Google funds $30 million moon prize

Dave — Thu, 13 Sep 2007 18:03:14 GMT

I've been waiting a long time for something like this and I'm pumped. There's almost nothing that Google can't do and a target such as the moon is certainly within the realm of possibility for a private company in 2007. For the younger generation it's as if there never was a moon landing since it happened so long ago, and nothing else we have sent since then has made it to the surface (besides Lunar Prospector, but that was a planned crash landing after the mission was over) so this is going to be something completely new to anybody under 35 or so. The other great thing about the prize is that it's not limited to American companies (even though I suspect it'll be an American company that'll win) which means that any company in the world capable of carrying this out could win.

The only thing I would change about the prize is that I'd like to see a way for the average person to contribute to the prize to make it larger than the original bid. I would contribute some of my own money in order to make the prize larger if that were possible. Besides that it's perfect.

Google funds $30 million moon prize

Frank, NY, NY — Thu, 13 Sep 2007 18:14:51 GMT

Man did not land on the moon in the 60's. That's impossible... We barely had color TV back then.

Google funds $30 million moon prize

Alan Boyle — Thu, 13 Sep 2007 18:26:38 GMT

By the way, I just caught up with a message from Flight International's Rob Coppinger that included this link:

http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/2006/10/19/
210040/cash-purse-for-robot-moon-lander-x-prize-sought.html

Looks like Peter Diamandis didn't just cook this up on the spur of the moment back in March. ;-)

Google funds $30 million moon prize

Joseph Basile, Worcester, MA — Thu, 13 Sep 2007 18:29:46 GMT

Dave,
I agree with you. I've got $100 I'd like the winner of this competition to have.

Google funds $30 million moon prize

reasonable skeptic — Thu, 13 Sep 2007 18:33:35 GMT

Frank. Please. Color TV has been around in theory since 1908, patented in 1928, tested in the 1940s, broadcast approval in 1951, and shows started in 1953. Now many shows stayed in black and white simply because the recouping of the investment in production needed to occur.
As for the moon in 1970s, we did do it. If it were a hoax with as much monitoring of each other the US and USSR did of each other, they surely would have called the bluff. Be realistic, the technology is not the problem. Look at the aeronautic curve from 1903 to 1938 we went from barely getting something into the air to jets.
The idea it did not happen is more preposterous than the daunting task that it was....I mean do you believe aliens built the pyramids too??

Google funds $30 million moon prize

Jack Kennedy, Wise, Va. — Thu, 13 Sep 2007 18:37:17 GMT

Tonight the Japanese government-funded mission to the moon begins to be followed by within months by the Chinese, Indian, American and Russian space probes returning and mapping the surface of the Moon.

A private sector competition will aid in the return to the moon. This is a wonderful competitive prize that will lead to private sector thinking of how to make money on the moon in the long-term. That is, really, the name of the game: lunar profits to sustain the long-term.

Google funds $30 million moon prize

Rob, Indianapolis — Thu, 13 Sep 2007 18:44:25 GMT

Frank -- Color (of any kind) wasn't invented until the late 60's, which is why they were much better suited for going to the moon than we are today.

Google funds $30 million moon prize

Mark R. Whittington — Thu, 13 Sep 2007 18:47:17 GMT

Alan, the idea of a lunar prize has a long history. I published a piece in the Houston Chronicle just this past June suggesting it as a Centennial Challenge. Great to see that other people have been working to bring a similar idea to reality.

Google funds $30 million moon prize

Paul Nink — Thu, 13 Sep 2007 18:48:01 GMT

Our current spaceshuttles can only go 300-400 miles into space CURRENTLY. How the hell are we supposed to believe that we went 239,000 miles(100000% farther) in 1969 with less technology than a game boy? Ridiculous!!!!

Google funds $30 million moon prize

SRS, North Las Vegas, NV — Thu, 13 Sep 2007 18:55:54 GMT

If it is run like the X-Prize was, then the "winner" has already been chosen.

Google funds $30 million moon prize

Matt — Thu, 13 Sep 2007 19:14:22 GMT

I should be allowed to rule the world, then such contests would not be needed. I would pool the worlds resources to get fusion power going, and get our rears out in space. I can't wait for second generation fusion... helium 3 is awesome! gives us a reason to go to the moon.. and even to jupiter! We can fit Mars in there too ;^)

Google funds $30 million moon prize

Ed, Denver, Co — Thu, 13 Sep 2007 19:14:24 GMT

Let's see a couple of weeks ago NASA was concerned about a small tile on the space shuttle and possibly causing disastrous consequences on re-entry. So, how am I to believe that we went to the moon in space suits that are no thicker than aluminum foil. PLEASE!!

Google funds $30 million moon prize

Kurt, Lansing, MI — Thu, 13 Sep 2007 19:21:32 GMT

Frank and Paul,

You've both been watching too much TV and reading Conspiracy Theory drivel. We did land on the moon -- otherwise just how did we place the retroreflectors still used today to measure the moons distance to the earth (using lasers)? We spend way too much time and energy dealing with you people on the internet. Get a life.

Google funds $30 million moon prize

Kurt, Lansing, MI — Thu, 13 Sep 2007 19:23:21 GMT

By the way, Frank and Paul -- just so you don't think I'm making it up -- here's an interesting link to the retroreflectors I was referring to....

http://www.spacetoday.org/SolSys/
Moons/TheMoon/LunarDistance.html

Google funds $30 million moon prize

Bob Oliver Bigellow XLII, Monterey, CA — Thu, 13 Sep 2007 19:27:22 GMT

Paul, Current space shuttles are made to particular specifications. These specifications do not include going to the moon, landing, and coming back. Just because I make a ham sandwich does not mean I am not capable of making a peanut butter sandwich. When the goal was to get to the moon, there was the great race to get to the moon. Once we got there, we changed our goals and stopped trying to get to the moon. Just because we aren't going to the moon today doesn't mean it's because we never had the technology, we just aren't spending the money in that area. Times are changing, and now we are going back to the moon.

I would love it if a private group can get to the moon first and beam back video of the evidence we did, in fact, land on the moon... to silence these conspiracy theories once and for all.

Google funds $30 million moon prize

Francis Schlimmer — Thu, 13 Sep 2007 19:31:22 GMT

Uh the shuttle could go as far as their supplies of oxygen and food would last. Just send it on a trajectory to the moon and it will get there and back. Its not as hard as you think. Once your free from the earth gravity you can go anywhere you want. The only technological hurdle after that is adequate life support which we obviously had at the time since Russians stayed in orbit for weeks. Unless they faked that too. The only reason they didn't go was because the rocket they designed for the job was a failure and they lacked the funding and resolve to start over after we had already done it.

Google funds $30 million moon prize

JP — Thu, 13 Sep 2007 19:31:38 GMT

Interesting...

Google funds $30 million moon prize

Nighan, Rochester, NY — Thu, 13 Sep 2007 19:31:43 GMT

Another worthless piece of techno-grandstanding with no practical application and a significant chance for the destruction of life and property. Do we REALLY need a bunch of rocket scientist wannabes attempting to throw a payload into space and instead crashing it into a housing development or on a school 500 miles away?

Google should be prevented by the courts or by Congress from encouraging such a project.

Google funds $30 million moon prize

Youve Gottobekiddingme — Thu, 13 Sep 2007 19:33:30 GMT

What a freakin' waste of money. Why not donate it to chairty instead? We've been there, done that and haven't been back since. Why? Because there's nothing there.

Google funds $30 million moon prize

Ronnie, TX — Thu, 13 Sep 2007 19:33:38 GMT

To Frank from NY: "Man did not land on the moon in the 60's. That's impossible... We barely had color TV back then."

Is that statement supposed to pass for some form of logic? Who made color TV a standard for exploration? People crossed the Atlantic Ocean in sailing ships to settle the Americas without color TV. They crossed the American wilderness in horse-drawn wagons without color TV. The Germans launched suborbital rockets in the 1940's without the benefit of color TV. And believe it or not, my family used to hop in the car and drive five hours to my grandparents' house long before we had a color TV. Amazing! Man has accomplished many seemingly impossible tasks with minimal technology. Actually, if we spent less time worshiping our color TVs, maybe we would have had settlements on the moon today.

PAul Nick...How about studying your technologies? We don't use game boy's to go to the moon. By your logic airplanes can't fly because trucks can only go 80 or so miles per hour. What does one have to do with the other? The space shuttle is a truck. It is designed to only go to low earth orbit because it hauls material to low earth orbit. The Saturn V was designed to lift payloads to the moon. Trucks deliver packages, jets fly to tens of thousands of feet and thousands of miles per hour...different technologies for different missions. Is that so hard to understand? Don't limit others by your own lack of vision. Get a vision for what's possible!

Google funds $30 million moon prize

Bill R, Columbia, MO — Thu, 13 Sep 2007 19:38:03 GMT

Paul:

So you think it would have been easier to orchestrate a conspiracy among a few hundred thousand people (remember, all of the contractors would have had to play along), create a perfect vacuum inside a warehouse and somehow reduce earth's gravity to 1/6 of normal for filming? All without CGI, since, as you say, we didn't have anything more powerful than a gameboy then.

I think going to the moon was easier than faking it would have been.

Google funds $30 million moon prize

Bruce G., Charlottesville, VA — Thu, 13 Sep 2007 19:40:21 GMT

"Man did not land on the moon in the 60's. That's impossible... We barely had color TV back then."

Also, Columbus did not discover American in 1492, because they barely had gunpowder back then.

Same logic, right?

