Slashdot Mirror
Unambiguous Evidence of Water On the Moon
Nethemas the Great writes "Information has leaked ahead of the scheduled NASA press conference tomorrow that we have found unambiguous evidence for water on the moon. From the article, 'Since man first touched the moon and brought pieces of it back to Earth, scientists have thought that the lunar surface was bone dry. But new observations from three different spacecraft have put this notion to rest with what has been called "unambiguous evidence" of water across the surface of the moon.'"
The water these missions have found is present in very small quantities. Extracting it would require a lot of energy. The hope with polar water is that there might be masses of the stuff in some craters so that you could at least get a kilo of water from 20 or so kilos of regolith. Water in those quantities would be of use to humans. But we haven't seen it yet.
http://michaelsmith.id.au
Clearly not common enough to assume that it was present in this particular location without direct evidence.
Didn't the mythbuster's determine that the moon landing was entirely plausible? They disproved the myth about the lighting not being possible without multiple sources.
The subject of the grandparent's post (which, by the way, you copied in yours) was 'It was the Indians who helped NASA find water.' Note the word 'helped.' Note that he explicitly credited 'NASA' (which, for those watching at home, is American). When the grandparent gives credit to both of the nations involved and draws attention to the fact that it was a collaborative venture, cries of nationalism are a little hollow.
I am TheRaven on Soylent News
He's modded funny, but he's right (well, maybe not he part about "immersed in an immense ocean of energetic particles" even though we are indeed immersed in an immense ocean of energetic particles; that is, after all, what matter and energy are).
We live in primitive times. The 1800s are considered by us to be primitive, but to a man getting off of a train and sending a telegraph to someone hundreds of miles away, it was amazingly high tech, almost magic. To someone watching Star Trek in the 1960s, their cellphones, flat screen computers, self-opening doors, space shuttles, sick bay monitors, etc were all impossible fantasy. But we have them now, as well as microwave ovens, VCRs, DVDs, CDs, the internet, PCs, tasers, LASIK, heart stents, viagra, and much more that people in the sixties never dreamed of.
Yesterday's science fiction is today's ho-hum mormalcy. Today's science fiction is tomorrow's reality (although never exactly as the science fiction writers envision it).
Sometime after we're all dead our descendants will have vehicles that can move at tremendous speeds and negotiate right angle turns without slowing down and without incurring damages due to inertial effects. Floating cities, unlimited clean energy, earth to mars in hours, New York to Beijing in minutes... That's the future of energy and travel.
There, fixed that for you.
Free Martian Whores!
Considering the incredibly harsh environment of every other body in the solar system, I'd say that transportation is one of the least of our problems in trying to colonize them. We haven't even colonized the vast majority of *this* planet, and just about any spot on it is way more hospitable than anywhere on Mars.
SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
And I guarantee you that their teenagers will probably all still rebel, they'll still groggily and grumpily get up for work in the morning, and they'll still grow old wishing that they hadn't fritted their youth away.
We're more or less still living like we lived 5,000 years ago, from a macro perspective. Somehow I don't see that changing any time soon (unless, of course, we all die).
The ______ Agenda