Slashdot Mirror
House Democrats Propose National Park On the Moon
MarkWhittington writes "Two House Democrats, Reps. Donna Edwards (D-Md.) and Eddie Bernice Johnson (D-Texas), have proposed a bill called Apollo Lunar Landing Legacy Act, H.R. 2617 (PDF), that would establish the Apollo Lunar Landing Sites National Historical Park at all the Apollo lunar landing sites, according to a story in The Hill. 'The park would be comprised of all artifacts left on the surface of the moon from the Apollo 11 through 17 missions. The bill says these sites need to be protected because of the anticipated increase in commercial moon landings in the future.'"
This idea is absolutely nuts. But if they're hiring park rangers I'll be in line!
It's really quite a simple choice: Life, Death, or Los Angeles.
One of these days, AC. Bam! Pow! Straight to the moon.
And even if they did, how would they enforce their claim? The best NASA could do was politely suggest the Chinese avoid the Apollo landing sites.
We don't own it so they don't have the jurisdiction to pass laws on the moon. How about a zoo for these moon bats?
they go fuck themselves since the moon isn't America's
From TFA:
“The government would also have to submit the Apollo 11 lunar landing site to the United Nations for designation as a World Heritage site.”
I'd think they've got a legitimate case for that being accepted. Terminology gets a little interesting though, with "World" referring to the moon as well.
William of Ockham had no beard. The most likely explanation is that it was chewed off by squirrels every morning.
Will there be funding to "recreate" all the artifacts that were supposedly left behind, but stolen by the aliens?
(I need to believe that the government didn't have the ability to lie to us about that (at least not that long ago)).
Suborbital [spaceflight] is the special olympics of spaceflight. - Rei
Of all the stupid, hare-brained ideas we've seen, this one has to be the stupidest so far.
We're close to exponential runaway on government spending (borrowing more, and more often). The economy is barely moving despite drenching it in money, jobs are part-time with no benefits, we jail more people than China, the government plainly tramples over all our civil rights, oil is running out, tax law is a joke, IP law is a joke, immigration law is a joke, H1B visas are a joke...
I'm half inclined to start a new political movement: the "Boot" party.
Let's give these people "the boot" - vote the incumbents out! Keep turnover high until we get good people who can accomplish something worthwhile.
The Bill passes and...the park is immediately closed due to budget cuts.
Tell you what though; I will be first in line to apply for the position of park ranger for this one.
But the landing sites are really a sound stage at Area 51 in Nevada.
"National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
None? Nothing to see here. More idiot legislators trying to get attention.
-jcr
The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
Actually, the Russians got there first.
Scientists point out problems, engineers fix them
altslashdot.org: The future of slashdot.
That they come up with an original name...
“He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
Or I guess putting the rocket before the capsule.
No that they have taken care of the celestial matters, perhaps they will find some time for actually running the country. Banal earthly matters such as the farm bill apparently requires some attention.
they go fuck themselves since the moon isn't America's
Oh but it is! Here, this terrifying truth was uncovered right here on slashdot, but since the Democrats have been trying to cover it up, many haven't heard. The current generation needs to read this, so I'll repost it now.
The Moon - A Ridiculous Liberal Myth
It amazes me that so many allegedly "educated" people have fallen so quickly and so hard for a fraudulent fabrication of such laughable proportions. The very idea that a gigantic ball of rock happens to orbit our planet, showing itself in neat, four-week cycles -- with the same side facing us all the time -- is ludicrous. Furthermore, it is an insult to common sense and a damnable affront to intellectual honesty and integrity. That people actually believe it is evidence that the liberals have wrested the last vestiges of control of our public school system from decent, God-fearing Americans (as if any further evidence was needed! Daddy's Roommate? God Almighty!)
Documentaries such as Enemy of the State have accurately portrayed the elaborate, byzantine network of surveillance satellites that the liberals have sent into space to spy on law-abiding Americans. Equipped with technology developed by Handgun Control, Inc., these satellites have the ability to detect firearms from hundreds of kilometers up. That's right, neighbors .. the next time you're out in the backyard exercising your Second Amendment rights, the liberals will see it! These satellites are sensitive enough to tell the difference between a Colt .45 and a .38 Special! And when they detect you with a firearm, their computers cross-reference the address to figure out your name, and then an enormous database housed at Berkeley is updated with information about you.
