# Possible Mars missions



## thepaladin (Sep 10, 2009)

It hit the news a few days ago that "scientists" (have you noticed that in news stories like this there are seldom any names, just scientists") anyway, scientists have suggested that Mars missions would be more cost efficient if the humans who went made one way trips. 


The news commentators depress me with their "why should we be doing this" attitudes. 20 or 30 years ago Carl Sagan observed we should be a 2 planet species. They'll "cheerfully" do programs on Asteroids striking the Earth, loss of natural resources, over population etc. and yet wonder why colonization and possible Terra-forming of Mars would be a bad thing. That it might "cost too much". Like we need another "turtle crossing" under a freeway and more office buildings named after "congress-persons". Now that's good use of public funds.


The down side for me is I'm past 50...no chance I'll get a shot at being one of the permanent members of the Mars colony/research team. Given some form of bionic body that would take a human brain or some form of rejuvenation I'd jump at the chance. Science fiction has had "robot bodies" controlled by human brains for decades...why is technology so far behind? Of course the first ones will be for military use....a brain controlled tank or something. Well, if they'd build it at least the research could go forward. 


Starting with green house set-ups and the use of hydroponic systems there could be a self sustaining colony on Mars in fairly short order. Should there actually be ice below the surface which could be accessed that would not only open up amazing avenues of research it would also provide for growth and development on the planet surface.


The human race is capable of so much for us always to end up subject to such short sighted leaders.

　​


----------



## Hilarious Joke (Sep 10, 2009)

I don't know, I can see why Mars would be a much lower priority than healthcare, education, social welfare, infrastructure, conservation, international relations, and foreign aid. Though I wish governments didn't spend so much money on military (a wish made in vain).


----------



## thepaladin (Sep 10, 2009)

And of course it will continue to be...on and on and on. Just like balencing the budget and so on. We waste enough money on what used to be called "pork barrel projects" and are now called "ear marks" to fund 50 space programs. Congress has it's own health care for life (even if you only serve one 2 year term) that pales any the American people will ever see etc. It's all priorities. This small rock now supports what seven Billion people? On large astriod.....and at best back to the stone age. Oh well... have it your way.


----------



## Pyan (Sep 10, 2009)

thepaladin said:


> One large asteriod.....and at best back to the stone age. Oh well... have it your way.



Or worse, one small-to-medium sized one - enough to destroy most of the infrastructure, communications and organisation on the planet, but not _enough _of the people...


----------



## Rodders (Sep 10, 2009)

What happened to the moon? Surely we need a permanent colony on the moon first. Start up the space tourism and get some money coming in. Space exploration won't really take off until it becomes profitable.


----------



## Sparrow (Sep 10, 2009)

We need neither a Moon Station or a colony on Mars.

A Mission to Mars would be fantastically expensive and as it stands right now we Americans are swimming in over ten trillion dollars of red ink.

When money is spent on a program such as space exploration, it means that we have foregone the other possible uses of those resources. In this case we have given up some very valuable resources. Virtually an entire generation of scientists, engineers, and technical experts were wasted over the last 35 years (1/2 trillion of today’s dollars) without completing any of the major possibilities and plans that were drawn up in the wake of Apollo 11. These were some of the smartest and most dedicated members of our society and they could have accomplished so much for the betterment of mankind had they not been enrolled in the NASA bureaucracy. What diseases could have been eradicated? What technologies could have been developed? What new products could have been produced? A mission to Mars promises to bureaucratize the next generation of these talented people and throw away most of their potential to help mankind.


No, we're not going anywhere.
We have not earned the right to explore space, not by a longshot.


----------



## thepaladin (Sep 10, 2009)

Not earned the right to explore space????

If we followed that line of thinking we'd not even know North America and South America were here. I mean think how much more good could have been done for all the poor of Europe with funds wasted on the months long gambles to cross the Atlantic. And as for the "right to explore". The native Americans might agree with you. Disease spread, wars fought....oh my goodness, what a mistake this all was....

Are you aware of how many of the things we take for granted today (including medical discoveries) came from space research?

Humans are humans and until God interviens and sets up His Kingdom here (okay, I know there are big disagreements here, but I'm not trying to start a religious discussion, I'm only talking about human failures) humans will be a mix of good and bad.

Ever read the old Heinlein novels. He pretty much approaches it with his eyes open. It's a matter of survival. Either we "squat" here on our little clod of dirt and die out or we step off and survive. Heinlien observed in one of his novels that we survive because we'd only once met any species that was nearly as "nasty" as we are.  Maybe not good, but the way it is. 

