• "Spreading the ideas of freedom loving people on matters regarding high finance, politics, constructionist Constitution, and mental masturbation of all types"

The Lunar Gold Rush: How Moon Mining Could Work

Joe King

Gold Member
Gold Chaser
Site Supporter
Joined
Mar 31, 2010
Messages
9,043
Likes
9,974
Location
Instant Gratification Land
#81
Well honestly the post I responded to was almost the perfect setup. It was asking about if anyone was so gullible to believe in the landings and I thought for a second about who's the most non-reality based person(s) on these forums and you two popped into my mind as perfect candidates. I guess it was the perfect storm question.
You still don't get it.
...but that's no real surprise.
 

goldielox1

Silver Miner
Seeker
Joined
Jun 20, 2013
Messages
1,211
Likes
836
#82
You still don't get it.
...but that's no real surprise.
Just like you don't get the moon landings you so passionately believe in were fake cold war propaganda?
 

Uncle

Midas Member
Midas Member
Sr Site Supporter
Joined
Apr 13, 2010
Messages
1,494
Likes
1,716
Location
SA
#83
Please PM each other or get a room. Your 'I said, you said' arguments are just clutter and adds no value.

Golden Regards
Uncle
 

searcher

Mother Lode Found
Sr Site Supporter
Mother Lode
Joined
Mar 31, 2010
Messages
97,427
Likes
36,825
#84
Who Owns The Moon? A 'Space Lawyer' Answers


by Tyler Durden
Mon, 07/23/2018 - 17:55


Authored by Frans von der Dunk via The Conversation,



Most likely, this is the best-known picture of a flag ever taken: Buzz Aldrin standing next to the first U.S. flag planted on the Moon. For those who knew their world history, it also rang some alarm bells. Only less than a century ago, back on Earth, planting a national flag in another part of the world still amounted to claiming that territory for the fatherland. Did the Stars and Stripes on the moon signify the establishment of an American colony?

When people hear for the first time that I am a lawyer practicing and teaching something called “space law,” the question they ask most frequently, often with a big smile or a twinkle in the eye, is: “So tell me, who owns the moon?”

Of course, claiming new national territories had been very much a European habit, applied to non-European parts of the world. In particular the Portuguese, the Spanish, the Dutch, the French and the English created huge colonial empires. But while their attitude was very Europe-centric, the legal notion that planting a flag was an act of establishing sovereignty quickly stuck and became accepted worldwide as part and parcel of the law of nations.

Obviously, the astronauts had more important things on their mind than contemplating the legal meaning and consequences of that planted flag, but luckily the issue had been taken care of prior to the mission. Since the beginning of the space race the United States knew that for many people around the world the sight of a U.S. flag on the Moon would raise major political issues. Any suggestion that the moon might become, legally speaking, part of U.S. backwaters might fuel such concerns, and possibly give rise to international disputes harmful to both the U.S. space program and U.S. interests as a whole.

By 1969, decolonization may have destroyed any notion that non-European parts of the world, though populated, were not civilized and thus justifiably made subject to European sovereignty – however, there was not a single person living on the moon; even life itself was absent.

Still, the simple answer to the question of whether Armstrong and Aldrin by way of their small ceremony did transform the moon, or at least a major part thereof, into U.S. territory turns out to be “no.” They, nor NASA, nor the U.S. government intended the U.S. flag to have that effect.


This composite image of the moon using Clementine data from 1994 is the view we are most likely to see when the moon is full. Photo by NASA Goddard Space Flight Center

The first outer space treaty
Most importantly, that answer was enshrined in the 1967 Outer Space Treaty, to which both the United States and the Soviet Union as well as all other space-faring nations, had become a party. Both superpowers agreed that “colonization” on Earth had been responsible for tremendous human suffering and many armed conflicts that had raged over the last centuries. They were determined not to repeat that mistake of the old European colonial powers when it came to decide on the legal status of the moon; at least the possibility of a “land grab” in outer space giving rise to another world war was to be avoided. By that token, the moon became something of a “global commons” legally accessible to all countries – two years prior to the first actual manned moon landing.

