Consider this:
"Kilroy was here."
If there's anything that's a sign that "we wuz there" it's Kilroy. :)
Human nature is, frankly, to leave some mark behind. Handprints are unlikely, but cave men left such prints behind before anyone could even dream of "writing" having been invented.
That said, however, the one thing we can almost be dead certain of is there won't be any holes dug for bms nor any -- uh-em! used TP fluttering about on that dusty surface.
But someone some centuries from know may decide they're going tote some tp up there just to do just that...
just for a laugh
:)
2
Just what kinda work of art is this piece of trash?
Geesh!
Where's the scrunched up MacDonald's fish filet wrappers?
:)
But to have one's family live on forever, now THAT'S! something to envy.
Oh the luxuries of modern times, to debate whether to preserve foot prints and litter.
Imagine if our fore bearers had such discussions about the Lewis & Clark Expedition? How many footprints, how many campfires, how many latrines would we have preserved?
Somethings are worth preserving, like Stonehenge; some things are not, like footprints and family photo's in Ziploc bags.
2
During the Apollo 11 mission I worked in NASA Headquarters’ Lunar Operations Office. We worked out the step-by-step activities the astronauts would conduct on the Moon’s surface for that and subsequent missions. Each one was considered unique. It was a thrilling time and we got to see photos and film footage almost before they were shown to the world. Of special interest to us were the “Earth-rise” images and film footage.
The crew of Apollo 8, in orbit around the Moon for the first time on Christmas Eve, 1968 saw the first “Earth-rise”. The astronauts read verses from Genesis to give some human dimension to what they were seeing. They should have read verse 28: “And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth.”
Whether astronauts’ boot prints survive future human visits is meaningless in the grand scheme of space exploration. More significant is the projection of ancient human ideas about holding dominion over the natural world, whether on this planet, the Moon, or Mars. God supposedly gave humankind title to all things of this planet and ordained human dominion over them; today, as then, global processes beyond our control refute that dominion. The “Earth-rise” images showed how tiny our planet is. It is all we’ve got and we don’t control it.
22
@bkbyers
Great inside story. Thanks!
3
The responsibility of preserving footprints on the moon should be left up to Trump's Space Force Commandos. Put a wall around them.
2
This worry is so farfetched and beyond silly I can't stand it. You can quickly make a list of serious space-related events we should worry about and with no solution in sight. Here's a start for such a list:
1. The proliferation of space junk orbiting the Earth.
2. The inability to secure moon rocks that were brought back (Google and you will hundreds are missing).
3. The U.S. is unable to send a manned rocket to the International Space Station, still buying seats on Soyuz.
5
"space is the province of humankind", until the alt-left Democrats figure out a way to exploit it for votes.
2
An interesting article about an interesting subject. My first thought was that these sites should be protected but then I wondered why exactly should they? I am afraid I don't know the answer to that as in this day an age surely it all has been documented extensively and is that not enough for future generations to access to? I can see that romantically it would be nice to have everything preserved, but practically I am not so sure.
A further thought, the author talks about international agreements, well as recent events on earth have shown not all national leaders set great store about such agreements especially when they do not suit their own personal interests! I would be most surprised if a certain President would adhere to any agreement if by ignoring it he saw profit in it for himself or his buddies.
Can't we clean up the Earth before we send any more stuff to the moon?
1
The first landing area should become a Moon Heritage site.
3
Not that big a deal. Move along as there are more pressing matters on Terra Firma.
4
And yet you waste precious moments commenting on this article.
1
Whenever I see such comments I am disheartened. There are a myriad of truly frivolous things just here on earth, but surely this should not be equated to them — and surely there is time and heart to give to an endeavor that not just ennobles us but is our future (after all can anyone imagine a future, say, 500 years from now, where we have not made a place for ourselves in the wider universe, at least among the planets?). In that future, we will still be inspired by the dedication and courage of those who took those first steps — and all who stood behind them. Something will be lost if those steps, at least, are not preserved. If we stop striving for new frontiers, of every kind, our future is bleak, as a nation and as a species, and our spirit is diminished. Yes, I am disheartened but only for moment, for I believe there are many more like me who chose to be inspired instead.
3
I disagree that weather could be the only cause of destruction of the footprints, flags, lander, tracks, etc. as some commenters have asserted. Just recently, there was a flash on the lunar surface indicating the impact of a meteorite. The same things that cause weather on Earth, atmosphere and water, are essentially absent on the Moon. The atmosphere of the Earth helps to protect it from small impacts, just as the lack of atmosphere on the Moon allows more impacts to occur. There is also the deliberate destruction of the signs of man's presence perpetrated by autocratic, ego-maniacal dictators, such as Putin, Kim, Trump, Erdogan, and others.
If the footprints had been left by President Barack Obama, then I'd bet Trump would fly to the moon himself to trample them. The point of which is: there are more important things to care about.
5
Interesting tecnica problem. Is there a way to isolate, freeze frame and gather this footprints for the Smithsonian, then rake the moon's surface back to natural stars?
Oh and yeah, while we're at it, why not just gather up all the other remnants as junk and bury or recycle those bits here on Earth.
The least we could have done is left a trash can there for all our garbage to go in.
2
To those of us who experienced the space race first hand, men walking on the moon is one of the great accomplishments of humankind. Clean up the moon landing site? You might as well suggest getting rid of the rubble that's blocking that field over in Stonehenge, or tear down the Taj Mahal because it's blocking the view.
Protecting the sites where humans first landed/walked on the moon would quarantine a tiny area, but one that deserves to be preserved for posterity.
That this is an international issue isn't in doubt. The only question is when the Outer Space Treaty will be renegotiated to include lunar world heritage sites.