We are now I believe at a turning point in human history (and I am a Christian so I won't be bringing my beliefs into it. I do believe God will intervein at some point but till then we live in a world He has turned over to us at own insistence). Mostly the "advanced" countries are settling into a comfortable rot. We are turning over to the "government" the care of our elderly, our sick, and more and more even our children. We are rapidly approaching Huxley's brave new world. It may be that if we are to move off this rock it will fall on private interests  to do it. Tourism, mining etc. may be a way to fund it. Again misfit, rebels and so on may be the people who take part, so long as it gets started before "government" clamps down so hard as to make it impossible.

Look at the exploration of the so called "new world". Risk, danger, adventure...death...but it kept on. There just isn't anywhere left on earth for indivualists to go. 

I still believe that if we don't step off Earth soon we'll go to seed so to speak. I don't expect universal agreement and that's fine. I believe in free speech and free thought. I'm just expressing my baffelment at those who don't see Space exploration as the next logical step...actually the only logical step.


----------



## Sparrow (Sep 11, 2009)

> Not earned the right to explore space????
> 
> If we followed that line of thinking we'd not even know North America and South America were here. I mean think how much more good could have been done for all the poor of Europe with funds wasted on the months long gambles to cross the Atlantic. And as for the "right to explore". The native Americans might agree with you. Disease spread, wars fought....oh my goodness, what a mistake this all was....




First, stop using that ridiculous metaphor that sailing the oceans of the world is comparable to space exploration. It is not.  We set out on the milky seas to points unknown to make our fortunes and to secure new lands for King and country.  Romance aside, it was economically viable. 

Do you have any idea what it costs to move one ton of cargo into orbit, to the Moon, to Mars, to the outer planets?.. I didn't think so.  Are you the least bit aware of the energy expediture needed to send a loaf of bread to our nearest neighbors circling Proxima Centauri?.. oh I thought not. Have you an understanding of what effect cosmic radiation has on a human body?.. no, of course you don't.  These and many more are the problems we have no workable solutions for.  For now and the distant future manned missions exploring deep space is out of the question. 

If you can, try to differentiate between science and technology, and science fantasy.  Because the only thing that has us colonizing Mars, or exploring deep space, are science _fantasy_ writers.



> Are you aware of how many of the things we take for granted today (including medical discoveries) came from space research?




Most of what you think you know is NASA propaganda, and let's face it, what NASA has become is little more than a golden goose where defense contractors go to pluck tax dollars in between Pentagon weapon projects. 




> We are now I believe at a turning point in human history (and I am a Christian so I won't be bringing my beliefs into it. I do believe God will intervein at some point but till then we live in a world He has turned over to us at own insistence). Mostly the "advanced" countries are settling into a comfortable rot. We are turning over to the "government" the care of our elderly, our sick, and more and more even our children. We are rapidly approaching Huxley's brave new world. It may be that if we are to move off this rock it will fall on private interests to do it. Tourism, mining etc. may be a way to fund it. Again misfit, rebels and so on may be the people who take part, so long as it gets started before "government" clamps down so hard as to make it impossible.



Well, since you lot don't take care of our sick and our weary the way Jesus commands you to, then there is little else for it, the government steps in.  Tourism?..mining?.. are you joking?
You really think a bunch of chubby well-heeled tourists are going to escape a tyranical government.  C'mon, be reasonable. 



> Look at the exploration of the so called "new world". Risk, danger, adventure...death...but it kept on. There just isn't anywhere left on earth for indivualists to go.




Individualist,
definition; One that asserts individuality by independence of thought and action.

Do you consider yourself one of these individualists?




> I still believe that if we don't step off Earth soon we'll go to seed so to speak. I don't expect universal agreement and that's fine. I believe in free speech and free thought. I'm just expressing my baffelment at those who don't see Space exploration as the next logical step...actually the only logical step.



The next logical step in Mankind's development will be to forsake fantastic beliefs in the supernatural, and turnaway from the old habits that are ruining the only home we've got.  In the end, we are all of us lucky beyond measure, to sojourn here on a planet that for all we know, is without equal in all the universe.


----------



## thepaladin (Sep 11, 2009)

I get it...it's hard and expensive so we don't start??? Gotcha

As for the comparsion...the technology of the time along with the given knowledge are fairly comparable....or is the world flat?

The entire point of this thread is that those who have been planning and want to make the first trip believe that a one way trip would cut costs enough to make it possible.

I see from the way this is going we'll never agree. However in spite of your attitude the same arguments _were_ made at every point in human exploration and advancement...it's just too expensive. It's impossible. It's too dangerous. Or the one I love...you asked if I understand the energy requirments...of course. Energy is one of the prime points of discussion among us all now, even here "at home".

