Won't get fooled again ...Moon Landing.

by The Rebel 579 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  prologos

  The Rebel

  TO DEFICIT INFINITY AND BEYOUND

  The question of 'funding benefits' on this: Ultimately the money was not spent on NASA, but on the kind of people, the kind of WORK done by them. Money spent on the Wrights, the Teslas, the Edisons the Jobs of their day. Imagine what we could have done for all the losers instead. Build a house for every welfare queen?

  Attempting to have humans in far space may be a tempting stunt, but the skills learned, stuff developed is worth it. Imagine wealthy welfare recipients instead. Imagine wt new world images people eating fruit, watching sailboats, studying wt literature.

  do not get fooled again.

  Rocket scientist were not fooling.
• 

  Bonsai

  "Noooo waaay! That's great. We landed on the moon!" - Jim Carey ( Dumb and dumber)

  You want to say there is no Valhalla, Yahweh or Santa Claus? Fine. But don't take away my awe of us landing on the moon!
  
• 

  The Rebel

  Was it worth the money?

  Well no one can refute the technological legacy of the Apollo programme which trickled down to the public,a quick research discovered and includes heat resistant materials, the cordless vacuum cleaner and freeze drying.

  So was it worth the money ? a survey conducted on behalf of E&T tecnology, concluded 40% thought the Apollo programme a waste of money.However i wonder what further space exploration, and scientific advancement, but for the cost of the Iraq war? Which according to a report in the New York, newspaper, has cost 1.7 trillion dollars, plus additional billions in benefits owed to veterans. And killed 134,000 Iraq civilians.

  So yes indeed maybe the Apollo programme was worth every scent, who knows by inspiring a whole new generation of scientists, we may indeed save our planet in the future.

  The Rebel
• 

  Caedes

  A) Because NASA are not funded to the same degree as they were in the sixties, not even taking into account inflation NASA has a budget less than the cost of the moon landings. You would have to increase the NASA budget tenfold to get to the sort of money they need to get to the moon. The cost in the sixties for the moon landing was $25Billion, NASAs entire budget this year was $18Billion.

  B) Because it is a matter of public record that NASA is not funded to the same degree and hence is the sort of question that you could find the answer to yourself given a computer and five minutes.

  In engineering you have three criteria cheap, accurate and on-time. You get to pick two so if you want it cheap and you don't want it to go wrong then it is going to take time.

  Re-posted as the OP seems to have missed my answer to his/her question.
• 

  Witness My Fury

  The OP isnt interested in answers.
• 

  Viviane

  Welcome to reality

  Exactly. Several people have gone, not one.
• 

  Viviane

  Friends:-Never mind about the insulting pictures, let's move on.

  In space, one can hear you scream, but you still gotta poop.

  Can you clarify what your current desire for the topic to be, since you seem to want to change it every time it's up to you to do some book learning?
• 

  _Morpheus

  The whole country went to the moon with those men.
• 

  The Rebel

  Should we get involved in debates that pertain to unprovable facts?

  Well I believe yes, because the answers exist, but maybe the question doesn't. Or questions can be raised new to us which help us find answers that do exist.

  So I believe each question that has been raised, is productive to constructive discussion, and in fact a discussion in which we all ought to be able to make some contribution to.

  Admitadly the internet is a maze of information, the worlds biggest bookshop and largest Libary, so a subject can easily be researched with out a debating forum. But to me their is something infinitely more rewarding, learning and being educated in friendship and the cross pollinating of thoughts on a debating forum.

  This is even more true when it's a forum on a religion we all have in common, which is updated daily, and includes a diversity of different topics.Personally I have enjoyed checking in each morning on the events in Australia, it's been enlightening,

  on another note, I have found a certain strength of character having to defend myself, against innuendo and unwarranted personal attacks. I have also learnt it is wrong of me to rush to judgement, or to assume the intellect, age, or nationality of fellow posters. That we are all more than dots on a computer screen and should be treated with respect.

  As we read each other's words, and we express our opinions, i realise we cannot understand what each other may presume, and what we presume also may not be the correct picture. So my advise is rather than become offensive simply leave a thread if it challenges you to break post guidelines.

  There is a big difference between knowing and understanding.

  The Rebel.
• 

  Viviane

  Should we get involved in debates that pertain to unprovable facts?

  What unprovable facts are you referring to?

  Your last post seems to be a hodge podge mashup of vagaries completely unrelated to the topic, which, BTW, seems to be undefined at the moment.

  To what imagined personal attacks do you refer? Is it an attack to state a fact? To mentioned observed behavior?

  Why does the caged bird sing? If a wood chuck could chuck wood, how much wood would that wood chuck chuck?