Lunar orbiter finds footprints on the moon

[Playinghardball]

Source: RawReplay
By Stephen C. Webster

A NASA lunar orbiter has, for the first time ever, returned photographs showing footprints and tire tread marks on the surface of the moon, as left there decades ago by the Apollo astronauts.

NASA said it was looking into protecting the lunar “heritage sites” from possible damage from future spacefaring vehicles, as the imprints left by mankind’s first extra-terrestrial vacation will remain — if untouched — for over a million years thanks to a distinct lack of wind or other weather patterns on the moon.

This video is from Reuters, published Wednesday, Sept. 7, 2011

http://www.rawstory.com/rawreplay/2011/09/lunar-orbiter-finds-footprints-on-the-moon/

[Dreamer Tatum]

1. Finally, the technology exists to fake the moon landings even more.nt

[NightWatcher]

4. It took them this long to get those fake props to the moon to cover their story

Why else would they have waited so many years to show it?

I know, my cousin's neighbor knew a guy who worked on the fake...

[RobinA]

146. Why Go

to all the trouble to put fake props on the moon? Clearly any photos of footprints and tire treads on the moon are fakes themselves.

[Warren DeMontague]

33. Unfortunately, the technology will never exist to convince conspiracy nutjobs

that their idiotic "moon landings WUR faked" crap is the bullshit it is.

[sofa king]

88. I have no doubt that...

... some day, not too far in the future I hope, there will be visitors to the Moon who refuse to believe they actually went there.

[11 Bravo]

35. I'm begging you, either drop a sarcasm smilie on us, or at the very least ...

tell us you aren't that fucking stupid.

[Dreamer Tatum]

42. Hee hee hee nt

[grantcart]

156. lol

[yawnmaster]

47. Sarcasm isn't as funny when you tell people it's sarcasm. eom

[Capitalocracy]

58. This is the internet.

On the internet, you have to warn about spoilers and label sarcasm.

[yawnmaster]

65. spoilers yes...sarcasm, sometimes. eom

[Baby Bear]

106. I Think You Are Being Disingenious, Captain

What kind of metal do you fly?

[Manifestor_of_Light]

133. Disingenuous is the word you meant.

[Bucky]

195. Do you really need to have that explained to you?

oy

[Matariki]

153. lol

:P

[Owlet]

2. Wow..that's a really important use..

..for our tax dollars. :sarcasm:

[kestrel91316]

5. You ARE aware, aren't you, that the technology you are using while

typing on your computer (in Mom's basement, no doubt) was developed to aid the US space program? Using primarily federal funds.

Aerospace engineering is one of the best investments of our TAX DOLLARS ever made.

[DavidDvorkin]

6. +1 zillion!

[RC]

14. I see your Zillion and raise you a Bazillion

[hifiguy]

19. That 's "Brazillion"

:hi:

[Liberal_in_LA]

49. how about a bajillion?

[hifiguy]

57. "Brazillion"

is a VERY old DU joke. Punchline to a gag about Chimpoleon.

[RC]

67. Sorry, I have a hearing problem.

:hi:

[DavidDvorkin]

99. +WhaterverYouSayPlusOne!

[DirkGently]

13. Certainly a better investment than military R & D. Whoo -- a bullet that goes around corners.

... that's where all our ingenuity and research money seems to be going now. Faster, cheaper, more efficient ... war.

[Owlet]

38. To find footprints?

I think not. I fully appreciate the discoveries made in the '60's - 80's that improved life - things that many take for granted now. But I see little value in a program that seems to have run out of ideas and is reduced to the kind of activity described in the story. As for the 'mom's basement crack' that says more about your level of maturity than mine. Have a nice day..:)

[Javaman]

39. I guess you don't like things that are just plain interesting, cool or neat.

It took zero additional time for them to swing the camera at a spot on the moon that they were passing over anyway.

Thank you mr. killjoy, hope you enjoy your entree' of dull.

[Matariki]

155. coffee. nose.

"hope you enjoy your entree' of dull" :rofl:

[yawnmaster]

50. I'm not sure I understand the hate of footprints? Do you think footprints should just be...

left alone?
Is there some bad history with footprints that is not being told?

[Owlet]

61. Actually, I'm rather fond of footprints

Evidently so does NASA. They released http://www.dailygalaxy.com/my_weblog/2009/07/new-nasa-images-of-moon-landing-sites-reveal-footprint-trail.html">an almost identical story about them back in 2009.

We gave up actually visiting the moon decades ago. We just recently lost the national ability to launch a human into orbit, and are now dependent upon Russia to do so. NASA has no discernible mission.