6
So, this though reciently occurred to me. Trump's interest in renewing the space program to land on the moon again is tied to his vision of a Trump resort on the moon. The Armstrong footprint will be popular tourist attraction, with an up-charge for for the space suit, moon buggy and guide.
1
@solar farmer Ha! Those up-charges are likely included in the hidden "resort fees" that you see at check-out. I hope he checks-out of the White House in 2021!!!
1
I would support a new international agreement to declare all moon sites visited by humans as of July 2019 to be simply off limits for any future visitations. Let's say a perimeter of 10 miles. Just leave those areas alone. Don't try to "investigate" them (for what?). Don't worry about what may happen to them by natural causes (meteor strikes, etc.). Rest assured that whatever is there, will remain undisturbed by man. We have plenty of very satisfying images and recordings here on Earth to document the achievement, and we won't be missing anything by just staying away from those physical sites on the moon.
Is this really the best use of our time and energy right now? The planet is cooking, literally cooking right now and threatening to end civilization as we know it in a century...maybe less. I could care less about the fate of Neil Armstrong's footprints on the uninhabitable moon.
9
When it comes to questions like this of such great importance I ask myself, “What would Yoda do?”
No atmosphere to offer winds to blow the light powdery surface but millions of impact craters from debris striking the Moon's surface. So what does that tell you about how long Armstrong's foot prints may survive if nobody else walks on the Moon's surface?
2
Let’s leave the moon alone. We will just ruin it.
Let’s fix the planet we’re on and have screwed up.
8
Given the serious everyday issues of affordable, edible food, shelter, and healthcare, potable water, drought, floods... that we are facing here on earth... Who cares about Neil Armstrong's footprints on the Moon ?
5
I can't believe I agree with something that Ted Cruz wants to do.
1
Would it have been so difficult in the photo cutline to identify the astronaut who left the family photo as "Apollo 16 astronaut Charles Duke" instead of "one of the Apollo 16 astronauts?" There were only two astronauts on the surface for goodness sake.
2
First off, to argue that since the Earth will, in roughly 4,000,000,000 years be destroyed by the sun so we should not care is a silly argument. The same could be said of anything on Earth as well. Heck, you're going to die anyway, so you should live fast, die young and leave a beautiful corpse, amirite?
To claim that protecting these sites will somehow impede research is to ignore just how little we have seen of the Moon. I'm pretty sure that Apollo 15 was not the only viable to explore the Imbrium Basin.
As for littering on the pristine Moon, that would imply that we should not go there at all. Weathering is on a time scale measured in 10's of thousands of years, so any tracks are effectively forever.
Finally, the value of knowledge does not lie in it's immediate application. Knowledge for it's own sake is also valuable.
13
@uwteacher, there is a phenomenon on the Moon called Dusty Plasma in the Terminator Region, the line between night and day. The Sun causes an electrostatic charge to lift micro-dust particles 10 to 30cm above the surface of the moon. After the Terminator passes the dust particles settle back on the surface. Eventuality this action will obliterate the tracks left behind by the astronauts. Probably in much less than 10s of thousands of years.
6
If commercial lunar services become affordable for the average millionaire (Uber Lunar anyone?) before international laws prohibit it, some jerk's going to send a bot to set the sand in place, dig up the footprints, and ship them back to hawk on eBay.
9
Those footprints are precious for all the reasons the author presents. Now, even without human interference, Nature can erase it forever. Our Moon, without a protective atmospheric blanket, is constantly being bombarded by micrometeorites in a process that geologists called "gardening", similar to tilling the topsoil. I also suspect that in the fifty years since Apollo 11 astronauts Neil Armstrong and the indefatigable champion for human spaceflight Buzz Aldrin set foot imprints on Mare Tranquillitatis, the extreme diurnal thermal cycling between lunar night and day would have caused some crumbling and changes to those imprints. So, if we would really like to preserve them, we need to be more proactive about it. In fact, that could be one of the mission objectives when we return a woman and man to the Moon. Now we also know that the region around Mare Tranquillitatis has "pits" that indicate there may be subsurface cavities that could be explored. So that too could be a fine science mission objective. Rolled into one, there is much we can do and learn around the region of the Apollo 11 landing site, not to mention that the spaceflight trajectory to get there and back, called a "free return trajectory", is also considered the safest, while we evolve new and highly reliable vehicles to ply between the Earth and our dear Moon. We need projects like these to unite our world and to our excite children as we become a truly cosmopolitan, spacefaring and globally connected species.
2
Couldn't the site be added to the UNESCO World Heritage list?
2
I have indeed given this much consideration, on a continuing basis, since 1969, but have yet to reach a decision. "One small step backwards for a man." Ralph L. Seifer, Long Beach, California
2
I am not worried about destruction. I am concerned about some yo-yo digging up and selling the famous "one small step." The current law can be amended to give world ( moon) heritage protection to artifacts. It is time,
We are driving our own planet’s species into oblivion whilst wringing hands over footprints on the moon? Malignant narcissism at its best.
7
What a terrible idea. Let's figure out how to preserve the sources of life on earth instead.
6
Nope.
There should be a “carry in, carry out” policy for the moon and any other celestial bodies that humans visit.
We have treated the earth like a garbage dump, the moon should be spared the same fate.
98
'There should be a “carry in, carry out” policy ...'
That's not so simple. Getting trash off the lunar surface and out of lunar orbit requires *energy*.
And then you have to figure out how to dispose of the trash.
9
@HYF
Moon trash?
I’m sure there is a market for that...sell it on ebay.
8
They aren't there now -- watch the ascent video, the rocket blast blew the heck out of the area.
