Wishful thinking I suppose, but wouldn't it be good if, upon the indesputable proof of intelligent life elsewhere, warefare stopped on our planet?

Maybe proof of a larger community would have this effect by putting our petty squabbles into perspective?

Yes, that's wishful thinking at its best. ;)

---

/Mav

We have lingered long enough on the shores of the cosmic ocean.
We are ready at last to set sail for the stars.
(Carl Sagan)

Wishful thinking I suppose, but wouldn't it be good if, upon the indesputable proof of intelligent life elsewhere, warefare stopped on our planet?

Maybe proof of a larger community would have this effect by putting our petty squabbles into perspective?

Thats exactly what I hope for too, maybe the discovery will make us realize we are not so different from one another, even though we have different views we are one species on one tiny world and we should work together for the good of our species.

---

Wishful thinking I suppose, but wouldn't it be good if, upon the indesputable proof of intelligent life elsewhere, warefare stopped on our planet?

Maybe proof of a larger community would have this effect by putting our petty squabbles into perspective?

---

The majority of the human population thinks that we are the center of the universe and that we are all important when in fact we are not. I think when we finally discover that signal that it will really drive this fact home for the human race as a whole. Hopefully it will mark the beginning of a new era for our species. 5,000 years from now when people look back they will say "Thats when we finally discovered that we are not alone." If we haven't destroyed ourselves by then.

---

"....that will change the way we think of ourselves and our place in this infinte universe."

I'm already convinced that intelligent life exists out there - I see life to be simply a by-product of matter, when that matter clumps in a certain manner - an 'M' class planet. Obviously to have it finally confirmed would turn everything on its head, but I don't think I would be particularly surprised.

I would be if they visited here though.....

---

If we do get a moon base we should put some radio telescopes on the far side of the moon. No atmosphere and less radio interference. A perfect enviroment for SETI. Maybe one day we will have radio telescopes on Pluto or even in other star systems scanning the skies for that one signal that will change the way we think of ourselves and our place in this infinte universe.

---

Leave the sciece for NASA....if we have multiple commercial companies will develop the technology to make the research possible

---

If that happens - and it may well do so - I think the true science would get left behind. That would be a pity.

Somehow, the money must come from some planet-wide consortium so that development and research can take place not for commercial reasons, but for the good of mankind as a whole. And I'm not referring to a moon base - I think we should be setting our sights higher than that, with maybe the development of an orbiting city - a complete self-sustaining colony.

We don't know what global disasters are on the way. Asteroid impact, earth crust displacement, alien attack even, but something needs to be done as NASA just don't have the funding anymore.

---

I agree Billy, Its greed and money that will in time bring large numbers
of people to space, the moon and mars.

It will happen because People love to spend their money on unusual things
like space travel.

---

I think the best way formard is a completely commercial space agency that can acctually make as much money as NASA gets from the goverment which is getting less and less...........Lets face it if someone starts making money out of stuff like space travel or research labs or wateva on the moon we would move forward much faster

---

Clyde C. Phillips, III said:
We can't do too much about the Moon when we have all these goddamn problems on Earth such as the Vietnam War (Yes, that was in full swing in 1969), crime, the Persian Gulf War and al-Qaeda. We have to spend too much to protect ourselves against these bad things. If we do put bases on the Moon (or Mars) we'll just probably tear up those bodies, too.

Who's "we", according to you?

The ones who want to make bases on the Moon and Mars.

---

Clyde C. Phillips, III said:
We can't do too much about the Moon when we have all these goddamn problems on Earth such as the Vietnam War (Yes, that was in full swing in 1969), crime, the Persian Gulf War and al-Qaeda. We have to spend too much to protect ourselves against these bad things. If we do put bases on the Moon (or Mars) we'll just probably tear up those bodies, too.

Who's "we", according to you?

---

/Mav

We have lingered long enough on the shores of the cosmic ocean.
We are ready at last to set sail for the stars.
(Carl Sagan)

The sun will burn out in about 4 billion years but great extinctions happen more often and are unpredictable.

The Great Extinctions

1. The End of the Ordovician (440 million years ago)
2. The End of the Devonian (365 million years ago)
3. The End of the Permian (225 million years ago)
4. The End of the Triassic (210 million years ago)
5. The End of the Cretaceous (65 million years ago)
and on the site: 6. The Impact of Man (current)

Anyhow, it looks like great extinctions happen on average at least once in 125 million years. The last one was about 65 mya. That leaves ON AVERAGE 60 million years. We are halfway through. I think if we have sustainable life beyond earth before the next Great Extinction, we'll be lucky. Why not start now? We really are riding on luck atm.

