When Newt mentioned going to the moon he was crazy, but when Obama mentioned goin to

[daveman]

No, you didn't. The Moon is not habitable. It was bad enough that I had to tell you this once; unbelievable that I have to repeat myself. The. Moon. Is. Not. Habitable. For somebody who claims to know science, you sure have a funny way of showing it.

Space is not habitable, but there are people living in orbit right now.

Did you really think you had a point? Because you don't.

Yeah, my point is that you don't know what the fuck you're talking about. I can live in a space station floating in the earth's orbit, but that doesn't make space habitable. In order for a planet or moon to be habitable, it requires liquid water and an atmosphere that can sustain life. ARtificial atmospheres don't make a planet habitable.

I can't believe that you're actually arguing over this.

And yet, people can build all those things. Obviously.

Just come out and say it: "I hate the idea because Newt supports it." It'd save you a lot of dancing around.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

I showed you it was.

Why do you hate science?

No, you didn't. The Moon is not habitable. It was bad enough that I had to tell you this once; unbelievable that I have to repeat myself. The. Moon. Is. Not. Habitable. For somebody who claims to know science, you sure have a funny way of showing it.

Natural satellite habitability - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Scientists generally consider the probability of life on natural satellites within our own solar system to be remote, though the possibility has not been ruled out. Within our solar system's habitable zone the only such objects are The Moon (Luna), Phobos and Deimos and none have either an atmosphere or water in liquid form.
Natural satellites are considered potential candidates for space colonization by humans as humans can inhabit moons through artificial environment, having already briefly inhabited our moon (Luna). However artificial environments are not considered in the definition of habitability.

is there liquid water flowing on the space station?

As far as your last highlight you're just playing semantics with words now.

You've clearly been proven wrong. Now prove you're not stupid and accept the facts.

 

[daveman]

Natural satellite habitability - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Scientists generally consider the probability of life on natural satellites within our own solar system to be remote, though the possibility has not been ruled out. Within our solar system's habitable zone the only such objects are The Moon (Luna), Phobos and Deimos and none have either an atmosphere or water in liquid form.
Natural satellites are considered potential candidates for space colonization by humans as humans can inhabit moons through artificial environment, having already briefly inhabited our moon (Luna). However artificial environments are not considered in the definition of habitability.

Well, looks like Obama's Mars mission is out of the question, then.

Or is that different? Somehow?

Did Obama say that Mars is habitable? No.

In summary: People shouldn't go to the moon because it's not habitable, and people should go to Mars because it's not habitable.

 

[daveman]

No, you didn't. The Moon is not habitable. It was bad enough that I had to tell you this once; unbelievable that I have to repeat myself. The. Moon. Is. Not. Habitable. For somebody who claims to know science, you sure have a funny way of showing it.

Natural satellite habitability - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Scientists generally consider the probability of life on natural satellites within our own solar system to be remote, though the possibility has not been ruled out. Within our solar system's habitable zone the only such objects are The Moon (Luna), Phobos and Deimos and none have either an atmosphere or water in liquid form.
Natural satellites are considered potential candidates for space colonization by humans as humans can inhabit moons through artificial environment, having already briefly inhabited our moon (Luna). However artificial environments are not considered in the definition of habitability.

is there liquid water flowing on the space station?

As far as your last highlight you're just playing semantics with words now.

You've clearly been proven wrong. Now prove you're not stupid and accept the facts.

Never!! /JosefK

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

Natural satellite habitability - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Scientists generally consider the probability of life on natural satellites within our own solar system to be remote, though the possibility has not been ruled out. Within our solar system's habitable zone the only such objects are The Moon (Luna), Phobos and Deimos and none have either an atmosphere or water in liquid form.
Natural satellites are considered potential candidates for space colonization by humans as humans can inhabit moons through artificial environment, having already briefly inhabited our moon (Luna). However artificial environments are not considered in the definition of habitability.

Well, looks like Obama's Mars mission is out of the question, then.

Or is that different? Somehow?

Did Obama say that Mars is habitable? No.

Hopefully you're fully enough informed to have this debate? Being such you would realize that in order to visit mars we would have to LIVE THERE for a minimum of 6 months right? That's the orbits sync with the earth that would dictate when our astronauts could leave.

 

[J.E.D]

Space is not habitable, but there are people living in orbit right now.

Did you really think you had a point? Because you don't.

Yeah, my point is that you don't know what the fuck you're talking about. I can live in a space station floating in the earth's orbit, but that doesn't make space habitable. In order for a planet or moon to be habitable, it requires liquid water and an atmosphere that can sustain life. ARtificial atmospheres don't make a planet habitable.

I can't believe that you're actually arguing over this.

And yet, people can build all those things. Obviously.

Just come out and say it: "I hate the idea because Newt supports it." It'd save you a lot of dancing around.

My gawd, you are really dense. Habitable in this context means that a planet or moon can NATURALLY sustain life. Man-made structures do not make a planet habitable.

 

[J.E.D]

Well, looks like Obama's Mars mission is out of the question, then.

Or is that different? Somehow?

Did Obama say that Mars is habitable? No.