Of course, this all works fine during the day, but what about at night? Even the liberals can't control the rotation of the Earth to prevent nightfall from setting in (only Joshua was able to ask for that particular favor!) That's where the "moon" comes in. Powered by nuclear reactors, the "moon" is nothing more than an enormous balloon, emitting trillions of candlepower of gun-revealing light. Piloted by key members of the liberal community, the "moon" is strategically moved across the country, pointing out those who dare to make use of their God-given rights at night!
Yes, I know this probably sounds paranoid and preposterous, but consider this. Despite what the revisionist historians tell you, there is no mention of the "moon" anywhere in literature or historical documents -- anywhere -- before 1950. That is when it was initially launched. When President Josef Kennedy, at the State of the Union address, proclaimed "We choose to go to the moon", he may as well have said "We choose to go to the weather balloon." The subsequent faking of a "moon" landing on national TV was the first step in a long history of the erosion of our constitutional rights by leftists in this country. No longer can we hide from our government when the sun goes down.
But how is anything the UN says gonna affect private enterprise? And do all countries obey UN mandates? I have a feeling the value of those relics to private collectors means the UN can say WTF they want, sooner or later SOMEBODY is gonna grab 'em.
ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
It sounds like Congress got ahold of some samples and smoked 'em. First, it's not even US territory. There are treaties against that kind of thing. Since a prerequisite for a national park is that it be... umm... NATIONAL, that's a non-starter right there, right? Next, even if it were our sovereign territory, it's not like there's a real problem with guys going up there and leaving beer cans and cigarette butts. Finally, how about doing something about the situation in are actual national parks where Mexican cartels are stealing water for illegal pot grows? Of course we could just legalize pot and fix that; but if you're not going to do that, at least have the common sense to protect the territory you already control. I think some returning Iraq and Afghan vets would jump at the chance to protect that territory in exchange for a land-lease where they could park a trailer or something.
When I was a kid, I got my Frisbee stuck on the roof. That doesn't mean that I got onto the roof. We, being a pronoun, refers to people. Your link, referring to an unmanned projectile fired at the moon, doesn't refute what was said.
But how is anything the UN says gonna affect private enterprise?
Countries are subject to national laws. Countries are all part of the UN, and even the ones that aren't can be more or less forced to go along with it by the ones that are.
do all countries obey UN mandates
Insofar as anyone obeys the laws they themselves have agreed to follow (which, I take your point, is not as often as one might hope).
sooner or later SOMEBODY is gonna grab 'em.
So... making an effort towards later rather than sooner is probably worthwhile.
Certainly the UN is only as capable as its member states, who are only so capable, and eventually I'm sure law and order will break down enough for whatever reason that anyone who feels like it can go pillage historical artefacts from everyone else. But for the moment we try and avoid that.
There isn't an infinite time horizon solution. We could simply say 'free for all, first come first serve' and let the artefacts get sold, but eventually notions of private property will break down long enough for someone to steal them from their owner of the day and if they have bigger weapons than the other guy, I guess that makes it legal. But for as long as there is lawful authority (insofar as such a thing exists at all) we can make laws to try and do the best possible for now, and when we're dead the next group of people can deal with whatever their problem of the day is. Lets face it, if they find the 25th century equivalent of oil under the apollo landing sights, they're getting moved to museums, and I wouldn't begrudge my greatx20 grand children whatever choice they think is best. For the moment 'don't touch' seems like the best bet.
When I was a kid, I got my Frisbee stuck on the roof. That doesn't mean that I got onto the roof.
In my house it did.
I remember climbing up on the roof by time I was 6 or 7, and probably sooner. After all, I was the youngest, therefor the smallest and lightest to lift up.
By time I was 7 or 8, we actually had an upper porch that had direct access to the roof, so we were up there whenever we wanted.
If you think I voted for Trump because of this post, you're wrong. I voted for Dr. Jill Stein of the Green Party. Again.
That one was actually humorous.
No mention before 1950?? lol
Good job.
If you think I voted for Trump because of this post, you're wrong. I voted for Dr. Jill Stein of the Green Party. Again.
It only counts when somebody licks the surface with their bare tongue.
Sleep your way to a whiter smile...date a dentist!
Well, the moon landings WERE faked, but they were filmed on the moon.
We've had a base up there since 1958. It's just on the far side so you can't see it from Earth.
---
ECHELON is a government program to find words like bomb, jihad, plutonium, assassinate, and anarchy.