2
It must be important to preserve the footprints... let's be sure to lend our destructive tendencies to all reaches of the universe. who knows; perhaps future generations with appreciate and study our graffiti-ladened marks well beyond this world; which we have by now nearly destroyed, due to our egos and narcissism. Of course, if we don't protect our titles for achieving a moon walk, then surely one of our earthly adversaries will lay claims. dust-to-dust seems perfectly adequate. Historical monuments have not gone over well in recent years back home... Lunar tourism will surely destroy more than just a few footprints...
Of course it should be preserved, it is our species first extra-terrestrial archeological site.
25
Yea
It boggles the mind that, with all of the problems needing to be addressed on Earth, we still make plans to spend billions of dollars to go to the moon and accomplish basically nothing.
8
Might be easier to just make casts of them and put them in a museum. They’d be similar to the casts most of us made in plaster as children. In this way, we’d be treating them like the trace fossils they are.
But I agree with the comments saying we should clean up our junk up there (and put it in a museum). Maybe we should stop ruining everything we put our collective hands on.
So the prints, tracks etc, are not being erased by natural means? The "moon sand' doesn't shift at all?
"So the prints, tracks etc, are not being erased by natural means?"
There is no atmosphere on the Moon, so there is no weather. Meteorite impacts could, eventually, disturb footprints.
'The "moon sand' doesn't shift at all?'
Not significantly. Lunar soil is "sticky", because it is electrically charged. For more, see the Wikipedia article:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lunar_soil
1
Forever is a very long time, maybe a few hundred million years, which is just a blink of an eye compared to forever.
1
This will be very, very low on the list of things I will worry about today.
3
How about building an ancient Greek temple, with moon concritic matter, of course, and preserve the first step for posterity. And every long-distance space trip should start from there. And whence upon return give thanks there.
No wonder no one bothers reading the newspapers these days. It's stories like this that have no appeal. I'm moving on....
Are you serious? All of the problems in the world and you want some kind of (how would it be enforceable) law to preserve litter?
1
If visiting the moon becomes commonplace, then the first visitors are not much more significant than say, the first white settler to tromp across a verdant field that is now a strip mall in Toledo, Ohio.
Would preserving these get in the way of building a Starbucks? I need one of those “you are here” moon mugs
The United States should declare this part of the moon to be US territory.
this is junk food for conspiracy theorists who think there’s nothing there and we never went, a law to prevent anyone from going to check. lol. they are going to have to put up a perimeter fence so future moon tourists can’t get too close. but seriously it all got buried by moon dust when they blasted off.
Or we could pick up after ourselves
Jeez. Can we maybe focus on the million or so species and natural wonders we are blithely destroying right here on earth?
3
Send me up there with a rake and I'll smooth out those boot marks ASAP.
Oh please. We've left our mark on this particular planet enough. Now we're going to start consciously marking Space too? Remove space garbage and erase the footprints.
1
It's easy. As the moon landing were the result os a space race, make it a racial thing.
Groan.
Could any topic matter less? I am hard pressed to think of one.
1
What if the Russians or Chinese send up a rocket to take out the American flag that was planted on the moon?
I have never understood the reason for landing on the moon. I object now to further attempts, at immense cost, to plunder the space around the Earth.
We are still despoiling this planet, increasingly rapidly, suggesting that we would only begin to destroy other parts of the universe.
I myself sincerely hope that those who thrive on “conquering” new territory will be thwarted, in whatever way required.
2
The only way footprints are preserved on earth is when they are made in concrete, not when they are made in the sand. If we expect tourists on the moon then we can't expect the sand on the moon to remain intact. If we care so much about something that was never intended to last forever, we should figure out a way to dig out the surface of the moon where the footprints were made and encase it in a protected enclosure. There is no other way of getting around the fact that if all our dreams are dust in the wind, so too is any dream of preserving our dust.
1
We should return to the moon to remove all signs of our presence as far as possible--the garbage, the machinery. Never mind the footprints--time will take care of those. All we need is records stored on Earth. We are so full of ourselves, to need to enshrine our achievements in physical form, like some kind of quasi religious ceremony, in a cold, dead place where we have no ownership. What we have done here on Earth should make us feel like doing penance, trying a brand new approach, respecting what's already there more than we love ourselves. Cosmos-sized egos, we have.
16
@tony
Yes. Yes. Yes.
3
Regardless of the relative 'importance" of this preservation effort, the decisions made concerning implementation will greatly help to shape future space law as it relates to claims on both the Moon and other celestial bodies. The 1967 OST was written in an intentionally vague manner by its primary authors (US and Soviet reps) and the time has come to provide clarity due to the ever expanding ambitions of key geopolitical actors in the lunar sphere.
Why would a future trip to the moon involve landing at the exact same spot? Future trips will target different locations in order to do new exploration and experiments. The surface area of the moon is nearly 40 million square kilometers. We have explored far less then once square kilometer. The footprints will remain undisturbed by humans if they weren't covered up when the lander left the surface.
We should now be realistic that science of Global Warming is threatening all life on earth. Why we worry about other planets-Moon, if the one we live on needs URGENT attention on each step man has encrusted on its surface and environment .
I urge the press and journalists to place a warning with such articles, like this one, to guide we the people to heed to our existential dangers, now. Thanks.
9
Why not do both?
You're worried about bootprints?
Future moon landings will occur to study its viability for mining. It has the potential for containing 'rare earth elements', the ones necessary for iPhones, computers and many other highly-critical technologies. That's probably why China recently dropped a probe on the dark side of the moon. It's more mountainous and therefore more likely to contain REE's than the smooth, dusty Neil Armstrong-side of the moon.
