Page 9 of 17 FirstFirst ...
7
8
9
10
11
... LastLast
  1. #161
    Immortal Sigma's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Just outside of Wigan, England.
    Posts
    7,330
    Curiosity manage to disturb some martian dirt.
    there was some lettering discovered, they are still making sure it is correct before releasing to the press.
    only letters that can be made out are

    _ad_ i_ C_ina

  2. #162
    Quote Originally Posted by Siggma View Post
    Curiosity manage to disturb some martian dirt.
    there was some lettering discovered, they are still making sure it is correct before releasing to the press.
    only letters that can be made out are

    _ad_ i_ C_ina
    Made in Chine

    Bet you its just evidence of water or something.

  3. #163
    Epic! Sayl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Scrubbity Burrow
    Posts
    1,638
    Quote Originally Posted by skatblast View Post
    The "one" referring to the first televised one with Armstrong that everyone talks about. Of course, they went in the 70's afterwards with landings. After they were there "first".
    Two crews orbited the Moon and returned before the first landing (Apollo 11; Armstrong, Aldrin, and Collins). All the landings then happened between July 1969 and December 1972. You haven't made clear what you think is "questionable" about Apollo 11. What did you mean by that?

    Quote Originally Posted by skatblast View Post
    Point is they went up there with a toaster oven CPU and they dont even bother to go up today, its useless.
    By today's standards, of course the computers were primitive (as was everything else available at the time), but why does that matter? The primary reason we haven't returned is because the cost of a lunar landing in today's currency would be exorbitant. It's not that going to the Moon is useless or that there isn't plenty of value there, scientific or otherwise.

  4. #164
    Quote Originally Posted by Sayl View Post
    Two crews orbited the Moon and returned before the first landing (Apollo 11; Armstrong, Aldrin, and Collins). All the landings then happened between July 1969 and December 1972. You haven't made clear what you think is "questionable" about Apollo 11. What did you mean by that?



    By today's standards, of course the computers were primitive (as was everything else available at the time), but why does that matter? The primary reason we haven't returned is because the cost of a lunar landing in today's currency would be exorbitant. It's not that going to the Moon is useless or that there isn't plenty of value there, scientific or otherwise.
    Curiosity cost was about 2.5 billion, and that was for Mars. While it would be expensive to go to the moon, yes; but not what you're making it out to be.
    At times, the frequent redundancy and stupidity of this forum turns me into an argumentative ass.

    To most of you, I apologize in advance. I will attempt to be nicer.

  5. #165
    that humans came from mars

  6. #166
    Bloodsail Admiral Decagon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Unfortunately, Central Utah
    Posts
    1,099
    Quote Originally Posted by Yzak View Post
    Curiosity cost was about 2.5 billion, and that was for Mars. While it would be expensive to go to the moon, yes; but not what you're making it out to be.
    Expensive in terms of opportunity cost.
    Quote Originally Posted by Asmekiel View Post
    "And nothing was ever heard from Deca again"

  7. #167
    Quote Originally Posted by dewote View Post
    okay just a rock, with traces of coal on it.
    coal yes!!!!!

    all i want for chrissy is a lump of coal


    but some idiots contaminated the rover before it left earth
    Last edited by TrapTripper; 2012-11-23 at 02:43 AM.

  8. #168
    Warchief Azgraal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    The Unvanquished City of Porto, Portugal
    Posts
    2,196
    Quote Originally Posted by Mujje View Post
    They have found a fully working dance studio. The Orc's forgot to bring it when they went to azeroth.
    I bet it is all the Draenei important roles in lore, tucked away in a little box,

    ---------- Post added 2012-11-23 at 02:42 AM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by Yzak View Post
    Curiosity cost was about 2.5 billion, and that was for Mars. While it would be expensive to go to the moon, yes; but not what you're making it out to be.
    Something people tend to forget is that the money used for those missions is not blown to the universe alongside with the rockets. That money goes to companies, enterprises and workers, effectively paying those people's salary and circulating the currency. The money isn't simply lost xD
    Last edited by Azgraal; 2012-11-23 at 02:42 AM.
    Disclaimer: The majority of my posts might be dripping in sarcasm. Don't take everything I say literally.




  9. #169
    Quote Originally Posted by Migas11 View Post
    I bet it is all the Draenei important roles in lore, tucked away in a little box,

    ---------- Post added 2012-11-23 at 02:42 AM ----------



    Something people tend to forget is that the money used for those missions is not blown to the universe alongside with the rockets. That money goes to companies, enterprises and workers, effectively paying those people's salary and circulating the currency. The money isn't simply lost xD
    Don't get me wrong, I'm not implying that at all. The trip to Mars obviously being far longer than the trip to the moon, you have to plan for unexpected scenarios and try to figure out how to safe-guard the tech on the rover during it's trip. Therefore a lot of man hours. Nor am I trying to make light the amount of planning that would go into a moon landing; but for someone to say that the cost of going to the moon is the main reason for us not going back there is a bit weak.

    Had he said that there is little value in us going back to the moon that would have been one thing. ^^
    At times, the frequent redundancy and stupidity of this forum turns me into an argumentative ass.

