![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Mon, 13 Apr 2009 01:30:33 +0200, jacob navia wrote:
Marvin the Martian wrote: Then Get your ass to Mars! http://OnToMar.org/forum/ (1) Mars is beyond current technology. Only machines can live in there. Any human expedition to Mars is just science fiction. Actually, NASA was planning on going to Mars right after Apollo, back in the early 1970s. This technology is almost 40 years old. And this fact is a GOOD thing since (2) Mars has probably life in it. Many hints in the last years have made this hypothesis much more real: The methane found in Mars, the amounts of water, there are, probably underground, mars living beings. Life on Mars is a reason for going there, not a reason for not going there. (3) Since any human expedition to Mars would destroy the possibility of finding those bacteria, it is a good thing that humans can't go to mars now Doesn't follow that humans would destroy life on Mars just by BEING there. (4) The technology for living in an independent vessel for more than 3-4 months is just not there The Soviets had cosmonauts in LEO for over 6 months. Not to put too fine a point on it, but you seem to be making stuff up. (5) The landing technology for a heave vessel in Mars is not there It's not impossible to do. (6) The technology for living in Mars is not the o -50 C in the day, -100 in the night Heating energy would need a nuclear reactor to keep humans from freezing o No oxygen. All oxygen has to be brought from earth. o No food. All food must be brought from earth. o No air pressure. You must live in pressure suits all the time you are outside o Etc We have had people on the moon, where the temperature variations are even greater. No, you don't have to bring all the oxygen from earth. Mars has CO2 and H2O, and you can easily make oxygen from both. (7) Since Mars bacteria probably exist, we can't take the risk of introducing them into the earth biosphere. We can't send humans since they would bring marsian bacteria with them if we bring them back. Machines can have a one way trip. A Mars mission would likely last 18 months on the surface. If no bacteria kill them, and they don't get sick on the six months back to earth, it is highly unlikely to be a problem. -- http://OnToMars.org For discussions about Mars and Mars colonization |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
sci.space.policy impact on policy | John Schilling | Policy | 4 | June 23rd 06 02:02 AM |
Shuttle Replacement Needs to Become a National Priority!!! | jonathan | Policy | 70 | August 15th 05 06:33 PM |
"Space policy and the size of the space shuttle fleet" | MasterShrink | Space Shuttle | 0 | December 26th 04 05:35 AM |
Spaceguard-Priority List | Matthew D. Mills | Amateur Astronomy | 1 | March 4th 04 04:28 AM |
Mars Exploration and the Search for Life is a Priority Says UK ScienceMinister (Forwarded) | Andrew Yee | Astronomy Misc | 0 | December 29th 03 12:57 PM |