We basicly face the choice of moving to another world (and yes Mars will be a huge challenge to Terra-form, but it can be done just as most things can in actulity), or reducing our population and living under a sort of totalitarian government that will have to control every part of all lives. Who can have children...how many children and be had....who will live where...who will live...and so on. But that will be a rather "messy" process. The so called third world will probably object to being starved or otherwise annihilated. How many billion can this world really support?

Exploration is a plus and will give us far more than it costs.

As for the comments on my belief system...pointless and has nothing to do with the discussion. As I said the very disagreement is a plus as it points out our freedom... we will all continue to express what we think on this and other subjects. When we can't do that we're really in trouble.


----------



## Sparrow (Sep 11, 2009)

If your beliefs have nothing to do with this discussion then why did you bring them up in the first place?  I made my comments based on YOUR statements and religious sentiments as they concern space exploration.
You were the one who introduced God and his imminent return to this thread.

Not to mention your obvious slam against liberals and healthcare reform, and a none to subtle jab at the liberal anti-individualists agenda.


C'mon dude, be real, that's all I ask for, some honest exchange of ideas.


----------



## chrispenycate (Sep 11, 2009)

Sparrow said:


> A Mission to Mars would be fantastically expensive and as it stands right now we Americans are swimming in over ten trillion dollars of red ink.


What percentage of the trillions 'wasted' were spent within the United States? You can consider it as creating employment, and training people in skills other than queuing up for a handout.





> When money is spent on a program such as space exploration, it means that we have foregone the other possible uses of those resources.


 the biggest loss of potential intellect is into the legal profession, instead of following a scientific education.  What makes the difference is motivation, and while that is almost always financial in present day society, there are examples where it has been otherwise. Occasionally an advertising executive will feel called into slum clearance, or a corporate lawyer develop a conscience, but these situations are rare. NASA at its inception had more than its fair share of these star-eyed idealists, and managed miracles. Oh, I regret the administration that has clogged it near motionless since, and don't think it will be America that develops Mars, or even the Moon; but those pioneers would not have done nearly as much if they'd been replacing sewer systems or broken street lights; they needed that high target.





> In this case we have given up some very valuable resources. Virtually an entire generation of scientists, engineers, and technical experts were wasted over the last 35 years (1/2 trillion of today’s dollars) without completing any of the major possibilities and plans that were drawn up in the wake of Apollo 11. These were some of the smartest and most dedicated members of our society and they could have accomplished so much for the betterment of mankind had they not been enrolled in the NASA bureaucracy. What diseases could have been eradicated? What technologies could have been developed?


What new glittery gadgets put onto the market to keep the economy and industry turning until they became unfashionable? What new designer drugs developed to enliven disco evenings? Scientists have been specialising for over a century (overspecialising, perchance); it is hardly likely that a specialist in fuel injection control would have been much use in analysing the surface proteins of the HIV virus. Even the engineers involved in manufacturing new techniques of death couldn't be easily recycled into producing lower pollution vehicles; their interests and training don't lie in that direction – no drive.





> What new products could have been produced? A mission to Mars promises to bureaucratize the next generation of these talented people and throw away most of their potential to help mankind.


 While an optimist about the future of civilisation, and our species, even I don't try and claim that a large percentage of invention is beneficial to society as a whole. And it would be easy enough to train up enough of the excess population to take up the slack in the scientific/technological staff; if you can infect them with  the dream. If nothing else, in the sixties, when they were recruiting the dreamers for the space industry, there were hardly any women getting a scientific education. Just accepting that half your population is capable of thinking logically, despite what years of tradition had taught, potentially doubles your workforce; if you can infect them with the right dream.

In the moon years, more kids saw a potential in research for interest and fulfilment; now it pays to be a lawyer, or a bureaucrat. 





> No, we're not going anywhere.
> We have not earned the right to explore space, not by a longshot.


----------



## thepaladin (Sep 12, 2009)

I'm going to be away from my computer for a week or so, no net access...not just vanishing, should be back in a week or so, God willing )) 

I did want to answer your question. I only mentioned my beliefs in passing when I mentioned that humans would probably bring about their own demise barring devine intervention, and that "by the way" I did believe there would be devine intervention. My argument was that we should work toward the future as though we were on our own however. My point is that locked here we will reach a point when it will all come down around our ears.

I make no apoligies for my Christanity, but it wasn't the point I was writing about. 

Looking back over the discussion we will soon be going over the same ground. I believe my basic premis holds... some of you honestly don't. If the conversation is still going on when i get back...I'll join in and expand, again.


