Do you think that living in moon by 2050 is a far fetched dream.

Jump to Last Post 1-14 of 14 discussions (30 posts)
  1. andromida profile image59
    andromidaposted 14 years ago

    The way world population is growing, it won't take much longer
    to cross 10 billions and its already creating a lots of problem
    like deforestation,food problems,green house effects,climate change
    etc.Moreover,there are threats of asteroids or comets coming towards planet Earth,this type of incidents are very much feasible and has been predicted by many scientists.Do you think that we should start thinking about living in the  moon as an alternative
    way for the survival in keeping mind the upcoming catastrophic incidents.

    1. packerpack profile image60
      packerpackposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      41 years is too less a time create an environment on moon conducive to living

      1. andromida profile image59
        andromidaposted 14 years agoin reply to this

        Thank you for your valuable comments.

    2. tksensei profile image60
      tksenseiposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      I for one don't think that is a good idea, and I certainly don't think it would happen on any major scale by 2050 even if we were determined to make it so.

  2. sunstreeks profile image80
    sunstreeksposted 14 years ago

    I'm not astronomy wiz and it's really gonna show here..

    My understanding is that the moon is like WAY small compared to the earth. Big, as far as moons go, but small as far as transporting millions or a few billion people to go live somewhere else.

    Plus, being that the moon is sort of tied to the earth on a orbit wouldn't a catastrophe possibly break that gravitational force?  Where does the moon go if the earth is broken?

    A more plausible scenerio by people who want to go somewhere else to save humanity is mars.

    Personally. I think that if you screw up earth by pollution, over population, and the like, what right does humanity have to go screw up another planet.

    1. andromida profile image59
      andromidaposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      Thank you for your very interesting reply.I also agree with you what you said.Since moon is the the nearest heavenly body from earth and it takes less time to travel to Moon than Mars,it just can be a better option for full understanding of human living
      requirements and the study of their psychological changes while living in an alien environment.In the next step we can move on Mars or even somewhere else as well.

  3. natura profile image59
    naturaposted 14 years ago

    No, humanity should not try to solve such a problem by colonization outer space. What I think humanity should do is start educating the downfalls of having too many babies. I am very sure billions of people on the surface of this planet are not aware of the drawbacks to having kids. We are not evolved yet, and as such we will either learn to repair the damage peacefully toward each other and the planet or face the consequences and see wars evolving.

    Already, water is an issue in several major hotspots around the world. Countries are threatening each other for water and it's availability. Once again going outerpace is not the solution - it will futher burden this planet of it's resources. We need to peacefully resolve issues through peaceful means using education as a tool to enlighten people who are not aware of the implications of population and it's effects on food and water.

    Besides, there are no resources on moon other than rocks. Water is the giver of life. Without it life is just not possible for our biology.


    1. andromida profile image59
      andromidaposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      Thank you for bringing the issue that billions of people on the surface of this planet are not aware of the drawbacks to having kids.Living in moon is not like colonizing outer space,its just
      an alternative idea apart from our only living ground planet earth.There is already technology of extracting Oxygen from Moon's soil;we need to extract Hydrogen and invent the device of making water.Do do really think its so difficult to get water in Moon.For human nothing is impossible, our only limit is our limiting belief or imagination.Thank you.

  4. profile image0
    MangoGirlposted 14 years ago

    40 and a half is even less.

    1. andromida profile image59
      andromidaposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      Thanks for thoughtful opinion.

      1. profile image0
        MangoGirlposted 14 years agoin reply to this

        Hey, andromida. Thanks for raising the topic in the first place. smile

        1. andromida profile image59
          andromidaposted 14 years agoin reply to this

          you are most welcome.

  5. andromida profile image59
    andromidaposted 14 years ago

    Please look at the news of TIMES ONLINE,December 6, 2006

    Man to be living on the Moon from 2024
    Mark Henderson, Science Editor

    Human beings are to go back to the Moon within the next 15 years and this time they will stay, according to ambitious plans to establish a lunar base announced by Nasa.