Those hoax-believers -- you could fly to the moon and give them guided tours of all the landing sites, and they'd still say they were all planted as part of the coverup. There is no way to falsify their beliefs based on actual evidence.

Google funds $30 million moon prize

Astonished — Thu, 13 Sep 2007 19:42:39 GMT

People actually believe that the moon landing is an elaborate hoax? LOL. The US government would have spent more money on keeping the truth under wraps than they would had they just spent the money and get it done.

Paul,
I think it's Newton's law that states that a body in motion will continue to stay in motion. It doesn't take much to keep a ship going 239,000 miles in space. God, why am I even trying to convince you? You'r obviously not all there.

Google funds $30 million moon prize

kumi — Thu, 13 Sep 2007 19:46:12 GMT

I can't believe that people still think we never went to the moon. I see dumb people they're everywhere.

Google funds $30 million moon prize

Jack Handy — Thu, 13 Sep 2007 19:52:13 GMT

Paul, the Space Shuttle is used for repeat flights. A one-time shot to the moon is a totally different proposition, so your logic doesn't really work. I wonder what the appeal is to believing in these conspiracy theories. Maybe you could help explain that, rather than posting nonsense?

Google funds $30 million moon prize

Thu, 13 Sep 2007 19:56:00 GMT

Paul / Frank

Do some research on the Saturn Five rockets used during the Apollo missions. They had an approximate payload capacity of 260,000 pounds. The Space Shuttles capacity is ~50,000 pounds. Yes - we can only travel 300-400 miles into space now because the shuttle was not designed for that kind of mission.

Google funds $30 million moon prize

Matt, California — Thu, 13 Sep 2007 19:59:44 GMT

Paul...Space shuttles only go into orbit because that is their mission. We have a probe that is currently exiting the farthest edge of the solar system...that is it's mission. Anyone who thinks we did not go to the moon either cannot comprehend the task or is choosing to live in a different reality.

Google funds $30 million moon prize

yehadut, New York, NY — Thu, 13 Sep 2007 20:03:28 GMT

I appreciate the gesture, but a lunar rover? How uninspiring is that. It's no "human on Mars" kind of thing. But, hey, baby steps I guess.

Google funds $30 million moon prize

Paul Nink — Thu, 13 Sep 2007 20:10:27 GMT

We killed 14 people on the Spaceshuttles only going up 300-400 miles, yet we're supposed to believe we went to ANOTHER WORLD(100000% farther away) 40 years ago with no loss of life????

Does science go backwards in your world??? If you believe this illogical propaganda you are a moron.

Google funds $30 million moon prize

Paul Nink — Thu, 13 Sep 2007 20:16:55 GMT

The Russians have a laser reflector yet they don't even claim to have sent a manned mission to the Moon. They put it up there with an unmanned probe called Lunokhod.

LASER REFLECTOR = NO PROOF OF MAN ON MOON

Google funds $30 million moon prize

Bill, San Diego,CA — Thu, 13 Sep 2007 20:19:22 GMT

Kumi - so true.
I do understand a little why Frank and Paul believe this. The US government has been keeping some information about the moon top secret. Some people come to the conclusion that the lack of information means it is fake. They have not released the hi-res pictures from the 1994 Clementine mission. Does not make sense. Every NASA related web site either does not have them or the hi-res are all corrupted. I have checked. Here is one link if you are curious. http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/mission_index.html

NASA did land on the moon, but after 40 years, what could be on the moon that they would want to keep secret?

I predict that somehow they will cancel the contest or they will limit the landing area for the rover.

Google funds $30 million moon prize

Mike, Miami, FL — Thu, 13 Sep 2007 20:23:27 GMT

Maybe we did maybe we didn't... the way people are bashing Paul/Frank it seems as if they are very insecure with this (almost like screaming "I AM NOT GAY" to hide the fact you are). Remember - when someone is that adamant - it is because they have doubts - I think we most likely did but there are a couple areas of concern for me (the rippling of the flag w/ no atmosphere, no stars on the pictures) but I think there probably could be an answer for this and it would have been really hard to fake - who knows - I would love to see us go back and prove everybody right (or wrong)

Google funds $30 million moon prize

Ronnie, TX — Thu, 13 Sep 2007 20:24:29 GMT

The Saturn V!...sigh...oh for the good ol' days! I've always regretted not making it to the Cape to see one of those babies go. I'm going to see Aries and Orion or die in the attempt! But now the Apollo generation of astronauts and engineers is passing, and the parting gift we give them for their achievements and risks is to accuse them of being fakes and liars. We used to respect and admire the trail blazers. Now we try to reduce them to our own pusillanimous mentality. I guess that's the way we compensate for our own lack of vision and accomplishment...reduce others to our own level. How many people of real accomplishment ever claim that man did not go to the moon?

As for the Google prize...more power to them. Fortunately, people of vision will never be held back by the unbelievers.

Google funds $30 million moon prize

Dave, Kansas City, MO — Thu, 13 Sep 2007 20:28:12 GMT

How did the astronauts survive the Van Allen radiation belts then? I also do not believe we were capable of landing on the moon in 1969. They can get live video feed from the moon in 1969 but I can't get a good cell signal while driving around the city???? ;)

Google funds $30 million moon prize

Alan Boyle — Thu, 13 Sep 2007 20:28:25 GMT

Gang, astronomer/blogger Phil Plait has put together the classic collection of info debunking the "moon hoax" claims:

http://www.badastronomy.com/bad/tv/foxapollo.html

Hope this helps ... By the way, John Carmack said a team would probably require multiple attempts to put a rover on the moon successfully. "I completely do not believe in 'make it absolutely perfect the first time.'" He said the only way you could do that is if you devoted a significant percentage of the country's gross domestic product to a space program ... like folks did back in the '60s.

Google funds $30 million moon prize

Mike Maxwell, Laurel MD — Thu, 13 Sep 2007 20:30:18 GMT

People, let's ignore the conspiracy theorists. They're too dumb to convince.

On a different topic--once the rovers have driven their required 500 meters, how about selling rights to drive them remotely? I would think lots of people would pay to do that. Driving a lunar rover remotely is not as difficult as driving a Mars rover, because the moon and back is only two or three light seconds, remember the voice lag in Apollo? (Oops, I wasn't going to bring that up...)

Google funds $30 million moon prize

Paul Nink — Thu, 13 Sep 2007 20:32:38 GMT

Phil Plait is a PAID NASA EMPLOYEE. Real impartial there!!!!!

Google funds $30 million moon prize

reasonable skeptic — Thu, 13 Sep 2007 20:36:03 GMT

What would make people believe that we went there before if we went now? Would it not be just as disputed? How thick do you think a spacesuit or craft needs to be to stop radiation other than gamma? The fact is people had more chutzpah back a half a century ago. They would do things they knew might kill them because they believed they were furthering science. Madame Currie knew radiation was killing her, but she did it anyway. The Namby-Pamby Babysitter state mentality did not exist at the level it does today. We,as a species, were able to not worried about whether our favorite TV show would be canceled...guess you got us there Frank, when color TV went into full swing, and put most of America on the couch to watch fiction instead of read it....you know, fiction, like how the moon landings were faked!

Google funds $30 million moon prize

Ronnie, TX — Thu, 13 Sep 2007 20:36:59 GMT

Mike in Miami,
Poor logic again. Vehement argumentation does not imply doubt. Many great apologists have had to propound their point with great vigor to pierce the unbelief of the ignorant and shortsighted. Thomas Paine comes to mind. There are those to whom the preservation of truth is so dear that they will dare to raise their voices above the din of ignorance.

Google funds $30 million moon prize

S. E. Ward, Broken Arrow, OK — Thu, 13 Sep 2007 20:37:46 GMT

The outpatients are out in force tonight, I see.

1. We went to the Moon. We came back. Now? We want to go again, colour TV or no colour TV. (I'm sure the ancient Chinese had colour TV when they laid the foundations of rocket technology.)

2. Going into space is a good thing. Colonies on other worlds, especially the Moon, are good things. Why? Because humans are numerous and prone to increasing those numbers, and room to spread out would be nice. Hell, if anyone's worried about the stability of full-blown lunar colonies, then turn the Moon into an industrial park. Shipping costs would be painful for a while, but there's no atmosphere to pollute. A lunar landing could be the first step toward moving all of the problems industrial pollution to a place where, really, it wouldn't be as much of a problem.

3. Since when have humans been content to sit still and take what we're given? It's time to move out. We've got the technology. We've certainly got the wealth. It's high time we went back to exploring the universe beyond orbit. Frankly, right now, we're just wandering the street outside our parents' garage, trying to decide whether or not we should look into getting an apartment.

Google funds $30 million moon prize

brian, atlanta,ga — Thu, 13 Sep 2007 20:38:18 GMT

Anything to avoid paying a dividend! Billions of free cash flow every quarter, and no dividend. How does this help shareholders? Typical tech stock scam. These jokers think the company exists for their personal egos and not to pay cash flows to shareholders.

Google funds $30 million moon prize

Ronnie, TX — Thu, 13 Sep 2007 20:44:06 GMT

Alan,
"By the way, John Carmack said a team would probably require multiple attempts to put a rover on the moon successfully. "I completely do not believe in 'make it absolutely perfect the first time.'" He said the only way you could do that is if you devoted a significant percentage of the country's gross domestic product to a space program ... like folks did back in the '60s."

That is precisely what is needed today. This slim budgeted "never make a mistake" mentality is slowing manned flight to a crawl.