Yes, let's spend time in the House of Representatives debating a bill establishing an international landmark on the moon because we got nothing better to do.
We have not seen a federal budget passed in how long? Ten years I recall. We got federal agents selling guns to drug dealers. These drug dealers then shoot federal agents. The economy is crap. We've seen an ambassador and his security detail get murdered. Government employees are openly lying to Congress and keep their jobs instead of ending up in jail. The Department of Education is spending money on shotguns instead of educating children. These same children end up dead because murders walked into the invisible force field of a "gun free zone" that Congress erected. (Hey Congress! How about you give some of those shotguns to some school security volunteers!) Cities get flooded and bridges fall into rivers because Congress can't seem to find the time to maintain basic infrastructure. We got entire cities getting burned up from forest fires. I could go on and on.
Don't think I'm just giving Democrats a hard time, Republicans share the blame. With all the crap going on right now why would anyone even think of bringing up declaring a national park on the fucking moon?
Wait... I just answered my own question. They bring this up to try to distract from all the shit happening right now. Much of this is from their own action or inaction, the rest of the shit they just make worse.
I'm reminded of a stupid joke...
If pro is the opposite of con then what is the opposite of progress? Congress.
I am armed because I am free. I am free because I am armed.
You are right, UN mandates are only as strong as the guns that support them. And, since most of the world believes as you do that private ownership supersedes public, you can rest assured that those "grab them" claims to ownership will be defended. Wouldn't it be nice if we could all just get along?
Time is what keeps everything from happening all at once.
The park would be comprised of all artifacts left on the surface of the moon from the Apollo 11 through 17 missions.
Including bags of astronaut shit? Yeah, it just wouldn't be the same if someone cleaned those up...
We got there first. We claimed it. What more do you want?
Speaking of which, the Nacotchtank want to know when they can move back into the whitehouse.
The real reason they want to make a park on the moon is so they can setup a gun free zone that actually has zero crime.
"There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order." -Ed H
Travel geeks would kill for that NPS passport book stamp!
didn't you guys plant a flag there?
If a private space entrepreneur does the job of flying to the moon, collecting the artifacts, and returning them before the US government gets its act together, perhaps ending up in his private collection is a fitting outcome.
Speaking of which, the Nacotchtank want to know when they can move back into the whitehouse.
Did they have a flag?
systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
Mr T invented the moon in 1976.
systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
Never mind that all this was only possible in the first place thanks to public research and public implementation, and that the only reason NASA is such a royal fuck-up today is because it's been ground down into a shell by Reaganite obsession with public-private partnerships (which are nothing more than corporate welfare).
You know what, I would have hoped that when it came to space exploration, humanity had finally moved on beyond a three year old's "mine mine mine!" mindset. Part of me wanted to believe that all those who were bright enough to make a project to go to the Moon would ultimately want to share their ability with others, not use their skill so they could buy a bigger yacht. But it turns out that 30 years of unfettered capitalism form as effective a repeated lie as those which plagued mid-C20, so that even your literal high flyers can be suckered in by the most base of goals.
Remember We do these things because they are hard?
I'd rather they were left in place. They're effectively a time capsule, and context is very important for future study.
always insisting the US must do things to make everybody like us no matter whether the actions will have long term negative effects
The opposite of that is what spawns the terrorist boogeyman. You're deluding yourself if you think anything is done, that does not directly or indirectly put money in the pockets of those in power. Whatever people feel about the Americans as a nation, it is completely of your own doing, and invoking long term negative consequences as a boogeyman works both ways. The only significant difference in either school of thought is when the negative consequences manifest themselves, stop doing shit for profit all the time and you might actually see an improvement. That being said, this proposal is beyond stupid, in that we can agree.
... whatever
We Europeans did that all the time during the great exploring days. No matter if there were other people living there, if we found it it was usually ours.
-- Cheers!
they go fuck themselves since the moon isn't America's
From TFA:
“The government would also have to submit the Apollo 11 lunar landing site to the United Nations for designation as a World Heritage site.”
I'd think they've got a legitimate case for that being accepted. Terminology gets a little interesting though, with "World" referring to the moon as well.
I'm not sure the attempt to be designated as a World Heritage site is an acknowledgement of the fact that the Moon isn't American property, I'm willing to bet that most UN World Heritage sites exist in some country's territory.
