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

1. 59

   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.

   replyreport
   1. 60

      packerpackposted 14 years agoin reply to this

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

      replyreport
      1. 59

         andromidaposted 14 years agoin reply to this

         Thank you for your valuable comments.

         replyreport
   2. 60

      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.

      replyreport
2. 80

   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.

   replyreport
   1. 59

      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.

      replyreport
3. 59

   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.
   
   Ta.

   replyreport
   1. 59

      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.

      replyreport
4. 0

   MangoGirlposted 14 years ago

   40 and a half is even less.

   replyreport
   1. 59

      andromidaposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      Thanks for thoughtful opinion.

      replyreport
      1. 0

         MangoGirlposted 14 years agoin reply to this

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

         replyreport
         1. 59

            andromidaposted 14 years agoin reply to this

            you are most welcome.

            replyreport
5. 59

   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.

   replyreport
6. 68

   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?

   replyreport
7. 59

   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.

   replyreport
8. 59

   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.

   replyreport
   1. 0

      MangoGirlposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      True enough, Andris.

      replyreport
      1. 59

         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.

         replyreport
   2. 61

      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.

      replyreport
      1. 59

         andromidaposted 14 years agoin reply to this

         What is your opinion about  removing the junkyard of satellites.

         replyreport
         1. 61

            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."

            replyreport
9. 0

   \Brenda Scullyposted 14 years ago

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

   replyreport
   1. 59

      andromidaposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      Wish you luck.

      replyreport
10. 59

    andromidaposted 14 years ago

    NASA to assess living on the moon
    22nd May 2009
    source://www.warwickdailynews.com.au/story/2009/05/22/nasa-to-assess-living-conditions-on-m
    oon/
    
    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.

    replyreport
11. 57

    Negativoposted 13 years ago

    In the future this can be reliable.
    
    Nothing is Apsoulut.

    replyreport
12. 56

    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.

    replyreport
13. 57

    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.
    http://www.blackcommentator.com/297/297 … _large.jpg

    replyreport
    1. 59

       andromidaposted 13 years agoin reply to this

       I like this picture.thanks.

       replyreport
14. 61

    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.

    replyreport
    1. 59

       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.

       replyreport