Google funds $30 million moon prize

John, Detroit, MI — Thu, 13 Sep 2007 20:44:36 GMT

If it sounds too good to be true..... it most likely is. The 60's were a different time with different views on international politics. The older generation truly believes they landed on the moon because their generation accomplished this great feat and they get quite angry if you question it. Looking back it is fairly obvious that it was just not possible. We would be hard pressed to do today what they claim to have done so easily back then. The 'moon landing' was meant to demonstrate US superiority over Russia and drive the US economy.

Google funds $30 million moon prize

Ronnie, TX — Thu, 13 Sep 2007 20:46:31 GMT

To Paul Nink..never studied history either, huh? You owe a big apology to the three Apollo astronauts who died.

Google funds $30 million moon prize

Colleen Corr — Thu, 13 Sep 2007 20:46:57 GMT

'The Greatest Generation' = The Sucker Generation for believing this Apollo crap!

Google funds $30 million moon prize

Mike Maxwell, Laurel MD — Thu, 13 Sep 2007 20:48:13 GMT

Nuts (pun intended), I have to comment:

Nink says that Phil Plait is a paid NASA employee, and that that prevents him from being impartial.

And I say, so what? The arguments are valid, even if the Man in the Moon came up with them.

Google funds $30 million moon prize

Dave, Chicago, IL — Thu, 13 Sep 2007 20:53:00 GMT

This X-prize is a great step forward for commercial space dev and for the World. But never underestimate the intelligence of the American public. Freedom to think as you like is a necessary thing, even if the result is occasionally a 'Frank' or 'Paul'. I respect their right to a voice... however, it doesn't mean we should have to defend ourselves to the scum of the earth who never bothered to learn how to use their frontal lobes. The government needs to and will keep their fat hands out of this. This is still America.

Google funds $30 million moon prize

PDC Milan, OH — Thu, 13 Sep 2007 20:53:45 GMT

Uncle Sam will stop this dream from happening... There was a movie kinda like this with Billy Bob Thorton and the government tried to stop him in that!... WE LIVE IN AMERICA PEOPLE! We're only allowed to do what the government says we're allowed to do!

Google funds $30 million moon prize

h Chattaway, Ashby, MA — Thu, 13 Sep 2007 20:59:27 GMT

Oh, Please... "we did not go to the moon..." the fact the Russians believed we did is good enough for me. The competition keeps you honest. If Diet Pepsi had 5 calories in it, you'd be hearing about it from Coke.

Besides the government is incapable of keeping this kind of secret. The government can't keep a blow job in the oval office a secret or virtually anything about our national security private in todays administration. No way would thousands of contractors be kept quiet over the years. And the moon hardware was easily trackable via radar, which you can be the Russians were doing...

Google funds $30 million moon prize

Mike, Miami, FL — Thu, 13 Sep 2007 21:03:16 GMT

Ronnie - what are you talking about. Paine was fighting for many many worthwhile things - this is just a little chat of people saying - yes we did or no we didn't - neither side can prove the other person wrong - (yet) - if you are fighting for a cause I agree with you completely. When you are trying to just prove someone wrong just because - I believe there are some insecurities there.

Google funds $30 million moon prize

Derek Meche — Thu, 13 Sep 2007 21:03:21 GMT

I am all for the private sector furthering space exploration. I grew up watching the Apollo missions and I thought that by now we surely would have at least a manned research facility on the moon.

In my opinion the aerospace industry and NASA need to develope and perfect a totally reusable system to give us cheap, reliable access to low earth orbit. Either a SSTO or tandem craft like Space Ship One is what is really needed to jump start real private sector space exploration.

I suppose that would put a dent in the rocket makers pocket book, but you don't see many buggy makers around now do you!

The choices are progress or stagnation. Which will we choose?

Google funds $30 million moon prize

Alexey — Thu, 13 Sep 2007 21:05:58 GMT

How about something like this for energy generation/storage/transmission? Burning things is getting old.

Google funds $30 million moon prize

Ronnie, TX — Thu, 13 Sep 2007 21:06:24 GMT

Isn't it amazing how people who are too young to have experienced a part of history know so much more about it than those who were there and lived it?

This is the television generation. They can't think logically enough to test the facts and learn the truth.

Google funds $30 million moon prize

Not for you to know. — Thu, 13 Sep 2007 21:06:25 GMT

How come we can send a robot to mars and not the moon? Now that doesn't make sense. On the other hand maybe there isn't a robot on mars...

Who knows. We might not ever know sense the government keeps hiding stuff.

Google funds $30 million moon prize

d, NY — Thu, 13 Sep 2007 21:06:38 GMT

Excuse me, but don't they already have a rover on Mars, sending pix back to earth? What's the big deal? Has Google Googoofed?

Google funds $30 million moon prize

Derek Meche — Thu, 13 Sep 2007 21:10:37 GMT

To all you "nattering, naybobs of negativism" who belive we did not or should not go BACK to the moon, here are some words of wisdom from one of our former presidents.

"It is not the critic who counts: not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles or where the doer of deeds could have done better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood, who strives valiantly, who errs and comes up short again and again, because there is no effort without error or shortcoming, but who knows the great enthusiasms, the great devotions, who spends himself for a worthy cause; who, at the best, knows, in the end, the triumph of high achievement, and who, at the worst, if he fails, at least he fails while daring greatly, so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who knew neither victory nor defeat."
"Citizenship in a Republic,"
Speech at the Sorbonne, Paris, April 23, 1910

Theodore Roosevelt server way before rockets or moon landings when even the airplane was in it's infancy. He was not talking about space exploration in this speech. He was talking about the human spirit. The kind of spirit space exploration nourishes. The kind of spirit this country NEEDS!!

Google funds $30 million moon prize

John Mayo — Thu, 13 Sep 2007 21:19:01 GMT

Anyone who thinks we have already been to the moon is a moron.
The film would not survive the temperature fluctuations on the moon.
The "Moon Rover" would not fit in the capsule.
Why have the drawings for the "Moon Rover" disappeared?
The drawings (if valid) belong in the Smithsonian.
Why are there no pictures of the earth from the moon.
Why in the world would the astronauts NOT have taken such a picture?
The "Moon Photos" are obviously staged.
The "Moon Video" when speed up (back to narmal speed)looks like a few guys jumping around the Nevada desert in "Moon Suits" at night.
Why is the flag on the Moon waving since there is no atmosphere?
How did the astronauts take such good photos with cameras that had no viewfinders and were mounted to their chests?
Why didn't the Van Allen radiation belts affect the astronauts?
Why did so many Astronauts die of suspicious circumstances in the late 1960's?
Has anyone seen the footage of the Astronauts on training missions? They were successful about 10% of the time. Why were the "real missions" always perfect? How is that possible?
Why haven't we (the US Government) returned since?
Oh, the technology in the private sector would easily track the NASA spacecraft, so perpetuating a fraud is impossible.
Shouldn't the 2007 technology that NASA has make it far easier to go to the Moon? If NASA could go to the Moon with 1969 technology, why not today?
Why is there no burned area beneath the capsule as it sits on the Moon? (Oh, no atmospere, that's right). Now again, on that waving flag?

Google funds $30 million moon prize

Bill G, Trabuco Canyon, CA — Thu, 13 Sep 2007 21:21:03 GMT

How about offering a link to an LCD display on the rover that could be seen via camera. People could pay a little to type and see their message displayed on the moon. Kick part of the collected fees back to fund the next x-prize.

Google funds $30 million moon prize

Ronnie, TX — Thu, 13 Sep 2007 21:22:30 GMT

Mike,
Are YOU just trying to prove someone wrong "just because?" If so, please don't waste my time. This is more than just a chat. These types of "chats" in revolutionary America helped to determine the beginning steps for the establishment of the United States. Issues like these (and the public opinion concerning them...informed or otherwise) help to set the course of policy for the future. Since I am obliged to live under that policy, I would prefer that they be based upon fact, not fantasy. My children and their children will be living under the policies set by a generation that can't discern the reality about a major human endeavor only a few decades old. Insecure? you bet that makes me insecure! The fight for the truth is of paramount importance regardless of the battlefield.

Google funds $30 million moon prize

Bhupal De, Kirkland, WA — Thu, 13 Sep 2007 21:24:04 GMT

This is a truly fabulous idea, I think other tech giants need to chip in and help the cause. Way to Google. I agree with the suggestion that private people should be able to fund it as well.

The only other suggestion I may have is, they can setup a commitee to oversee progress from various initiatives and fund them as they go. This would help progress the cause for smaller organizations who are cash strapped for such development work.

Google funds $30 million moon prize

Pierre Hostettler, San Juan, PR — Thu, 13 Sep 2007 21:24:39 GMT

Just one question to this great idea: From which countries can competitors be expected?

Google funds $30 million moon prize

newbie — Thu, 13 Sep 2007 21:24:58 GMT

I've seen both sides of whether or not we've been to the moon & honestly don't know whether or not we went or not. Why, because media can give you compelling evidence to support either claim. Having seen most of the evidence, all I know is we believe way too much of what we are told. And to the guy who stated that the other guy probably believes Aliens built the pyramid, I'm convinced humans didn't have the technology to build them. I'm not talking about the weight of the stones (although that couldn't be done), I"m talking about the degree of accuracy on the blocks. See Christopher Dunn's research. Don't want to get too carried away. Glad Google's doing this!!

Google funds $30 million moon prize

H. Alley, NC — Thu, 13 Sep 2007 21:27:08 GMT

And we need to return to the moon for what reason? It's a hunk of rock...we've been there already. Don't get me wrong...I'm a true space fanatic. Have been since the Mercury program but I think it would be wiser for Google to spend that 30 million on any one of the problems we have here on earth? Just think what that money might do or might help cure.

