There is an argument that is acceptable, that it isn't that we lost the technology but rather that no one has manufactured anything for that technology and can't readily do so in the last 40 years or whatever.
I still find it a bit odd that we don't go back even for an instant. Higher resolution photography, better radiation protection, brand new samples and a new generation of spacewalkers.
Even if you you believe that we didn't visit the moon before, we are absolutely smart enough and have enough technology to make that possible now.
So the question that always lingers is, "why not?"
It would certainly shut a lot of people up to see it happening live and there are a few goals that can be accomplished.
At this point I half believe there's a base on the dark side of the moon after all.
But they never say anything specific like "nobody makes x or y component anymore." They literally say, "we lost the technology" as if they need some pixey dust and can't find it.
That comes from Obama saying that line first, so consider the source.
A lot of TV manufacturers wouldn't know how to make new CRTs in a short time period for example, especially when it comes to modernizing the technology.
Old technologies can absolutely sort of "age out" and be "forgotten" without a way to rectify it in the short term as sad as that actually is
You make some good points but usually when old tech gets aged out, its because it's been replaced by better, more capable technology. In this case they supposedly "aged out" the shit needed to go to the moon, and only replaced it with shit that can't go to the moon. This from nasa, which has a budget of $20 million per day. I feel like most organizations in possession of technology that could go to and land on a place that isn't earth, would not only value that technology, but continue to improve upon it, especially after 5 decades have gone by.
There is an argument that is acceptable, that it isn't that we lost the technology but rather that no one has manufactured anything for that technology and can't readily do so in the last 40 years or whatever.
I still find it a bit odd that we don't go back even for an instant. Higher resolution photography, better radiation protection, brand new samples and a new generation of spacewalkers.
Even if you you believe that we didn't visit the moon before, we are absolutely smart enough and have enough technology to make that possible now.
So the question that always lingers is, "why not?"
It would certainly shut a lot of people up to see it happening live and there are a few goals that can be accomplished.
At this point I half believe there's a base on the dark side of the moon after all.
But they never say anything specific like "nobody makes x or y component anymore." They literally say, "we lost the technology" as if they need some pixey dust and can't find it.
That comes from Obama saying that line first, so consider the source.
A lot of TV manufacturers wouldn't know how to make new CRTs in a short time period for example, especially when it comes to modernizing the technology.
Old technologies can absolutely sort of "age out" and be "forgotten" without a way to rectify it in the short term as sad as that actually is
You make some good points but usually when old tech gets aged out, its because it's been replaced by better, more capable technology. In this case they supposedly "aged out" the shit needed to go to the moon, and only replaced it with shit that can't go to the moon. This from nasa, which has a budget of $20 million per day. I feel like most organizations in possession of technology that could go to and land on a place that isn't earth, would not only value that technology, but continue to improve upon it, especially after 5 decades have gone by.