So, the U.S. flag was not a manifestation of claiming sovereignty, but of honoring the U.S. taxpayers and engineers who made Armstrong, Aldrin, and third astronaut Michael Collins’ mission possible. The two men carried a plaque that they “came in peace for all mankind,” and of course Neil’s famous words echoed the same sentiment: his “small step for man” was not a “giant leap” for the United States, but “for mankind.”

Furthermore, the United States and NASA lived up to their commitment by sharing the moon rocks and other samples of soil from the lunar surface with the rest of the world, whether by giving them away to foreign governments or by allowing scientists from all over the globe to access them for scientific analysis and discussion. In the midst of the Cold War, this even included scientists from the Soviet Union.

Case closed, no need for space lawyers anymore then? No need for me to prepare University of Nebraska-Lincoln’s space law students for further discussions and disputes on the lunar law, right?

No space lawyers needed?
Not so fast. While the legal status of the Moon as a “global commons” accessible to all countries on peaceful missions did not meet any substantial resistance or challenge, the Outer Space Treaty left further details unsettled. Contrary to the very optimistic assumptions made at the time, so far humankind has not returned to the moon since 1972, making lunar land rights largely theoretical.

That is, until a few years ago when several new plans were hatched to go back to the moon. In addition at least two U.S. companies, Planetary Resources and Deep Space Industries, which have serious financial backing, have started targeting asteroids for the purpose of mining their mineral resources. Geek note: Under the aforementioned Outer Space Treaty, the moon and other celestial bodies such as asteroids, legally speaking, belong in the same basket. None of them can become the “territory” of one sovereign state or another.

The very fundamental prohibition under the Outer Space Treaty to acquire new state territory, by planting a flag or by any other means, failed to address the commercial exploitation of natural resources on the moon and other celestial bodies. This is a major debate currently raging in the international community, with no unequivocally accepted solution in sight yet. Roughly, there are two general interpretations possible.


A super blood moon tinted red by scattered light. Photo by NASA Goddard Space Flight Center

So you want to mine an asteroid?
Countries such as the United States and Luxembourg (as the gateway to the European Union) agree that the moon and asteroids are “global commons,” which means that each country allows its private entrepreneurs, as long as duly licensed and in compliance with other relevant rules of space law, to go out there and extract what they can, to try and make money with it. It’s a bit like the law of the high seas, which are not under the control of an individual country, but completely open to duly licensed law-abiding fishing operations from any country’s citizens and companies. Then, once the fish is in their nets, it is legally theirs to sell.

On the other hand, countries such as Russia and somewhat less explicitly Brazil and Belgium hold that the moon and asteroids belong to humanity as a whole. And therefore the potential benefits from commercial exploitation should somehow accrue for humanity as a whole – or at least should be subjected to a presumably rigorous international regime to guarantee humanity-wide benefits. It’s a bit like the regime originally established for harvesting mineral resources from the deep seabed. Here, an international licensing regime was created as well as an international enterprise, which was to mine those resources and generally share the benefits among all countries.

While in my view the former position certainly would make more sense, both legally and practically, the legal battle by no means is over. Meanwhile, the interest in the moon has been renewed as well – at least China, India and Japan have serious plans to go back there, raising the stakes even higher. Therefore, at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln we will need to teach our students about these issues for many years to come. While ultimately it is up to the community of states to determine whether common agreement can be reached on either of the two positions or maybe somewhere in between, it is of crucial importance that agreement can be reached one way or another. Such activities developing without any law that is generally applicable and accepted would be a worst-case scenario. While not a matter of colonization anymore, it may have all the same harmful results.