Google funds $30 million moon prize

John D. Stack Sr.Lodi, Ca. — Thu, 13 Sep 2007 21:32:11 GMT

$30 Million on moon project? Why not start here on earth and solve the fuel problems we have HERE? Why the MOON when we have so many problems with fuel here on earth. How about a Deisel truck that gets 50 miles to a gallon of fuel? That would save the trucking industry and all of us millions of REAL dollars. How about a car that gets 100 miles to a gallon? Or another kind of fuel thats renewable and cheap? The MOON? GOOGLE has too many egg heads and no real people running that company. Solve the problems here on earth first.

Google funds $30 million moon prize

Ilya, Boston, MA — Thu, 13 Sep 2007 21:33:14 GMT

"How did the astronauts survive the Van Allen radiation belts then?"

Short exposure. One hour trip through Van Allen belts is well above OSHA safety standards, but is hardly fatal. For that matter, radiation levels in it are well known, and communication companies make shielding for their satellites based on that information. If Van Allen belts were as lethal as conspiracy theorists seem to believe, every geosynchronous comsat would fry within a day.

"I also do not believe we were capable of landing on the moon in 1969. They can get live video feed from the moon in 1969 but I can't get a good cell signal while driving around the city????"

Your cell phone does not have several redundant 70-meter antennas.

Google funds $30 million moon prize

Ronnie, TX — Thu, 13 Sep 2007 21:37:11 GMT

Here's an interesting question...
Why would anyone WANT to believe that people did not go to the moon. Why would anyone want to remove such a great part of the human cultural and scientific heritage?

Concerning the Google prize: I look forward to seeing what young America can do. If the young people I have met are any example, getting back to the moon will be just a quick stop on their way to far greater challenges.

Google funds $30 million moon prize

Alan Boyle — Thu, 13 Sep 2007 21:39:23 GMT

I should have made more clear in the original item that $30 million for a lunar rover landing would represent a significant reduction in the cost. NASA says putting seven Surveyor landers on the moon cost $469 million, for an average cost of $67 million per lander. That's in 1960s-era dollars, and it's just for landing, not for roving (autonomous roving capability on another world wasn't put to the test until Mars Pathfinder in 1997, I believe). The reduced cost is more important, in the long term, than the mere fact that the missions would be privately founded.

http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/database/MasterCatalog?sc=1966-045A

Google funds $30 million moon prize

Pyro3k — Thu, 13 Sep 2007 21:46:01 GMT

"How did the astronauts survive the Van Allen radiation belts then? I also do not believe we were capable of landing on the moon in 1969. They can get live video feed from the moon in 1969 but I can't get a good cell signal while driving around the city???? ;) "

Unreal what people will say. If you even had an inkling about radio you would learn that at ULF and VLF frequencies transmitted at 30W transmitting goes a lot farther than your puny cell phone transmitting at 1.9 GHz at less than half a Watt.

Google funds $30 million moon prize

S.P. Wiliams, Lakewood, CO — Thu, 13 Sep 2007 21:46:35 GMT

Gosh, for $30 million, you could clean the space debris out of Earth's orbit; or bring fresh water to everyone in Latin America; or inoculate African children against some of the killer diseases there; or...well, you get the point. Instead of this or even Steve Fosset's adventurous travails, they could have joined the Gates' efforts on education or alternative energy entrepreneurs. What a waste.

Google funds $30 million moon prize

ken, Knoxville, tn — Thu, 13 Sep 2007 21:46:58 GMT

My grandmother passed in 1975, she was born before the turn of the century. As a kid I sat in her lap and heard her talk about going from N.C. to AL in a covered wagon. By the time she died, she had watched man walk on the moon.

To get to the moon between 1962 and 1969 (dates Kennedy set the direction) we had to invent over a million things - but we did. Providing money to these programs - IS building our future.....

Google funds $30 million moon prize

Youve Gottobekiddingme — Thu, 13 Sep 2007 21:47:56 GMT

To those of you that are actually taking the "it's a hoax" comments seriously: Thye're pulling your leg and you're falling for it... Everyone just keeps chiming in on it because they see how fired-up it gets you geeks.

On a serious note: No one has posted a compelling arguement for why we need to be in space in the first place. There's nothing there.
Colonies on the moon? Are you serious S. E. Ward? Do you really desire to live on the moon?
Really?
No: seriously now.

Google funds $30 million moon prize

Frank Glover — Thu, 13 Sep 2007 21:48:00 GMT

"Our current spaceshuttles can only go 300-400 miles into space CURRENTLY. How the hell are we supposed to believe that we went 239,000 miles(100000% farther) in 1969 with less technology than a game boy? Ridiculous!!!!"

Um, there are CARS with more mileage than that (almost half that on my own), without benefit of merely coasting through vacuum (can you get more benign than that?), but enduring friction, wear, tear and weather down here. What's your point?

http://articles.moneycentral.msn.com/SavingandDebt/SaveonaCar/CarsThatLastAMillionMiles.aspx

You accept that unmanned devices have gone there, yet humans haven't. This is like believing in trains, but not passenger cars.

I guess Magellan couldn't possibly have circumnavigated the Earth without GPS, either. (Sextant? What's that?)

h Chattaway is right, too. If the Soviets believed we'd faked it, and they could prove it, that would have been the greatest propaganda coup of all time. Yet they never so much as hinted it was phony. There's utterly no way they would have cut us any slack on that.

Of course, when we do get back to the Moon and visit some of the Apollo locations, someone will surely claim we placed it all there recently... (never mind that the very act of getting back there would undercut most of their arguments)

Disclaimer: I am not and have never been employed by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, though I did visit the Johnson Space Center once, and know a non-NASA employee there [who was only three, in 1969])

Just tell me when the round trip Lunar tickets come down into my price range, please.

Google funds $30 million moon prize

Floyd Hoopper, Minot, N D — Thu, 13 Sep 2007 21:50:22 GMT

To Paul,

No deaths? Tell that to Gus Grissom and his crew.

Google funds $30 million moon prize

John Doe, Seattle, Wash. — Thu, 13 Sep 2007 21:52:13 GMT

You people are so gullible. The folks here who are saying "we never went the the moon" are yanking your collective chains! They're "messin' wit ya", as it were. Can't you see that?

Google funds $30 million moon prize

AJ — Thu, 13 Sep 2007 21:52:47 GMT

For all those that don't have a doubt, about us going to the moon in the 60's, our government can cover up almost anything. Proof: do we know what really happened in area 51, the Kennedy assassination, how the CIA said there were WMD in Iraq and we can't find them. Why hasn't top secret information hit the news yet? Simple the government will assassinate/torture/kill anyone that will spread this information. If the geneva convention, outlaws tortue, why did Bush need to define it when we all know what it really is? Can you say loophole.
Our government is an evil and anytime the government can herd the masses they will do it. The freedom of information act should make anything thats 5 years old free to the public. Until our government is truely transparent, we will always have to fear its power.

Google funds $30 million moon prize

Paul Nink — Thu, 13 Sep 2007 21:54:53 GMT

asking why the russians didn't reveal the apollo hoaxes is like asking why the russians didn't reveal who killed jfk.

a. they probably don't know themselves
or
b. they wouldn't want to start a diplomatic foodfight with the usa exposing their dirty laundry in return

incidentally, the ussr didn't have the means to track NASA flights until 1973, after Apollo program had ended.

Google funds $30 million moon prize

Pyro3k — Thu, 13 Sep 2007 21:55:03 GMT

Hmmm.. A half a Watt transmitter broadcasting at 1.9 GHz to a tower site probably more than a mile away because people always b&m about how ugly a cell site would look close through buildings, trees, smog. vs. a 30W transmitter at ULF frequencies to dishes 30 to 60 meters in size traveling through free space which has very little loss. Does that explain why they could communicate back then

Google funds $30 million moon prize

Jen H — Thu, 13 Sep 2007 22:06:26 GMT

Intersting - very interesting.

So, Google's willing to throw $30 millon in to get 500 feet worth of footage.

Am I missing something?

Sure, it's cool. It's just sad that corporate America decides to tackle a challenge like this rather than something useful. Who's going to remember the Google landing 50-100 years from now?

I say, take the money and give out microloans to small startups across the country - to benefit the economy. Or reward someone who perfects a transportation system without oil - to benefit the environment. I'm ranting, but is anyone else thinking that this project is a big ol' waste of time and resources?

Google funds $30 million moon prize

Mak Merlo — Thu, 13 Sep 2007 22:11:54 GMT

Stanley Kubrick was involved in the first faking (Apollo 11).

Google funds $30 million moon prize

jay Albright — Thu, 13 Sep 2007 22:13:53 GMT

"Color (of any kind) wasn't invented until the late 60's, which is why they were much better suited for going to the moon than we are today." by Rob

I guess you weren't born until after the early 70's. I always got a kick watching the Flintstones, Johnny Quest, Disney and other programs in COLOR around the mid-60's. I not sure where you're getting your information that color didn't start until the late 60's.

Google funds $30 million moon prize

Gus Grissom, Graveyard! — Thu, 13 Sep 2007 22:14:58 GMT

What technology was 1000x better in 1969 then NOW?

apparently manned space flight. Sounds illogical.

Google funds $30 million moon prize

Tom Smith, Texas — Thu, 13 Sep 2007 22:26:54 GMT

We can't stop people from ruining this planet and now we want to go and ruin another. The order of mankind must first be controlled before the order of the good of mankind is allowed to move forward.

