To think millions of litres of fuel shouldn't be wasted on sending a rocket to the moon

We have not 'destroyed' this planet - the problem is that there are too many people on the Earth - breeding has spiralled out of control. That is why resources are stretched so thinly. What we need is a comprehensive and effective method of limiting the number of children born - particularly in some of the developing countries, but I doubt this will happen.

But they could only launch in daytime and what about when they’re on the dark side of the moon?

About 0.34% of total U.S. federal spending, using NASA’s core FY 2025 discretionary appropriation.

It's barely anything in the first place. Stop whining.

So what about the costs? It'll generate and spur technological change and innovation.

The outer Space treaty says no one owns the moon and other celestial bodies. It also says no military in space.

So what if it's inhospitable?

Although to be fair the LH2 is made from methane, i.e. natural gas.

Don't try bringing facts into the thread!

Yes of course. My brother is a rocket scientist (European not NASA), they are a fascinating bunch of people, great at dinner parties. Western governments spend (waste?) eye-watering amounts on all sorts, it's from different funding pots to the funding pots used for saving the planet.

@LittleBearPad for me it’s more that we have destroyed this planet, why do we need to destroy others

I suspect you would find something to complain about it if it was being done with shoe boxes and the project run by mutant hamsters not humans.

You just don't like the idea of the whole project and are scratching around for a reason to justify this opinion.

Fair enough. We get it.

Me too. Visiting Kennedy was a dream come true for me. Never thought I would be in the same room as Atlantis.

I agree - loved my visit to Kennedy. Everything was just fascinating, especially the mock-up of the first moon landing, and being able to touch that little piece of moon rock!

How small some of your worlds are.

The point is to explore, to gain knowledge, to push human knowledge further. It’s exciting.

Seeing the space shuttle at Kennedy Space Centre made me tearful.

If they put trump and his administration in it with just enough fuel to go one way then I would be in favour.

You do realise that "the bods at NASA" aren't doing this as a whim or because they had a spare day to fill, but because they've been directed to by the elected government of the US, right?

I'm sure a couple of billion humans consider you living in a nice cosy house with a bed each, a bath and a shower and probably two toilets is overdoing it while they are living in slum conditions on under $3 a day.
But you would probably say that you've worked hard for your money and should be allowed to spend it how you please and that "it isn't a race to the bottom".
Well, that's what the super rich and bods at NASA think about spending their money on space travel etc.
Everything is relative and you being unable to afford fuel for your car isn't their problem at all.
(Oh and Amazon will just increase prices to cover the extra needed for drivers' fuel if too many stop on account of fuel price.)

A little review of how research in space has benefited terrestrial healthcare delivery

pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10276356/

The applications are vast.

I kinda get you OP.

I know it’s in our nature to want to explore and advance as a species, but we just have far too much on our plate here which imo should take priority. We’ve got a significant proportion of the world living in poverty or very close to it, and a tiny minority at the top swanning around in super yachts (and designing rockets..) etc with more money than they’ll ever be able to spend. So sort out the injustices and imbalances of the world first (imo not possible until you tackle the cause: basic greed) and when everything is peachy, crack on with your rockets.

Were quite possibly going to annihilate ourselves in the next few decades/hundreds of years anyway because of that greed, so what will having a few chunks of rock from the moon or mars to analyse gain us?

The PP that said eventually our planet will become uninhabitable: even if the worst possible outcomes of climate change come to pass, earth will still be a thousand times more habitable than eg Mars, just because Mars is an incredibly long way from being habitable; it’s got virtually no atmosphere for a start, and a much weaker/non existent magnetic shield: hello stellar radiation…

So sort the world out first, and once that’s achieved, go and play around with rockets. That’s my little coffee fuelled rant.

Probably 5 is a bit young

I think it's ridiculous. Like a lot of science experiments, just because we can, doesn't mean we should. People can see the end goal, but what about the cost?

Who will own the Moon?
Will wars be waged over the Moon?
Will people on the Moon revolt against Earth?

Space is completely inhospitable to humans - no atmosphere, no soil, extreme radiation, unhealthy gravity. We should concentrate on keeping our planet healthy right now.

Is it nothing but some rich men's personal fantasy.

Investing in space travel drives technology forwards. You may as well be saying let’s not invest in anything new.

I do get the argument that we are spending resources on leaving the planet when we could be spending them fixing the many issues we have here already. But we should really dedicate resources to both.

Now spending our precious resources on defence, weapons and fighting each other in pointless wars that’s another story…

Really?????

Ok, my point is people saying they don’t see the point of space travel lack the imagination, or intelligence as has just become clear, to see what the future benefits might be.

Innovation and technological change will benefit us

And your point is?

I see no issue with colonising other worlds
Why not.

@PistachioTiramisu satellite or planet doesn’t mean we can’t fuck it up.