I'm old enough to have heard JFK's 'to the moon' speech live, and have never begrudged a dollar spent on genuine space research. It's been money well spent, but NASA now seems content to rest on its laurels. I do have a problem with projects that have little or no research value, and which seem primarily designed as PR gimmicks, especially when they're basically a rehash of something already done.

[yawnmaster]

68. An agency with as much public exposure as NASA, does need Public Relations. eom

[RobinA]

148. NASA

I don't think you can blame NASA for the current state of affairs. I think it's the current science-hate, curiosity-hate, imagination deficit and above all the hatred of spending money on anything not designed to kill foreigners.

[Posteritatis]

176. Do you actually think a probe was sent there specifically to photograph footprints and nothing else?

Please consider actually knowing what you're talking about instead of embarrassing yourself further with these kinds of kneejerk reactions.

[Hosnon]

200. Never relied upon satellite imagery?

Either way, our economy has certainly benefited therefrom.

[Name removed]

92. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[bvar22]

126. Are you really going to argue that micro processors, computers, and the Internet

would have NOT been developed if we had never wasted BILLIONS on a Manned Lunar Program?
REALLY?

....because THAT position is preposterous,
even in YOUR Mom's Basement,
even IF your Mom loves you.

I have been a proponent of Unmanned Space Exploration since the 60s,
and have debated this position with smarter and more educated people than you.

Not a single One has argued that a MANNED Lunar visit was necessary to develop the technology you are using to spam the internet.
Not a single one.

...but help yourself to that lunacy.

[Warren DeMontague]

27. Yeah! What benefit could we possible get from learning about the universe we live in?

Fucking knowledge and science, piss me off, maaaan.

[pokerfan]

84. Knowledge is good

[yawnmaster]

114. Knowledge without dreams is a fleeting pleasure and not much use otherwise. eom

[Fumesucker]

3. Giant steps are what you take..

Walking on the moon

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mbv-LcdLY-Y

[Broderick]

30. good tune

[Bandit]

7. I have found when I walk in soil that has zero moisture, I don't leave tracks.

:shrug: I guess there is an explanation for it though....

[jberryhill]

8. What tends to happen when you lift your foot?

...to the place where the track would be?

[jsamuel]

9. Really? You don't leave tracks in the sand in the desert?

Are you a ghost?

[Bandit]

29. You leave indentations but I would not call them tracks.

:shrug:

[yawnmaster]

51. Bandit, have you really ever walked in dry fine dirt in the desert, and I don't mean sand...

as the moon is definitely not sand.
I don't believe you have or you would understand the high detail of print that is left in fine dirt.

[kentauros]

150. For example,

A handprint in flour:





:)

[DirkGently]

10. You'd leave tracks in gravel, right? Sand? Talculm powder? Any particulate substance, dry or wet?

[Recursion]

12. Do you levitate?

We used to track roadrunners out in the Mojave. Were we imagining it?



http://www.flickr.com/photos/94028658@N00/2993739280/

[backscatter712]

18. On the moon, the soil's a bit different.

It's never been eroded, so the lunar soil is like zillions of tiny pieces of broken glass. Makes it so it doesn't crumble so easily.

Also, in the lunar vacuum, it builds up quite a static charge, so it sticks to everything, and sticks to itself.

So yes, you can have sharp footprints in lunar soil.

[csziggy]

96. Also because of the lower gravity the angle that sand or lunar soil

Can hold is steeper than on earth. Dry sand on earth has a low angle that it will hold so a large shallow footprint will tend to turn into a depression with sloped sides. On the moon, the angle is much steeper, more like the angle of wet sand on the earth.

[Puzzler]

20. Yes there is: watch mythbusters...

... they devoted an entire episode to the fake moon landing conspiracy theories.

[yawnmaster]

22. The moon surface is not "soil", for one thing. For another, apparently...

your experience with soil of zero moisture is very limited.
Go grind some rock, extremely fine, then sift an inch or more over your floor.
Walk on it.
Observe fine detail of tracks left.
Scratch head.
Say "hmmmmm".

[Warren DeMontague]

28. IT WUZ FAKED!! FAKED!!!!! FAKEDDDD!!!

Uh, did perform that experiment in a vacuum, by the way?

[Marr]

34. The moon's surface is like the dirt under a very old, raised foundation house.

It's very powdery, and takes a print very well.

[Dreamer Tatum]

52. Do your knuckles leave tracks when they drag, though? nt

[Ohio Joe]

82. +1 - nt

[Lyric]

56. The surface of the moon is covered in something like powder.

Dump a bottle of baby powder on the floor and walk through it. Think you'll leave tracks?