Hopefully you're fully enough informed to have this debate? Being such you would realize that in order to visit mars we would have to LIVE THERE for a minimum of 6 months right? That's the orbits sync with the earth that would dictate when our astronauts could leave.

Yeah, no shit, Sherlock. But that doesn't mean that Mars is habitable; and like I said, Obama never claimed that Mars is habitable.

 

[J.E.D]

No, you didn't. The Moon is not habitable. It was bad enough that I had to tell you this once; unbelievable that I have to repeat myself. The. Moon. Is. Not. Habitable. For somebody who claims to know science, you sure have a funny way of showing it.

Natural satellite habitability - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Scientists generally consider the probability of life on natural satellites within our own solar system to be remote, though the possibility has not been ruled out. Within our solar system's habitable zone the only such objects are The Moon (Luna), Phobos and Deimos and none have either an atmosphere or water in liquid form.
Natural satellites are considered potential candidates for space colonization by humans as humans can inhabit moons through artificial environment, having already briefly inhabited our moon (Luna). However artificial environments are not considered in the definition of habitability.

is there liquid water flowing on the space station?

As far as your last highlight you're just playing semantics with words now.

You've clearly been proven wrong. Now prove you're not stupid and accept the facts.

Right, you've proven me wrong The Moon is habitable because we have the ability to construct an artificial environment on its surface. You go with that. Take that theory to your astonomy teacher and let me know whether he pisses himself laughing before or after he tosses you out on your ass.

 

[daveman]

Yeah, my point is that you don't know what the fuck you're talking about. I can live in a space station floating in the earth's orbit, but that doesn't make space habitable. In order for a planet or moon to be habitable, it requires liquid water and an atmosphere that can sustain life. ARtificial atmospheres don't make a planet habitable.

I can't believe that you're actually arguing over this.

And yet, people can build all those things. Obviously.

Just come out and say it: "I hate the idea because Newt supports it." It'd save you a lot of dancing around.

My gawd, you are really dense. Habitable in this context means that a planet or moon can NATURALLY sustain life. Man-made structures do not make a planet habitable.

Semantics. Man-made structures ARE habitable.

Gotta have them in Earth orbit, gotta have them on the moon, gotta have them on Mars -- shoot, you gotta have them in Antarctica.

Come on, you can do it: "I hate the idea because Newt supports it."

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

Did Obama say that Mars is habitable? No.

Hopefully you're fully enough informed to have this debate? Being such you would realize that in order to visit mars we would have to LIVE THERE for a minimum of 6 months right? That's the orbits sync with the earth that would dictate when our astronauts could leave.

Yeah, no shit, Sherlock. But that doesn't mean that Mars is habitable; and like I said, Obama never claimed that Mars is habitable.

Well if all you're interested in is parcing words and not discussing the ACTUAL IDEA AND RESULTS OF SAID IDEA, its my turn.

Newt didn't say the moon was habitable. He said we should colonize it.

Two different words, same basic meaning. Same damn thing we would have to do to goto mars. Now just stop dude. I had a bit of respect for you but you're blowing it with this stupidity.

Bottom line, unless private industry steps up to the plate neither GOOD ideas will happen as we can't afford it. Especially since Obama just cut NASAs budget. ( understandably so)

Just stop dude, you look foolish

 

[American Horse]

The problem was, when Newt said it he actually meant it, and that goes against the new Obama/NASA policy on manned exploration of space.

Newt would've added incentives and awards into the program to actually make it viable and economically feasible. Obama says we will circle Mars by 2030, with a goal of landing LATER.
In other words we will do a "dry run to Mars."

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

Natural satellite habitability - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Scientists generally consider the probability of life on natural satellites within our own solar system to be remote, though the possibility has not been ruled out. Within our solar system's habitable zone the only such objects are The Moon (Luna), Phobos and Deimos and none have either an atmosphere or water in liquid form.
Natural satellites are considered potential candidates for space colonization by humans as humans can inhabit moons through artificial environment, having already briefly inhabited our moon (Luna). However artificial environments are not considered in the definition of habitability.

is there liquid water flowing on the space station?

As far as your last highlight you're just playing semantics with words now.

You've clearly been proven wrong. Now prove you're not stupid and accept the facts.

Right, you've proven me wrong The Moon is habitable because we have the ability to construct an artificial environment on its surface. You go with that. Take that theory to your astonomy teacher and let me know whether he pisses himself laughing before or after he tosses you out on your ass.

In an English class you might be right. But this isn't school fool. You're playing games with definitions because you can't win the debate on the content of the discussion.

You can have your grammar victory, ill take the victory on substance.

 

[J.E.D]

Hopefully you're fully enough informed to have this debate? Being such you would realize that in order to visit mars we would have to LIVE THERE for a minimum of 6 months right? That's the orbits sync with the earth that would dictate when our astronauts could leave.

Yeah, no shit, Sherlock. But that doesn't mean that Mars is habitable; and like I said, Obama never claimed that Mars is habitable.

Well if all you're interested in is parcing words and not discussing the ACTUAL IDEA AND RESULTS OF SAID IDEA, its my turn.

