# Should we go to Mars?

Discussion in 'Earth Science' started by Syzygys, Oct 17, 2006.

1. ### SyzygysAs a mother, I am telling youValued Senior Member

Messages:
12,671
Instead of making it a poll, we can just argue about it. I say, no, unless maybe in 30-50 years when we get things in order, like another energysource instead of hydrocarbons and if we avoided another world war. Then we can waste a little energy and money conquering a dry rock...

2. ### Google AdSenseGuest Advertisement

to hide all adverts.
3. ### P. BOOM!Registered Senior Member

Messages:
122
I think all kinds of new energy technologies would be developed if we went to Mars. Not too many hydrocarbons available there. Technologies that could be applied back home.

4. ### Google AdSenseGuest Advertisement

to hide all adverts.
5. ### orcotValued Senior Member

Messages:
3,475
I believe we should first visit and mine a asteroid, some asteroids recruire less delta V then reaching to the moon. It's relativly easy to launch the mined minerals in orbit, where they can be procests to a large (100people plus) space station.

This baby would actually make money because it would be large enof to alow a circle shape so there can be artificial gravity and also large enof for side projects like tourism, and asteroids generaly have so much hydrogen that it can also be a fuel station.

6. ### Google AdSenseGuest Advertisement

to hide all adverts.
7. ### MetaKronRegistered Senior Member

Messages:
5,502
We should go there as soon as it is physically possible. For God's sake, spending a trillion dollars just to screw up Iraq, I would say that even throwing all that money down a dry hole would be better.

8. ### madanthonywayneMorning in AmericaRegistered Senior Member

Messages:
12,461
Let me tell you something, you know when we'll "get things in order"? Never. Human nature will not change, there will always be problems anywhere there are humans. Sticking our head in the sand and waiting for this imaginary utopia will only serve to insure our eventual demise.

What would our fate be if we decided to ignore space and concentrate on internal matters? Look to history:
The result? China, who once had the greatest navy in the world, became isolated and backwards. Instead of conquering the world, china soon found western gunships on its shores dictating terms.

We must move forward, or perhaps, this time, it will be China who boldly goes where no man has gone before. And we will find ourselves isolated and backwards with Chinese gunships on our shores.

9. ### draqonBannedBanned

Messages:
35,006
YES YES YES we should go to Mars!

Mars is beautiful
Mars is future (for some its past)
Mars has sooo much to offer (technologies is the least of these...)
Mars
Mars
Mars is amazing

10. ### FacialValued Senior Member

Messages:
2,219
The exploration of Mars is a long-term investment. I support it.

But at the same time, there are problems to solve here on earth.

11. ### orcotValued Senior Member

Messages:
3,475
Mars is extremely Bad, the prospect of it's colonisation gives us pretty much all reasons to continue to rape the earth.
We should first terraform earth before we start with mars

12. ### SyzygysAs a mother, I am telling youValued Senior Member

Messages:
12,671
I agree, nevertheless it doesn't mean we should stop trying. I could say the same, do you know when we will conquer other planets? NEVER. But you keep advocating trying it.

And you can stop posting the chinese 600 years ago, I already got it the first time you did. Again, prove that the world would be a better place today if the Chinese conquered it 600 years ago.

Let's face it, we are not made for living in space. just because it can be done it doesn't mean it should be. We can also live under the ocean, but again, it doesn't mean it should be done.

Oh wait a minute! Speaking of ocean. Maybe it makes more sense trying to adopt to ocean life and living then space. After all we have plenty of it right here and with all these gloabl warming and lands disappearing maybe we should just go back where we came from..

13. ### SyzygysAs a mother, I am telling youValued Senior Member

Messages:
12,671
Nope, Mars is past, way past its time. It was beautiful when it had water, now it is just a dry rock...

14. ### jumpercable6EQUJ5 'WOW'Registered Senior Member

Messages:
305
.........And getting drier and drier all the time.

15. ### John99BannedBanned

Messages:
22,046
Wonder if it looked like Erth(sp).

16. ### orcotValued Senior Member

Messages:
3,475
there is plenty of water for a "small" settlement don't forget that mars still has a north pole cap that is mostly made out of water

17. ### kazakhanRegistered AbuserRegistered Senior Member

Messages:
915
I think in this case it does. We can't keep putting it off, the sooner we get off this rock the sooner mankind benefits. Airplanes only got off the ground a hundred years ago and now access to flights to pretty much anywhere on the planet is available to hundreds of millions. I would like to think that in another hundred years or so millions of us will have access to space...

18. ### P. BOOM!Registered Senior Member

Messages:
122
Mankind will not be the only life that will benefit. The history of life on earth is one of expansion, diversification, and so far survival. Ultimately, however, survival is not insured. Sooner or later, BOOM! and everything the earth has brought forth will die. The odds of that happening will be decreased if our planet's life is spread to other planets. Perhaps humans are only the first of Earth's lifeforms to have a chance at doing this. But we could also be the first AND last chance.

19. ### valichRegistered Senior Member

Messages:
3,501
It's not should we, it's not if, it's now when. We WILL be going to Mars.

20. ### jumpercable6EQUJ5 'WOW'Registered Senior Member

Messages:
305
And probably when we do go to Mars, we will land nearby an already established chinese Mars base.

21. ### dixonmasseyValued Senior Member

Messages:
2,151
Until "warp" drive is not invented, the is no practical point in the flights to Mars, except state-sized vanity. Regarding new technology, it must be really smart idea to invest X amount of $so that only fraction of those investments returned as useable on Earth technologies. Why not to invest entirely X amount of$ in those technologies? Here comes commies like nature of military and space expenditures. If trillions of dollars were invested directly by state in something useful, all kinds of rightwinger would yell "communism". Overspending trillions on military and space leave rightwingers mouths shut, everybody is waving American flag, everybody is happy. Nevermind that we could get much better bang for a buck without military-space middleman.

22. ### MetaKronRegistered Senior Member

Messages:
5,502
Mars is a viable place of refuge for a million or so Earth humans and some plant and animal life. One planet has all our eggs in one basket. Unless someone is already there we should go. Also, this is what an advanced society does and is like. If we don't use it we lose it. It is very possible for the entire planet to go retrograde. We also don't want the Chinese to take it. Whatever faults America has, China has many worse faults.

23. ### RomanBannedBanned

Messages:
11,560
Going to Mars doesn't really make sense. What's there for us? A cold vacuum and no hydrocarbons.