When I mentioned Mars Direct to a friend several years ago his comment was something to the effect that there would have to be piles of money laying around there.<br /><br />His meaning was, of course, that such an undertaking was going to be so expensive that without immediate pay-off for those who had invested it would never happen a second time. And really, he was right. We went the moon, took some pictures, left some footprints, did some science, put up some flags and brought home some rocks. Well, those rocks, though they did make for some interesting geology lessons, didn't turn out to be very valuable. In fact, the technology advancements made in getting us there and back have turned out to be thousands of times more valuable to business and industry than any material returns from the moon missions. For this reason, investors are going to be loath to put up funds toward the ongoing exploration of the moon, and, in my mind this is the greatest factor in why we haven't been back in over 30 years.<br /><br />There's an anectdotal story of an early demonstration of electricity for a gathering of wealthy in London. Afterwards, one woman was heard to remark to the scientist "Very interesting, Sir, but what good is it?" to which the scientist responded "Madam, what good is a newborn baby?" Famous story, I'm sure you have heard it before. Well, we don't really know what returns on investment there is going to be from going back to the moon, and really, we won't know until we do go back. But some facts are obvious. The first is the only thought that we knew the moon. The Apollo missions brought back samples, sure, but the fact is that they only scratched the surface, literally. Since then we have discovered evidence of sub-surface water at the lunar poles. Makes you wonder what else we have missed. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>