[yawnmaster]

63. A great substitute is a bag of cement powder (no sand or gravel added)...

and its gray like the moon!
It is made from rock by being subjected to high heat and is very powdery.
And it holds really fine detail of a footprint!

[Capitalocracy]

60. Try stepping on a pile of talcum powder.

And since I'm not very well initiated in this particular conspiracy theory, is that really the reason people think the moon landing was fake? Really?

[snooper2]

142. ROFL ROFL ROFL ROFL

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

[DirkGently]

11. Oh, those. No new ones? Some clawed feet, perhaps? Tail drag marks?

:evilgrin:

[Bucky]

197. Maybe the spot where Alice landed

After that bastard abused her...

[bvar22]

15. WOW...

Four Wheeler Tracks on a pristine lunar scape must be PROTECTED?
I would rather we remove all our trash and restore it to its original condition.

I hate what the Four Wheelers & Dirt Bikes have done to the wildernesses that are left on Planet Earth.

[Silent3]

23. The surface area of the Moon is 14.6 million square miles

We've altered less than a square mile of that, or less than 0.00000685% of the Moon.

Those tiny changes are markings and artifacts of great historic significance, and yes, that's worth preserving.

Just how much stark, lifeless landscape do you think the universe needs? And who or what would you be preserving it for? Unlike wilderness of this planet, there isn't even an ecosystem on the Moon to preserve.

What kind of "Oh, humanity is so horrible!" nonsense is this? Some strange "there's a way things are supposed to be, and we shouldn't go messin' with it!" belief, completed divorced from the ecological reasons that can much more understandably motivate such a sentiment on Earth?

[bvar22]

26. Don't mind me.

I'm just an old Romantic who has watched our race (Human Race) trash everything we touch.
Read Ray Bradbury's Martian Chronicles.
He shares the same embarrassment for the Human Race that I do.


I opposed the Manned Missions to the Moon in the 60s,
and I still oppose a Manned Presence in Space.
It is hideously expensive when we have much more threatening concerns ON our planet.

Everything we have accomplished so far could have been done much cheaper with robots.
The most expensive parts of our Manned Space vehicles are the systems necessary to support our own selves.
Think how much MORE we would know IF we had relied on Robotics instead of Manned vehicles.
What have we gained by Putting a MAN on the MOON and driving a 4-Wheeler around beyond some Ego Boosting of questionable worth, especially compared to what we could have done had the money been spent elsewhere?
It IS a Zero Sum equation.

Should we also memorialize the first Shit Bags that we deposited on the Lunar Surface?

[Warren DeMontague]

31. Far better to hate ourselves, and wish for our blighted presence to be erased from the universe.

Those shit bags are the most interesting thing that's happened to the moon in a billion years. How do you know it's not an improvement?

[bvar22]

36. I don't.

I'm just expressing an opinion.

What we have done to this planet is bad enough without spreading out trash across the heavens.
Mostly, I question our need to do so.
What have we gained by putting Men on the Moon?
It IS Zero Sum.
Could the money have been better spent elsewhere?


I fully support unmanned missions like Hubble.

[Warren DeMontague]

37. Actually, the science done on the Apollo missions completely rewrote our understanding

of the moon's history and origins.

And the Apollo missions demonstrated the value in having field scientists actually THERE. It is not either/or- unmanned missions do great science, too.. but humanity will move off this planet. It's going to happen.

[bvar22]

54. "Humanity will move off this planet."

I disagree.

There may be some temporary Military Outposts on the Moon at a prohibitive cost,
and possibly an attempt at a Manned Mission to Mars in the next few decades,
but they will find that the colonization of outer space will not be cost effective,
and much more trouble than it is worth.

The complete rewriting of our understanding could have been accomplished with unmanned vehicles.
Look at what Hubble has done. Look at the Voyager Spacecrafts.
They have done much, MUCH more to rewrite our understanding at a much cheaper price...
and they are STILL working, discovering, and sending their data back to Earth every day.

Some have made a case for the Shuttle in that it was used to repair and update Hubble,
but it would have been much more cost effective to simply build and launch a NEW Hubble.

[yawnmaster]

55. Without the human factor - discovery is empty. Why discover anything?...

really, what is the use of knowing how many galaxies are out there or what types of stars exist or if planets like ours exist?

[bvar22]

66. Nonsense.

There is more Science, Wonder, and Humanity in this one Photo from Hubble
than everything we accomplished by putting a footprint on the Moon.

[yawnmaster]

69. And that is just a pretty picture. A painting or CGI could have created the same emotions...

what does it do for us other than spur some emotions?