1
It costs over $2500/kg to get into low Earth orbit. The cost to get something back from the moon would probably be at least 25000 per kg. Rare Earth minerals sell at less than 1000 per kg. We won't be mining the moon in this century.
As we progress into space as a species, new questions will continue to arise that will involve most nations. Space is widely seen as a human venture, as opposed to one carried out by one specific nation. Of course, however, since we will likely retain our nation system until the end of civilization as we know it, we will have to reckon with each other and agree on certain matters. One of these matters is preserving history in space. Many people are for preserving our human legacy such as our first steps on the moon. The question is: "Although we have one small step for man, are we ready for one giant leap for mankind?" Unless we can learn to cooperate when it comes to when we travel in space, what we do in space, etc., then chances are we may be earthbound until our disagreements get the better of us.
Plymouth Rock was not technically the exact spot where the pilgrims landed. The landmark was unilaterally declared to be so, by a preacher who was not an eyewitness to the events. Just make a plaster cast of the footsteps, and then reconstruct them at the nearby Moon History Museum, where moon-visiting tourists can pay $100 each to see them... Add in a McDonalds and a souvenir shop, and now everyone has a reason to visit the moon.
2
One goal would be investigating how Apollo artifacts have been affected by nearly 50 years in the lunar environment, which necessarily involves altering the site’s present state.
Indeed, never mind the solar wind and the fact that eventually the tracks will disappear. And it doesn't involve alteration. Send a small "lunar drone" that will operate in the moon's atmosphere and do a 3D survey, and then publish it on Google Moon for everyone to see.
"... in the moon's atmosphere ..."
There is no "atmosphere" on the Moon.
"... and do a 3D survey ..."
That might be possible with a lidar in lunar orbit.
See the Wikipedia article, "Lidar":
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lidar
2
This is a no-brained. We protect every other human historical site. I'm sure we'll have a framework in place by the time humans are travelling to the moon on the regular.
A better question might be: are the footprints still there? The ascent module blast knocked over the American flag so it's reasonable to surmise it blew away the footprints too. If not, they may have been erased by moonquakes.
1
With all the problems from poverty, to prison; from climate change to political turmoil, facing our planet, why is this even an issue?
Shouldn't we clean up the problems on our own planet before we worry about the negligible mess made 50 years ago on our
satellite? How many billions of dollars will be wasted on this foolishness that could be employed easing real crises?
11
A lot of things are already gone. Anything made out of cloth or paper and exposed to direct sunlight is gone. The flags they planted were destroyed by ultraviolet light and more energetic radiation. The next person to look at them will probably see just a pole. That photograph left will be at faded, if not completely gone. Footprints and metal hardware may be all that is left.
3
Let’s get over ourselves shall we? I bet we wouldn’t be have this discussion if the Russians landed first.
3
The headline is ridiculous. Like the song by Kansas, Dust in the Wind, those footprints on the moon are, in the big scheme of things, a tiny reminder that we dabbled up there. In geologic time, they will be wiped out by asteroids crashing into the moon at some point. Better we start sweeping the forests to prevent forest fires, as our fearless leader recommends.
2
No worries, a meteor strike will sort it all out in the fullness of time.
Just like the way the traces of that unfortunate asteroid mining project begun by the dinosaurs, and that went so disastrously wrong, were wiped away.
1
We should preserve the moon and all the celestial bodies as they are and not worry about how some humans reached there and left some stuff behind. A museum on the Earth, ala Smithsonian, is sufficient for that.
2
Should probably point out that the company mentioned in this article, PT Systems, went bankrupt 6 days ago.
What are we doing to preserve OUR home planet?
17
With the huge amount of revisionist history this country is undergoing, some liberal is liable to sue to get his foot prints swept off the moon because once he offended some one’s sensitivities.
Personally I think they should be saved and treated like the Lascaux cave paintings or the Wright Brother’s flight, join a list of mankind’s first efforts that changed the history of the species.
But in will come some person offended by some thing and successfully sue in a California or New York court room to have them removed, like so many other pieces of history.
Of all the amazing achievements of mankind, Armstrong’s boot prints and artifacts must be preserved. Certainly if anyone could even give a passing thought to a Trump Library (God forbid), we should consider preserving our best heritage instead of the worst. No narcissistic monuments or “Towers” here, plastered with repulsive names.
1
Unrelated question: I keep reading about how the new effort to land people on the Moon has been delayed by issues around the design and construction of a rocket, landers and “Moon Suits”. Why don’t we just use the same stuff we used last time? Worked then.
There are plenty of problems on Earth. Forget the moon.
6
On my suburban street, once you put something out on the curb you've given up your claim to it.
4
armstrong's footprints should be preserved forever.
1
What possible difference does this make? He didn't throw garbage all over the place. He stuck a flag in the ground, and left other mission related "things". In fact, I truly hope his bootprints stay there a very, very long time. Like several millenia, although I believe it will be colonized in some form or fashion, like for science, as long s we don't go further beyond the tipping point in climate change here. If we don't stop, like now, there won't be anyone on earth for a very long time; certainly none that will have heard of Neil Armstrong.
12
Yes. The moon, although significantly smaller than the earth, is still very large. An international treaty to preserve the small areas in which humanity explored, and will explore, the moon is paramount to continue the spirit of scientific collaboration and preservation of history between nations.
Why waste time, money, and valuable talent to preserve ephemeral history on the moon? Unlike our national parks or monuments like Stonehenge and the Great Pyramids, 99.99999% of humans alive (and probably in the distant future) will be able to visit the moon. Talk about preservation for the 1%. I say let's Invest In American Workers instead. Universal Healthcare, Free Education and/or training for the new AI world, Minimum income for all Americans. I'll let the politicians figure out how to fund this policy but we can start by progressive taxes on all incomes above $10 million, rolling back the corporate tax cuts and offer tax incentives for companies employing American Workers, have corporations pay into the universal health care fund the amount they are currently paying for health care for their employees - this cost is more than the amount most industrialized nations are paying for their healthcare.