I'm looking at this with a very sympathetic eye, but at best this is a naive, but good hearted attempt to establish some precedence for protecting the Apollo landing sites before a serious commercial interest gets involved, an attempt that doesn't realize you can't declare a national park outside of your territory. At worst it's a cynical PR/ego move that doesn't care if it doesn't make sense because it's not supposed to do anything. It's just supposed to get their names in the papers and/or serve as a club with which to bat opposing legislators who oppose it.
I actually wouldn't mind a bill that said nothing but 'lets submit it to the UN as a World Heritage site and come up with some plan for protecting this stuff for when commercial interests eventually find their way up there", but talking about a national park is the wrong way to do it.
I stole this Sig
Personally I'd love it if they stayed there but I'm also a realist, and 1.- those things won't last forever in the nasty conditions on the moon,solar winds and little meteors and the like will trash them, which IIRC scientists said the flags might last 300 years, and 2.- To a private collector those things will be worth a fortune and as we have seen time and time again if there is enough money on the table SOMEBODY will claim it.
But just FYI I don't think private ownership should be the end all be all, I sadly have just seen too much when it comes to my fellow man to think everybody will play nice and leave stuff alone because we ask. Hell look at how gourmets are happy to pay crazy prices for endangered fish, rather than let stock build back up I wouldn't be surprised if they would be happy to be the one that ate the last of this or that fish, just as i'm sure some private collector would pay a ton of money to have one of those flags behind glass for his friends to ooohh and aahh over even if they had to have a historic site trashed to get it..
ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
Do you have a flag? - classic!
In Genesis it is called the 'lesser light' that rules the night. In Revelation it will turn to blood.
So was it the Liberals who also put the word "moon" into the Book of Genesis in the story of Joseph? or is that why Genesis 1 only mentions "a lesser light to govern the night"?
Yeah, that is a thing that is going to happen. Any day now.
innumerable photons from his many fires, some of which struck the moon means that Ogg got there first. Ooga booga.
The United States Department of the Interior listed a location outside the nation on the National Register of Historic Places: the oldest American embassy. The Apollo sites are certainly as worthy of preservation. They should be listed as historic landmarks.
Nope. But the Brits did. So pack your crap and move out, the redcoats wanna move in again. You can pack your third amendment too, while you're at it.
Snide comments aside, when will humanity learn that "but I was here first" means exactly jack when it comes to land claims. How far back do you want to reach to determine who owns it? Should Europe belong to Austria, for they pretty much held a sizable portion of it in the 18th century? Or maybe the Germans, after all the Holy Roman Empire, which contained pretty much all of central Europe, was ruled by German Emperors for most of its existence? Maybe the French would be more fitting, after all Emperor Charlemagne ruled nearly all of Europe in 800. Or the Mongols? I mean, considering how much of it was conquered by Attila before? Or Italy, owning it to the Roman Empire? Maybe Greece would be fitting, considering they settled almost all over those parts of Europe that border the Mediterranean Sea. Or ... who is the legal successor of the Celts again?
Forget "I was here first" as a claims to land. You might find out that someone can say that to you, too.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Hasselblad, who made some of NASA's photographic equipment, used to run adverts offering free cameras to anyone who was prepared to go and pick them up. These were, of course, the Hasselblads left behind by the astronauts on the lunar surface. And now this bunch of do-gooders wants to put all the Apollo artefacts off-limits! Has the camera offer been cancelled? I feel betrayed!
I'm not sure, but this might actually be a contradiction of Poe's Law.
I am officially gone from
Small problem with that theory is that the items are still U.S. government property by international law/agreement. Taking them without permission would constitute grand theft and the U.S. would most likely be willing to go to war to get them back, given their significance.
Remember We do these things because they are hard?
Not particularly, and that was never the case anyway. It was always a space race, an attempt to beat Cold War enemies. With that rationale gone, NASA lost much of its support.
The lesser light reference was introduced in 1953, six years after the Roswell aliens gave the Democrats time travel technology and fertilizer. All editions of the Bible were retrofitted to make this new satellite agreeable to proper God fearing Republicans.
... whatever
Snide comments aside, when will humanity learn that "but I was here first" means exactly jack when it comes to land claims.
Fun quote from The Lion in Winter:
Henry II: The Vexin's mine.
Philip II: By what authority?
Henry II: It's got my troops all over it; that makes it mine.
The bill wants to protect the items left behind by NASA. Basically they are saying the landers, the rover, the planted flag are historical landmarks and any future visitors should not remove them.
