Mars Missions Are A Scam

[Mikestang]

http://www.buzzfeed.com/danvergano/mars-aint-never-gonna-happen

Curious what this community thinks on this topic?  I am of the opinion that we have progressed beyond "get a man there first" like in the 1960s for the moon missions; our robots can do most of the exploring and field work at a fraction of the cost it would take to get humans there, and they do it much safer.  As the tech improves our robots will only get better at it.  I can't see any real benefit, especially when cost is factored in, to sending humans other than a cool factor or to say, "I did it first!".

I can get behind asteroid mining much sooner than I can a manned Mars mission.

[finnile]

Well I have heard of planned trips in 2024 to take people to Mars, lets see if that happens. The General population won't lie.

[ajareselde]

http://www.buzzfeed.com/danvergano/mars-aint-never-gonna-happen

Curious what this community thinks on this topic?  I am of the opinion that we have progressed beyond "get a man there first" like in the 1960s for the moon missions; our robots can do most of the exploring and field work at a fraction of the cost it would take to get humans there, and they do it much safer.  As the tech improves our robots will only get better at it.  I can't see any real benefit, especially when cost is factored in, to sending humans other than a cool factor or to say, "I did it first!".

I can get behind asteroid mining much sooner than I can a manned Mars mission.

How about preperations for future colonisation of the planet? exploring possible mining etc..
I realy hope they go there, i wonder how it will be for them, future is coming, and its perfectly possible that it will be an option to have a self sustaining life there.

Why ruin the fun, let them.

cheers

[BADecker]

http://www.buzzfeed.com/danvergano/mars-aint-never-gonna-happen

Curious what this community thinks on this topic?  I am of the opinion that we have progressed beyond "get a man there first" like in the 1960s for the moon missions; our robots can do most of the exploring and field work at a fraction of the cost it would take to get humans there, and they do it much safer.  As the tech improves our robots will only get better at it. I can't see any real benefit, especially when cost is factored in, to sending humans other than a cool factor or to say, "I did it first!".

I can get behind asteroid mining much sooner than I can a manned Mars mission.

How about preperations for future colonisation of the planet? exploring possible mining etc..
I realy hope they go there, i wonder how it will be for them, future is coming, and its perfectly possible that it will be an option to have a self sustaining life there.

Why ruin the fun, let them.

cheers

Right. Let them have their fun. Just don't tax the rest of us to do it.

Some of the kids - the younger people of the group - have looked at the idea of having babies (I'm talking normal, not a Mars mission baby). They realized making babies was fun. But they realized how much trouble it is after they get the kids living. So, they know what it will be like going to Mars - a thousand times harder, more dangerous, more expensive, more painful, and maybe even deadly. Let them have their fun.



EDIT: After all, as Blofeld said to Bond in You Only Live Twice, "You only die once, Mr. Bond." (Or was it, "You only live twice, Mr. Bond?")

[grendel25]

Bull crap.  Mars missions are long overdue.  If we didn't have such squabling babies wanting to rule the world and greedy pigs stealing from poor workers we'd have been to Mars and beyond by now.  What a load of crap.

[Spendulus]

http://www.buzzfeed.com/danvergano/mars-aint-never-gonna-happen

Curious what this community thinks on this topic?  I am of the opinion that we have progressed beyond "get a man there first" like in the 1960s for the moon missions; our robots can do most of the exploring and field work at a fraction of the cost it would take to get humans there, and they do it much safer.  As the tech improves our robots will only get better at it.  I can't see any real benefit, especially when cost is factored in, to sending humans other than a cool factor or to say, "I did it first!".

I can get behind asteroid mining much sooner than I can a manned Mars mission.

Mars is habitable, because it has the required elements for life.  Unlike the Moon it has lots of carbon, nitrogen, hydrogen.  This means that dirt such as plants like can be created and then farming is possible.

The question is then not can mars missions be done but should they be.

Usually this question is answered on a cost or vision basis.

[BADecker]

How long does it take completely "dead" clay to be changed enough so that it can support plant life?

If you take red clay that has all the minerals in it, and you kill all the organisms and organics in it, and then wash them out, how long does it take before you can make plants grow in it again by reintroducing the basic humic microbes?

Many plants, if they are introduced to soil as adult plants, already have humic microbes in them. Their roots can take these microbes down into the soil as the plants search for water and nutrients. But the minerals have to be converted to ionic minerals by the humic microbes, otherwise the metallic and inert minerals kill the plants.

Fungus is different. Some yeasts can live directly off metallic minerals. These yeasts can be consumed (brewers yeast). Yeasts can be bred for taste and nutrient quality, that are healthy for people and animals to eat, or for plants to consume.

Perhaps we should start doing experiments on breeding yeasts. Since we haven't had the need here on earth, it may never have been done on a scale big enough to actually feed people.

[Schleicher]

How long does it take completely "dead" clay to be changed enough so that it can support plant life?

If you take red clay that has all the minerals in it, and you kill all the organisms and organics in it, and then wash them out, how long does it take before you can make plants grow in it again by reintroducing the basic humic microbes?

I guess with 'plant life' you mean useful plants? Not something like lichen?
I think the biggest problem will be the nitrogen.
You need plants that get the nitrogen out of the air.

[Lethn]

The fact that these people have so blatantly advertised it as a 'one way trip' just shows you how much contempt they have for people, I would never work with anyone with such a disregard for their own peoples' safety, It could possibly make sense if you were going to try sending these guys to a planet with atmosphere but they're basically asking them to die and they don't even have a real plan to get this colony of theirs set up.

