....Question? Have They Found a Reason to go 'To the Moon and Mars' Yet???

You know, I think this is an excellent question, an adventure this big
should be justified, we should not do this just because we want to,
there should be a reason to the Moon and Mars and I feel there is one,
a reason that cannot be denied.
We must go there, it's for our own survival, I do ask that our
national goal be changed from simply going to the Moon and Mars to the
goal of actually colonizing at least Mars; we must start thinking in
terms of longer than our lifetimes.

Why we must to go to Mars:

The Earth is the cradle of mankind, but one cannot stay in the cradle
forever.
Konstantin Tsiolkovsky, 1895

We can only hope what comes out of the Columbia accident is a new,
definite direction for our Space efforts. I hope we make a conscious
decision to do something in space, to go someplace rather than to just
orbit the Earth.
I believe that this decision should be to send humans to Mars, to
colonize that planet as we colonized this entire planet when we moved
out of Africa. If we have the attitude of colonization rather than
just exploration then perhaps we'll plan a permanent presence on
Mars, rather than just a mission or two and then never to return for
another 30 years. But before we go we must know why we are going, we
must have a real reason to go.

You could argue successfully that we need to go to Mars because we are
natural explorers to see what's there, to learn how our Solar System
was created or we could go to find out if life ever existed there at
some time in the past, that alone could answer the question if we are
alone in the Universe or not. Or we could go as a stepping stone to
mine the Asteroids, these are just a few reasons to send humans to
Mars, there are many more reasons to go and perhaps we should go for
all of them ... but the underlining reason to send humans to Mars is
for the sake of our own survival. We have to go because we cannot
survive here forever. Perhaps we won't perish in our generation or
the next but the time is fast approaching when this planet will just
not be able to support all of us.

Stephen Hawking once wrote:
"To ensure the survival of humans, efforts must be made to colonize
other planets."
"... unless the human race spreads into space, I doubt it will survive
the next thousand years."

Hawking actually only gives us about 600 years but it will take many
years to learn how to do the things necessary to get to Mars and
survive there and hundreds of years to terraform Mars into a much more
Earth like planet. Because of this we have got to start now.

I believe that we belong on the Moon and Mars. I don't think that
the Moon or any other celestial body is "forbidden terrain" for
mankind, they are just the next places for us to go, we have pretty
much gone as far as we can on this planet. I believe that we must move
out and colonize, first our solar system and then the stars. It's
widely accepted now that we are not alone in the universe, us moving
out into space may well be just another matter of the "survival of
the fittest", just like what has been happening on this planet, among
the animal species, for thousands of years. This is no different
except this is for the survival of our species, in the Universe.
The question is: Do we have what it takes to survive?

Does anyone really believe that we can stay on this planet forever
without ever moving out into space?

Are we to just stay here on this planet and perish as we overpopulate
and over pollute ourselves when we can clearly move out to other
worlds? The Apollo program proved that we could travel to distant
worlds and survive.

Walter Cunningham of the Apollo 7 mission writes:
If we consciously decide not to go to Mars, our generation will truly
achieve a first in human history. We will be the first to stop at a
frontier, to draw a line and say to our children, "This far, and no
farther."

Colonizing Mars is the only way for the human civilization to be truly
guaranteed of not perishing in some single horrific event of one type
or another, it's the only way to guarantee our immortality. With the
terrorist events of the last few years can we really feel safe that we
won't annihilate ourselves? It seems to me that we're trying to.
For the first time, we truly hold our survival in our own hands.
Again, the question is: Do we have what it takes to survive?

Think of the unification that a human mission to Mars may bring to this
planet when someone plants the yet to be determined flag of Earth on
it's soil. Think of how no one will be able to claim hallow or
sacred ground because it won't be anyone's homeland, it will be
everyone's New World only if they can and want to make the journey.

Mars is just the first step in our becoming a permanent space faring
civilization; It's out there for us, waiting.

Henceforth I spread confident wings to space
I fear no Barrier of crystal or of glass;
I cleave the heavens and soar to the infinite.
And while I rise from my own globe to others
And penetrate even further through the eternal field,
That which others saw from afar, I leave far behind me.
------------- Giordano Bruno
"On the Infinite Universe and Worlds" 1584

In sci.space.policy wrote:
One possible reason for going is to give humans a chance as a species
assuming that our world was for some reason destroyed.