They do not intend to mark off a couple hundred acres worth of moon surface and label it a US national park...
"Action without philosophy is a lethal weapon; philosophy without action is worthless."
Nonsense. That's where the Nazis are hiding out. Didn't you see the documentary about it?
We also stuck a flag on it. So finders keepers.
The UK stuck its flag on what is now the USA, and look how that turned out.
No colour or religion ever stopped the bullet from a gun
I propose Newt Gingrich as Chief Ranger.
The lunar landing sites are historically significant. At the very least there should be a policy in place that all space agencies, private and public, should recognize these sites and possibly protect them. At least make it so the lander base, flags, experiments and vehicles must not be disturbed, moved or vandalized. In the future if there are regular commercial visits people will try to take artifacts back for collection.
As for a national park: NO. The USA nor any other country or agency owns the moon.
Never mind that all this was only possible in the first place thanks to public research and public implementation...
And thanks to the German V2 program that was lifted lock stock and barrel in Operation Paperclip. (or at least the parts that weren't taken by the Soviets)
It's good to see our government working on important things. Things like making a national park in a place we're incapable of reaching right now. Doubly so since there's nothing else for our government to be doing right now.
The same way all international agreements are held, with threat of sanction and war.
Theft of those relics would be prosecuted just like any other crime.
You can declare a national park any place you want. Preventing access to others is another thing.
In this case if a private company tries to steal this stuff you can either prosecute or declare the Apollo 11 Site has become the Lunar Atomic Range. I doubt anyone would risk a swift nuking to steal some artifacts.
It would be cool to do a sort of "street view" simulation based on high resolution scanning and photography. For example, you could have a small vehicle that would "hop" over the site at low altitude, making multiple passes from various angles, downloading the data to earth between hops. You would want to repeat the whole process a few times to catch the scene from different lighting angles, etc., but eventually you'd have enough data to reconstruct the whole area in fine detail. It would be a lot of fun to just wander around in there with a VR helmet.
You could even go so far as to rig up a big helium balloon with a harness, to simulate the 1/6th gravity. I would pay some serious coin for an hour in that kind of setup.
XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve your problem, you're not using enough of it. --AC
Aren't all artifacts left by the Apollo missions still considered US property and therefore still protected by federal law? As far as I know, the US government never relinquished ownership, and therefore no additional protection is needed.
All this does is add unnecessary bureaucracy and administrative costs. Once this "park" is set up, the artifacts will have to be catalogued, regulations drafted, lawyers proficient in space law consulted -all this will be non-trivial expenses for little benefit.
Not particularly, and that was never the case anyway. It was always a space race, an attempt to beat Cold War enemies
Yes, and that goal was set because it was achievable, but a difficult (ie hard) goal to achieve.
The motivating force might have been to ultimate-one-up the Soviets, but for it to be a true 'win' that goal had to be hard. Otherwise, it wouldn't be as significant as it was.
Out of modpoints but really liked a post? 1BDkF6TtmmeZ3yqXbz9yhdYVqRYnwFoXDj
It's dumb for Americans to claim the moon as ours.
Remember kids, if you're not paying for the service, YOU ARE THE PRODUCT THAT IS BEING SOLD.
And a Communist government is somehow better? Fuck off.
Remember kids, if you're not paying for the service, YOU ARE THE PRODUCT THAT IS BEING SOLD.
start an embassy on the site.
How about the UN go fuck itself because the moon isn't theirs, either.
In your view, does anyone have legal authority to dictate what happens on the moon? Is there a proper legal authority for this at all?
William of Ockham had no beard. The most likely explanation is that it was chewed off by squirrels every morning.
The UScongress does not have jurisdiction on the moon
neither does the UN
But it might be a good idea to send them (both houses ) there (on the B-Arc)
Remember We do these things because they are hard?
Not particularly, and that was never the case anyway. It was always a space race, an attempt to beat Cold War enemies. With that rationale gone, NASA lost much of its support.
This is an important detail that seems to be glossed over. NASA's development prior to the 80's was a way of developing technology the military needed that was too "big" to be kept classified. Big rockets were needed for big nukes. Putting spacecraft into orbit and being able to control those orbits was necessary for spy satellites. Skylab was about countering concerns of manned space spy stations from the Soviets. The moon shot was half cold-war PR and half critical military technology development.
