I agree with Chuck 100 percent, and hope that the administration doesn't derail the moon base idea. It will be useful for many decades, compared with the likely one or two expensive flights to Mars. And after the Mars landings, what? I have trouble imagining the value or even the possibility of a permanent Mars colony. But with the moon as a destination, scientists can regularly commute to the base and carry out such important work as radio and light astronomy in a way possible nowhere else. The moon could even be a suitable place for tourism in the not-too-distant future. -- Joe --- On Sat, 5/2/09, Chuck Hards <chuck.hards@gmail.com> wrote: From: Chuck Hards <chuck.hards@gmail.com> Subject: Re: [Utah-astronomy] Potential for lunar policy shift at NASA To: "Utah Astronomy" <utah-astronomy@mailman.xmission.com> Date: Saturday, May 2, 2009, 5:03 PM That's too bad.  As alluring as Mars is, it's obvious that a permanent lunar presence will benefit further solar-system exploration in the long-run.  I think the Planetary Society got this one wrong. _______________________________________________ Utah-Astronomy mailing list Utah-Astronomy@mailman.xmission.com http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy Visit the Photo Gallery: http://www.slas.us/gallery2/main.php Visit the Wiki: http://www.utahastronomy.com