Google funds $30 million moon prize

Brian, Burlington Vermont — Thu, 13 Sep 2007 22:27:24 GMT

Why a 30 million dollar prize to return back to the mooon and not put that money into cheap gas, curing disease, and so on.
Every advancement we now enjoy has mostly trickled down to us by the advancement of better space technologies. This 30 million dollar investment back to the moon means far greater advancements for us back here. The discovery of cleaner fuels, better techs, and furthering scientific knowledge.
Whether we landed or not, I am a not. The idea of having had acomplished it has pushed our society so much further just by the confidence it has provided our people.
This is a Great proposal at a much needed time in history. Lets do it! ( or do it again... )

Google funds $30 million moon prize

Juan — Thu, 13 Sep 2007 22:32:08 GMT

Make the moon an industrial zone to relief the Earth from all of our pollutants? What?? Dream on!

The Lord created the universe for us to enjoy...the sky an all its stars for us to SEE..., not to go visit!

Google funds $30 million moon prize

John, Chicago — Thu, 13 Sep 2007 22:32:36 GMT

Hey Guys, We went to the moon. We're going back with an Apollo design "on Steroids" and I'm hoping to witness that too. I believe we're headed to Mars by 2030 or 2035 and Lord willing, I'll even see that as well. What a time to be given the gift of life!

Stay well,

John

Google funds $30 million moon prize

Paul Nink — Thu, 13 Sep 2007 22:35:27 GMT

Imagine working at NASA and actually believing something as ridiculous and illogical as saying our MANNED SPACE TECHNOLOGY WAS 1000x better mileage-wise 40 YEARS AGO!!!!!

Google funds $30 million moon prize

Ivan Delgado — Thu, 13 Sep 2007 22:39:54 GMT

There is no doubt we went to the moon back then. What is regrettable is that we did not carry on with the space exploration momentum, by focusing our efforts on low-earth orbit projects (outside looking in) instead of developing the technology for the next step=manned mars missions. Over 40 years later, our moon astronauts are very old men, many have passed away already, and we are still circling the earth, and it will take us over 5 years to get back to the moon, with all of our supposedly advanced technology, in a capsule and rocket very much like the Apollo! (that's how right they got it bachk then!!). And the biggest ignominy; a capsule that will land by parachute! Isn't this totally embarassing?

Google funds $30 million moon prize

Bill Craig — Thu, 13 Sep 2007 22:40:22 GMT

To Paul, AJ, et al,
You had me going there for a while. Nice try but no one actually believes our moon program was a hoax. It sure whips people into a frenzy though when people start saying it. It was good for a laugh. It reminds me of when people say that they get up at 2 AM to change the clocks for switching to/from daysight saving time and some people actually believe them. Keep posting, I love to read the incensed replies.

Google funds $30 million moon prize

Z9-_. — Thu, 13 Sep 2007 22:42:52 GMT

A few points:

1) As I recall, many astronauts who did go to the moon later died of cancer (but not all of them), which is at least indirect evidence that they flew through or near the Van Allen Belts and got zapped quite a bit. Remember, there is typically a 20- to 30-year 'incubation period' between when a sub-fatal cause of cancer is experienced until the cancer fully develops.

2) IMHO the greatest imperative for manned space exploration and eventual colonization is the human population explosion on earth -- exponential population growth on a fixed-size piece of real estate. Some say the New World Order plans are for wars and plagues to devastate populations on earth to well below a billion but that reveals their lack of vision: If it became fairly easy to migrate to space once pioneers perfected sustainable agriculture, etc. 'out there', then the material in the asteroid belt alone would provide an enormously larger 'real estate' area than the earth's surface! It is the preferred way to cheat and win despite the Malthusian Doctrine and, arguably, (though this terminology has strong negative connotations to some populations -- and I empathize with them in that) mankind's 'manifest destiny'!

3) Some think it irreligious or unGodly to 'invade space' but an obscure scripture in the old testament reveals that God would bring back His people from faraway places to which they became scattered. I believe this is, sort-of, an invitation from God to go ahead and live in space (perhaps as a safe haven against religious persecution) when that becomes technologically viable because God will not forget the pioneers doing that when He re-gathers the nations after the coming disastrous events prophecied for the end of the church age and ushering in the Millennium. Furthermore, arguably, the best type of people to first pioneer space are those good at very diligently obeying sets of principles that lead to the good of society (the Ten Commandments, etc.) because space will be such a delicate place to live in that virtually no breaches of proper behavior can be allowed lest the whole colony be endangered -- i.e. cutting a sizable hole in the covering that encloses the breathable atmosphere, letting it escape into space; compromising the mass between the colony and the sun, allowing too much cosmic radiation to irradiate the colonists; failing to save enough seed for the next crop; failure to properly time the exposure of the growing food to the sun (probably through clear bags of precious, clear pure water to allow visible light for photosynthesis while blocking too much UV and particle radiation); failure to maintain an adequate stock of materials, plans and machine tools, electronics parts, etc. to replicate any life-essential component of the colony that could fail and need to be quickly replaced before the next supply ship visit from afar, etc. Only the most well behaved and properly organized of colonists and colonies, including their children still being socialized, would survive these demands for careful daily planning and execution of survival needs far expanded compared with life on earth, at least for the earliest colonies housing whole growing families.

Though it is regretable that the United States 'winning the moon race' of the 1960s resulted in a hiatus of manned space exploration, as a first baby, baby step back into eventual manned exploration and even, hopefully, colonization of the moon, this private incentive to do something robotic on the moon to excite newer generations is, IMHO, very commendable!

Google funds $30 million moon prize

Tempest111, Brooklyn, NY — Thu, 13 Sep 2007 22:46:39 GMT

"On a serious note: No one has posted a compelling arguement for why we need to be in space in the first place. There's nothing there."

Helium 3. If nuclear fusion isnt a good enough reason i dont know what is.

Google funds $30 million moon prize

Jorge — Thu, 13 Sep 2007 22:48:57 GMT

I think we are destined to colonize space by the logics of population increase and technological development. This would be a great technological achievement but it is not necessarily a good thing for humanity. So far we have avoided the use of weapons of mass destruction by the threat of mutual assured destruction. Since we are all on the same planet and we cannot fight a war without destruying all the planet nobody was the first to launch an attack that would cause his own destruction. If Stalin had been in another planet I am sure he would have launch a nuclear attack and he would have happily watched the Earth burn. So far everybody have to recognize we only have one planet and we cannot destroy it unless we want to die with it, with space colonies the rules of the game change.

Google funds $30 million moon prize

nic "soonvapor", Orlando,FL — Thu, 13 Sep 2007 22:50:23 GMT

I believe "Paul Nink" is a "plant." (pun intended!) He is planted in this discussion to spark others into feeling a-paul-ed (another pun intended)that anyone would still think we have not landed on the moon. Yea Paul, good job! People are sounding off that we do need to go back. But we also need to start collecting H3 molecules which the moon dust proves is abundantly available all over the moon surface. H3 will feed our future "Fusion" reactors thus reducing the need for energy from other more damaging resources. Let's go America... Let's get-'er-done!

Google funds $30 million moon prize

Danny, Ignacio, CO — Thu, 13 Sep 2007 22:55:44 GMT

Hey Ronnie, I am with you! I want to catch one of those Ares 1 or Ares 5 launches when they happen!!! Yeah baby! Back to the Moon and On to Mars!!!

Google funds $30 million moon prize

charles — Thu, 13 Sep 2007 23:01:00 GMT

you all believe in the moon landing yet you weren't there. you saw it on tv. big deal. your world as you know it doesnt actually exist since your view is created by the media. do your own research on the moon landing and the political ramifications of it and your belief might get rocked. dont point your fingers and laugh. people thought the world was flat at one time and laughed at the ones who said "wait a minute, lets think about this"

Google funds $30 million moon prize

S. E. Ward, Broken Arrow, OK — Thu, 13 Sep 2007 23:26:42 GMT

You've: Yes.

Google funds $30 million moon prize

R. B. Chandler — Thu, 13 Sep 2007 23:31:29 GMT

I can think of a lot better things to do with 20 million. We already have an under funded space program we need to spend more money on.

I cannot believe the babble I'm reading here. We lost 3 good astronauts during the Saturn Missions and almost lost 3 more during Apollo 13. Saturn rockets did not fly anywhere near the number of missions the shuttles have nor were they as complex as the shuttles. The shuttles have had many more chances to screw up. For that matter we still haven't got airplanes down perfectly as they keep falling out of the sky from time to time too. Going into space is risky business. Risk nothing, gain nothing.

If you don't believe we went to the moon. Go find a really big telescope. We left a lot of damn junk up there that will or won't be there if we did or didn't land on the moon. Of course there are people who still believe the world is flat too.

Google funds $30 million moon prize

Jay, Redlands, California — Thu, 13 Sep 2007 23:42:58 GMT

The challenge of space flight is not technical. It is financial. It is easy to put together a program with off the shelf systems to get to the moon in a few months with no particular purpose once there. But not for $30M. These kinds of recent X prizes are not for being first, they are for being on the cheap. It would be better to offer the prize money to the first person who comes up with a proven business plan that shows how to make a profit on the trip commensurate with the risk. But what is really needed is a change to the "Outer Space Treaty" that would provide for some kind of homestead-like program that grants internationally recognized private property rights for being first to put moon real estate to some kind of use, certainly defined more broadly than in the old days. Maybe all that is required is to put down markers, with all area between markers no more than x meters apart then owned. If something like that occurs, we will see a real race to the moon.