Post-Apollo, NASA's manned program has been 100% about corporate welfare for defense contractors. The joke was always "why does the space shuttle exist? to build the space station! Why does the space station exist? To give the shuttle somewhere to go!". And it wasn't far of the truth. Continuing the Apollo-era style rockets and targeting Mars (which was the program NASA declined in favor of the Shuttle -- the intent was to be on Mars in the early 80's!) didn't strategically align with the technology development investments needed to pump money into the defense contractors. And when the cold war ended, it became all the more critical to crank up the construction of the ISS to ensure the key expertise was maintained at the set of contractors deemed strategic to national security.
Why do you think the ridiculous work is still going on with Orion? To keep important NASA and defense contractor skills working on new technology.
Does that only apply to samples returned by an Apollo mission? If an asteroid impacts the moon, sends pieces of it into space and they fall to earth in my back yard, can I keep it legally?
I OWN ARCTURUS! and Antares, Aldebaran, Alpha-Centauri and Altair and Algol.
Now, for the parking....
"Flyin' in just a sweet place,
Never been known to fail..."
Fitting, but not one that I think any of us would want to happen. I'd rather tax dollars be spent more higher pursuits than racing to preserve a historic relic from some rich asshole. Just tell him he CAN'T steal it, arrest him if and when he does, and spend them money you saved on research into cancer, a space elevator, or something worthwhile.
Send Obama up with a ribbon for the new national park. Pelosi and Reid can ride along. No need for a return trip. They can have fun reading the Healthcare Bill while waiting for a taxi home.
Well - clearly we must be annexing part of the moon. That's why we put our flag there. It's the same as what happened in the New World except without natives messing up our manifest destiny.
I think it will be a while before our moon territory revolts. One of the main things missing for this to happen is a population.
And...Congress wastes what little time they spend in session (between long weekends and 'breaks') on a Moon Park?
There appear to be several commenters misreading the OP. Please be aware that the "National Historical Park" only applies to the artifacts themselves. Thus, they are only applying "American jurisdiction" to property that was ours in the first place, and not a would-be-controversial boundary on land.
Source: http://thehill.com/images/stories/blogs/flooraction/jan2013/hr2617.pdf (page 4)
~Jarmihi
"Big rockets were needed for big nukes." -- at least this was factually incorrect by the time NASA came around in 1958. The military originally developed the Saturn I, predecessor to Apollo's Saturn IB and Saturn V in the late 50's/early 60's but gave it up to NASA when they determined that they had no military use for a rocket that big -- the nukes were coming down nicely in size. When the military later needed boosters bigger than their biggest ICBM (Titan II) they independently developed the Titan III and its successors which were cheaper than the Saturns. I've also heard the "Skylab Spy Station" theory before but don't buy it because the Air Force had their own spy station in the works (Manned Orbiting Laboratory) pretty far along in the 60's with astronauts and everything then gave it up because their unmanned spy satellites were doing the job.
Jackie, you've come back from the dead!! How's Art doing?
This just looks like a land grab to me. I haven't taken the time to actually look it up, but I suspect the area covered by the Apollo 11-17 landings is actually pretty large. If we declare it a national park, we keep other countries from claiming it for themselves. It's real estate investment with no money down!
Neil Armstrong didn't lay claim to the moon when he planted that flag, and it was: "That's one small step for a man, one giant leap for mankind", not for America.
Just another day in Paradise
DEAR FUCKTARDS:
It's real nice of you to do something like this, but I have a suggestion for something you should be doing instead: End the god-damned motherfucking sequestration, you ignorant baboons!!!
Sincerely,
TAXPAYERS WHO ARE GETTING SCREWED BECAUSE YOU SUCK SO MUCH ASS
Are YOU using the TOOL, or is the TOOL using YOU? Think about it!
I think it's an outrage that, given all the money we have spent on NASA since the 1970's, NASA has been incapable of going back to the moon, let alone launch interplanetary flights. I think it would be poetic justice if entrepreneurs or other nations snatch the relics of the glory days of the US space program.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Series_Has_Landed
"Even for Slashdot, that was a very obscure reference!" - Anonymous Coward
I didn't make a comment about legality, I made a comment about poetic justice for the the failures of the US space program over the last half century. Their significance at this point is not so much demonstrating America's technological prowess, it's that they are reminder of missed opportunities and technological stagnation of the space program.
Sorry, but the Moon is not our territory.
