Debate: Returning to the Moon (Now Underway)

Upcoming Debate: Returning to the Moon, Economist

"This house believes that NASA should not send humans back to the moon. This debate will happen online, and starts on August 4th 2009. You can sign up for email alerts to be notified when this debate begins."

- Defending the motion: Michael N. Gold, Director, Washington, D.C. Area Office, Bigelow Aerospace
- Against the motion: Gregg Maryniak, Director, James S. McDonnell Planetarium and VP, Energy and Aerospace, Saint Louis Science Centre

It's time for NASA to get back on track, editorial, Walt Cunningham, Houston Chronicle

"The so-called benefits of establishing an outpost on the moon are ephemeral and will be quite costly. Outposts on the moon are what I call "Mars Lite" -- going beyond earth orbit, while avoiding commitment to the next real milestone of human exploration -- Mars. Claims of mining Helium 3, prospecting for water, and rehearsing for Mars are not compelling reasons for returning to the moon. A lunar outpost diversion will cost at least $150 billion and carry with it the potential of becoming a financial swamp that could delay our exploration of Mars indefinitely."

  • submit to reddit


Loading






Join our mailing list




Commercialization: Monthly Archives

Monthly Archives

About this Entry

This page contains a single entry by Keith Cowing published on August 4, 2009 12:00 PM.

Augustine Committee Meeting Update was the previous entry in this blog.

NASA OIG on NextGen is the next entry in this blog.

Find recent content on the main index or look in the archives to find all content.