[bvar22]

73. "And that is just a pretty picture."

And THAT statement tells me everything that I need to know about you.

By the Way, you DO know that the United States had abandoned its Manned Space Program,
and that the robotic Voyager 1 which was launched in 1972 has left the reaches of our Solar System,
and is STILL sending back data on its discoveries?

Good Luck to you in your life.
You will need it.

[yawnmaster]

94. Yes, and what good are those discoveries if we do nothing with them?

or are they just so we can oooh and ahhh and to wonder about the universe?
If we never move into space - humans that is, not robots - then other than aesthetic fulfillment, what is the purpose?

[tigereye]

152. I agree about Hubble and Voyager- amazing.

But I think there is still room for us to be "literally" out there, too. What about the Space Station- incredible science, collaboration and exploration going on there.

[Warren DeMontague]

75. you're not serious, are you?

Doesn't it make any difference to you that it is REALLY out there? It does to me.

[yawnmaster]

98. I do not believe it is just a pretty picture because I believe that man has the drive...

and the will to explore beyond this planet.
Yes, use robots, but man must eventually go.
My view is that spacecraft such as voyager do discover things that will be useful in the future of exploration and not just pretty data (or images).

My argument, is that without a dream to go beyond, then they are just pretty pictures.
I dream - and believe - that eventually we will move beyond.

That dream turns a pretty picture into an incredible image.

[OneTenthofOnePercent]

139. +1

[Warren DeMontague]

74. I'm fully in favor of robotic exploration of the universe, also

but I believe that humans have an innate desire to explore and, yes, expand the places we live. Maybe I'm wrong, but long-term I don't think I am.

Certainly you must agree that if someone figures out how to make large amounts of money by doing it, it will happen.

[bvar22]

100. "make large amounts of money doing it".

That IS one of the problems.
There are others.

This year, the US abandoned its Manned Space Program.
It was simply impractical and too expensive to keep doing it for basically zero return.
It consumed way more resources than it discovered.

Simply piling enough explosives in one spot to BLOW somebody to The Moon & Beyond will never be practical.
It is spectacular to watch, but laughable and primitive if one thinks about it.
This IS the same technology harnessed by the Chinese in the 9th Century.

Unless somebody develops a much more advanced, effective, and efficient method
of lifting people & life support systems into orbit and beyond,
that equation won't change.

I actually have some hopes for an efficient Anti-Gravity Engine or Gravity shield,
much like same poles of a magnet repel each other.

There must be a better way to do it,
or we won't be doing it.
The Chinese, with their new found Wealth and Authoritarian Single Party government, might give it a go,
but they will reach the same conclusion that the US Space Program reached.

I hope we discover that better way before we manage to kill ourselves.

[yawnmaster]

104. BTW it is NASA that does not have a manned space program...there are US companies that will be...

handling it now.
So there it is - it will be commercial eventually - so it will happen.

[Warren DeMontague]

105. the rumors of manned space travel's demise have been exaggerated.

One, NASA is not 'abandoning' it. The lack of a clear, immediate successor to the space shuttle implies no such thing. In many ways, farming out the job of LEO transport to companies like SpaceX makes a lot of sense, and can free NASA up for more true, long-range exploring (both manned and unmanned)...

we definitely need better, cheaper heavy lift capability. No question.

[yawnmaster]

115. +pi

[joshcryer]

102. LOL, I suppose you'll be protesting the sun engulfing both the moon *and* Earth.

Humans are destined to get off this rock and transform into something else. The Earth's environment meanwhile is doomed to death and destruction.

[yawnmaster]

45. Why do you support Hubble or other unmanned missions? eom

[bvar22]

59. I support unmanned Space Missions because I am not anti-Science.

Man is not designed to survive in Outer Space,
and the equipment and hardware necessary for keep a human alive in those conditions is a needles expense.
Computers and Robots are fully capable of handling these Scientific endeavors.

For the price and resources expended on the Space Shuttle and the Apollo Missions we could have 10 Hubbles
100 voyagers, and be further along in the development of Propulsion Systems that are more advanced
than the rather archaic Rockets we currently use, and the development of more sophisticated robots, computers, power systems, and metallurgy for more advanced exploration.

NOTE: I did NOT do the accounting necessary to determine exactly how many Hubbles or Voyagers we could have had for the same cost, but I believe my estimate is conservative.
THAT would be a good project for someone else.
I am already convinced, and have better things to spend my time on.

[yawnmaster]

62. But my question is why support unmanned missions at all? what good does it do? eom

[Warren DeMontague]

76. what good does anything do?

no, seriously. Answer that.

