Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

General Discussion

Xipe Totec

(44,518 posts)

2. It's a subliminal message, to the Moon Pie Masses.... nt

Reply to BrentWil (Original post)

Sun Jan 29, 2012, 09:55 PM

Jan 2012

Click here to purchase valentine hearts!

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

37 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Newt and Moon Colonies: Wouldn't a Colony on Mars make a heck a lot more sense? [View all] BrentWil Jan 2012 OP

You know, I hope I never see the moon as a "state". Not in my lifetime. Saving Hawaii Jan 2012 #1

It's a subliminal message, to the Moon Pie Masses.... nt Xipe Totec Jan 2012 #2

Moon, Colon-y, it all sounds so heterosexual... napoleon_in_rags Jan 2012 #6

Mitt?... nt Xipe Totec Jan 2012 #9

We can't even get a single person to Mars yet, much less build a colony Bjorn Against Jan 2012 #3

Water is there.... BrentWil Jan 2012 #5

neither make much sense gristy Jan 2012 #8

No, it would take effort... BrentWil Jan 2012 #25

I am very skeptical Bjorn Against Jan 2012 #12

Of course there wouldn't be food. BrentWil Jan 2012 #15

Do you realize the amount of resources it would take to ship materials to Mars? Bjorn Against Jan 2012 #16

Not as bad as you think... BrentWil Jan 2012 #18

I have a hard time believing that Bjorn Against Jan 2012 #20

The robots actually do cost a lot.. BrentWil Jan 2012 #23

I never said they did not, but they certainly cost a lot less than a colony on Mars Bjorn Against Jan 2012 #26

Certainly... but if the choose is to spend billions/trillions.. BrentWil Jan 2012 #28

I think it would make a great prison. NBachers Jan 2012 #4

That works fine for a while Paulie Jan 2012 #11

Newt is a pseudointellectual, so he doesn't do this "sense" business. eppur_se_muova Jan 2012 #7

Thats the point.. BrentWil Jan 2012 #13

Gingrich also said a continuous propulsion system for getting to Mars quickly nt bananas Jan 2012 #32

Make sense for what? muriel_volestrangler Jan 2012 #10

Which one would cost more? Which one would squander more public funds? AnotherMcIntosh Jan 2012 #14

Well, I think it would be startup versus long term costs. NT BrentWil Jan 2012 #17

Both startup and long term costs would be very high. Bjorn Against Jan 2012 #19

Unless we went to Mars to terraform the place XemaSab Jan 2012 #21

The base parts would be there to do just that BrentWil Jan 2012 #22

It would be such a long-term goal that I dunno XemaSab Jan 2012 #27

If you're going to get minerals, energy, whatever customerserviceguy Jan 2012 #24

The biggest cost on distance is getting out of the earths orbit... BrentWil Jan 2012 #30

Gingrinch's proposal is illegal pokerfan Jan 2012 #29

I assume if it happened, we would vacate that treaty.. BrentWil Jan 2012 #31

We always have pokerfan Jan 2012 #35

I wonder why noone points this out Johonny Jan 2012 #33

Probably becuase he was just pandering to voters on the space coast RZM Jan 2012 #34

Newt? He's much more suited to Uranus. xfundy Jan 2012 #36

The moon has Helium 3 mojowork_n Jan 2012 #37