What is Digg?75 Comments
- agnostic90, on 07/06/2009, -5/+26People who say landing on the moon was a hoax are mentally retarded.
- anonymousmedic, on 07/06/2009, -2/+20And I would like to see you define what is ridiculous about space? The fact that there are near limitless resources in the asteroid belt, the moon and mars; the fact that there are substances that are very useful to man that can only be made in space, including some prototype drugs that showed great promises in testing and electronics crystals; or the fact that, eventually, the earth will overgrow it's ability to support a human population and we'll have to go somewhere else?
- shammer1, on 07/06/2009, -1/+12It puzzles me, where did this kind of American drive for excellence and the hero's who were it go? I view this as the greatest achievement of humanity to date, it was 40 years ago.
- inactive, on 07/06/2009, -1/+11NASA is given less than 0.5% of the federal budget and look at the returns you get from space science/engineering. Besides, they do critical research in jet engine efficiency and fundamental aeronautical research. Why do you think the planes today are so fuel efficient, quiet, and lightweight when compared to their predecessors?
- pushmouse, on 07/06/2009, -1/+10How is it possible for someone living in the "Age of Information" to be so willfully stupid as you?
- shredswithpiks, on 07/06/2009, -0/+840 years ago we'd get scared and the knee-jerk reaction was to put people on the moon. Now we get scared and the knee-jerk reaction is to take away everyone's water at the airport security gate.
:( - JarOfEyeballs, on 07/06/2009, -0/+7No, we should use them to test new medicines. The results will be far more accurate than animal tests or computer simulations will ever be.
- JarOfEyeballs, on 07/06/2009, -0/+7Two words: *****. Retard.
- Homerr, on 07/06/2009, -0/+7The government called and said they would like you to not use any GPS device or service, to not watch TV that is beamed via satellite, or use a computer - as government funding helped create these technologies.
Also, the Stone Ages called and they will welcome you back heartily. - budboomer, on 07/06/2009, -0/+7Said through a microphone: "Medication time.......Medication time."
- inactive, on 07/06/2009, -0/+7...what?
- RogerStrong, on 07/06/2009, -1/+8Elon Musk believes that over the four-and-a-half-billion-year history of planet Earth, a dozen or so events have truly mattered. "There was the advent of single-celled life, multicelled life, the development of plants, then animals," he says. "On this time scale, I'd put the extension of life to another planet slightly above the transition from life in the oceans to life on land."
America's human space flight programs cost around $7 billion a year. In the same year they'll spend more than $154 billion on alcohol. And of course far, far more on current wars.
With even a *tiny* shift in spending, America could lead the next major step in evolution, in our lifetime. Europe could do it too. But don't hold your breath. - neelshiv, on 07/06/2009, -0/+7I'm still amazed that we landed on the moon. The idea of walking on the moon is still completely unbelievable and unattainable 99.9999999999999...% of the population. It seems like some people don't think it's that big of a deal, given that it happened 40 years ago. There are still only 12 people who have walked on the moon, and nobody has done it for over 30 years. It is still a very big deal, but perhaps it is not quite as rewarding as it used to be.
- inactive, on 07/06/2009, -0/+6Let's focus on getting lunar operations going before sending people to Mars. Keep robots going there since you get so much bang for your buck that way. In all practicality, it would be advantageous to stage from the moon anyway, and there's hydrogen, oxygen, uranium, and many other useful elements in-situ. Good luck getting people to allow you to fire a nuclear thermal rocket from the Earth ("What if it accidentally explodes?"), but from the moon nobody cares!
- RogerStrong, on 07/06/2009, -0/+6The big space budgets of the early 1960s were knee-jerk reaction to Sputnik, Gagarin and other Soviet firsts. In an age when people were afraid of Soviet missiles in Cuba and Soviet bombers coming over the pole, seeing that Soviet-made point of light pass over American skies was a Really Big Deal.
But once the Gemini flights started, the U.S. was demonsterably ahead. Budgets were slashed and Saturn V production capped, even before the first moon landing. Apollo coasted through the moon landings with what hardware was already in the pipeline.
By Apollo 13 the TV networks stopped paying attention to the space program (until things went wrong.) With little interest from the public, Congress had little reason to keep funding it. The last landings were cancelled. - pushmouse, on 07/06/2009, -0/+5Are you saying we faked it nine times? Because we went to the moon nine ***** times. Russian even tracked the crafts all the way to the moon and verified that we did it. Don't you think they would have made a statement to the world press back then saying we faked it? They really would have benefited but outing us, right?
- Apokalyps2547, on 07/06/2009, -0/+5Me neither. Cool thing is, 12 Americans HAVE been on the moon.
- anonymousmedic, on 07/06/2009, -2/+7All arguing aside: We will have to leave earth eventually. Our resources, even with recycling, are finite, and the earth is already reaching the limit of its ability to support the current population.
- mjparme, on 07/06/2009, -0/+5http://www.apolloarchive.com/apollo_gallery.html
- mikbunn, on 07/06/2009, -0/+5Don't send Emily to Mars. The authoritarian Mars governors will be all like:
"Hey Emily you can't go outside the airlock without a spacesuit."