Just to play devil's advocate he

That assumes that humanity in some way deserves to survive
and go on to another planet, therein to wage war and kill
each other in new and exciting ways whilst irrepairably
damaging that planet's ecosystem.

If we get wiped-out by a meteorite, what's the big deal?
Evolution will take care of things and restart the cycle.

--
Andrew B

G. L. Bradford wrote:

The compelling reasons to go -- while we could easily go --
will always be found in the far too late hindsight of never
having gone.

Has it occurred to you that no one has gone for exactly the same
reasons *you* haven't gone?

Jim Davis

"Jump!" wrote in message
oups.com...
There are many reasons to go, yet they are not easy to articulate.

Until they can be easily articulated, they aren't good enough to warrant
funding.

G. L. Bradford wrote:
"jonathan" wrote in message
...

No, this is not just sarcasm, it's the dripping kind.


I heard the Nasa administrator was solicting opinions on how
best to justify, rationalize, conjure or contrive a reason or three
why America's ...Next Great Scientific Project.. is to go
'To the Moon and Mars".

My question is simply, did he find one?

Have they, or have they not, manufactured a reason why
America's ...Next Great Scientific Project ...exists?

Maybe I'm old fashioned, or naive, but it seems to me there
should be a reason for it. And it seems to me that our
...Greatest Single Scientific Effort....spanninng generations...
should be oriented around one of America's....

...Greatest Single Needs, or Greatest Single Problem.


But instead the plan is to go there, and like magic, something
will make it all worthwhile. Like Dorothy on the Yellow Brick Road
if only Nasa can make it to the Emerald Planet then.....



Cowardly Lion: I'd be brave as a blizzard...
Tin Woodsman: I'd be gentle as a lizard...
Scarecrow: I'd be clever as a gizzard...
Dorothy: If the Wizard is a wizard who will serve.
Scarecrow: Then I'm sure to get a brain...
Tin Woodsman: A heart...
Dorothy: A home...
Cowardly Lion: ...........The nerve!



Truth is always stranger than fiction.



Jonathan

The compelling reasons to go -- while we could easily go -- will always be
found in the far too late hindsight of never having gone.

GLB

If it's easy to go, then GO. You don't need to explain your reasons to
me whatsoever, unless you try dipping your hand into my wallet to pay
for it -- then you better have a damn good reason that I like, or lose
your hand.

My wallet is not now, not ever, your blank check.

wrote in message
oups.com...
You know, I think this is an excellent question, an adventure this big
should be justified, we should not do this just because we want to,
there should be a reason to the Moon and Mars and I feel there is one,
a reason that cannot be denied.
We must go there, it's for our own survival,



So far I only see three broad reasons posted

One is a safety valve for future catastrophes that are
assumed inevitable.
For building additional infrastructure for other future
'unnamed' space activities.
And the third is for pure research.

As for the first reason, assuming our future on earth is
somehow doomed to self inflicted destruction is not
at all logical. Hawking and his populist ideas aside, nature
is known for stability, adapability and resilience.
As life, humanity, continues to bloom, these natural
tendencies will only grow stronger. So the underlying
assumption of reason one is false. In addition, the
solution in reason one, to find somewhere else to live, is
irresponsible. Working to prevent future catastrophes
so other places to live are /not needed/ is the responsible
choice. Not running away from the problem, but fixing
it instead.

The second reason completely leaves unanswered the question
of 'why' move into space.

As for pure research in space, using telescopes to look ever farther
back in time in much like the effort to find ever smaller particles.
It's assumed the answers to the 'big questions' will be found
with such extreme searches. But in truth we end up only with
'uncertainty' as a principle. The opposite of the certain
simple answers we seek from pure research.

These reasons either have no significant tangible benefits
to the citizens and taxpayers, or are uninspiring to those
not already sold on such goals.

Before we start up a production line of ssme's that cost
FIFTY MILLION each, I want to know what they plan
on doing with them, that'll matter to those 'left behind'
here on earth.

I'll keep asking until they answer!