[yawnmaster]

117. Without dreams, goals, hopes, most everything does no good...

except for temporary mental pleasure (like looking at a pretty picture).
Unless it is for survival (food, shelter, clothing, etc..).

That is my argument, in this context, if one does not have a dream of going beyond the planet or using the knowledge gained for some future goal, what good is Hubble pictures, the voyager probe, or anything similar, other than for the pleasure of looking at it?

I look at it and imagine where we might go, and believe we will have the will, purpose, and ability to do it (not necessarily in my lifetime or even close).

[Warren DeMontague]

118. We agree.

I guess I can't answer your question since I do have the dream of man leaving the planet. But I also want too see what's beyond the horizon, even if I can't get there myself.

[Dreamer Tatum]

71. You're more of a hand-wringer than a romantic

Huge difference.

You're weeping about tire tracks on the moon.

On the moon.

The moon.

It's far away.

Get over it.

[bvar22]

121. "Weeping & Hand Wringing".

You discounted your own credibility by posting a hyperbolic exaggeration (Strawman).

I have neither shed tears, nor wrung my hands.
I expressed an opinion, nothing more.

This IS, after all, a Discussion Board,
and not everybody will agree with you.
That is not a license for Personal Attacks or other Logical Fallacies.

In an above post, I disclosed that I have held this opinion since the 60s,
and I have debated it with smarter and more educated people than you.
There are many who agree with me,
many more who disagree,
and then there are just assholes.

It is entirely up to you which group you wish to join.

[Dreamer Tatum]

134. So you Appeal to Authority as you point out my logical fallacies?

:rofl:

:hi:

[Odin2005]

127. Carl Sagan would disagree with you, Bvar.

"We embarked on our journey to the stars with a question first framed in the childhood of our species and in each generation asked anew with undiminished wonder: What are the stars? Exploration is in our nature. We began as wanderers, and we are wanderers still. We have lingered long enough on the shores of the cosmic ocean. We are ready at last to set sail for the stars."

"Since, in the long run, every planetary society will be endangered by impacts from space, every surviving civilization is obliged to become spacefaring — not because of exploratory or romantic zeal, but for the most practical reason imaginable: staying alive."

[tigereye]

151. just in the spirit of adventure, exploration and learning

what man has always done. And it was a hell of a lot cheaper then, I suspect, than it would be now. Glad they went - and it must have been amazing to see earth from there. Puts things in perspective, I think.

[yawnmaster]

43. There is no "original" condition of the moon. It changes constantly...

it may be slow, but it changes.
You might mean the condition just before we arrived on the moon.

Why does the lunar surface need to be protected?

[AngryAmish]

46. We have raped the moon goddess!!!11!

[DirkGently]

70. Save the Lunar Dust Shrew!

[joshcryer]

101. Were you one of those people who was upset when we crashed a probe into the moon?

:rofl:

[yawnmaster]

113. bombed. eom

[joshcryer]

116. haha

:D

Yeah!

[uncle ray]

137. liberated.

[Hosnon]

201. Jeez.

Posts like this make me want to bang my head on my keyboard.

[burrowowl]

16. Kick

[closeupready]

17. What happens in a million years, that they disappear?

If not erosion?

[yawnmaster]

24. It will take a million years or more for the objects and prints to get any coating of...

moon dust. They won't disappear, but may be less visible from 15 miles up.
It takes so long because there are very very few moon dust particles floating above the surface of the moon, due to its near-lack of atmosphere.

[closeupready]

25. Thanks.

nt

[Le Taz Hot]

21. When I first read your headline

it was right next to the "Nekkid people in S.F." thread and just struck me as funny. And yes, I do have a sick mind. Sorry, you were saying? ;-)

[Broderick]

32. They should have raked their tracks over

like I do in a sand trap.

[yawnmaster]

44. Do you know how much a lunar rake costs??! eom

[Liberal_in_LA]

48. It would cost a billion dollars and 50 engineers to design.

[Taverner]

40. Side note: Looking forward to seeing Apollo 18

[progressoid]

41. This calls for a Buzz Adrin video.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZOo6aHSY8hU

:)

[yawnmaster]

53. I wish they would fly over that moon bombing site from last year...

so we can see the real damage that bomb caused to the moon.
cracks and such.

[Old Troop]

72. Can you provide a link? I'm not familiar with the moon bombing.

[Warren DeMontague]

78. Aw, crap, that was DU's finest hour.

Classic comedy gold.

[Dreamer Tatum]

90. People who ridicule religion were all up in arms about some karmic bullshit

that would befall us if we shoot something at a dusty rock.

