why has it been 47 years since we have landed on the moon?
-------------------------------------------------------
answers:
Ronald 7 say: There hasn't been much point
There is nowhere to grow Weed
-
retired old sarge say: How do yo know we haven't. Just because the GOV says we haven't.. '
How about what if we actually have a secret base there and some of the shuttle missions which they just say were classified were missions to the moon.
Are you sure there isn't a secret base on the moon and that we do not fly back and forth from Area 51 or Plant 42 there and back and just do not advertise it.
-
nineteenthly say: Because that's how many times Earth's been round the sun since then.
-
Athena say: Lack of national will.
We could do it tomorrow if we wanted or needed to.
-
Clive say: It hasn't. There have been unmanned probes ever since.
If you mean manned missions, there just isn't enough reason for them to justify the enormous cost. Why send people there when you can do just as much science with an unmanned spacecraft at a far lower price? A robot probe doesn't need air to breathe, food, exercise or sleep. So why would you do it unless there was something only real people could do?
Let's face it, the only reason the USA did it was from feeling hurt that the Soviet Union got into space first and it wanted to be first at something. So JFK set the target of going to the Moon. Which it did on time, great stuff, OK mighty America can do it, I'm first in line to say well done, and it was done several times to prove it. Now what?
Why would you build the biggest rocket in the world (which is what it needed) just to do that again? NASA is only doing a more modern version now with the intention of moving on to Mars.
Just out of interest, the Soviet Union never managed it. Their Moon rocket was too unstable and blew up every time they tried to launch it. Once it destroyed the entire launch pad and secretive as they were, even they couldn't stop that being picked up on seismometers as the world's biggest non-nuclear explosion. So the USA would have won the race anyway, but nobody knew that at the time.
-
Tom say: Easy enough 2019-1972=47
-
daniel g say: My how time goes by when you are having fun.
Time to move on to bigger and better things.
-
Richard say: because of the religious fundies forcing us back into the dark ages
-
samiamrd say: There were some rocks and dust. Its also too little to bring back.
You know they spent like $25 billion to bring back about 500 lbs of rocks. Probably not a good investment.
But what we achieved was amazing:Transistors, primitive computer chips, Velcro, and Tang.
-
billrussell42 say: politics
lack of public enthusiasm
-
Cathy say: Because time flies when you are having fun
-
robert2020 say: strokes. US isn't the world power it was when I was you g. There is enough problems maintaining flint Michigan's drinking water. Not to mention the homeless that crowd our cities.
Our military budget is too high also. I think China is the new superpower--or soon will be.
-
ctc453 say: Because why go back?
-
Campbell Hayden say: We have not been back to the Moon
because of the discovery of who and what
has been there since long before we ever first set foot on it.
We were not prepared to "share" the Moon,
no less be restricted by others whose presence there
would determine what we would be able to do.
Otherwise, we would have been going back to the Moon
on a weekly basis with the greatest of ease, and sending
back a seemingly endless and plentiful supply of Helium-3.
Sampling rocks, and leaving footprints = All we can do for now.
The Proof = We should never have stopped going to the Moon.
The Moon is not a territory .... it belongs to many.
-
busterwasmycat say: Well, there is only a modest amount of money (relatively speaking) and not much to be gained by doing what we already did, again, so they chose to do other things. We were not ready to set up a base there, back 40 years ago, after all. We lacked knowledge about the effects on humans of off-world activities over the long term, so we had to test those things first (see the ISS)., and we also had to wait on technology to catch up to the probable needs of such an established base.
Basically, there was no point in being tourists to a place we had already visited several times when there are so many other places to see and visit. Going back will happen when it will not just be a tourist visit.
-
Nabiha say: I mean, we’ve landed unmanned as well, but the manned part was the most publicly broadcasted and renowned one so maybe that could be why people have forgotten about the moon still being explored (just without the major missions)
-
JSG say: Maybe because NASA moved on from that. Maybe NASA had that "been there, done that" mindset. They have lunar rovers, probes and satellites they use for exploration now- they don't need to send another astronaut to the moon.
-
say: Waste of time. The whole thing was a pissing contest with Russia.
-
vorenhutz say: well you see, 47 years ago we landed on the moon, then some time passed. 47 years passed, actually. see how that works?
-
quantumclaustrophobe say: It's an expensive enterprise. We'd need a very good reason to begin another lunar program. Personally, I'm hoping we go to Mars before we return to the moon...
-
####ElliotTheCorgi#### say: you can't land on the moon, because earth is flat
-
Edna say: The last manned moon landing took place in 1972. There have been several unmanned landings on the moon by machine since then. The latest unmanned landing on the moon took place in 2013.
-
Climate Realist say: Because no one wants to come up with the cash required to return to the Moon.
-
anna say: they too scared
-
Lunchlumps say: Cause Buzz Aldrin left a big poop up there and no one wants to clean it up
-
Bill-M say: NASA funds were cut by congress. They did not want to waste the money on useless projects.
-
ReductioAdAstronomicus say: Not enough incentive to go back that will justify the cost.
Would you consider returning to a desolate, barren rock you visited 47 years ago to be a priority?
-
WwwdotBibleSelectordotcom say: We can't think of any way to justify the tremendous expense
to Congress
and/or
to the taxpayers
-
Walipmemo say: Nobody ever landed on the moon trust me.
-
. say: Because there's minimal economic/scientific benefit to be gained by repeating it.
-
say: We've been there we done that why spend a trillion dollars doing something that we already know we can do. Space the final frontier
-
Chuck Cunningham say: Have you heard of a thing called technology? There have been more than 100 missions to the moon since then, sending live astronauts there and getting them back alive costs hundreds of times more than just sending the automation. Would you stand in the hot sun to use a shovel to dig a hole if you had an auto-shovel you could operate from your computer anywhere in the world that would do the same job just as well?
-
CarolOklaNola say: We HAVE landed on the Moon many times since December, 1972. There have been no MANNED missions since December, 1972. The main reasons why are complicated, but the quick answers are the Vietnam War, national and international politics, including the wars on drugs, crime, violence and terrorism, and MONEY, the economy, and increasing solar activity. The USA won the Cold War on the battle ground of the Moon, but the hot flip side of the cold war was raging in southeast Asia and the Middle East, and civil rights in the USA and protests and mass shootings on university campuses. Kent State was 1970. I was a high school junior.
Despite what you have been told, the general public DID NOT lose interest. I was part of a successful letter writing campaign that go5 NASA to change the name of the prototype Shuttle from. Constitution to Enterprise.
-
wobafetty say: The moon is old news. Russia and China have plans to visit in the near future but space ex and NASA have their sights on mars and asteroids. Even on one of our neighboring solar systems.. a bit later on though. Apparently there's a planet similar to earth orbiting a star there. Astronomers did think titan was earth like until they got a closer look though...
-
say: Moved on to better projects.
-
Michael say: There's nothing there to do.
-