Why is it that nobody has landed on the moon (if that is the case) for over 35 years?

Question

Surely another country would have had the money and know how to go up there but nobody has in over 35 years.You would think that with the advance of technology that it would be easier now?I don't want to point to a Conspiracy but for all we know,it could be a cover up by NASA and that nobody ever landed on it at all.I have read about Radiation belts that could be cause problems and no living thing,equipment,machinery etc.could pass through it without being destroyed.Of course,i can only read up on this stuff and we will never actually know for sure that any of the moon landings ever happened untill we actually go there ourselves that is.....

Answer 1

Because it's just a waste of money really ....

Answer 2

basically the russias and usa were having a race to the moon, too see who was most technogly advanced and also some thought that it would determind who would win the war that was going on at the time, so now there is no need to go to the moon, it would just waste money, time and co2

Answer 3

I heard they closed the Denny's.

Answer 4

Maybe its a case of 'been there, done that'? I happen to beleive they did land on the moon. They are now looking at Mars, to see how habitable that is, I dont know, maybe other countries just dont have the resources to get up into space. There are a lot of other things closer to home that need to be addressed first, at the time of the landings on the moon, it was still considered to be somewhat a waste of funding and resources.

Answer 5

Let’s get this straight. The moon landings are not part of a belief system.  

It is as ridiculous to say “I believe the moon landings happened” as it is to say  ÃƒÂ¢Ã‚€ÂœI believe they didn’t happen”.

The question should not even be asked.  

THE MOON LANDINGS ARE AS PART OF HISTORY AS WORLD WAR II.  You don’t say I believe WWII happened, do you?

What is the matter with you kids – you watch too many conspiracy shows, and listen to garbage views rather than go read about the reality.  

It was incredibly expensive to go to the moon.  The US govt pulled the plug on it.  Nobody else has had the money and the ability to do it.

GET IT IN YOUR THICK SKULLS, FOR GOD’S SAKE.  

There is no supersonic airliners since Concorde was canned – you don’t go around saying Concorde was a hoax, or nobody could have flown a supersonic jet airliner.  

AND CONCORDE WAS 60s TECHNOLOGY JUST LIKE APOLLO.  

GET A LIFE.  

Answer 6

Because they were building the international space station

Answer 7

Manned moon missions are very, very expensive, and much more technically demanding than a simple orbital mission.  There's been no compelling reason for anyone to bother since the Apollo programme was wound up as there would be little scientific or prestige bonus for whichever natio arrived second, although NASA are now planning a new series of missions as a preliminary step to a Mars mission.    

Answer 8

What is more probable?

We went to the Moon with less computer power than a modern digital watch, and we're going back. Then to Mars, and after that off to Zeta Reticuli.

or

Your government has sold you out and plans to force this on you soon:

http://www.verichipcorp.com/

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f0gXGTcd6...

Answer 9

Been there, done that, seen it all, thanks.  Next?

Answer 10

After 6 manned missions to the moon, NASA turned its attention to developing a reusable craft (the Space Shuttles).  Also, their funding was cut.  We do have a new Moon mission planned as part of Project Constellation.  The Space Shuttles are to be retired in 2010 and be replaced by the Orion Spacecraft with the Ares rockets and Altair lander.  It is to go to the moon and to Mars.

Answer 11

There was no need.  After we went, it was pretty much agreed that there was little justification for the expense and risk of such missions.  There was little expectation that anything of value would be achieved by continuing lunar missions.  This applied to the United States as well as other countries.

The main motivation for going was to be the first to achieve a millennia-old dream. Second place held no allure at all.

Answer 12

It's been done

Nobody wants to spend that kind of money

There's nothing up there worth going for.

Answer 13

I'm not going to be nasty, promise, but all these conspiracy theories about the moon landing are really cretinous.

Think about it. ALL of the worlds top scientists, geologists, cosmologists etc would have to be complicit in fooling the world for 39 years. In that time NOT ONE single person in the know (of which there are thousands) has spilled the beans. Not one. Ever.

We have rocks that have been brought back from the moon, which have been studied (and are still being) by experts. We have photographs and video tape of everything, and there's not one shred of evidence that they've been doctored. And bear in mind, that technology 40 years ago was woeful in comparison with what we have now - believe me, someone would have spotted it was fake by now.

Yes, there are questions that can be asked (like the radiation issue you mention) but they can all be answered, and are. People just choose not to listen to those answers.

We went to the moon - fact. Not just once, but several times. In all 17 people have walked on the moon.

Answer 14

We don't need to.

Answer 15

ITS LIKE A PARTY WITH NO ATMOSPHERE

Answer 16

You claim not to be a conspiracy nut but still ask the question could NASA have covered it up???!!! In short, the answer is no. The evidence for the moon landings is too abundant and to cover up a hoax of that proportion would have involved too many people. We haven't been back to the moon for several reasons, the main one being the cost. It must be remembered that the main reason for going in the first place was political - to get one over on the Soviet Union.

Answer 17

NASA has a small budget, they are currently focusing on other things.  But don't worry, we're planning on getting back there around 2019 to prepare for a possible mission to mars, and Russia is planning to go there around 2025 and possibly have a manned moon base a few years later.

Answer 18

Actually the Russians sent a couple of scientific probes to the moon after we finished all our manned landings. The USA has also sent several additional probes to the moon since our last manned mission. The biggest reason that no manned missions have been sent is strictly a matter of money. It is way cheaper to send a probe and the moon is still the target for advanced space industry in the near future.

