National Park on the moon.

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 12, 2013 10:52 AM GMT
    http://www.wunderground.com/news/new-bill-would-create-national-park-moon-20130711

    Who's going there when its finished?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 12, 2013 4:45 PM GMT
    they are failing to protect earth, but a bill passed to save lunar landing spaces?
    Strange & sad! especially when the article mentioned "Protect sites for posterity" icon_rolleyes.gif
  • kew1

    Posts: 1595

    Jul 12, 2013 4:57 PM GMT
    Didn't think the moon was American, how can they set up a National Park?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 12, 2013 5:33 PM GMT
    Shawnathan said
    kew1 saidDidn't think the moon was American, how can they set up a National Park?


    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manifest_destiny

    SO true! icon_lol.gif
  • ThatSwimmerGu...

    Posts: 3755

    Jul 12, 2013 6:21 PM GMT
    kew1 saidDidn't think the moon was American, how can they set up a National Park?

    I think areas on the moon are already owned by people.
  • HndsmKansan

    Posts: 16311

    Jul 12, 2013 6:23 PM GMT
    Well sounds strange, but I can see the eventual need for it. I just think it could be legislation that could come up... some.. time. down the road. We have other more pressing issues at this time....

    icon_cool.gif
  • ATLANTIS7

    Posts: 1213

    Jul 12, 2013 7:27 PM GMT
    People should get there shit together on earth before taking off to space?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 12, 2013 7:31 PM GMT
    I wonder if this will the new cruise spot for gay aliens?

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 12, 2013 7:40 PM GMT
    ThatSwimmerGuy said
    kew1 saidDidn't think the moon was American, how can they set up a National Park?

    I think areas on the moon are already owned by people.

    People have placed claims on them, but they have no real validity. If I'm not mistaken there is a treaty which says that no one (be it a nation or a private individual) is allowed to own land off of the Earth. They can own objects, such as communication satellites, but not land. So this means that the US can't really establish a national park there.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 15, 2013 9:17 PM GMT
    Forgive me if I'm wrong, as I just scanned the story (in The Economist, I think..) and I believe it said that all they are trying to do is give "national park" status to the artifacts that have been left behind on the moon by USA astronauts, so that, if/when other nations make it there, they cannot "take" the items,nor destroy them..much like you are not allowed to take anything significant from Yellowstone or Washington Monument.
    I don't see a problem with that.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 15, 2013 9:18 PM GMT
    StudlyScrewRite said Forgive me if I'm wrong, as I just scanned the story (in The Economist, I think..) and I believe it said that all they are trying to do is give "national park" status to the artifacts that have been left behind on the moon by USA astronauts, so that, if/when other nations make it there, they cannot "take" the items,nor destroy them..much like you are not allowed to take anything significant from Yellowstone or Washington Monument.
    I don't see a problem with that.

    If that is the case then I'm pretty sure it is perfectly consistent with international law.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 15, 2013 9:20 PM GMT
    First thing that comes to my mind is this....