https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-07-23/who-owns-moon-space-lawyer-answers
 

oldgaranddad

Gold Member
Gold Chaser
Midas Supporter
Joined
Feb 21, 2012
Messages
4,771
Likes
8,172
Location
On the top shelf.
#85
The outer Space treaty of 1967 has no effect nor can it be enforced since the sovereign jurisdictions do not extend to space and one of the key signatories (USSR) no longer exists and Putin’s Russia can easily disavow the treaty. The treaty looks good but does nothing.
 

goldielox1

Silver Miner
Seeker
Joined
Jun 20, 2013
Messages
1,211
Likes
836
#87
While in my view the former position certainly would make more sense, both legally and practically, the legal battle by no means is over. Meanwhile, the interest in the moon has been renewed as well – at least China, India and Japan have serious plans to go back there, raising the stakes even higher. Therefore, at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln we will need to teach our students about these issues for many years to come. While ultimately it is up to the community of states to determine whether common agreement can be reached on either of the two positions or maybe somewhere in between, it is of crucial importance that agreement can be reached one way or another. Such activities developing without any law that is generally applicable and accepted would be a worst-case scenario. While not a matter of colonization anymore, it may have all the same harmful results.
LOL it's like arguing over who owns the sun. If you can get there, knock yourself out. Neither is an issue we'll have to worry about in out lifetimes or our children's children's.

Well, you can add bottom feeder to yer 'special' little list there goldie.

BF
There's a sucker born every minute. I'll bet that picture of the Good Ol US flag blowin in the wind on the non-atmosphere of the moon gives you a sense of great pride, eh?
 

searcher

Mother Lode Found
Sr Site Supporter
Mother Lode
Joined
Mar 31, 2010
Messages
97,427
Likes
36,825
#88
Russia's Moon Base Plans Could Lead To Moscow Mining The Asteroid Belt


by Tyler Durden
Wed, 11/14/2018 - 22:25


Authored by Andrew Korybko via Oriental Review,

Head of the Russian space agency Roscosmos Dmitry Rogozin said that “this is about creating a long-term base, naturally, not habitable, but visited. But basically, it is the transition to robotic systems, to avatars that will solve tasks on the Moon surface”, which shows that Moscow is moving ahead with a general proposal that was first made a few years ago.




It’s an open secret that the world is in the midst of a new space race between the US, Russia, China, and even a few other countries that are trying to enter the field, with this process unofficially started by America after Trump declared the creation of his country’s so-called “Space Force”. The US claims that it needs to act in order to thwart Russia and China’s militarization of this domain, while those two multipolar Great Powers have consistently accused the US of actually being the one to break international law by secretly doing this all along.

Moving beyond the controversial rhetoric and into objectively recognized reality, however, there’s apparently no stopping the process that the US has unleashed, though that doesn’t necessarily mean that every manifestation of this race will be inherently militarized.

Russia’s proud history of exploring space is universally acknowledged after it was the first country to send a satellite and a man into orbit, so it shouldn’t be surprising that it still longs to send a man to the moon after the US beat them to it back in 1969 during America’s first victory in this race. There are practical reasons for doing this other than prestige and the sake of science because a moon base is thought to be required for facilitating the future mining of mineral-rich asteroids, something that still remains in the realm of science fiction for now but shouldn’t be discounted as a promising industry of the future.

President Putin also famously said last year that “whoever becomes the leader in the sphere (of AI) will become the ruler of the world”, and he also emphasized his nation’s prioritization of this technology and other related ones during a keynote speech that he made earlier this year ahead of Russia’s presidential elections, so it’s logical that his government would seek to pair this with space exploration and the potential mining of asteroids that might eventually follow in order to become a global leader in this respect.

That’s why Russia’s plan to construct a robot-built moon base is more sensible of an investment than it might initially seem to those who hadn’t thought it through, though the country first has to prove that it has the technology to pull off this feat before it becomes something that the rest of the world can take seriously.

https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018...-plans-could-lead-moscow-mining-asteroid-belt