IIAW will make us a stronger, more durable and humane country.
4
Aside from the obvious historic value of the first landing site where humans landed and walked on another celestial body for the first time, there is also an entrepreneurial value that will undoubtedly be exploited (ala the novel Artemis by Andy Weir). I could imagine sipping my Quad Grande, Non Fat, Extra Hot Caramel Macchiato Upside Down from the first Starbucks on the moon while overlooking the footprints on Tranquility Base!
1
In this weeks times I read about preserving our first steps on the moon. The first steps were by Buzz Aldrin and Neil Armstrong who boarded Apollo 11 to get to the moon. It is said that they left over 100 objects on the moon including trash. And since the moon has no atmosphere all of these things will stay like the first steps on the moon. These things can’t technically be preserved and stopped from rovers driving on them because the United States doesn’t own the land on the moon. Also restricting access to historical sites on the moon may restrict the freedom of exploration of the moon. And although right now we can’t preserve the first steps on the moon we are still working to because we find it a good cause and memory for history. I enjoyed reading about this because I love space. I think it is fascinating that there are other galaxies and planets that may be similar to ours that we can’t see. I also believe that we should continue to work to find a legal way to preserve humanities first steps on the moon. These will be important to look back on in history as a memory for people on Earth. And for Neil and Buzz themselves.
The first imprints humankind made on another sphere are historical by any standard. Making an effort to preserve them for that reason should be a no-brainer. One person here notes that “their value is more sentimental than scientific” – to which I reply, yes! And the sentiment is a worthy one.
I appreciate the competition to see which commenter is the most heard-headed: Humans are awful. We “trashed” the moon by touching it. We shouldn’t ever spend a penny on anything bold or inspiring until every we account for every conceivable mundane thing. What a sad vision of our purpose for being. If you intended it as wisdom, please know it came across as spite. Perhaps the competition here is to see whose heart is the driest.
And at least half of the commentary here moots itself by misunderstanding the question. No one is proposing that we “spend money” to build a dome or fence around these sites. Merely that we agree among ourselves not to trample them. That costs nothing—a fair trade for a priceless outcome.
6
I think someone who has a love for history and is a major history buff, I think it's important to preserve history because we can learn from major lesson that people went through and we don't have to make the same mistakes. Preserving Armstrong's footprints will show the power and the dominate that the US had in the space race. But since space is basically a vacuum and nothing "living" is alive on the surface of the moon, and like Joshua said in the comments "making every country's first landings on the moon into shrines seems silly and likely to cause of completely unnecessary controversy."
1
America has national parks, but what if there were international parks?
The moon should be preserved as an international park.
5
I am very skeptical about the archaeological value of preserving footprints etc. Due to dust storms it will not be possible to preserve footprints on Mars. So why should we preserve them on the Moon? We are doing just fine without preserved footprints of Christopher Columbus or Lewis and Clark or all the explorers who have visited the North and South Poles. It makes sense to me to put markers on historic sites and move interesting equipment to the Lunar equivalent of the Smithsonian Air and Space Museum. Making every country's first landings on the moon into shrines seems silly and likely to cause of completely unnecessary controversy.
2
The photographs are enough.
While I am indifferent to whether we ever go back, a fence around the sites would be enough.
When we consider the needs of people on our borders, worrying about footprints on the moon fades into insignificance.
9
The chances are that anything organic, paper, or plastic that was left on the moon, exposed to vacuum, sunlight, cosmic rays etc., has long since been reduced to nothingness. The footprints might actually be valuable scientifically, as evidence of micrometeorite bombardment over the period. But if we get to the Moon again (50-50 at best) we can do all the measurements we want.
4
Perhaps the lessons learned from the exploration of Antarctica and the international agreements that ensued could be a starting point. No nation has sovereignty over that continent. Now we are seeing what the commercialization of that area is looking like as the tourists queue up for their chance to set foot on it. I imagine a day where there is an international landfill on the moon and the Moon garbage collectors go on strike.
There is nothing precious about footprints, as any child ever to play on the shore has observed with distress. This bit of ephemera is preserved only because the moon has no winds, and because it is so remote of access. The idea that they should be preserved, rather than trampled is comical. No one has walked on the moon since December 1972. Let that sink in. Most people alive today were born after that. The moon should have more visitors, even if they scuff up footprints left by Buzz and Neil.
Anyway, there is no forever. Even barring an impact from a celestial object, the moon will be consumed when the sun expands into a red giant, before it contracts into a white dwarf.
13
@Michael Sierchio
There is nothing precious about footprints to you, and I understand and respect your belief.
From the other viewpoint most preserved footprints are precious features that document humanity in ways other objects simply cannot.
Take the fossil footprints of early hominids at places like Engare Sero or Trachilos, Crete. These finds helped re-write our understanding of human evolution.
Closer to home, two years ago I documented a site in Tucson that by a freak of geology, preserved hundreds of footprints from the dawn of agriculture in North America. Army Rangers were able to identify the actions of 13 people on a farm from 1000 BC. Men and Women, children, dogs. We learned more from that excavation than any similar project in the region for decades.
15
Thank you. There is no "forever"; my point exactly. Simply look how man has treated planet Earth: With complete disregard of the consequences, as if we will be here "forever". We will not (survive), as all civilizations fail, at some point. Earth will recover easily; however we won't; that is unless we make some very tough, but absolutely necessary, choices. And doi it ASAP.