If we really wanna do this, we better claim ALL of it, or there will be all sorts of parks there, and I'll have to buy permits for every damned one, and use every different reservation system to get a campsite. And that is annoying.
Not to mention I'm not about to drive all that way to see a bleached flag. I can do that on a sound stage in Arizona for cheapo.
Seriously, we have no other pressing issues to consider? Disrespect Congress much?
deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.
that stood idly by while the Baghdad Museum was looted.
As soon as the US authorities stop violating basic rights.
No colour or religion ever stopped the bullet from a gun
This isn't about who owns the Moon, because obviously no one does.
The more interesting question is, does the USA own the sites where our astronauts landed? And it seems to me that, absent any other legal precedent, we do. Or we would at least have a better claim to those sites than anyone else not currently inhabiting them.
I'm a little surprised that Congress, in 1969, didn't declare the Moon (or parts of the Moon) to be official U.S. territory, annexed by whatever means we used to annex a bunch of islands in the Pacific, and a big slice of Antarctica. Perhaps there is a residency requirement, but there are at least a few island territories that have no permanent inhabitants.
Anyway, I don't mean to troll -- we came in peace for all mankind, etc. But obviously there are analogous cases on Earth that could be used to define a protocol and legal framework for claiming non-contiguous, unoccupied land as a territory belonging to a nation-state. And if we didn't do it right during the Apollo missions, then that sounds like a damn fine reasons to haul our asses back there and stake a proper claim.
I'm not sure why it's an outrage. We got at lot of technological advances out of going to the moon. Nothing on the moon was going to directly pay back the investment, we knew that beforehand, but I think we got plenty of value out of it. Going back would be in many ways a waste compared to investing the money in the other things I mentioned, at least in my opinion.
And "poetic justice" is not a good reason to spend tax dollars or let private entities appropriate historical relics.
I think you're missing the point. The humorous article says: "there is no mention of the "moon" anywhere in literature or historical documents -- anywhere -- before 1950"
Clearly, there are lots of references, because the moon actually exists. You don't have to refute a humor piece.
Even as an American, the AC's sentiment was the exact one I had... Who the fuck is US House of Representatives to have any say over some junk they left on the moon?
Unless the UN recognizes it, it's completely meaningless... and even in then it's still only slightly less meaningless.
Land is owned by whoever has the power to conquer/discover it and then defend/control it. The United States of all places should know that since it was originally created by displacing many native peoples.
Even today all claims over land are only based on the ability to defend those claims, ultimately with force.
The outrage is the decades we wasted on the shuttle program and the lack of progress in nuclear propulsion.
Do we really know enough about the moon to positively say there is very little value in returning? That is based on established knowledge and (relatively) superficial observation. It's like saying there is little value in exploring the deeper recesses of the ocean's on Earth because there's nothing left unknown. The truth is that we don't necessarily have ALL the knowledge there is know about these places--and so in that case return trips to the moon, for research and study, could potentially yield some yet-unknown caches of valuable information.
Observing the Earth from orbit you'd have no idea about the details and histories that can be discovered by literally scratching away the surface. I understand it's unlikely the moon holds the same types of secrets, but until we start to check, how can we truly know?
The moon is also a fantastic way to start our efforts for settlement and permanent research on other planets... it's extremely close by (in astronomical standards), and it represents a very harsh environment (in human life standards) ... so why not use it as a test bed? That alone makes it a worthwhile effort to return.
Umm... I think his point is that as a 5 year old you, if you tossed a frisbee on the roof that didn't me that YOU were on the roof. It means you threw something on the roof.
YOU were on to the roof until you were "6 or 7" and expended your time and resources to physically move your body up to that place.
So going back to the original post... the 5-year old you is like the Russian's--Not on the moon, just tossing stuff up there... The "6 or 7" year old you is like the US American's--Actually on the moon in person.
He's so bright and milky white.
Shining down upon the ground.
He's so bright, milky white.
Shining down upon the ground.
Everybody look at the moon!
Everybody seein' the moon!
The moon is bright!
He's milky white!
Everybody look at the moon!
Uh!
Heey! I did a song! Jupiter, I did a song! You ain't got one! Heey!
(I got nothing else)
My studio - www.graylands.ca
I think it will be a while before our moon territory revolts. One of the main things missing for this to happen is a population.
And gaseous oxygen, and liquid water. For long term independence, there's also the near total absence of nitrogen and carbon on the moon to consider. No, they're going to be dependent on Earth for quite a while.