Obviously he isn't me :-)
6 posts • joined 2 Jun 2007
Obviously he isn't me :-)
For those interested in reading more, the full 24 page document on the Global Exploration Strategy can be found here http://www.space.gc.ca/asc/eng/resources/publications/default.asp#global . It is quite an interesting read.
I have a great sense of humour. But it doesn't extend to certain subjects. Space mission hoax claims, which are historical vandalism of the most noxious kind, are among them.
Good question. The US is working with others on lunar missions. For example next years Indian mission will carry some Us instruments. However, as I read it, when it comes to human missions, the US wants to be in the driving seat. This does not rule out participation by other nations or consortia, but they will be add-ons, rather than core technologies and capabilities.
Why fake a mission?
What makes you think that missions to the Moon and Mars would be faked?
How do you think is it possible to fake such missions?
Do think that any past or present missions have been faked?
The GES is simply a non-binding strategy that will enable to better cooperation in space exploration. This is a worthy declaration that builds in the reality of more than 40 years of colloborative space exploration. The past 40 years have seen probles sent to every major body in the solar system, and many of the smaller ones. With the increasing number of space faring nations and the increasing capabilities for space exploration such a strategy makes eminent sense. Most who have posted seem to have absolutely no idea as what all of this is about or any sense of vision.
Morely Dotes seems to think this is an excluse for smart aleck comments about the number of agencies taking part.
"Lessons from the Moon" seems unaware that NASA had extensive quaratine proceedures for the first lunar samples to ensure thare was no biological hazards. Fruthermore there is an extensive literature on how to handle futures samples from Mars and elsewhere.
"And you think that the public moon rocks are the real ones ?" appears to be ignorant of the fact that the Apollo samples (and those from the Soviet Luna probes" have been studied by hundreds of institutions round the world.
Mike VandeVelde cynicism about the rewards for investment in space science and technology is ironic since it is made on a technology that owes much to investment in space. As for finding statements about global goals in space exploration sleep inducing, that is his problem. Or does he think there should be no global goals, nbo global cooperation or perhaps no space exploration at all?