    To most of you, I apologize in advance. I will attempt to be nicer.

  10. #170
    Blademaster W1shm4ster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Feel with me
    Posts
    46
    So they finaly found it?


  11. #171
    Epic! Sayl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Scrubbity Burrow
    Posts
    1,638
    Quote Originally Posted by Yzak View Post
    Curiosity cost was about 2.5 billion, and that was for Mars. While it would be expensive to go to the moon, yes; but not what you're making it out to be.
    Robotic missions (obviously) are significantly cheaper. The Apollo program cost the equivalent of over $100 billion today. Previous NASA estimates from 2005 (when the Bush administration's previous space policy, the Vision for Space Exploration, called for a return to the Moon) show how expensive a proposition it is, and unsurprisingly the VSE ended up getting canned because it was way too costly. As former administrator Griffin noted, the expenditure necessary to design and implement new launch vehicles, crew vehicles, and logistics would have resulted in the first new-generation lunar landing costing 55% of the original Apollo program. Needless to say, that's over three times NASA's annual budget.

    ---------- Post added 2012-11-22 at 09:12 PM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by Yzak View Post
    Nor am I trying to make light the amount of planning that would go into a moon landing; but for someone to say that the cost of going to the moon is the main reason for us not going back there is a bit weak.
    I'm not sure why you think it's weak when 1) it's the reason the Apollo program was shut down prematurely in the first place, and 2) it's the reason the plug got pulled on the VSE before it even produced functional launch vehicles.
    Last edited by Sayl; 2012-11-23 at 03:35 AM. Reason: Typos.

  12. #172
    Herald of the Titans RicardoZ's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Irvine, CA
    Posts
    2,676
    I don't see what difference it makes. Unless they're intelligent life forms who can communicate with us and set up a mutually beneficial rapport, it really won't change anything.

  13. #173
    I am Murloc! Gothicshark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    In Thrall's loving embrace, all hail ThrallChrist.
    Posts
    5,063
    Quote Originally Posted by Gnowo View Post
    Here's a number of possibilities I considered:
    - Gems, powder or other earthly "precious"
    - Water, oil or traces of other liquids
    - Any kind of product that could be used as fuel
    - Fossils or any kind (hence the "history" reference)

    My take from the cryptic way NASA is talking that they found a Multicellular Fossil. That would mark a point in history when humanity realized life is not uncommon.

    Gems, Water, and many useful elements are on Mars, and the asteroid belt, this is already known and wouldn't be a source of "for the history books".
    Water, and most liquids are interesting but they know that there is ice in the poles, so finding water would be like finding water on the moon, which they did 4 years ago. Not a historic moment. Oil on the other hand is a type of fossil, and that would be a historic moment

    ---

    I should point out that single cell fossils or even current living single celled life would not be as historic since they have already proven that bacteria can be transplanted between planets. So the academic community would ask did it come from Earth in the past.
    Last edited by Gothicshark; 2012-11-23 at 04:14 AM.

  14. #174
    The Insane peggleftw's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Berks, UK
    Posts
    15,616
    when are they going to announce what they found?
    Too cool for a signature

  15. #175
    Quote Originally Posted by peggleftw View Post
    when are they going to announce what they found?
    For some reason the back of my mind says "December 3rd".

  16. #176
    Quote Originally Posted by schwarzkopf View Post
    Grotzinger says they recently put a soil sample in SAM, and the analysis shows something earthshaking. "This data is gonna be one for the history books. It's looking really good," he says.

    I don't know - but earthshaking and one for the history books seems more than finding a bit of methane or something.

    Signs of possible life would only be something for the science books, finding past life on the other hand would be something for the history books.
    The Catholic church will make sure it never see's the light of day.
    http://raptr.com/puremallace/about

    What has been made by QQ can be unmade by QQ!!!

  17. #177
    Quote Originally Posted by peggleftw View Post
    when are they going to announce what they found?
    they're gonna double and triple check everything

    it'll be a few weeks

  18. #178
    Brewmaster Vayshan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Netherlands - Draenor (EU)
    Posts
    1,268
    Quote Originally Posted by Creamy Flames View Post
    And NASA isn't telling us until what they found has been checked, double-checked and checked again. The result may take weeks, but apparently "it's one for the history books".
    http://www.npr.org/2012/11/20/165513...ts-mum-for-now

    Do you think NASA has found life or the remains of life?
    No matter what it has found... we won't be told anything other it was a glitch or it was something insignificant afterall. Nothing groundbreaking since that would be kept secret for the next 3 centuries.

  19. #179
    Epic! Sayl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Scrubbity Burrow
    Posts
    1,638
    Quote Originally Posted by peggleftw View Post
    when are they going to announce what they found?
    Sometime during the first week of December, at the American Geophysical Union's fall meeting.

    Edited to add: given the locale, anyone hoping for something truly earth-shattering is probably going to be rather disappointed.
    Last edited by Sayl; 2012-11-26 at 10:17 PM.

  20. #180
    Quote Originally Posted by peggleftw View Post
    when are they going to announce what they found?
    Tired of waiting? Here's a leaked picture:
    http://img525.imageshack.us/img525/5...reen002gr2.jpg


Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •