Quote

It certainly is possible to construct a moon base in such a way that crews could stay for extended periods of time.

The way I see it, commercial interests should manage a lunar base while NASA gets on with the really important task of flying to Mars.

Well, I don't think we should go to the moon. I think we maybe should send some politicians up there.

You wouldn't want to land on the Moon and launch to Mars. That would be very inefficient.

I don't think there is much value in trying to use the moon as a base to go to Mars. That's going into one gravity belt and having to get back out of it again. And the moon doesn't have a lot to offer as a resource base.

I think a Moon base is not necessary to get to Mars, but I think it will be helpful. It would give you a chance to develop and mature some systems; long duration, deep space stuff; and you're close enough to get some help, via radio from Earth.

To send humans back to the moon would not be advancing. It would be more than 50 years after the first moon landing when we got there, and we'd probably be welcomed by the Chinese. But we should return to the moon without astronauts and build, with robots, an international lunar base, so that we know how to build a base on Mars robotically.

But I don't think we'll go there until we go back to the moon and develop a technology base for living and working and transporting ourselves through space.

Of course, mankind would not have landed on the Moon in 1969, were it not for two things: conquered Nazi rocket technology and post-war anti-Communist paranoia in the United States.

If they could offer up a way to go to the moon that wouldn't kill you, I'd sign up.