Google funds $30 million moon prize

R. B. Chandler — Thu, 13 Sep 2007 23:49:03 GMT

~On a serious note: No one has posted a compelling arguement for why we need to be in space in the first place.~

Dude almost everything you enjoy right now is a product or by-product of the space program. The space program accelerated a lot of research all across the board. Think of what can be gained just trying to put a man on Mars. There are manufacturing processes that can only be done in 0gee. Certainly, we are much better off spending our money on space exploration than we are spending it on useless wars.

Google funds $30 million moon prize

Kevin danson, San Clemente CA — Fri, 14 Sep 2007 00:23:42 GMT

I think it's great that google is sponsoring a $30 million prize for this. It encourages innovation and creativity!

I'd like to suggest a similar contest for NAMING THE MOON. Our moon has no name! We simply call it it's generic name (the moon). There are over 100 moons in our solar system, all of which have names.

So don't you think it's about high time to name our own moon? Let's have a worldwide contest to do so!!!

Google funds $30 million moon prize

Doogie — Fri, 14 Sep 2007 00:34:39 GMT

The Apollo landings were an expensive and elaborate hoax, just like all the shuttle missions and the international space station. It's all a big hoax. Nobody even has rockets, let alone space ships.

Google funds $30 million moon prize

BOB,DET.,MI. — Fri, 14 Sep 2007 00:35:06 GMT

WY DO YOU PEOPLE GIVE CREDENCE TO PAUL AND FRANK
THEY JUST WANT ATTENTION AND ARE STEERING THE TOPIC
NOT A ROCKET

DID THE FIRST X-PRIZE DEVELOP ANY NEW TECHNOLOGY???

Google funds $30 million moon prize

james bargar obrien fl — Fri, 14 Sep 2007 00:38:43 GMT

technology advancement is great, but old tech is still amazing too. with 6 vacuum tubes and some voltage i can still listen to short-wave radio transmissions from half way across the planet, no connection required. don't knock old tech till you see it in action, newer isn't always the only way. the old apollo missions were brilliance in action, men had to think,(no calculators) not only did apollo happen but it happened with a slide-rule (ask grandpa what a slide-rule is). most every thing tech today is built on old-school smarts but made cheap and small.

Google funds $30 million moon prize

Erick, Ft. Lauderdale, FL — Fri, 14 Sep 2007 01:04:16 GMT

Portions of this 'debate' are extremely sad, and highly disappointing to me.
Although I will speak in generalizations for the most part, feel free to check the validity of my comments.
We, as a species, have records and evidence of both attempts and slowly advancing technology in the filed of rocket science from at least 100 B.C. Think about that. To assume the technology to achieve orbit did not exist in the 60's, after more than 2,000 years worth of effort, is ludicrous.
Computing technology is one of the largest core components of successfully launching, landing, and retrieving a space-going vessel. To say that the computers of the 60's were incapable of properly manipulating the required data for such a mission because they were less powerful than a Gameboy is a fallacy. The gameboy, just like modern cell phones, are simply smaller versions of older technology..like a RAZR vs. a cell phone from the 80's, which looked like bricks. Older computing systems are as capable of successfully crunching numbers as newer desktops...they were simply much, much larger - and much hotter. All simply a matter of components.
Once an object is launched into space it is almost as if it were thrown from a slingshot...the difficult part is slowing it down and guiding it. The whole concept of launch windows developed as a means to 'time' when it is appropriate to sling something into space so that it reaches a desired destination. That includes people.
The comment about astronauts not dying is incorrect - many gave their lives in the attempts to reach space. Google it if you must.
Next we come to radiation, a subject about which I am an expert. Know what the easiest and likely most available means to block alpha, beta, and gamma radiation resulting from a nuclear blast is? A human body. More effective is some really really high-tech material - water. Those big things called nuclear reactors use this 'advanced' technology for daily operations and radiation containment. The nuclear power industry got it's start in the 40's, btw, so I feel pretty confident believing that scientists were able to devise simple methods for protecting components and passengers from what, in reality, is minimal radiation exposure.
The biggest factor in respect to launching is actually heat - having something capable of withstanding the heat of ripping through the atmosphere. For that we use ceramics. That advanced technology has been around since at least 3000 B.C. We’ve only had about 5,000 years to perfect that aspect of a mission.
Looking back at the recent advances in technology, how can you possibly believe that industry was incapable of supporting a moon shot? Telephone technology was first used in the year 1900, the same year that Eastman-Kodak introduced the first mass production cameras. In 1901 shocks were developed for telescopes, allowing precision control and imaging, which is the same year that radio transmission technology came into existence. In 1902 the first building a/c was put in place, and in 1903 the first proof of liquid rocket fuel technology was shown. In 1904 we had the first diode, the year before we saw the special theory of relativity. Move forward a few years. The ability to function within a vaccum was sparked by someone who's name you may recognize - Benjamin Franklin.
The internet was theorized and work on it's creation began in 1962. Not in the 80's, as some seem to think. Look up packet switching technology.
I could go on, but the bottom line is that the modern technology for space missions has been developed and perfected, through trial and error, for about a hundred years.
Take that existing historical information, put behind it the will of the same people who mass produced 2000 Naval vessels and more than 100,000 airplanes in WWII alone. Place that determination and funding into properly tossing something from one point to another. Then bringing it back. Tough, but readily doable.
btw - the moon mission was not to another world - it was simply to our moon, a body locked into gravitational pull with our planet, which is essentially the house next door when compared to interstellar distances.
Read. Learn. Educate yourself on the subject matter, rather than mimicking things you've heard, and then come discuss the realities and truth of moon missions.

Google funds $30 million moon prize

Alan Boyle — Fri, 14 Sep 2007 01:12:42 GMT

Popular Mechanics' David Noland has already come out with "5 Reasons Nobody Will Win the Google Lunar X Prize" ...

http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/air_space/4222146.html?series=35

To my mind, if no one wins, there would be only one reason: money, or rather the lack thereof. Burt Rutan is indeed a genius, but he's not the only one in the world who can figure out how to land a rover on the moon. We all know it can be done, since it was done four decades ago. And we know it can be done in seven years or even five years, since again it was done that way four decades ago. I'd hate to think that we're so concerned about emissions that we can't send probes into space anymore (although some of the folks who have posted here might think so). In my mind, that leaves the money issue, plus the matter of whether people would feel sheepish spending the amount of money it would take. But what do you folks think?

Google funds $30 million moon prize

Erick, Ft. Lauderdale, FL — Fri, 14 Sep 2007 01:27:33 GMT

btw - with regards to solving all of our world problems, making the Earth a perfect place, prior to heading into space is sort of a foolish concept. It seems to say that we will eventually make such a trek - just not right now.
There are many problems which can be solved by space missions, as simple as providing much needed resources to our planet..water..heavy metals..etc.
The whole gasoline issue is interesting... have you ever heard of the Saturn EV1 car? 180 miles between charges, 80 mph top speed... fully produced and driven by thousands of people..including many celebrities... and suddenly not in existence. We already have to technology to solve the gas/oil issue, however, one should probably 'follow the money' to see why such options are not in place.

Above and beyond the money, and the resources, and the state of our planet, there is one thing to consider, which I seem to have missed in this ongoing discussion - the human desire and passion for knowledge, the ability to have a dream, to conquer the unknown.

And, if God did not want us to travel into space, I think he would be powerful enough to somehow stop us. Also, people who believe that we will somehow 'pollute' space have little concept of it's vastness. There are billions of billions of billions of planets out there - how egotistical is it to believe that humans can somehow do enough damage to bring down the firmament?
We will either make the leap, or we will not. Quit bemoaning the inevitable and spend your energies making the planet better for mankind, while the rest of us work on keeping the human spirit alive and kicking.

"Don't hit at all if it is honorably possible to avoid hitting; but never hit softly."

Google funds $30 million moon prize

Wil, Sacramento — Fri, 14 Sep 2007 01:31:47 GMT

You who are responding to the moon hoax people are just encouraging them to post again. They aren't "scum of the earth", "idiots", or anything else like that. The government has a long history of cover-ups(MK-ultra ring a bell?) and people should be skeptical about what it says. They certainly are close-minded, however, because anyone who looks at the Phil Plait explanations would see that they are valid.

On to the real issue: Corporate space travel. This was a long time coming. In the movie "Fight Club" the narrator spells it out: "When deep space explration ramps up, it will be corporations that name everything. The IBM Stellar Sphere. The Philip Morris Galaxy. Planet Starbucks."
What kind of galaxy will it be when the corporations start renaming the planets like they did the ballparks? Let's hope Saturn goes to the car manufacturer, Mercury to the insurance company, Mars to the candy company, ect.

In all seriousness, space exploration is a necessity beyond almost all others. We all need to help out as much as we can and not bicker over the petty things.

Google funds $30 million moon prize

james bargar obrien fl — Fri, 14 Sep 2007 01:35:40 GMT

history is amazing, and repeats. nearly a century ago there were prizes for aircraft flight. some people had the opinion that airplanes were merely toys for the rich to waste money on silly prizes and contests. flying across the atlantic was a waste of time and too dangerous to be of interest and profit. steam ships could do the job safer and more profitable, why waste time and lives. funny how those skeptics had no vision then,.... and now? what's the point of being without innovation and asparations to be more than what we see. these x prizes have helped to relight the visionarys of tomorrows taken for granted norms. if the skeptics rule then we're all doomed to repeat history, the dark ages.

Google funds $30 million moon prize

David Shatto, Los Angeles, CA — Fri, 14 Sep 2007 01:48:05 GMT

Great coverage, Alan! Do you think Red Whittaker was tipped off ahead of time? He had a website up & CMU issued a news release within hours of the prize announcement....

