Canceling NASA's Terrestrial Planet Finder

spaceref.com ^ | 02/06/06 | Keith Crowing

[RightWhale]

You lay claim

Cannot be done. The 1967 UN Outer Space Treaty prohibits.

[RightWhale]

land on the moon

Quitclaim deeds at best. Fraud otherwise.

[RightWhale]

a physical presence can be the basis of a legitimate claim.

And more, only a physical presence can be the basis.

[RightWhale]

The Report on Moon, Mars and Beyond, the President's base document for the new NASA program, says so in no uncertain terms. The Senate agrees about the Treaty: the Treaty effectively kills off any chance of meaningful private investment.

[Brett66]

I think there was some question whether a physical presence was defined as the person physically being there or a robotic probe landing there as a proxy for the person. I'm looking forward to when this happens, if a corporation or individual can do this under the OST then the door swings wide open for anyone with the ability to send a probe and land on an object.

If their claim is not upheld, then it would be time for serious consideration of US withdrawal from the ill-conceived OST.

BTW-If NASA succeeds and sets up a base and mining facilities on the moon, I wonder what they'd do if China set up a base right next to ours, put a small fence around our base and told us not to trespass. I have a feeling this would cause quite an uproar and we would assert our national sovereignty, OST be damned!

[RightWhale]

A robot might be physical presence if the countries concerned agree on that. Most space development would be robotic, especially asteroid mining. It wouldn't be profitable if the firm had to provide a manned presence at one or more asteroids just to hold a claim.

[LIConFem]

"Hey at least the Hubble will be saved."


That ain't what I heard...