4
@Michael Sierchio, "the moon will be consumed when the sun expands into a red giant..."
But imagine how Keith Richards will feel as he watches that happen.
4
Every time a Democrat proposes something that costs money, like disaster relief for example, Republicans and members of the press corps roll their eyes and ask where the money is supposed to come from, as if the US treasury were some puny cookie jar. But Republicans promote spending billions on outlandish, grandiose things like a trip to Mars, and for no other reason than to glorify the dear leader Trump, another trip to the moon, and money is no object.
Do deal. Medicare for all first. Then later, maybe, we'll talk about the moon.
19
@Mike
First of all, I very much doubt that space exploration is a Republican agenda only.
Second, - and this is a common misconception - the fact that funds are not spent for space exploration does not equal that they will be spent on health care. Most likely they will go to defense.
3
@Mike
At its highest, Nasa’s Budget during the Apollo program was just under 5% of the total Federal Budget; today it’s about 0.5%.
That wasn’t or is now enough significant sums of money for any social program including Medicare for all; today, per year, NASA’s $20 billion versus $1,400+ billion for health insurance.
1
@Elena M.
The subject was trips to Mars and the moon. Space exploration, a rather broad topic, is something else.
The point was not that we should trae space for health care, the point was hypocrisy. The point was the lavish and indiscriminate waste of trillions of dollars by people who suddenly become "fiscally conservative" when the stakes are life and death for struggling Americans.
3
Law professor Steve Mirmina: "Is there anything stopping you from just driving over Neil Armstrong’s footprints?"
Mirmina means LEGALLY "stopping you".
Mirmina: "If you’re a couple of college students and you have a rover and iPhone, of course you’re going to want to drive around ..."
Technically and economically, there is a LOT "stopping you":
1. An "iPhone" would need to be able to communicate with the "rover", and that's not possible currently.
2. Getting anything into space is expensive, so it is unlikely that "a couple of college students" will be "driv[ing] around" on the Moon any time soon.
6
@HYF
I'm not so sure about your points 1 and 2.
College students have driven the Curiosity and Opportunity rovers on Mars from home computers in their apartments.
2
Doug: "College students have driven the Curiosity and Opportunity rovers on Mars from home computers in their apartments."
I can't find any news articles saying that has been done. Please cite a reliable source.
Anyway, that scenario would be conducted under highly controlled conditions as part of an existing research project, which is not at all like Mirmina's boozed-up college students on spring break fantasy.
3
Clarifying my criticism of Mirmina's "college students" scenario:
Mirmina supposes that the "college students" "have a rover and iPhone". Mirmina assumes a lot with the word "have", which suggests ownership or access to a "rover".
Mirmina used to work at NASA so he should know that a lot of infrastructure is required to "have" a lunar rover -- including a spacecraft to get the rover to the Moon and a reliable communications infrastructure to communicate with the rover.
If Mirmina can come up with a realistic scenario where "a couple of college students" would have access to that infrastructure, it might be possible to take him seriously.
More realistically, a commercial enterprise could put together a "Drive-a-Moon-Rover" service, but any abuse of the service would provoke a severe backlash on Earth similar to what certain social media companies have been getting recently.
I know exactly where I was when we landed on the moon, my ear pinned to the radio broadcast outside a local convenience store for the announcement. I had built the models of the various rockets, studied the progress, we were very excited as a little boy. I also recall how underwhelmed I was a couple years later when a piece of the moon came to our school on tour, the tiny sliver viewable with a huge magnifier. Somehow the glory had faded.
I now understand quite a bit about the world, nuclear war via ICBMs, government of military men, and the power of $$ that drives the military industrial complex. I know that the Apollo project was a monumental boondoggle of distraction, a side issue to the most insane human project in world history, the Cold War of mutual standoff in readiness for world annihilation. This barbaric genocidal program was a Pentagon/MIT Lincoln Lab/Rand Corporation program of insult to the humanity we all share. Which element of the moon landing: the waste of money, it's tie-in to the Cold War, or the Big Lie foisted on we citizens, is the most egregious is left to each of us to determine. This silly article is only insult of pure ignorance piled on injury of wrongheaded dishonest government.
1
Treaties, Agreements, Pacts. Call it what u like. It’s still subject to the whims of the current White House occupant. Why would any other nation want to sign something like that nowadays?
5
Thanks Nadia,
Armstrong's prints belong on the moon. What doesn't belong on the moon is Richard Nixon's memory. 100,000 years from now when archaeologists from Sirius find our traces they will think that Nixon must have been quite a guy. JFK's name should be on the moon. And tell Enrico that the cosmos is wide and the aliens are far away. But eventually it will happen. Nixon's the one? Oi
6
Unfortunately, neither the footprints on the moon nor our species, our planet or the moon will be here forever. At the very least, our sun will become a red giant and incinerate the earth and moon.
5
we need to get over ourselves.
come on. we have a discussion about how to put crime scene tape around historical detritus, trash and scuffing on the surface of the moon, and we can't even preserve our home planet.
"but we're a special species, we've flown to the moon, we walked around on it -- no other species can do that."
no other species can pollute a planet into extinction, either, unless it's a bloom of sulfide spewing ocean bacteria.
"but we're a great species, we do great things, we cure cancer, fly to the moon!"
get back to me on cancer. i want to hear today about what you're doing to save the planet.
"we can't stop progress now! more people, more profit, more bucks for the big dogs!"
spoken like a true zombie. prattle on, deadhead.
8
While I appreciate the goal of a pristine moonscape, with nothing left behind other than the landing marks and bootprints as evidence of our species visits, to spend significant human and monetary resources on achieving this goal seems perhaps to be missing the mark, considering what mankind is facing here on earth.