Google funds $30 million moon prize

Jon,Ygn. OH — Fri, 14 Sep 2007 02:28:00 GMT

Well Colleen, count me as one of those suckers. I believe, no I know the United States of America landed men on the moon in the late '60's early '70's.
Crap? I think juvenile minds are full of it.
Despite what you might think, your generation is not superior to those that came before.
Just because I don't know how something happened, or how a thing works, does not make that thing impossible.
For example: I don't know every detail there is to know about flight. Therefore, airplanes are impossible? I do not know every aspect of electrical theory, so light bulbs must be unreal? Do you really know how your iPod works?
The point being, stop listening to and reading conspiracy theories. And start using your brain.

Google funds $30 million moon prize

Ken Murphy, Addison TX — Fri, 14 Sep 2007 04:30:01 GMT

For all the doubters out there, I don't think I can say it any better than one of the guys that actually went there, in the movie "In the Shadow of the Moon":

"If we were going to fake going to the Moon, why would we fake it 9 times?"

I've got several of the Moon hoaxer books in the Lunar Library, and they're pure, unmitigated bunk of a quality completely lacking in any kind of professionalism, academic or otherwise. Those who would question the mountains of evidence demonstrate an ignorance belieing a profound lack of education in any number of areas.

If you haven't seen "In the Shadow of the Moon", do so as soon as possible. Those men aren't liars. They have the steel in their eyes and the grit in their voices that comes from doing heroic deeds. That anyone would be shameless enough to question that is beyond my ken.

Google funds $30 million moon prize

TRUTHSEEKER Altoona, Iowa — Fri, 14 Sep 2007 05:31:26 GMT

In response to Bill in San Diego, I agree completely with your statement. There have been BLACK OPS missions (NASA) and the Clementine data is the proof of what they know and have been hiding. Why has "Hubble" never been pointed at the moon? Or at least that we know of? What does BIG BROTHER not want us to see or know. Sadly this private proposal to land a rover will be restricted or controlled or even "accidental crash" scenario to prevent mankind in general from knowing the truth. THE TRUTH IS OUT THERE.......GO MANKIND GO!

Google funds $30 million moon prize

roy minneapolis, mn — Fri, 14 Sep 2007 05:47:12 GMT

wow, I quit reading comments after awhile but I'd say maybe we should all remember that this contest is to improve space flight and possibly lift humanity up a few degrees. This nonesense about did we or didn't we is a waste so enough said.

Google funds $30 million moon prize

Frank Stratford, Melbourne Australia — Fri, 14 Sep 2007 11:08:58 GMT

Google and X Prize are to be commended for this great idea. On behalf of Marsdrive, a mainly U.S and Australian based group I'd like to say that we have starting looking into this, but before we go very far we would like to know what kind of support we would have if we were to try organizing an entry to this contest. We are a non profit space company and while we are pursuing Mars, these sorts of projects are obviously a good thing for anyone to pursue in the space sector- as long as it is a serious approach. So interested people, let me know, and let's see what/if we can do anything. www.marsdrive.com

Google funds $30 million moon prize

john — Fri, 14 Sep 2007 11:52:24 GMT

Our beloved government has been lying for so long, that I question EVERYTHING that I have ever been told by them ,we need the TRUTH PEOPLE...........

Google funds $30 million moon prize

Paul Nink — Fri, 14 Sep 2007 12:47:42 GMT

Imagine the shame of having to live a lie for all these years like the Apollo astronauts. They must want to come clean so bad.

If the truth comes out they can finally come clean and clear their consciences and stop being extorted to keep the Apollo lies going.

Google funds $30 million moon prize

Bill, Rockville, MD — Fri, 14 Sep 2007 12:48:04 GMT

We split the atom in the 40s. We landed on the moon in the 60s. We defeated Communism in the 80s. We wired the whole world in the 90s.

In the new millenium? ... we're back in the caves.

Google funds $30 million moon prize

Colleen Corr — Fri, 14 Sep 2007 12:50:24 GMT

Any talk of aliens or ufos just further re-inforces the lie that we actually went to the Moon.

Google funds $30 million moon prize

James B, Indianapolis, IN — Fri, 14 Sep 2007 13:43:50 GMT

If Google, with its infinite amount of money, wants to do something really ground breaking it should do something that can help one of man kind’s greatest needs, alternative FUEL. Have a contest for the first person to develop an economically sound working prototype of a car that can run on WATER! Just think if Google could be responsible for bring on a change that would allow mankind to have a fuel of the most abundant resource on earth!

Google funds $30 million moon prize

mthomas — Fri, 14 Sep 2007 14:22:06 GMT

Sorry, but $ 20 million is just a teaser. Not much there. We might see something like this but they say it will take more than a few million. Maybe someday we can get serious about man's exploration of space.

I think what Google has done is fantastic to help people to start thinking in this direction !

http://nlspropulsion.net

Google funds $30 million moon prize

Luke Morrison, Halifax, NS — Fri, 14 Sep 2007 14:50:43 GMT

TURTHSEEKER:"Why has "Hubble" never been pointed at the moon?"

Because optical theory tells us that even if Hubble were pointed directly at the moon, it would be physically impossible to resolve the Moon Landers.

It would require a telescope 2.5 times bigger than the largest telescope under construction in the world today to be able to resolve the Moon Landers as anything larger than a single pixel.

Google funds $30 million moon prize

Kenny, Clifton, NJ — Fri, 14 Sep 2007 15:11:46 GMT

To all,

What this all looks like to me is a bunch of children arguing with each other about conspiracy theories, technology, gameboys....

How about you all stop the nonsense and try working together. One of the main reasons we're not already permanently stationed on the moon with lunar colonies and perhaps colonies on other planets is simply due to human nature. We'll spend countless hours arguing about meaningless things rather than getting our priorities straight and actually working together to accomplish a task.

Why does Google even have to offer such a prize to gain peoples interests? Shouldn't the need for the acquisition of knowledge far exceed the need for the acquisition of wealth ?

Google funds $30 million moon prize

J.C.,TX — Fri, 14 Sep 2007 15:40:32 GMT

My Uncle was not a fake or a liar! He was there in Houston for all of the Apollo Mission,He was one of the first to speak to Apollo 13 when they came around from the backside of the moon.At the age of fourteen He place a small rock in my hand's "Guess where from". I'm a BELIEVER!

Google funds $30 million moon prize

dialashop — Fri, 14 Sep 2007 17:14:53 GMT

It is great new that Google is sponsoring the Moon X-Prize contest. Incentives are needed for space companies to invest and I believe this competition will bring results. SpaceSpaceOne was a great success as the first suborbital plane. The moon mission would be useful in developing technologies which NASA and other organisations can use in the future.

Google funds $30 million moon prize

Soonvapor, Orlando, FL — Fri, 14 Sep 2007 20:02:26 GMT

REPLY to "H.ALLEY, NC SEP 13, 5:27 PM

"Why go back to the moon?" you asked. Aside from the virtues of human explorations, let me point out that One Ton of H3 gas from the moon's surface is theorized to foster successful nuclear fusion plants with enough clean energy to provide ALL of America's energy needs for decades. The moon's surface is covered with the stuff as proven in the 800+ pounds of moon surface materials returned from the trips we made there.

Russia, China, Japan, and multitudes of other nations are clamoring to return [man] to the moon to mine the stuff! The US target is 2017, Russia 2020, and China by 2025.

And that's just for the stuff we already know is there. Who knows what we'll find more than 3 meters below the surface!!!!!

Alley, with that much energy you'll see magnitudes more benefits to mankind as we learn more about our universe. God made a wonderous place to explore. I pray we'll survive (mankind) long enough to enjoy the benefits He has placed into our material world so we can grow to learn about His Spiritual Kingdom.

Google funds $30 million moon prize

Nick, Sea of Tranquility — Fri, 14 Sep 2007 20:49:02 GMT

Some guy who thinks he is smart tries to tell Buzz Aldrin that he didn't land on the moon. Buzz does exactly what anyone who accomplished something amazing would do. This guy got what was coming to him...Check it out.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-7421174610946445686&q=buzz+aldrin&total=380&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=0

Google funds $30 million moon prize

Tom, Long Beach, CA — Fri, 14 Sep 2007 22:02:03 GMT

this is to mike in miami. the issues you have i will address here. 1. flag waving with no atmosphere. The flag wasnt waving it was wobbling. the surface of the moon is only soft for a few inches down. then it turns almost as hard as concrete. with no atmosphere and very little gravity the flag will wobble for long time after last being touched. 2. No stars in pictures. The stars werent in the picture because the shutter speed on the camera had to set extrememly high because of the reflectiveness of the moons surface. Look at how bright the moon appears in our sky from 200k+ miles away through the atmosphere. Imagine how bright it must be from 6 feet away. The fast shutter speed kept the stars, which are very dim compared to the surface, from being exposed on the film.

Google funds $30 million moon prize

George Roy, BattleGround WA — Fri, 14 Sep 2007 22:34:18 GMT

Sweet!! I have to get involved!! been dreaming of space inventions since i can remember! Now to join or build a team. Google Rocks! way to keep the private engineers in the loop.

Google funds $30 million moon prize

Ronnie, TX — Fri, 14 Sep 2007 23:20:48 GMT

"~On a serious note: No one has posted a compelling arguement for why we need to be in space in the first place.~ "

Here's one for you R.B., It's time we humans stopped our planet-wide bickering (wars), pooping in our diapers (pollution), whining for our next treat (consumerism), crawled out of our crib (Earth), grew up and left home.