---

TEAM
LL

If nothing else, at least it will be cool for people born on the moon to be called "lunatics". Heh.

-Hey, where are you from?
-Tycho city.
-Cool, a real lunatic!
-O_o

---

/Mav

We have lingered long enough on the shores of the cosmic ocean.
We are ready at last to set sail for the stars.
(Carl Sagan)

We can't do too much about the Moon when we have all these goddamn problems on Earth such as the Vietnam War (Yes, that was in full swing in 1969), crime, the Persian Gulf War and al-Qaeda. We have to spend too much to protect ourselves against these bad things. If we do put bases on the Moon (or Mars) we'll just probably tear up those bodies, too.

---

Some of the best inventions/ideas arise from need, not want. We'll need it when our colony on Mars needs supplies yesterday. Besides, it's easier to predict what we'll need if we've already encountered what we need to deal with. That's sounds awkward but it has its point.

---

TEAM
LL

Agreed, sort of, although I would hope space travel would have moved on by the time our Sun expands appreciably!

I still think we are attempting to perform extreme feats using mediocre technology, and the money, quite frankly, would be better spent researching new forms of propulsion, or ways of manipulating physics to our advantage, rather than wasteful multiple trips to the Moon just so we can say 'we did it'.

We badly need to get out there, I think it's in the human gene to do so, but we are wasting money by trying to push back the barriers a tiny bit, when a major breakthrough could yield us the Galaxy. My point is that we should focus our attention on the next generation of space vehicle, as the rocket has done just about as much as it can.

---

Just to bung a spanner in the works, why build a moon base?

I can't see it would offer any advantages to anyone, it would just be hideously expensive and technically bordering on impossible. I don't feel the human race has advanced far enough just yet. Now, we can't use the excuse of space-borne telescopes as we already have that facility, and placing one in orbit is near perfect for the job.

With a moon base there would be the issue of maintaining an atmoshere, despite the high possibility of high velocity meteoroid impact.

There would also be the issue of thermal insulation - against the extreme cold at night and the searing heat of the day.

Then there is the issue of transportation of supplies. This still hasn't been adequately resolved, even for orbit-bound stations.

Establishing a moon base seems a good idea solely from the 'we've moved on' point of view, but unfortunately I don't think we have - not much, anyhow.

While we are still setting light to the end of a stick to get into space, we aren't going to get manned missions much further than we already have done. We need a scientific breakthrough in propulsion which makes a jaunt to mars as easy and cheap as a trip to the next city. :-)

The most important reason to build a moon base is to prove we can do it for when we keep going. The reason we need to keep going is that eventually, something devastating will occur on Earth or the Sun burns out in 4 billion years or maybe Earth exits the habitable zone as the sun begins to cool. Anyone that uses computers for important work realize the value of backing up data. The same goes for the Human Species. We need to effectively back up our civilization by varying our location. Put some on the moon, some on Mars, some in spacestations. This way if a giant meteor that we can't stop hits Earth or a Nuclear war occurs that wipes life off the face of the Earth, we have a backup copy of our civilization and the information that we've collected to date is not wasted nor lost.

It's about long term survival, but if that's not practical for you, we can leave you behind or anyone else that doesn't think we should do it.

---

TEAM
LL

Just to bung a spanner in the works, why build a moon base?

I can't see it would offer any advantages to anyone, it would just be hideously expensive and technically bordering on impossible. I don't feel the human race has advanced far enough just yet. Now, we can't use the excuse of space-borne telescopes as we already have that facility, and placing one in orbit is near perfect for the job.

You crawl before you walk. How can we expect to do anything with mars when we haven't done much with our own moon. I'm thinkin a base on the moon would make it that much safer/better in testing a new propulsion system. To advance you have to move forward.

Jim McDonald, I wholeheartedly agree with your argument:
"Radio telescopes on the far side would be permanently shielded from interference from Earth and the low gravity would allow building enormous reflectors."

That is one serious benefit of a telescope on the moon. I envisage a structure not unlike the Aricebo dish but maybe 10 times larger or more, listening at frequencies down into the shortwave band and lower.

That could be seriously useful, but I think it would take a world-wide consortium to fund and maintain such a project, simply because of the transport costs.

Pity.

---