----------



## Sparrow (Sep 14, 2009)

> I did want to answer your question. I only mentioned my beliefs in passing when I mentioned that humans would probably bring about their own demise barring devine intervention, and that "by the way" I did believe there would be devine intervention. My argument was that we should work toward the future as though we were on our own however. My point is that locked here we will reach a point when it will all come down around our ears.



No, actually, what you said was,"We are now I believe at a turning point in human history (and I am a Christian so I won't be bringing my beliefs into it. I do believe God will intervein at some point but till then we live in a world He has turned over to us at own insistence)"... so unless I'm very much mistaken you announced you wouldn't bring your religious beliefs into the discussion and then you proceeded to state your religious beliefs.




> I make no apoligies for my Christanity, but it wasn't the point I was writing about.




It's not your beliefs you need to apologize for, it's the comments you made inferring that I introduced religion to this topic when it was you who brought it up... it's me you owe an apology.


----------



## Dozmonic (Sep 14, 2009)

There is no right to earn when it comes to exploring space, or anything else for that matter. It is difficult and it's there, that's why we'll do it. If we waited until we were ready to get things done, we'd never achieve anything as a species or as individuals. Physical problems and limitations are what stand in the way of space exploration, far easier to overcome than humanity who'll invent new problems as old ones are being solved.


----------



## Brian G Turner (Sep 14, 2009)

Let's try and keep the discussion cool, folks.


----------



## Urien (Sep 14, 2009)

We as a species live in the equivilent of an uninsured house. We know for certain that there are hazards human made, and natural that are capable of destroying our civilization and perhaps our species as well. We are also short term creatures, few of us can think in terms of the decades and billions required to create viable and sustainable systems for settling/exploiting/colonizing space. 

To those that say "wouldn't this money be better spent on...(well meaning project of choice)" then how much is species survival worth? Or don't we care because we're short term and by the time viable space colonisiation comes about we'll be dead or decrepit. But that's an argument for never addressing long term problems.

So I don't know if a Mars project is the right route; probably a better long term route is reducing payload costs into space. A massive space elevator project is probably a better idea than another gigantic firework.


----------



## Sparrow (Sep 14, 2009)

I'll go ahead and jack this thread back on topic...

The article linked below is dead on target concerning humankind's chances of populating the far flung wasteland that is our universe.  It's by Charles Stross, science fiction writer, and I should add, a futurist who thinks with his mind more than his heart.  Our romantic notions of space exploration are horribly outdated to the point of being old fashioned and even irrelevant.
We are perhaps further away from deep space travel then you think. In context, the time it's taken us to go from donkey cart to modern automobile may well be how far we are from space ships capable of reaching neighboring stars, much less setting up colonies.   

http://www.antipope.org/charlie/blog-static/2007/06/the_high_frontier_redux.html




I take my science fiction serious.  If not, well then I'd confine myself to reading those books about elven kingdoms, dragons, knights, wizards, vampires, etc... by and large, science fiction is merely fantasy dressed up with technology.


----------



## dustinzgirl (Sep 14, 2009)

Sparrow, 

I don't want to disagree with you, but

Only the rich merchants and pirates and rulers had their own cross-ocean worthy vessels. Columbus, Poncho, and all the other guys spent small fortunes with NO guarantee of any economic viability. Many died from disease and crashes. It was dangerous, expensive, and most failed to increase any real economy in their own lifetimes.

Even in early times, the Vikings for example, while they did cross oceans and go to N. America, entire villages worked tirelessly to build their vessels, together, and most didn't survive, and furthermore, they never got rich from it. 

Spice trading did increase the economy massively for nearly all sea faring nations. BUT NOT FOR MANY YEARS UNTIL AFTER THEY HAD CHARTED A PATH!

Its not like they built a ship by the lowest bidder, stuck a monkey on it, and had an automatic method of making money. It took long hard years, dangerous years, of working and building and thinking and mapping and trading.

I love space exploration. 

Space exploration means we are:

Still thinking about the possibilities
Still hopefull about the universe
Not arrogant enough to think we know everything about the universe
Striving, trying, working, believing in something greater than our bound earth.


----------



## johnsvenn (Sep 27, 2009)

Going to the stars is one thing (and the more you think about what it would entail, the more daunting it becomes) , but surely something like the colonisation of Mars is actually within our grasp right now.

This isn't to say it would be remotely easy but IMHO its more a question of the application of a lot of money and a lot of technology, it doesn't need us to invent anything new - it would be about the synthesis of a lot existing stuff - although as Urien just said we'd need something better than more big fireworks...

Anyway about to read the Charles Stross Article.


----------