    The first manned mission to Earth’s satellite in two generations will blast off by 2020 to start work on an outpost that eventually will be occupied permanently, the US space agency said.

    At first, crews of four will make week-long runs to the Moon, before larger missions make progressively longer trips to build up living modules and power plants. The goal is to establish a full-time human presence by 2024, with astronauts spending six-month tours at the lunar base.

  6. B.Z. Alixandre profile image68
    B.Z. Alixandreposted 14 years ago

    I believe it is feasible, with our technology, to have stations on the moon, much like they have in the poles, where several people can live for several months to several years, in the next few decades.  However, true colonization of the moon by 2050 seems a tad beyond our current grasp.  Of course a brand new technology may spin that theory completely out of the water, but as it stands, no.  In the 90's an experiment was conducted called Biosphere 2 in Arizona, US where they created a self sufficient dome with several scientists living there for a year.  They were almost successful (a thumb amputation of one of the scientists caused a break in the seal as she was rushed into an emergency room).  Something on a much larger scale, in a more hostile environment, would take massive amounts of money, research, and technology.

    Nature often solves overpopulation problems herself, and we have had many scares in the past few years of a pandemic.  I think it is much more likely to see one of these in the next half-century sweep through the world and do a little pruning of its own.  And there are a lot of untapped land resources.  I don't know how many people have driven through Nevada, but there's a lot of room there! 

    As for educating people not to have kids, thats a grand idea, but designed for failure without the regulations of an Orwellian society.  Look at teenage pregnancies, how many times do we tell them not to procreate?

  7. andromida profile image59
    andromidaposted 14 years ago

    hello Alixandre.thank you for your reply and pointing out towards
    untapped resources of our world.For educating teenagers not to
    procreate is a social responsibility  and we all should work together as a family to solve out this problem.

  8. scheinandras profile image59
    scheinandrasposted 14 years ago

    I think by 2050 we will noy just invade the moon but we will probably ruin it too. Humanity just never learns.

    1. profile image0
      MangoGirlposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      True enough, Andris.

      1. andromida profile image59
        andromidaposted 14 years agoin reply to this

        Good forewarning Andris.Ruining the atmosphere of moon by human
        is only a possibility.Humans will definitely learn and keep learning in every seconds of our life time.But by thinking the negative thing we cannot stop our progress.

    2. mohitmisra profile image61
      mohitmisraposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      We have already created a junkyard with our satellites.The orbits are overcrowded and there are many dysfunctional satellites in space.

      1. andromida profile image59
        andromidaposted 14 years agoin reply to this

        What is your opinion about  removing the junkyard of satellites.

        1. mohitmisra profile image61
          mohitmisraposted 14 years agoin reply to this

          Get more systematic, today the fear is that a satellite will collide with a dysfunctional satellite which has gone off its orbit.All countries meed to get together for the good of mankind, these immaginary lines just cause trouble.

          " How do I make people understand?
          We are all part of the same bamd."

  9. profile image0
    \Brenda Scullyposted 14 years ago

    wish I could go and live on the moon now....

    1. andromida profile image59
      andromidaposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      Wish you luck.

  10. andromida profile image59
    andromidaposted 14 years ago

    NASA to assess living on the moon
    22nd May 2009

    NASA says it is on target for a June mission to scour the moon's surface for landing sites and water that would allow humans to work and even live on earth's nearest neighbour.

    The space agency hopes to launch a dual craft in June, part of which would survey the moon's surface from orbit while another unit ploughs into the lunar surface in search of water.

    The mission will focus on the little-known lunar poles, hoping to confirm reports of hydrogen accumulation and possible water ice not found at the equatorial regions that where
    famously explored by humans in the last century.

  11. Negativo profile image57
    Negativoposted 13 years ago

    In the future this can be reliable.

    Nothing is Apsoulut.