Newt didn't say the moon was habitable. He said we should colonize it.

Two different words, same basic meaning. Same damn thing we would have to do to goto mars. Now just stop dude. I had a bit of respect for you but you're blowing it with this stupidity.

Bottom line, unless private industry steps up to the plate neither GOOD ideas will happen as we can't afford it. Especially since Obama just cut NASAs budget. ( understandably so)

Just stop dude, you look foolish

I never claimed that Newt said the Moon is habitable. I don't think he's that stupid. You, Daveman and The T are the ones claiming that the Moon is habitable. Get it straight, Gramps, before you look even more foolish than you already do.

 

[Rowe]

When Newt mentioned going to the moon he was crazy, but when Obama mentioned goin to
Mars he was applauded. What gives?



Could be more people want Obama off planet than Newt. (Grin)

 

[American Horse]

No, you didn't. The Moon is not habitable. It was bad enough that I had to tell you this once; unbelievable that I have to repeat myself. The. Moon. Is. Not. Habitable. For somebody who claims to know science, you sure have a funny way of showing it.

Space is not habitable, but there are people living in orbit right now.

Did you really think you had a point? Because you don't.

Yeah, my point is that you don't know what the fuck you're talking about. I can live in a space station floating in the earth's orbit, but that doesn't make space habitable. In order for a planet or moon to be habitable, it requires liquid water and an atmosphere that can sustain life. ARtificial atmospheres don't make a planet habitable.

I can't believe that you're actually arguing over this.

It has been discovered that there are huge reservoirs of almost pure water in lunar polar craters. Equipment to mine it has been design-awarded by NASA.

 

[The T]

Space is not habitable, but there are people living in orbit right now.

Did you really think you had a point? Because you don't.

Yeah, my point is that you don't know what the fuck you're talking about. I can live in a space station floating in the earth's orbit, but that doesn't make space habitable. In order for a planet or moon to be habitable, it requires liquid water and an atmosphere that can sustain life. ARtificial atmospheres don't make a planet habitable.

I can't believe that you're actually arguing over this.

And yet, people can build all those things. Obviously.

Just come out and say it: "I hate the idea because Newt supports it." It'd save you a lot of dancing around.

Precisely.

 

[J.E.D]

is there liquid water flowing on the space station?

As far as your last highlight you're just playing semantics with words now.

You've clearly been proven wrong. Now prove you're not stupid and accept the facts.

Right, you've proven me wrong The Moon is habitable because we have the ability to construct an artificial environment on its surface. You go with that. Take that theory to your astonomy teacher and let me know whether he pisses himself laughing before or after he tosses you out on your ass.

In an English class you might be right. But this isn't school fool. You're playing games with definitions because you can't win the debate on the content of the discussion.

You can have your grammar victory, ill take the victory on substance.

I won the "debate" as soon as you opened you fucking mouth. English has nothing to do with it. It is a science fact that THE. MOON. IS. NOT. HABITABLE.

 

[J.E.D]

Space is not habitable, but there are people living in orbit right now.

Did you really think you had a point? Because you don't.

Yeah, my point is that you don't know what the fuck you're talking about. I can live in a space station floating in the earth's orbit, but that doesn't make space habitable. In order for a planet or moon to be habitable, it requires liquid water and an atmosphere that can sustain life. ARtificial atmospheres don't make a planet habitable.

I can't believe that you're actually arguing over this.

It has been discovered that there are huge reservoirs of almost pure water in lunar polar craters. Equipment to mine it has been design-awarded by NASA.

So? Does the Moon have oxygen? No, it doesn't; therefore, the moon is not habitable.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

The problem was, when Newt said it he actually meant it, and that goes against the new Obama/NASA policy on manned exploration of space.

Newt would've added incentives and awards into the program to actually make it viable and economically feasible. Obama says we will circle Mars by 2030, with a goal of landing LATER.
In other words we will do a "dry run to Mars."

Only problem with that is......

BEEN THERE, DONE THAT.

They're driving rovers around on the surface as we speak. Unless the last remaining rover finally died and I just haven't heard.

Bottom line were not working with the technology of a smart phone in space anymore. We will HAVE TO test run any maned mission to mars with a trip to the moon again. To do otherwise would be both foolish and a risk to our astronauts

 

[The T]

Natural satellite habitability - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Scientists generally consider the probability of life on natural satellites within our own solar system to be remote, though the possibility has not been ruled out. Within our solar system's habitable zone the only such objects are The Moon (Luna), Phobos and Deimos and none have either an atmosphere or water in liquid form.
Natural satellites are considered potential candidates for space colonization by humans as humans can inhabit moons through artificial environment, having already briefly inhabited our moon (Luna). However artificial environments are not considered in the definition of habitability.

What part of 'has NOT been ruled out' did you fail to see?

*Idiot*

What part of "artificial environments are not considered in the definition of habitability" do you not understand?

*Mor. On.*

Son/ What was the Lunar Module? What is the ISS? Man made structures so WE can be there. And this cannot be done on the moon beacuse__________________________?

You lack imagination, but posess a plethora of political dogsqueeze.

Take your pick for the future assclown.