WELCOME

Some of the criticism has been directed at the Space

Aug. 12, 2018 by Carolyn Mueller

Some of the criticism has been directed at the Space Exploration Technologies (SERE) program, which the Space Shuttle Program currently is using to make exploration and launch science missions to the Moon. A group called "Moon Is a Rock," which has been pushing for SERE to be replaced with a commercial crewed mission, stated that a commercial SERE mission to the Moon "would put humans at a disadvantage." SERE recently received $100 million in funding from NASA for a mission to the Moon, and some members of Congress have called for it to be scrapped.

Moon Is a Rock: Space Exploration Technologies

The official NASA statement sent out to supporters, titled "Apollo 11 to Launch on Moon," is as follows: "[The] Apollo 11 launch was designed to provide an opportunity for NASA to put humans on an extended mission and to continue its mission of supporting missions to the Moon. SERE is a private company that is making a small, small investment. The Apollo 11 mission was designed to provide a small, very small cost to the SERE team so that we can make a very significant contribution to the science of the next manned mission to the Moon, and we are pleased to welcome the SERE team to NASA's program."

The statement also said that NASA had provided "no financial support at this time to SERE" and that it was "satisfied that we are using the full resources associated with NASA's mission to the Moon."

Some of the criticism raised by some of my colleagues is that the Apollo 11 mission is a waste and a waste of resources. The NASA mission did so because it demonstrated that, in order to achieve this mission, a spacecraft with a reusable atmosphere would have to have a cost advantage of more than $10 billion. It would also have to have a much more cost-effective orbit than a reusable spacecraft which would be much more expensive than the $100 billion cost of a commercial spacecraft.

However, NASA has spent decades developing reusable spacecraft which are far more cost-effective than reusable spacecraft of any kind. The Apollo program was one of the first missions to land on the Moon and was the first to land on a Mars surface. If that mission was successful, the astronauts and the scientists that worked on it would be able to return to Earth in the 2030s for another manned mission. Even so, the Apollo mission did prove that the Apollo space station was safe and feasible. The Apollo 11 mission is a waste of taxpayer dollars by not having a reusable atmosphere.

This is not to say that