  12. negacrowbar profile image56
    negacrowbarposted 13 years ago

    Look, the moon is not a planet. Plus the astronomical cost of sending things to the moon. The government keeps quiet about how much each launch affects global warming already. We don't need to be sending tons of spaceships to the moon unless we can figure out a better way to send ships into orbit.

    One science fiction book I read solved the issue by using a giant sling shot style launch. This would have to be accomplished first before we destroy more of our ozone layer.

  13. profile image57
    untiedshoelaceposted 13 years ago

    I think living on Mars is a more realistic dream, although I don't see it happening til later in the century. … _large.jpg

    1. andromida profile image59
      andromidaposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      I like this picture.thanks.

  14. Lisa HW profile image61
    Lisa HWposted 13 years ago

    I don't think there will be living on the moon then (unless a few astronauts spend some time there, like they do on the space station)..  In the 1960's everyone thought there would be flying cars by 2000.   Here we are - still driving around in pretty much the same thing as ever.

    1. andromida profile image59
      andromidaposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      I agree with you.Yet like alternative energy sources we may need some alternatives for our dwelling.We still have no technology to protect our planet from asteroids.


This website uses cookies

As a user in the EEA, your approval is needed on a few things. To provide a better website experience, uses cookies (and other similar technologies) and may collect, process, and share personal data. Please choose which areas of our service you consent to our doing so.

For more information on managing or withdrawing consents and how we handle data, visit our Privacy Policy at:

Show Details
HubPages Device IDThis is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.
LoginThis is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.
Google RecaptchaThis is used to prevent bots and spam. (Privacy Policy)
AkismetThis is used to detect comment spam. (Privacy Policy)
HubPages Google AnalyticsThis is used to provide data on traffic to our website, all personally identifyable data is anonymized. (Privacy Policy)
HubPages Traffic PixelThis is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.
Amazon Web ServicesThis is a cloud services platform that we used to host our service. (Privacy Policy)
CloudflareThis is a cloud CDN service that we use to efficiently deliver files required for our service to operate such as javascript, cascading style sheets, images, and videos. (Privacy Policy)
Google Hosted LibrariesJavascript software libraries such as jQuery are loaded at endpoints on the or domains, for performance and efficiency reasons. (Privacy Policy)
Google Custom SearchThis is feature allows you to search the site. (Privacy Policy)
Google MapsSome articles have Google Maps embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
Google ChartsThis is used to display charts and graphs on articles and the author center. (Privacy Policy)
Google AdSense Host APIThis service allows you to sign up for or associate a Google AdSense account with HubPages, so that you can earn money from ads on your articles. No data is shared unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
Google YouTubeSome articles have YouTube videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
VimeoSome articles have Vimeo videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
PaypalThis is used for a registered author who enrolls in the HubPages Earnings program and requests to be paid via PayPal. No data is shared with Paypal unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
Facebook LoginYou can use this to streamline signing up for, or signing in to your Hubpages account. No data is shared with Facebook unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
MavenThis supports the Maven widget and search functionality. (Privacy Policy)
Google AdSenseThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Google DoubleClickGoogle provides ad serving technology and runs an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Index ExchangeThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
SovrnThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Facebook AdsThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Amazon Unified Ad MarketplaceThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
AppNexusThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
OpenxThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Rubicon ProjectThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
TripleLiftThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Say MediaWe partner with Say Media to deliver ad campaigns on our sites. (Privacy Policy)
Remarketing PixelsWe may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.
Conversion Tracking PixelsWe may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.
Author Google AnalyticsThis is used to provide traffic data and reports to the authors of articles on the HubPages Service. (Privacy Policy)
ComscoreComScore is a media measurement and analytics company providing marketing data and analytics to enterprises, media and advertising agencies, and publishers. Non-consent will result in ComScore only processing obfuscated personal data. (Privacy Policy)
Amazon Tracking PixelSome articles display amazon products as part of the Amazon Affiliate program, this pixel provides traffic statistics for those products (Privacy Policy)
ClickscoThis is a data management platform studying reader behavior (Privacy Policy)