Feel free to copy and distribute them verbatum without inaccurate distortions like I'm against going to the Moon. I'm arguing against the claim we need to go to the Moon to get to Mars, not against going to the Moon. My problem with moon firsters is the false argument we need the Moon to get to Mars not arguments for the moon itself with the exception of Grondine's bogus claims. I think we should set our sites firmly on Mars and return to the Moon along the way as a side benefit. I certainly want to evaluate lunar ice as a resource for future lunar commercial industry.
I am strongly against diverting hundreds of billions into lunar investments supposedly for the purpose of getting to Mars which are not needed.
Regards,
Mark
Space/Science » in reply to Foolish Mars only Arguments
Sure Save Them All
The whole thread (75 posts)
- The Moon as a test bed.
- Guess you haven't hear the news yet: the cometary impact hazard is far greater than was believed earlier
- The Earth & LEO As Test Bed.
- re: The Earth & LEO As Test Bed.
- And as Yet Nobody Has Addressed The Oversights In The Original Article
- re: The Earth & LEO As Test Bed.
- Ok
- re: The Earth & LEO As Test Bed.
- re: The Earth & LEO As Test Bed.
- PS
- Case In Point - Funny You Don't See It
