NASA plans return to the moon

About time, too.

But as Buzz Aldrin put it so well, "...We don't want to stay too long. ... The ultimate goal is Mars."

It's not just a matter of our destiny among the stars, or even of the scientific knowledge to be gained. Considered simply in terms of economic return, no dollars were ever better spent than the ones which sent the Apollo missions to the moon. The money the space program infused into our economy exceeded what we spent on it many times over. New products and even new industries grew from the effort to reach the moon in the 'Sixties, and there are even greater economic incentives to go back today. As I've pointed out in this blog before, the moon is rich in hydrogen/helim 3- an energy source of incredible efficiency, one square foot of which could meet the energy needs of the entire United States for a year!

The argument that we can't afford to resume our ascent to the stars is about as classic a case of false economy as can be imagined. Of course we should go back to the moon, and then to Mars. In fact, we should never have paused. We should be colonizing Mars by now, and planning the missions to Titan and Europa.

Economics isn't a zero sum game. Wealth can be created by spending money wisely- and history is a more than adequate answer to those who raise economic arguments against our return to the moon and the ultimate conquest of Mars. After all, it's really more a question of when than of whether. The human imagination and the American spirit simply will not permit us to remain confined to Planet Earth forever.