I really want to know what their angle is and how they are supposed to benefit from this, yes, there have been resources on Mars found, but because of how far away it is and how there isn't a natural supply of oxygen they probably wouldn't last a day, going by that logic, the moon is closer and we already have operations going on there so there's a better chance of rescue if something goes wrong.

[BADecker]

The fact that these people have so blatantly advertised it as a 'one way trip' just shows you how much contempt they have for people, I would never work with anyone with such a disregard for their own peoples' safety, It could possibly make sense if you were going to try sending these guys to a planet with atmosphere but they're basically asking them to die and they don't even have a real plan to get this colony of theirs set up.

I really want to know what their angle is and how they are supposed to benefit from this, yes, there have been resources on Mars found, but because of how far away it is and how there isn't a natural supply of oxygen they probably wouldn't last a day, going by that logic, the moon is closer and we already have operations going on there so there's a better chance of rescue if something goes wrong.

If they state the known dangers, and if they state that they don't know what all the dangers are...

People throw their life savings into gambling. In this case the gamble might have aesthetic value rather than monetary value. The colonists feel that they are moving to expand our living spaces.

While I personally would never do this in this kind of a way, I vote for freedom for the people. Sure, explain to them how stupid they are, but let them be free... as long as I am not forced to pay their way through taxes.

[Danielzo]

I honestly think that they're real.

What purpose would a scam serve in this case? It's not like any of us have to contribute to the Mars landings.

[Hamuki]

Why a scam?

I think its going to be awesome to see that humans have come so far with tech that we are able to travel through the universe.
I hope that it happens, and that we will be able to start a colony on mars and start making it a second earth.
(Still needs an atmosphere and a few other things, but I hope you get the idea)

[BitCoinNutJob]

I honestly think that they're real.

What purpose would a scam serve in this case? It's not like any of us have to contribute to the Mars landings.

I heard each person pays an application fee? juding by the amount of interest and applicants the scam could simply be applying for something that has little chance of ever starting?

[Mikestang]

The jist of the article is that is much, much more complicated than anyone is anticipating.  It'll happen some day, but first I think we'll go back to the moon, and then to a near Earth asteroid.  Or there are plans to gravity capture an asteroid and put it into orbit around the moon, then go practice there for Mars.  I think expecting us to go from here, today, straight to Mars is a bit grandiose; there are a lot of intermediate steps that need to happen first.

[Lethn]

I honestly think that they're real.

What purpose would a scam serve in this case? It's not like any of us have to contribute to the Mars landings.

I heard each person pays an application fee? juding by the amount of interest and applicants the scam could simply be applying for something that has little chance of ever starting?

Is that fucking true? If so that's really bad, the worst part about all this is the media has clearly been doing barely any checking on them so they're just doing free advertising all the time.

The jist of the article is that is much, much more complicated than anyone is anticipating.  It'll happen some day, but first I think we'll go back to the moon, and then to a near Earth asteroid.  Or there are plans to gravity capture an asteroid and put it into orbit around the moon, then go practice there for Mars.  I think expecting us to go from here, today, straight to Mars is a bit grandiose; there are a lot of intermediate steps that need to happen first.  

Asteroids are a far more realistic venture, one asteroid alone even if it was a relatively small one would contain billions worth of precious metals, that would make the return trip worth it and could easily fund future space missions.

[medUSA]

They need have ten years to figure out the solutions and ten years is a very long time for technology. I don't think it is a scam, as in some one running off with the money. I think it is more like a venture with nothing guaranteed.

It was advertised as a "one way trip" right from the start and no participants should expect to return. I believe a lot of people with no personal attachments would be interested. They will be in the history books being the first few humans to die on Mars.

[tee-rex]

They need have ten years to figure out the solutions and ten years is a very long time for technology. I don't think it is a scam, as in some one running off with the money. I think it is more like a venture with nothing guaranteed.

It was advertised as a "one way trip" right from the start and no participants should expect to return. I believe a lot of people with no personal attachments would be interested. They will be in the history books being the first few humans to die on Mars.

They have all the chances to die even before landing on Mars. Space radiation may not kill them right in the space, but surely will make their days on Mars counted and miserable. Besides that, Mars, unlike Earth, doesn't have global magnetic field, and its thin atmosphere permits ionizing radiation to reach the surface of the planet. Living underground would diminish the exposure to radiation, but then why all the hassle?

Venus seems to be a better alternative to terraforming in the long run.

[Honeybooboo]

I've never believed in this Mars One Mission. It just doesn't make any sense nor do I see where they would get the money from or how they would profit from it. I think it's just some elaborate hoax.

The fact that these people have so blatantly advertised it as a 'one way trip' just shows you how much contempt they have for people, I would never work with anyone with such a disregard for their own peoples' safety, It could possibly make sense if you were going to try sending these guys to a planet with atmosphere but they're basically asking them to die and they don't even have a real plan to get this colony of theirs set up.

Well it's not feasible to bring them back. BEsides, they will probably go crazy up there and kill each other or themselves anyway.

[mishax1]

"Mars One" will be the biggest lie of all, they are just gonna make money off the reality show about the project..

[Snail2]

Those Mars One guys should make a Moon project first, just for testing the gear. If everything working as expected for a few years, then they can do the next leap towards the Mars.
In addition a Moon colony could be a good training and preparation ground for the next groups of settlers and for new technology as well. Later someone could establish some mining and manufacturing facilities and then the heavier "low tech" stuff for building ships and Mars modules could be "Made in Moon" what would make the project cheaper.