International prestige. There are rumours that the Chinese may try this.
  2. Test flights of Mars hardware. Much easier to abort and recover.
  3. Astronomy. The establishment of observatories on the far side avoid the problem of radio noise from earth
  4. Low gravity environment for manufacturing of resources for orbital industries
  5. Tourism.
  6. Launch pad for further planetary explorations

Now aside from 1, 2 and 5 you don’t actually need people there. Most of the other points might be doable with remote presence robotics but that lacks pizzazz!

4

There are two reasons right off the top of my head. The first is the energy and mineral resources available without messing up an ecosystem (no eco (life), no eco system). Lots of stuff there just for digging up. Also makes a jump-off point for space stations, solar power satellites, etc. A deliberate exploitation of lunar resources would probably be at least as big as the development of the internal combusion engine.

The second reason is one of prestige, for America, anyway. The Chinese government has stated it wants to establish a station on the moon for the reasons (roughly) above. For the country that actually has actually been to the moon before to be beat in exploitation would be a real kick in the ego.

If any nation is going to develop lunar and presumably other extraterrestrial resources, I’d much rather it be the US/West than China - China’s environmental record is frightful. I’m not saying the US has left pristine wilderness everywhere, but they’re WAAAAY better than the Chinese. Again, there’s no ecosystem on the moon, but I’m really concerned Chinese led development would mess it up badly.

5

Is there any reason to climb out of the ocean?

Is there any reason to come down from the trees?

Is there any reason to walk over the land bridge to the americas?

Don’t explore. It’s unsafe! To say nothing of expensive.
But seriously: any group which convinces itself to stop exploring will probably not last for too many centuries.

PS, if you want to be rational, then think: if we can’t even get to the moon as desired, the next really big rock could end civilization or even cause our extinction. Think of space exploration as a kind of long-term medical research: it won’t have instant application, but it will save your great grandchildren’s lives.

6

Can you put the wind in your pocket?

Can you kiss a rainbow?

No! Such is Mango.

Err, I mean the moon.

7

Well, China and Japan turned inward centuries ago, only to be rudely awakened by the West, which had far surpassed it. China got cut up by the West and Japan began a hurried rush to build their own empire, which came to a rather nasty end in 1945.

8

Just so you know, I am all for space exploration and would love to see some manned space flights to the moon.

I have a buddy and he thinks anything to do with space is a waste of money. I disagree with him, but have never really had anything to back my side of the argument up with.

I always thought I was right!

MtM

9

hush little baby…
do not say the words…
mango’s going to buy you the mocking bird…
and if tha mocking bird does not sing…
mango’s going to buy the diamond ring…
and inside that diamond ring is a little inscription saying…
YOU CAN’T HAVE THE MANGO!!!

anyway…i’ve read books about living on the moon when the earth runs out of the necessary recourses…

hope i helped…
-CJo

10

Pray we don’t run out of nitrogen or carbon because the moon doesn’t have either.

11

Carbon 001% Nitrogen 001% approx-
Not absent, but scarce.
That is a shame, because we need carbon to grow or manufacture food, and we need nitrogen in our metabolism and mostly to dilute oxygen in our air to reduce the risk of fires…

carbon is also a prime component of most projected nanotechnology designs, so the miners of the future will have some difficulty building matter compilers.

As a resource in the sky, however, the Moon will prove to be ery useful- plenty of iron and silicon, and plans for lunar manufacturing take account of the lack of certain volatiles and carbon.
Ultimately the Moon could be used to launch solar energy collectors into various stable orbits, and volatiles could be imported from comets or mined from the deep core of the moon (some possibility of water in an accessible state there)
to support lunar colonies , even paratarraforming is possible(large domes and world roofs to slow down evaporation)
http://www.permanent.com/intro.htm

SF worldbuilding at
http://www.orionsarm.com/main.html