I was wondering about this. Why was America able to accomplish this feat in less than 10 years 40 years ago, yet it's going to take us almost 15 years to duplicate the effort with better technology, plus the data gained from the Apollo Program?

Is anyone else disappointed with our space exploration efforts? I know there are issues on Earth, but striving to explore and colonize other planets is just as important.

Interesting observation FBH. Does make you think. Could it be that the bureaucracy is so much bigger, that it takes longer to get something approved and working?

It was a lot easier to push things through congress back then.

it is the fault of unions. You see, the original warehouse in New Jersey where they staged the lunar landing was torn down years ago, and to build a new state of the art facility that will duplicate what earthlings think the moon and Mars surfaces looks like will have to be done under union contract. Of course, since union laborers control who works and when, it will be a long, drawn out, over-budget process that is indicative of all union jobs...

LOL - good post. But come on! Jerry Bruckheimer could do this in a weekend!

But seriously, I don't buy the staged moon landing conspiracy theory. We did it!

Seems to me it has a lot to do with the priority level of spending our tax dollars on a trip to the moon just because versus doing something that had never been done before.

Is there some race to get to the moon again like there was back then? Would ANYTHING be gained by going there tomorrow instead a few years from now?

FBH- I think it's because of budget and national security priorities. If you think about it, the Apollo program was one of the biggest battles of the cold war. Thus, it was given a budget and manpower focus consistent with that priority. Now that there isn't a space race, NASA has diversified its goals (space station, research, unmanned missions, sattelites, SETI, etc) and the next trip to the moon isn't nearly as important as the first. I imagine that has something to do with it.

In 1966, NASA's budget was 5.5% of the total federal budget. In 2009 (the most recently passed budget) it was 0.55% of the total federal budget. Ever since the late 60's, NASA's budget has been falling. Some of that is doing more with less, computers are better, etc. But it shows the priority that we give to NASA now versus the Apollo era.

And from a research perspective, going back to the moon isn't really going to give us as much "bang for our buck" that research in low-earth orbit will, because it will basically have the same experimental conditions. Now if we were to use Neil Armstrong's proposal and use the moon as an intermediary for further space travel (such as to Mars) and begin a colony, it would probably be worth it, but will cost a whole lot more.

But Fox’s "Conspiracy Theory: Did We Land on the Moon?," was so convincing.

one of my favorite quotes:

"Only in America do people think the mooon landing was fake and wrestling is real."

Also, do not forget how much the entire country was trying to fulfill the beliefs of its murdered President to get to the moon by the end of the decade. That, along with the Cold War, drove the NASA program.

Now of days, they wouldn't even have to build much of a sound stage. Most of it would be computer animated.

sorry PB, check the union contract...CG not allowed...

I have often threatened to send female Pales to the moon...

but all I end up with is a shiner....

And that would not be a Shiner beer I presume

Never worked for Gleason either Pale.

My guess is her foot made a moon landing also

From Wiki, wiki, wiki:

Public opinion
A 1999 Gallup poll found that 6% of the American public doubted the Moon landing occurred and 5% had no opinion.[6][7] These figures roughly matched those of a 1995 Time/CNN poll.[6] Officials for Fox television stated that such skepticism increased to about 20% after the February 15, 2001 airing of that network's TV show titled "Conspiracy Theory: Did We Land on the Moon?," seen by approximately 15 million viewers.[7] The 2001 Fox special was seen as promoting the hoax claims. [8][9]

But Americans are not the only believers in the existence of a hoax. A 2000 poll conducted by the Russian Public Opinion Fund found that 28% do not believe that American astronauts have been on the Moon and this percentage is roughly equal in all social-demographic groups.[10] A poll by Swedish tabloid newspaper Aftonbladet indicated about 40% of readers thought the first Moon landing was faked.[11] In 2009, a poll conducted by the British Engineering & Technology magazine found that 25% do not believe that man has walked on the Moon.[12]

There are subcultures in the USA and significant cultures worldwide that strongly believe that the Moon landings were faked. Some claim this is taught in Cuban schools and wherever Cuban teachers are sent.[13][14]

Why do some think it's possible or even reasonable to think about colonizing other planets?

I can think of some people in Washington I would like to volunteer for this mission.

Possible? We have a small colony floating in orbit right now. Granted it can't maintain a population of more than half a dozen, and it needs supply shipments, but it works. Given enough room for hydroponics, and manufacturing equipment, a larger colony should be feasible.

Is it reasonable? As a somewhat well known physicist once said "We must colonize space in order to survive" (Hawking). Sooner or later Earth will be imperiled, either through our own stupidity, or some unknown that we cannot predict or prevent. This makes it not just reasonable, but necessary. Besides, there's a whole universe out there to explore, why the heck not go take a look at it?

Warp speed Scotty, takes us out of here!

Hawking is a smart guy to be sure, however, if history is any indication the thing that will drive extraterrestrial colonization is money. Once somebody figures out efficient way to make money from going to other planets or stars, it may likely continue to be a hobby for governments.

Sure, the need for survival drove many migrations, but that was only after the population was forced to move. In our case, it might be too late by the time we are forced to move.

Which is exactly why we should be working on the problem now. Mars is a definite colony candidate, but we should be starting the work on it now. Going back to the moon and using it as a way to test technology for future manned missions to Mars makes sense.

I'm also interested to see how the Moon 2.0 private project goes. It's an offshoot of the Ansari X-Prize. I tend to agree, space flight and exploration won't really take off until some private group starts making money off it.

Either way, I'd love to see a human on Mars in my lifetime.

I agree...all of our previous extraterrestrial colonization efforts were money-losing boondoggles...

I'm volunteering to be the first compliance officer at the first bank in space! Surely the regulators couldn't find us there!

If anyone's interested in learning more about the Lunar X-Prize:

Google Lunar X-Prize

It'll be nice to see if someone even makes an attempt before 2012!