And she'll totally be like:
"You can't tell me what to do, fascist!"
...on second thought, send her to Mars. - elosorusso, on 07/06/2009, -1/+6Who wrote, "Da moon rulez, #1"... On my car... with a key?!
- roddack, on 07/06/2009, -0/+5We're Whalers on the moon! We carry our harpoons! But there ain't no whales so we sits and tales and sings our whaling tunes.
- judicar, on 07/06/2009, -0/+5Don't. Feed. Trolls.
- judicar, on 07/06/2009, -0/+4Anyone who still doesn't believe we've landed on the moon after all these years isn't basing their opinion on evidence.
- roddack, on 07/06/2009, -0/+4Well once the U.S.S.R fell apart we didn't really have any driving force to continue.
- roddack, on 07/06/2009, -0/+4Space is mind-blowingly ridiculous, in a good way, in almost every aspect
- Stoyanov, on 07/06/2009, -1/+5I hope they release HD versions of the original tape scans later this month. This could help scientists, make HD enthusiasts (like myself) happy and also settle the decades-long question: was it all an elaborate hoax?
- Nosyn, on 07/06/2009, -0/+4You fail dude. Billy Mays day is ONLY June 28th!
- TheFinaleofSeem, on 07/06/2009, -0/+3Buzz Aldrin has a good way of dealing with you nuts. It involves some wrinkled, knobby knuckles in the teeth.
- appleseed1234, on 07/06/2009, -1/+440 years ago we reached the moon, but soon we won't even be able to reach orbit.
- Chupacabraz, on 07/06/2009, -0/+34 words: You. Are. A. Moron.
- MatlasK, on 07/06/2009, -0/+3That's not an astronaut, it's Ralph Cramden, and he's just using space-travel as a metaphor for beating his wife.
- grantmoore3d, on 07/06/2009, -0/+3There have been a lot of moon landing articles lately.
- roddack, on 07/06/2009, -0/+3Fine. I'll go build my own lunar lander! With blackjack! And hookers! In fact, forget about the blackjack and lunar lander!
- ophello, on 07/06/2009, -1/+3People who think we faked the moon landing need to be shot.
- SneakyNinja, on 07/06/2009, -0/+2The original "Moon People"
Sounds like someone needs to write a prequel. - realitysurfer, on 07/07/2009, -0/+2I made a film called DID WE GO?
I was paid $65,000 from the State of Ohio to try and prove we really landed on the moon.
I traveled all over OHIO trying to get Neil to talk...he will not talk to anyone.
Here is link to my film on youtube. It opens with me on WLW-AM Radio in Ohio, trying to reach out to Neil
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gM3Mt1Vym3g
please share this link - imbok, on 07/06/2009, -0/+2Irrelevant.
- BossKey, on 07/06/2009, -0/+1Like that's anything new.
50 years ago we'd get scared and blacklist half of Hollywood as "Communists." - kebwi, on 07/06/2009, -0/+1I am well aware of the presence of moon-landing hoax-claimers as a fringe concept, but I am continuously stunned by their incredibly high representation on digg. Does digg accurately reflect the rest of the population? Do this many people truly believe it was a hoax?
- TheFinaleofSeem, on 07/06/2009, -0/+1You'd have to ask Brigham Young. Man the mission to Kolob!
- Shakermaker, on 07/06/2009, -1/+2A couple of shuttle disasters have proved that space isn't "child's play".
Going to the moon isn't "hard" per say....it's expensive as *****. - danwallace, on 07/06/2009, -0/+1You mean David Gilmore?
- fargo182, on 07/06/2009, -0/+1It's expensive, not as expensive as you think it is for a government of their size. Cheap as ***** if they collaborated with other countries to make it happen. Rogan brought up a good point in that url above.
The apollo missions were the cheapest way to fly people to space and we've junked those projects for a more expensive, lower powered ship...The Space Shuttle. It was confirmed by Phil Plait on the show who was debating that the landing was real. So there you have it.
Why have we been planning to send people to Mars for the last 2 decades, and still can't get anyone back to the moon or do a fly by? food for thought I think. - MacParrot, on 07/06/2009, -0/+1Then try out being real instead
- inactive, on 07/06/2009, -0/+1I'll be long dead by then, either by WWIII or old age. Either way, it's not really high on my list of things to worry about.
- inactive, on 07/07/2009, -0/+1In-situ essentially means "living off the land". As I stated above, uranium is already on the moon. No need to carry anything radioactive into orbit.
- imbok, on 07/06/2009, -0/+1Hey, I think you should show more respect for the retarded. At least they are trying.
- MacParrot, on 07/06/2009, -1/+2I thought it was 6 landings. Apollo 11-12, 13...oh so close, 14-17. Also, just because we did it before doesn't negate that there's much more to learn with almost 40 years of advanced technology PLUS being able to test out the equipment required for even longer missions.
If you're going to complain at least get the math right. - TBBucs, on 07/06/2009, -0/+1Looks like leaving off the /s was a mistake...
-
Show 51 - 77 of 77 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is