Answer 19

Let me answer your question with a question.  Is the financial burden of funding another trip to the moon worth the rewards?  I don't think it is but it's just my opinion.  I don't think we faked the moon landings because of two points I would like to make.  1. Our video analysis technology today could quite easily prove any moon landing video was a fake if indeed it was.  2.  If the rest of the country found out that we did fake the moon landing...wouldn't that be quite embarassing?

Answer 20

Well we did and if you have any questions about these so called "conspiracy theories" I would be happy to show you how flawed they are, but that isn't your question.

This question seems to be a popular one, and it has a pretty simple answer. Too dangerous, the moon is old news, and people would rather see their tax dollars going towards another mission.

We landed on the moon 6 successful times and did pretty much everything there is to do on the moon. We walked around, brought back over 300 kilograms of moon rocks, put some reflectors up there, and planted our flag... what more is there to do? Now I can understand the possibility of maybe a future scientific colony on the moon to observe the cosmos. After all, the moon has no atmosphere, and when it is in Earth's shadow there is basically no light pollution. Would you rather see your money going towards moon exploration when we've already done it, or to search for life on Europa, explore Saturn's moon system, and perhaps land man on Mars?

And the statement "we will never know for sure" is kind of unfair to say. We did land on the moon. The crowning piece of incontrovertible proof is that the Apollo missions left reflectors on the moon today that astronomers use to calculate the position of the moon. The technology for robot placement didn't exist back then like it does today.

If you have questions about the factuality of the moon landing, I created a webpage that debunks conspiracy theories while proving the moon landing was real. Although it is far from finished, your free to take a look. :)  

Answer 21

Because it costs millions of dollars for a manned mission to the moon, and the funds for such a mission just aren't available right now.  NASA and other aerospace groups rely mostly on funding from the government and private donations, which are difficult to get with all the military actions going on around the world, and the shaky state of the world economy.  Plus, public interest in space exploration has been on a steady decline since NASA first landed on the moon back in '69, making it even more difficult to obtain the much needed funds.

NASA didn't just land once.  There were a total of six manned landings between 1969 and 1972.  Unfortunately, the space race's end led to decreased public interest, which is why there have been no landings since then.

By the way, that stuff about the radiation belts is total c**p.  The ship they traveled in and their suits were specially designed to prevent exposure to that radiation, allowing the astronauts and the machinery to travel through.  All of the points brought up by conspiracy theorists have been debunked.

Answer 22

What they found up there told them to not come back. Plus we put Russia in its place, and the US owns it now mission accomplished haha.

Answer 23

Nick S is correct - there are no more ocean liners going back and forth from the US to the UK; why not? Surely we could do it easier now? Is it a cover up? Did we ever really do it? Is the Titanic just a big hoax?

On one hand, you have people who don't believe it happened because they weren't around to remember it - you don't hear from many people who watched the landings denying it now.

On the other hand, there are those who think we're wasting money with a space program at all, while there are so many problems on Earth. Of course, we're fighting a war that's costing a billion bucks a month - I think NASA would love to have that kind of a budget.  

Answer 24

We were in a one-upsmanship race with the Soviets to prevent losing face. It was very expensive.

Today no-one is challenging us and costs have skyrocketed. Furthermore the public seems disinterested and seems to have other priorities for federal spending.

Answer 25

NASA switched gears and started working on the space shuttle and the international space station.

Answer 26

There is no money in it.  Thats the most honest truth and as much as that sounds "capatillistic" it is the truth because people have never moved anywhere unless there was some kind of trade involved such as the california gold rush.  If we found oil up there then Exxon will be building super tanker shuttles to pump it out of the moon.  

Answer 27

maybe they were bored of the moon and set their minds on a new target i.e. the mars or something :D

Answer 28

I am not entirely convinced that we indeed have landed on the moon.

As to why not in 35 years, whats the point of going there?

Answer 29

Note: I'm just joking.

Evil Killer Space Monkey's are the reason they haven't went back, you are partially right about the Van Allen radiation belt only the radiation mutated there higher brain functions to make them super smart and once they became aware that they were being used as test subjects they became insane with the desire to destroy the humans of earth, so they turned there plans of revenge towards gathering up space junk and building a rocket to the moon where they set up a base of operations from which to launch there attack on the humans of earth.

P.s. or something like that.

Answer 30

The reasons we haven't been back in 36 years are as follows:

It was extremely expensive to send two men there for a couple of days. Because the wallet is in the pockets of politicians, they saw that THEIR goal had been achieved, which was to beat the Soviets and ratchet up the national prestige a bit. The scientific considerations didn't concern them. Three further missions were planned, but cancelled.

You don't just build a rocket and find three blokes to put in it. It was called the Apollo PROGRAM because there was a h**l of a lot of development in it. It's the same way that a country can't instantly stage the Olympic Games. Many are capable of it, but the things that go on at the Olympics are not things that normally go on in that country, and have to be planned, built, used, and dismantled afterwards.

Because the program was ended, it would have to be begun again to go back. It's only recently that this has been considered seriously, and they've been doing other things meanwhile. The shuttle, the ISS, planetary exploration. And now that they have started work on it again, they want to be able to go back for longer than two days, and to do more than collect rocks. That's going to take some serious R & D.