7
It's said that the easiest way to remove a building is to cut a one foot square in the roof; the environment will take care of the rest. It is an interesting thought to consider that when humanity's time on earth is over and the earth has renewed itself of our presence, there could still remain ancient footprints on the moon. At that point it will no longer be about science or history but will instead become a poignant piece of art.
22
Yes, there are other priorities, but I'd like to think an advanced society can both walk and chew gum. We always hear "If we can go to the moon, why can't we do A, B and C?" Well, how about we go to the moon AND do A, B and C? Space exploration and earthly concerns don't have to be an either/or proposition.
31
@StuAtl but it is an either/or proposition because space exploration is totally unnecessary. not a popular view, i know, but apart from satellites for communication and earth observation (mission accomplished! no need to go further!), i have yet to hear a convincing argument for space exploration. the "humans NEED to explore" argument is very, very tired, in my view, and not substantiated by anything other than the fact that we do explore (so, tautological). if you or anyone has a good argument for why pushing out into space should be a priority, i'd love to hear it.
3
@mpr
Then how about these argument for manned space programs;
1)Because of the necessity to reduce the risk given human crews, the level of quality in propulsion, computing, redundancy, environmental and navigation systems have to be magnitudes above non-manned.
2) Given these are engineering issues, the likelihood of success is higher than for success in any social programs.
3) The amount spent at the height of the Apollo program Nasa’s Budget was 4.7%(today it’s under 0.5%). With that the top mechanical, electrical, rocket and system engineers as well as large-scale and long-time project management systems and people are employed; yes these are rocket scientists.
All for 0.46% of the Federal Budget.
Heck, we also don’t need a military budget that’s greater the next 7 countries combined. How about even the amount of money spent on dry cat food. This argument is real, there are many consumer expenditures that are also detrimental to personal and societal health and well being; alcohol, extreme sports, etc. that total way more than $20B/year.
“We choose to go to the moon” or you can choose to do nothing extraordinary. And when you do nothing, you are not great if that’s important to you.
6
@mpr To learn about the universe. That quest elevates us beyond a simple life form that lives and dies. If we stop trying to advance scientific knowledge, we're headed back toward living in caves.
6
It’s not a laughing matter. When the US has to dedicate a specific part of the Air Force just to monitor space debris, we have a serious problem. We won’t even be able to get to the moon if we continue to surround earth orbit with garbage. At some point there will be a serious collision with a manned spacecraft and the debris circling the earth. As far as the moon goes, we simply need to negotiate a treaty with all the other nations that leaves Tranquility Base as a historic landmark for the people of earth. That problem is easy compared to the junkyard orbiting our planet.
22
@Mike L
You are right. Space junk endangers our communications, weather, and GPS satellites as well as future space projects. Sadly, not too many nations are lining up to negotiate and sign treaties right now.
6
There are so many other things overwhelmingly more important right now than preserving footprints on the moon, that I dearly hope zero human resources are spent on this project.
22
@polymath
Consider the resources required to allow us to complain about resources not be used as we personally believe they should. What a waste. Think of the millions of things we humans do that are not as important as the other millions of things we do. We should drop absolutely every other human endeavor until we solve someone's top priorities. All of us, all six plus billion people need to focus, right now. Because there are not enough people to waste time on art or exploration or philosophy.
2
@Mark
And if you drop every other human endeavor to solve top priorities such as addiction, poverty, income inequality, health ... you will fail, absolutely and totally.
Those are social problems, extremely complex while space exploration is an engineering problem, extremely difficult but with testable solutions.
Put another way, total the amount of money Nasa has spent since 1958, $602 Billion (manned and unmanned) versus any social program such as just welfare programs- for JUST one year $698 Billion.
We went to the moon, poverty and inequality are still with us. I’m not saying we shouldn’t have social programs, I am saying if you wait to do the “other things” you’ll be waiting forever.
It’s not a pleasant thought, but it is reality.
6
This article states a few times that it will take a long time to amend the Outer Space Treaty to include lunar preservation. Is anybody working to do that? If not, get to work!
3
@Aardvark Avenger
Well, yes, they are. That is what this article is all about. People are working on this. Problem is that current geopolitics are anathema to friendly world encompassing agreements, much less outer space encompassing. And our country is leading the charge away from international agreements.
This is kind of funny that the US wants special treatment for some footprints on the moon.
Let's treat them with the same respect as they treated the native Indians when they started colonizing North America.
11
@Two in Memphis well intentioned but wrong, let's learn from the past. Let's not repeat it. Historical sites are worth preserving.
21
@Two in Memphis
The first settlers were not just murdered - but horrifically slaughtered - by the indigenous tribes.
And there is no such thing as native American. The first humans to this continent were Asian nomads.
9
@Two in Memphis
Well, for one the U.S.A did not start the colonization. It is the result of it after a couple of hundred years of it. Then the U.S. managed to make it worse.
However, the world changes and we most of us disagree with genocide now.
Also, it is not just about U.S. sites but also Russia, China, etc.
If you go back 50 years you will see that this was seen as a human achievement as much or more than a U.S. achievement.
We live in a world that appreciates shared human history, thus UNESCO World Heritage Sites. They are important to us even if the country they exist in did something bad to us or someone else in the past. This is no different.
5
They should be made to pick up their litter on the moon. Should be a littering on the moon fine: $30,000,000.
30
@Marjorie Summons Anything that is made from organic materials / compounds will already be nearly non-existent right now due to: (a) constant exposure to radiation (both from the sun and from cosmic rays) and (b) intense temperature (from 220+ to minus 220).
4
How long is forever?
Whose Moon is it?