Jonathan

s






I do ask that our
national goal be changed from simply going to the Moon and Mars to the
goal of actually colonizing at least Mars; we must start thinking in
terms of longer than our lifetimes.

Why we must to go to Mars:

The Earth is the cradle of mankind, but one cannot stay in the cradle
forever.
Konstantin Tsiolkovsky, 1895

We can only hope what comes out of the Columbia accident is a new,
definite direction for our Space efforts. I hope we make a conscious
decision to do something in space, to go someplace rather than to just
orbit the Earth.
I believe that this decision should be to send humans to Mars, to
colonize that planet as we colonized this entire planet when we moved
out of Africa. If we have the attitude of colonization rather than
just exploration then perhaps we'll plan a permanent presence on
Mars, rather than just a mission or two and then never to return for
another 30 years. But before we go we must know why we are going, we
must have a real reason to go.

You could argue successfully that we need to go to Mars because we are
natural explorers to see what's there, to learn how our Solar System
was created or we could go to find out if life ever existed there at
some time in the past, that alone could answer the question if we are
alone in the Universe or not. Or we could go as a stepping stone to
mine the Asteroids, these are just a few reasons to send humans to
Mars, there are many more reasons to go and perhaps we should go for
all of them ... but the underlining reason to send humans to Mars is
for the sake of our own survival. We have to go because we cannot
survive here forever. Perhaps we won't perish in our generation or
the next but the time is fast approaching when this planet will just
not be able to support all of us.

Stephen Hawking once wrote:
"To ensure the survival of humans, efforts must be made to colonize
other planets."
"... unless the human race spreads into space, I doubt it will survive
the next thousand years."

Hawking actually only gives us about 600 years but it will take many
years to learn how to do the things necessary to get to Mars and
survive there and hundreds of years to terraform Mars into a much more
Earth like planet. Because of this we have got to start now.

I believe that we belong on the Moon and Mars. I don't think that
the Moon or any other celestial body is "forbidden terrain" for
mankind, they are just the next places for us to go, we have pretty
much gone as far as we can on this planet. I believe that we must move
out and colonize, first our solar system and then the stars. It's
widely accepted now that we are not alone in the universe, us moving
out into space may well be just another matter of the "survival of
the fittest", just like what has been happening on this planet, among
the animal species, for thousands of years. This is no different
except this is for the survival of our species, in the Universe.
The question is: Do we have what it takes to survive?

Does anyone really believe that we can stay on this planet forever
without ever moving out into space?

Are we to just stay here on this planet and perish as we overpopulate
and over pollute ourselves when we can clearly move out to other
worlds? The Apollo program proved that we could travel to distant
worlds and survive.

Walter Cunningham of the Apollo 7 mission writes:
If we consciously decide not to go to Mars, our generation will truly
achieve a first in human history. We will be the first to stop at a
frontier, to draw a line and say to our children, "This far, and no
farther."

Colonizing Mars is the only way for the human civilization to be truly
guaranteed of not perishing in some single horrific event of one type
or another, it's the only way to guarantee our immortality. With the
terrorist events of the last few years can we really feel safe that we
won't annihilate ourselves? It seems to me that we're trying to.
For the first time, we truly hold our survival in our own hands.
Again, the question is: Do we have what it takes to survive?

Think of the unification that a human mission to Mars may bring to this
planet when someone plants the yet to be determined flag of Earth on
it's soil. Think of how no one will be able to claim hallow or
sacred ground because it won't be anyone's homeland, it will be
everyone's New World only if they can and want to make the journey.

Mars is just the first step in our becoming a permanent space faring
civilization; It's out there for us, waiting.

Henceforth I spread confident wings to space
I fear no Barrier of crystal or of glass;
I cleave the heavens and soar to the infinite.
And while I rise from my own globe to others
And penetrate even further through the eternal field,
That which others saw from afar, I leave far behind me.
------------- Giordano Bruno
"On the Infinite Universe and Worlds" 1584

Some say helium 3

Rare Earth Elements in KREEP mineral is my guess.

Things that are expensive on Earth because you need big strong
expensive magnets on Earth, due to the size of vacuum chambers you can
have here.
The Moon is one big vacuum chamber, if you roof the parts you use over
to avoid pollution.

