Image courtesy of

This is the old site. Click the title to go to the new Shoot a Liberal.

*Disclaimer: Don't actually shoot liberals... Impaling is much more satisfying. But then again, there's always walking the plank...

Monday, September 19, 2005

Maybe I Don't Get It

Why? Why are we going back to the moon?

"It is expensive, but at the same time it's incredibly important because the return to the people of the United States and the world is also very important," DeLay said.
How is it important Tom? What return? I understand that a space program is important since the earth may not have room to hold us all for much longer, but the moon is not going to work as a human storage device. I get the whole experimentation idea if we are going to use it to improve things on the planet, but we have a space station (we spent billions of dollars on) for that.

Are we going just to study more moon rocks? Are we going in a futile attempt to try and find some evidence of the 'Big Bang'? What benefit is going to come of this? NASA is a great organization and they have done great things but I think it is time to start questioning the purpose of such things. Especially if it is going to keep costing us $16 billion annually. I want my money's worth.

Update:On Rightwingprof's suggestion, I checked on lunar ice and did find this. But as this article asks, is it worth it?

Not according to Bruce Murray of the California Institute of Technology. Murray told The New York Times, "Water at 1 percent by volume is not a resource," (see "Craft Sees Signs... " in the bibliography). "For something to be a resource, it has to be, by definition, economically viable, and this would not be."
'Not economically viable' i.e. a big waste of taxpayer's money.

Day By Day© by Chris Muir.