[zappaman]

97. Yes, that was a classic!

But, with a little search, you can find plenty of threads where the Moon Loons like to spread around their insanity.

[yawnmaster]

103. I wasn't worried about the karma, but that the moon would be dangerously cracked...

and might split in two - or more! - pieces.
Imagine if one of those pieces struck the Earth.

I've seen examples of this happening in the movies.
I don't think we would have had the time to send a team to the moon piece to detonate an atomic bomb on it.

[yawnmaster]

107. Here is the link to the moon bombing discussion...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x6712126

[zappaman]

111. Epic. n/t

[Warren DeMontague]

77. There are still karmic ripples being felt by the world's indigo children

that's damage enough.

[zappaman]

64. ha! people still believe we went to the moon!!!!

seriously, it's 2011 and it has been proven the whole moon landing was faked.
people are sooo gullible.

[Warren DeMontague]

79. funny.

unless you're serious.

you're not, are you?

[zappaman]

83. no, I just have my friend's

(who post in the 9/11 forums) back.

[pokerfan]

80. It's too late!

NASA said it was looking into protecting the lunar “heritage sites” from possible damage from future...

Here's Pete Conrad defacing the Surveyor 3 site:

[ThomWV]

81. They polluted the surface, and we call it a monument. How about if they had tossed out a beer can?

Would we put a fence around it and worship it too?

[zappaman]

85. Really?

So now footprints are pollution?
Mind telling me how those footprints have hurt the moon's environment?

[Shagbark Hickory]

86. +! It's not enough we leave our mark on this planet, we have to do so in other worlds. n/t

[Dreamer Tatum]

89. It's not another world. It's the Moon. And I hate to burst your bubble

but there don't seem to be any rainforests or spotted owls up there.

It's just a fucking dusty rock.

[Shagbark Hickory]

91. So let's shit all over it then. What are we waiting for?

Let's not waste another minute.

[zappaman]

93. so. you are saying footprints are pollution?

really?

[Shagbark Hickory]

119. Yeah. When they never go away, they're pollution. That's what I'm saying.

[zappaman]

120. Too funny!

It's pollution goes it never goes away!
:rofl:

[Shagbark Hickory]

122. Hi. Your reply is funny too.

"It's pollution goes it never goes away!"

REally? What the fuck does that mean?
Goes it never goes away?

Understand you not nametag talking what bowl about so yourself anteater fuck toilet rap music go.

[zappaman]

123. ha ha

you caught my speeling airor.
but still, your ridiculous notion about what constitutes pollution is a knee slapper!

[Shagbark Hickory]

124. I'm not a fan of tattoos either.

Go figure that one out.

[zappaman]

125. I don't even try to figure out irrational minds. n/t

[Dreamer Tatum]

135. Someone LITERALLY bothered by FOOTPRINTS ON THE MOON.

Just wow. I am in awe. Not enough to worry about on earth, huh?

[Warren DeMontague]

144. and some people are literally bothered by a naked boob at the Superbowl, too.

Honestly, I think folks have too much time on their hands.

[Dreamer Tatum]

95. OK, deal. nt

[yawnmaster]

108. I'm being serious here now... If I had the money...and it would be a large amount...I'd pay to be...

able to shit on the moon...
because that would BE on the moon!

[zappaman]

110. yo yo yo!

My shit is on the moon!
How awesome to be able to tell people that?!

[yawnmaster]

112. You don't mean an unopened can do you? because I doubt it would survive the...

near vacuum of the moon, and there would be beer all over.
And the beer would be wasted.

Now an empty beer can(or bottle!) on the moon would be awesome.
It would make a GREAT poster!

Lucky Lager.

[OneTenthofOnePercent]

141. A beverage can would likely survive the vacuum of space.

The average soda can is pressurized somewhere in the neighborhood of 30-55 psi. Placing such a can in a hard vacuum would reult in differential pressures ranging from 45-60 psi. This is only about a 25-45% increase in pressure. I would have to imagine, given the rigorous factors of safety found in consumer products, that this modest increase would not burst the can.

After some reading, proof pressure for various aluminum cans is somewhere around 140psi-210psi. Not only that, but beer is generally much less carbonated than soda. I believe canned beer would easily survive the vacuum of space. Although we should not neglect the intense heat or cold of space - the can would have to be temperatrue controlled (I'm calling dibs on the intellectual property for space koozies).

[yawnmaster]

161. I think it would be deadly to ignore the heat and cold of space. Especially...

if not properly dressed and after drinking many beers.