Google funds $30 million moon prize

Bill Hensley, Houston, TX — Sat, 15 Sep 2007 00:10:27 GMT

Let's ignore the goofy conspiracy theorists and get back to the Google X-Prize.

Alan, I read David Nolan's piece and I think he is overlooking a few things. First, no one in their right mind is going to develop a new launcher just to win this new prize. The trick will be to build a vehicle and a third stage small enough to be launched by a small booster like the Dnepr or the Falcon 1. That will make for a pretty small rover, but that seems doable. The Sojourner rover from the Mars Pathfinder mission was only 16 kg. Of course, the Pathfinder lander was much larger at 250 kg -- probably too big to launch on a Falcon 1 along with the required third stage. But I bet Armadillo, for instance, could build a lander small enough and still carry a 16 kg payload to the lunar surface.

It is true that $20 million isn't much and there are "greener" prizes out there. But there doesn't seem to be any shortage of Internet mogul space enthusiasts, who wouldn't be looking for a return on their investment.

Not enough time? If you're buying your ride to LEO, which as I say is the only rational thing to do, it seems like five years is enough time. That's how long it took JPL to develop the Pathfinder.

The challenges are still huge for a small, privately funded team. The biggest gamble will be whether the thing will actually work when you try it. With the high cost and short time frame each team is likely to get only one shot at it. It will take a lot of luck as well as hard work to win. But I hope at least a few teams make a serious attempt.

Google funds $30 million moon prize

Yoda's left ear — Sat, 15 Sep 2007 00:21:55 GMT

Frank,Paul-do you believe in evolution too. Cause you can't explain where you came from. Do you even exist? How do you know this isn't an elaborate hoax? Why does an electromagnetic field work? Why do you have to explain everything. You can argue anything if u want to. I just choose to believe and move on. If you choose not to then move on. Because in the cosmic sense of things. Who cares. Stop arguing with people who obviously aren't going to change their minds. Since you obviously won't change yours. So whether it was a hoax... who cares, lets just get there again or for the first time.. whatever. Competition is good. It inspires, and heck if we could get somebody up there besides nasa or someone with a propaganda then we could find truth. So stop writing stupid comments on a website, go build your rocket and then after you prove we didn't land there you can tell us all the truth. But then again how do we know you won't just be making it up?

Google funds $30 million moon prize

Andrew, Portland OR — Sat, 15 Sep 2007 06:55:50 GMT

Perhaps the Japanese will do us all a favor, and once the craft they just launched reaches the Moon, make a hi-resolution pass over some of the Apollo landing sites and settle this once and for all.

Google funds $30 million moon prize

dan hyperlinker — Sat, 15 Sep 2007 10:11:53 GMT

Kind Sirs of CosmicLog,

I send you my best regards.

Sharing the same passion, I think you could be the right persons to be informed about a special calendar that starts again the reckoning of years from that in which human beings landed for the first time on a celestial body that was not the Earth and in which contemporaneously Internet was born: both these events happened, may be not by chance, in the same fantastic year, the 1969.

"The Earth Calendar" has several other particularities, and today I'm feeling the duty to signal it to you. I hope that it could be of help to let a new generation of people, more reasonable, more scientific, more pacific, more enthusiast about the mysteries of Cosmos and the exploration of Space, to affirm itself. Equally I would be very happy if it could serve your aims.

My warmest greetings,

Danilo D'Antonio
Abruzzo - Italy

[AB: Danilo passes along information that can mostly be found on his Web site:

http://www.earthcal.com/introduction.htm

Since this is tangential to the discussion(s) ... that is, the Google Lunar X Prize, plus for some reason moon-hoax conspiracy theorists ... I'd prefer to direct people instead to the Web site and Dan's contact information.]

H y p e r L i n k e r
Piazza del Municipio
64010 Rocca S. Maria
(TE) - Italy

tel. ++39 861 63368

http://dan.hyperlinker.org
dan@hyperlinker.com

Google funds $30 million moon prize

Rick Boozer, Greer, SC — Sat, 15 Sep 2007 12:22:12 GMT

Dave. Just a note from someone who is currently getting his Master's degree in astrophysics with a 4.0 average. The Van Allen Belts were not a great danger because a) they contained less radiation than you think and b) the Apollo spacecraft's speed was so high the astronauts were almost out of the belts before they realized they were in them.

A very REAL potential danger to Apollo were CME's (coronal mass ejections) from the Sun. One such event could have bathed the astronauts with lethal levels of radiation. Fortunately, none of these occurred during any Apollo mission or some dead astronauts would have been recovered after splashdown. It was a calculated risk on NASA's part, but they scheduled missions for when the sun would hopefully be quiet. But there were no guarantees since CME may happen at ANY time though they are less likely when the sun is less active.

Conspiracy theorists such as yourself know just enough science to murk up the issue, but not enough science to understand what really happened.

Google funds $30 million moon prize

Revelde-20,Panama city ,Panama — Sat, 15 Sep 2007 15:10:36 GMT

Hey , I like to invest some money to get a bitte of that 30 million . I don't have the know how ,but I can help with labor or with a little money to be part of the winner team! I have dream ot only into reaching the moon , but also setteling a colony like the one in antartica . As a true "basement scientist",I belive it is possible to reach the moon with and investmen under $500,000 and a team of 10 people!

Google funds $30 million moon prize

FostersMan, Denver, CO — Sat, 15 Sep 2007 21:08:41 GMT

Some people are just Pompus Windbags! Saying "we didn't go to the moon" is like saying "Vietnam wasn't a war, just a occupation." I hear about conspiricy theories, and Notrounamas chants (however you spell his name)and what a crock. If you don't believe we went to the moon get off your couch potatoe rear and prove we didn't! Otherwise, get a life.

Google funds $30 million moon prize

Carlos DeFungi, Santa Monica, CA — Sat, 15 Sep 2007 23:37:46 GMT

h Chattaway - a well made point. I'm not American, but I'm sure you guys made it to the moon. Just take one look at at the SFX in a 1960's movie and you'll see that there's no way it could have been faked.

Having said that, I think NASA should take some "Alien Artifacts" on its next Mars mission for the rovers to "stumble across". Unlimited funding would be sure to follow...

Google funds $30 million moon prize

Jeremy, San Diego — Sun, 16 Sep 2007 23:08:01 GMT

Bill, I agree with your comments regarding our government's strange course of action regarding our natural satellite. In addition, there are a few photos of the moon's surface online that are extremely...odd. Regarding this article, I hope it awakens people to the fact that a chance occurrence (disease, natural disaster, asteroid impact) could wipe out our entire species in the blink of an eye, due to our current imprisonment on this rock.

Google funds $30 million moon prize

Soonvapor, Orlando, FL — Mon, 17 Sep 2007 06:20:11 GMT

re: JAMES B, Indy, IN Sep 14, 9:43

You asked why doesn't NASA help us find ALTERNATIVE FUELS... obviously you have not read these postings. Try reading mine, Sep 14, 4:02 plus my earlier posting explaining exactly that: ALTERNATIVE FUELS.

Google funds $30 million moon prize

basem : m ; jordan : amman : south Amman — Mon, 17 Sep 2007 06:36:06 GMT

I wish that achieved the dream of Google: But I am afraid that exploits the enemies of the environment this dream and pollutes the moon as contaminated land : Basem Abedio

Google funds $30 million moon prize

Mekhong Kurt, Bangkok, Thailand — Mon, 17 Sep 2007 17:41:13 GMT

In passing, the debate about whether the U.S. landed men on the Moon is futile. Disbelievers will never believe the patently true. Or do they think the Rovers are somewhere in Hollywood?

I applaud Google's award competition. Governments have taken many of the unknown, potentially dangerous first steps, as is proper. Now there are knowns with which private entities can deal.

Like other posters, I would be quite happy to add to the pot were to do so possible for an ordinary, uninvolved person. How about it, Google?

Google funds $30 million moon prize

Bill Colburn, Hollister, CA — Tue, 18 Sep 2007 15:32:44 GMT

For those interested, the "Moon Hoax" theory had its beginning in the 90's when Bill Kaysing's friend, who worked at NASA Ames in Mountain View, CA, was fired from his job. He and Bill Got together and the conversation was something like "Hey, Bill, we ought to get back at these guys, like what if THEY NEVER WENT TO THE MOON" after which which Bill, a former tech writer for Rocketdyne, wrote the book after doing some research to nail some oddities that might support such a strange conclusion.

Bill got punched by an astronaut that was offended by his bizarre ideas; that is probably the best evidence we have that it was real! Who would risk a celebrity law suit otherwise!

By the way, I was an Apollo Engineer. This was the most grandiose project in modern times and the morale and commitment by the workers was incredible. It was a project that made the Manhattan Project look tiny. I personally have 60 hours of transcribed 16mm film taken on Apollo missions, most of which is boring out of focus shots of the moon from a few thousand miles distance. A real filmmaker would never have taken such footage!

Google funds $30 million moon prize

Richard, England — Sun, 24 Feb 2008 18:14:33 GMT

This is an amazing idea! State-funded exploration is OK, but it will never accelerate at the rate that private space ventures will.

Where there's money to be made, much more progress will be made.

Google funds $30 million moon prize

rich, denver, colorado — Fri, 29 Aug 2008 18:15:53 GMT

The moon is named [...]. It is "Luna"

Google funds $30 million moon prize

CT — Wed, 29 Jul 2009 22:39:19 GMT

What kinds of pessimists will not beleive in space technology and moon landings? There are 1000's of people who put in their hard work, talent, money and land ont he moon, Mars..and some idiots easily criticize them.Seriously, thats how Moon looks like.