The OP original title "China rushing to beat US in the race to space " was NOT his wording. It is the tweet words of CNBC which direct people to the article. This is not the first time an article changed its title or used sensational title to lure reader. The point still stand. The OP did not use a false title but was simply copy/paste CNBA tweet title of the article.
It does matter........
If CNBC put "Angelina Jolie, Nude, Nude, Nude" on their tweeter header, and would you still think this article is any relation to nude or Angelina Jolie??
You read the article regardless of whatever handle you have seen, handle can change and may not represent the title, it could well be CNBC fault if the tweeter handle is indeed the OP title (Don't have tweeter, can't verify) But the OP is also equally culpritable for copying the tag line word to word without reading the article
In the end, do you read the article handle? Or the article itself??
As for the content of the article, like I said, the western insecurity and hype surrounding our space program with intention to draw it as a space race have been done before and people can draw parallel with this article even if this article is not talking specifically about a space race. We said before, we are not racing with anyone in space. Our program has a step-by-step process with no pressure on the timeline. Our current immediate goal is to test the capability of bringing moon soil back to earth. In 2020s, we will bring human to Moon. In 2030s, a settlement will be test place. Therefore our end goal is to possibly colonizing the moon in the 21st century.
It is not the insecurity and hype, but the facts and matter that your agency CNSA do not know what it need to settle on moon, you can imagine, you can guess, but unlike the US, which actually went to the moon and have extensively studied the Moon for the last 50 years (Yes, you heard me right, 50 years). All you can do is guess.
For you, the moon is an uncharted territories, a lot of thing you are still currently unknown, it's impossible for you to keep a time table for an item that you do not know much about. You need to chart the moon first, by actually conduct experiment on the moon, then you can enter the conquering phase that the US is currently in at the moment.
US have plan to colonize the moon since the first time they move up on it, in 1970s. It take them at least 30 years to understand the hardship on moon and try to conquer it, you are saying you can launch sorties to the moon in 2020 and within 10 years you can conquer all the hardship? Then excuse me, I will not believe it until I actually see it.
And you are pretty stupid though. Just because we achieve the same milestone you achieved in 1960s, it doesn't mean we use the 1960s tech. That is like say a computer back then is the same as today computer. No, not at all, my friend. If you speak strictly in term of achievement, then you go to the moon before. But from a modern standpoint right now, nobody has any rocket power in operation that can land on the moon. For that, you will need to go back to the drawing board on Saturn V rocket. For us, we developed the Rocket Long March 9 to do the job but that is still projected to be in mid 2020s.
It's actually naïve of you to think the US tech is still stuck in the 1960s. And no, your agency currently did not even achieve the mile stone the NASA achieve in the 60s and 70s. Let alone what the NASA can achieve today.
Your knowledge on space tech is extremely limited, and I will try to explain to you below why you are naïve to believe the US is still stuck in 60s tech.
Lastly, my friend, I don't think you understand the difference between exploration and colonization. The US simply cannot have a permanent base in the moon with 1970s tech and knowledge. To make colonizing the moon permanently feasible, there is a lot of obstacles to be resolved. In fact, 4 main reasons: energy, sheltered, food supplies, and money. The US simply cannot send people to the Moon and every week send supplies to them. It will bankrupt your economy.
lol. If you think for one second the US need to keep sending space ship back and forth every week in order to colonize the moon, then I would say you look as much blank as your brain does. Nobody can do that, not even with 2020 technology. You cannot support a colony on the other side of the world without self-sustainment, let alone supporting a colony 300000 mile away from earth.
The US have already know it's impossible to send sortie every week to supply the base in the 70s, have I actually told you they started the plan to colonize the moon back then?
The US is working on solution that will allow self-sustainment on moon, there are 4 phases of settlement.
1.) Automation - Before the moon are inhabitable, all the hard work have to be done by robot, or robotic aide. It is important for the moon to be build to habitable for human with the minimal input of manpower.
2.) Habitation - For that, you will need to have an earth like environment on moon, and by this stage, the environment would have already achieved and regulated by automation. Then and only then, you can send in the human. In this phase, you need to make the moon self sustainable (With infrastructure to support life, such as water, food and resource) and have to shelter the colony from space hazards.
3.) Industrialisation - Factor, lab and so on were then build on the moon to continue the work to make sure everything runs right, and if something break down on moon, unless it is really a big problem, you can fix them on the moon and don't need earth intervention.
4.) Actual colonization - Carry out what you do, the reason you want to colonize the moon in the first place.
From where I am seeing, you lack of basic understanding of what is require and what is US and China up to at this point, The US is well underwent the 3rd phase, the Chinese does not even start on this scale. To understand what NASA already did colonizing the moon, I suggest the following NASA publication, it was published in 1992, that is the only one you can get which is declassified, there are newer one out there, and I suppose what talked in this article have been solved long time ago.
http://settlement.arc.nasa.gov/spacersource84/toc.html