[OneTenthofOnePercent]

172. Nonsense. To warm? Drink an Ice cold beer. To cold? A shot of whiskey warms nicely.

[yawnmaster]

173. Having beer and whisky is not exactly ignoring the heat and cold, is it?...

and nobody said anything about whiskey.
That works.

[Odin2005]

129. Your sick misantropy is showing.

[LanternWaste]

140. Archeologists quite often place fences and barriers around middens

Archeologists quite often place fences and barriers around middens (trash dumps) during their digs (but I don't think they worship it), such as the South Grove Midden outside of G. Washington's home which was excavated in the mid 90's: mortar and plaster fragments from renovating buildings, buckles, buttons, tobacco pipes, and more than 30,000 animal bones, remains from the meals eaten by the Washington household and their guests have been processed, cataloged, restored, pieced together, and stored and recorded for further study.

Quite the little journey a mere can of beer can can make...

[Shagbark Hickory]

87. So much for Leave No Trace.

[yawnmaster]

109. LNT is absolutely needed in some places and not needed in others...

the moon being one of those places.

[Dreamer Tatum]

131. If you sacrifice LNT on the Moon, I will promise you Leave No Trace on Uranus. nt

[Warren DeMontague]

136. In 5 Billion years, the sun will swell up to red giant size and vaporize the inner solar system

really, I think you need to put "leave no trace" in perspective.

The idea that anything CAN 'leave' a trace -ever- is a fantasy of omnipotence that no one and nothing has.

Fire on the mountain, man.

[Shagbark Hickory]

138. 19th century attitudes like that aren't going to help us solve our problems.

[Warren DeMontague]

143. Knowing that the sun is going to eventually burn out is a "19th century attitude"?

:shrug:

You said "leave no trace". When the moon is vaporized, there will be no 'trace'. Also, I'm not sure how not leaving any tire tracks on the airless, dead surface of the moon is going to "solve our problems", either. The appearance of the surface of the moon is the product of natural processes; i.e. mostly asteroids and rocks slamming into it for the past couple billion years. There is, now, some other residual evidence of natural phenomena on the moon, i.e. our footprints and Apollo leftovers. Because we, too, are a part of nature.

But thank you for your authoritative-sounding yet essentially meaningless rebuttal, my good sir.

[Shagbark Hickory]

145. Go ahead then. Build a fucking McDonalds there. And a few subdivisions why don't you?

[LanternWaste]

149. Reductio ad Absurdum...

Reductio ad Absurdum?

Or do you actually believe that a footprint in the dust is the moral and/or architectural equivalent to a subdivision of houses or a fast food restaurant?

[Shagbark Hickory]

154. No, it's this attitude that it just doesn't matter because it will all be gone in a few million yrs

that I find very disturbing.

I can make the same argument for tossing litter out the window.

[Warren DeMontague]

164. I was pointing out that the traces you're so concerned about will be gone in a few BILLION years

no matter what. It's something worth remembering given the over-wrought hand-wringing and hysteria some people seem to place on humanity's importance, for good or ill, in the scheme of things. The difference between us and a momentary blip is, well, not a whole lot.

I think it's important to preserve, protect, and keep clean the living ecosystem of the Earth, but the moon is a DEAD, LIFELESS ROCK. The idea that somehow we're 'fucking it up' is ridiculous.

[Shagbark Hickory]

167. Oh. Excuse me- a few billion years.

The same attitude can be found here on living earth. Why recycle? Why reduce waste? Why not just dump this motor oil in the grass? Why not build more nukes?

[Warren DeMontague]

170. Because, like I said, the Earth has a living ecosystem that supports us and other living things.

The moon is a DEAD, LIFELESS ROCK.

Let me ask you- since you're interested in protecting the Earth, which is alive... if you value life, why not support life doing what life does naturally, i.e. expand it's presence into areas previously non-living? Every corner of the Earth that can harbor life, does, and we've found it in amazing places we never expected. That's what life DOES- it expands, it spreads, it GROWS.

We are life. We will go to the moon, and stay there. Perhaps we will terraform Mars. Life will spread out to places that previously did not have life.

Why does that frighten you?

[Shagbark Hickory]

177. Because the attitude is contagious. If you say "Big deal" enough times, it starts to rub off on

others.

[Warren DeMontague]

179. Okay, well, your objection has been noted.

I still think the twin imperatives for life are to reproduce and expand.

[Shagbark Hickory]

181. And I think we are reproducing and expanding at a rate that isn't sustainable

[yawnmaster]

182. If it is not sustainable, it should work itself out, yes? eom

[Shagbark Hickory]

185. No!

It's might not just work itself out.