6
The human capacity to thoughtlessly destroy things truly has no bounds. When people 'go where no one has gone before' there will be trash and for aliens studying our remains in the future that is what they will study.
8
@just Robert It depends. On the Moon, anything that is made from organic materials / compounds will already be nearly non-existent right now due to: (a) constant exposure to radiation (both from the sun and from cosmic rays) and (b) intense temperature (from 220+ to minus 220).
2
@Angel Perez but WAS anything made from organic material left on the moon? i think it was all metal and plastic, or encased in metal or plastic. if you know otherwise, please share!
1
Rest assured humans will trash the moon just as we have the earth.
15
In the sci-fi novel Artemis by Andy Weir, the site is roped off as a tourist attraction. Tourists take a tram from a nearby moon base and view Tranquility Base from an indoor platform. They can also get into clear, pressurized gerbil balls and roll around the area, but no one is allowed to disturb the site itself.
27
YES! Of course! Leave the boot prints where they are. It's history. Our history.
29
The astounding hubris of humans, seeking to protect a 50 year old footprint on a object billions of years old. I doubt the space fairing cockroaches that inherit the earth after we make any other life impossible here will care much about our “achievements” other than the fact that we were so short sighted.
99
"The astounding hubris of humans, seeking to protect a 50 year old footprint on a object billions of years old."
"Humans" already do that on Earth, which is also "billions of years old".
See, for example, the efforts to preserve a prehistoric child's footprint in Chauvet Cave in France.
And prehistoric cave art is also carefully preserved. In the case of the Lascaux cave art, it is reproduced in separate locations, so people can see the replicas while the original is protected.
There are numerous books on prehistoric art and culture, including:
"Chauvet Cave : the art of earliest times" by Jean Clottes.
"The cave painters : probing the mysteries of the world's first artists" by Gregory Curtis.
31
Maybe, but those footprints will still be there, revolving around the earth for eons, reminding of what could have been.
10
@Paulie
But for the Cold War between the Soviet Union and America there would have been no race to the Moon.
But for the current Cold War with China, the Chinese would have a place on the International Space Station.
There is only one human race on one planet with one Moon in one solar system and one galaxy that we know of.
3
This is a problem?
How vulnerable is the moon to human interference and habitat destruction? The number of actual visitors to the moon will always be negligible, and the stuff they left behind--inspirational and pollutive--are a testament to who we are.
Our changing climate, and the destruction of the world's forests for grazing and farming are pants-on-fire issues, compared to lunar abstractions. And exactly how would our current geopolitical forces agree on it anyway?
5
Absolutely. Take the long view. We will never know when and where Homo sapiens first took steps on this planet, but never has the historical record been so precise as what happened at the Sea of Tranquility 50 years ago.
Preserve the first landing site as best we can. When we came for all man kind, that also refers to mankind’s future generations. Let them thank us for our foresight.
15
What a quaint thought. The only reason these sites seem so sacred now is because there are so few of them, and I’m sorry, but their value is much more sentimental than scientific. From my perspective as an ancient historian, if there comes a time when future historians need to resort to archaeology to reconstruct Apollo 11, it’ll be because some disruption in human civilization will have caused all the video and records of it to be lost. If those footprints are still there after that happens, it won’t be because we succeeded in preserving them, it’ll be because we failed at exploiting the moon well enough to eliminate them.
12
@Craig Russell I do not believe any "ancient historian" would take that attitude.
2
@Craig Russell
Well yes, first steps are usually in short supply....
In you study of ancient history, how many times have you come across abundant quantities of a first thing?
I suppose after the first dozen times someone does something for the first time ever it becomes rather uninteresting...
There is a plaque up there right? That's enough.
14
I don't want to talk about the Moon until we clean up the Earth.
57
@Gerry
That'll require zero population growth, as ought've been the case since the 1960s.
7
@Gerry
I don't want to talk about the earth until we clean up our continent. Which needs to wait until we clean up our country. Which needs to wait until we get our state in order. Which is somebody else's problem until my city is cleaned up. But its starts in our neighborhood. By cleaning my house.
We'll talk again right after you go clean up your room young man!
4
So we’re worried about preserving spots where we sullied a pristine wilderness?
We SHOULD go back to those spots. To clean them up.
As with another commenter, I was raised with the leave it better than you found it ethic.
39
@Steve B "So we’re worried about preserving spots where we sullied a pristine wilderness?"
The house you live in, the roads you drive on, the schools your kid attend also "sullied a pristine wilderness". Will you be sacrificing them to "clean them up"? Didn't think so, Steve.
11
Couple things come to mind..
1. My grandfather [an Eagle Scout, Army Ranger and avid Naturalist] always told me, "Always leave a campsite cleaner than when you found it."
2. There are sections in Yellowstone Park [thermal mud] closed to visitors for the same reasons- once stepped in, the foot prints are indelible.
I thought all of us want to make the world a better place? Let's take that into consideration before we start trashing the surface of the moon.
52
Wow, is this really practical? Imagine fencing off whole parts of Plymouth, Massachusetts to preserve the footprints of the Pilgrims.
16
@Steven Harrod. We were not the first inhabitants to the New World but we were the first to step on the moon. We have sites throughout the world that are preserved why not the footprints on the moon?
28
@Steven Harrod It's like the old gag about Columbus "discovering America."
No, Christopher C. was discovered IN America by the locals!
10
@Steven Harrod there is literally a fenced-off area surrounding Plymouth Rock where the Pilgrims were supposed to have landed: https://www.shutterstock.com/editorial/image-editorial/at-400-plymouth-usa-18-nov-2018-9985213c
Of course, it's not where they actually first landed, and they weren't the first to have landed, and the rock is just a random rock assigned meaning in lieu of actual archeological preservation.
8