[yawnmaster]

188. If it is not sustainable, the growth will stop by definition of "not sustainable"...

Nature, of which we are a part, does work everything out.

[Warren DeMontague]

183. then I guess we'll need to find more places to live, and resources.

fortunately for us, the Universe is really, really, really big.

[Shagbark Hickory]

184. Yeah. When your closet is full because its full of clothes you don't wear anymore...

It's time to buy a bigger closet!

[yawnmaster]

186. So unworn clothes are like unwanted humans? if not, which humans are like the unworn clothes??

or is this just a bad analogy?

[Shagbark Hickory]

187. Don't go pulling replies from the bottom of the stack and take them out of context. nt

[Warren DeMontague]

192. Yeah, comparing the moon to the rainforest is much more effective.

:rofl:

[Warren DeMontague]

189. Yep.

I know, the moon people will weep at the damage we've caused, there. But still.

[Shagbark Hickory]

190. We still have some rainforest left to cut down.

I guess we have some time before we move to the moon or some other planet to trash that next.

[Warren DeMontague]

191. Okay. Here, I'm gonna put it in simple English: THE MOON IS A DEAD ROCK.

There is no rainforest, no indigenous culture, nothing for us to 'trash'.

Who, or what, are we preserving it for? IT IS A BARREN, LIFELESS ROCK. To compare it to the rainforest is just, well, lunacy.

[Shagbark Hickory]

193. We covered that already.

Then we moved on to earth and the imperatives of reproduction and expansion.

[Warren DeMontague]

194. What are you, the self-appointed thread monitor? I'm repeating it because you don't seem to be

grasping the concept.

Let me ask you this- was the Earth "better off", "more pristine", or somehow less "trashed" before life developed on it, when IT was a dead rock?

[geomon666]

196. Reading this whole thread, I can see that you have some problems.

Dude relax ok. I'm sure the Mooninites can be reasoned with when it comes time to tear down their moon rainforests. Until then, go have a zima or an eskimo pie and chill out.

[Shagbark Hickory]

199. I'm not unrelaxed. And it's pretty clear you didn't read the whole thread.

[Odin2005]

160. I'd much rather do that on Mars.

[Warren DeMontague]

163. Exactly.

[Warren DeMontague]

165. I think it would be great if people could live on the moon.

I'm not a big fan of McDonalds, but they're gonna need to eat something.

[Shagbark Hickory]

169. No food? No jobs? No problem.

It'll be just like home.

[Warren DeMontague]

171. The future is coming.

Tough shit for the people who don't want it to.

[Odin2005]

159. Humans are part of the cosmos, we affect things. That is not something horrible.

[yawnmaster]

162. Why should we leave no trace on the moon? Hopefully, you have a logical answer. ..

I would like to understand.

[Warren DeMontague]

168. Because everything that has happened to the moon thus far has been natural

whereas we are un-natural and not part of the universe.

[yawnmaster]

174. I do get it now. Yesterday walking I stepped on..

a wrapper some a-hole human discarded. I was so pissed off.
Happily I soon stepped in some nice natural dogshit that wiped out any traces of that un-natural candy wrapper from my shoe.

[Warren DeMontague]

180. exactly.

the dogshit was not tainted by original sin.

[grantcart]

158. well the Andromeda Galaxy will come in a few million years

In a way the Statue of Liberty is a wonderful example of human hubris.


We are watching a slow motion war between that structure and gravity.


I am betting on gravity. Eventually gravity will win, just won't be around to see it.

[Warren DeMontague]

166. That collision with Andromeda probably won't mean very much to individual star systems

such as our own, but it might make for a VERY interesting night sky.

I won't be around to verify that either way, though.

[Odin2005]

128. The Moon-Hoax nuts have just been pwned, LOL.

[zappaman]

130. I prefer "moon loons" n/t

[Posteritatis]

175. I'm a fan of "self-deluded idiots," myself. (nt)

[Proles]

132. Unfortunately, it won't convince the conspiracy theorists

that 12 humans walked on the moon, starting in 1969.

Only an uneducated idividual would say they didn't. If you were to read the their "arguments", they're all soundly debunked.

[newspeak]

147. oh heck, here I thought they were going to talk about aliens

After all, that new movie is coming out about the astronauts on the moon and apparently some big bad alien or aliens is killing them.

[Evasporque]

157. Apollo 11 landing site absent from video?

TINFOIL TINFOIL!!

[MedicalAdmin]

178. How do we know it is from the Apollo astronauts?

It could be aliens or the chinese or... Bin Laden's evil nephew Skippy.

[Bucky]

198. Damn Skippy!