Regards

Carsten Nielsen

"Carsten Nielsen" wrote in message
oups.com...

Some say helium 3


At least that idea has a goal that would provide clear
benefits on earth. Our energy future is tied directly to
our future environmental concerns such as global
warming. Solving our dependence on fossil fuels
helps solve climate change problems at the same
time. For our future, those two issues are the
elephants in the room, few would doubt it.

Such a goal that is directed back to earth, as opposed
to ethereal dreams of discovery or colonization, will
draw supporters from all over. Whether in environmental
causes, anti-war, business, or politics a goal that can
transform our future will inspire new and diverse support.
Bringing in larger and more consistent budgets for space
exploration and setting off a frenzy of scientific efforts.

"The goal is the thing"! It's everything to creating a scientific
revolution and a better future. The goal has to be ...more carefully...
designed than the technology supporting the goal.

I don't see really any careful design and lasting idea behind
our current goals in space. I see knee-jerk political hacks
creating space policy that'll make good sound bites.

And here we are in the middle of designing all new space
architecture built around a poorly designed, if not completely
idiotic.....goal.

So if a proper goal for space revolves around our energy future, then
should we pursue fusion or solar types of solutions? I would think
solar power is the true long term solution due to the simplicity of
the technology and abundance of source.

But what the hell, set a goal that puts the two in competition and
let the best man win.

A competition to see who can 'save the future' first!!!
While transforming America into the energy supplier
.....the next Saudi Arabia....of the future.

Now that would be inspirational. Imagine the sound bites!

That's the future I want, and ya know, the way the world
works is this. If enough want that future badly enough
.....it'll happen.

The world is what we make it.


Jonathan


s









Rare Earth Elements in KREEP mineral is my guess.

Things that are expensive on Earth because you need big strong
expensive magnets on Earth, due to the size of vacuum chambers you can
have here.
The Moon is one big vacuum chamber, if you roof the parts you use over
to avoid pollution.

Regards

Carsten Nielsen

On Sun, 26 Mar 2006, jonathan wrote:
"Carsten Nielsen" wrote in message

Some say helium 3

At least that idea has a goal that would provide clear benefits on
earth.

He3 is useless to us as we don't know what to do with it.

Our energy future is tied directly to our future environmental concerns
such as global warming.

Our energy future is determined by the oil fascists.

A society in which money is the measure of all things, human and divine
is a culturally and spiritually bankrupt society.

Solving our dependence on fossil fuels helps solve climate change
problems at the same time.

It'll be solved by cold turkey, which is about to be served.

A society in which money is the measure of all things, human and divine
is a culturally and spiritually bankrupt society.

For our future, those two issues are the
elephants in the room, few would doubt it.

You are terrorist activist liberal environmental disappeared citizen to
talk about those white elephants. Only India and Africa may have
elephants and only for a short while longer.

A society in which money is the measure of all things, human and divine
is a culturally and spiritually bankrupt society.

Such a goal that is directed back to earth, as opposed
to ethereal dreams of discovery or colonization, will
draw supporters from all over.

The ethereal dream of the survival of civilization will evaporate with the
collapse US emporium empire.

A society in which money is the measure of all things, human and divine
is a culturally and spiritually bankrupt society.

Whether in environmental
causes, anti-war, business, or politics a goal that can
transform our future will inspire new and diverse support.

Say your New Age prayers and repeat your New Age rosary.

Bringing in larger and more consistent budgets for space
exploration and setting off a frenzy of scientific efforts.

Nonsense. You forgetting the mob represented by congress who not only
are to get their cut, they to get the whole hog.

A society in which money is the measure of all things, human and divine
is a culturally and spiritually bankrupt society.

"The goal is the thing"! It's everything to creating a scientific
revolution and a better future. The goal has to be ...more carefully...
designed than the technology supporting the goal.

The goal is to make all the money in the world ie to buy, own, and control
everything, even every little peon like me, you and yours.

A society in which money is the measure of all things, human and divine
is a culturally and spiritually bankrupt society.

I don't see really any careful design and lasting idea behind
our current goals in space. I see knee-jerk political hacks
creating space policy that'll make good sound bites.

See above and add the supreme despotism of invading and occupying
space, of militarizing space.

A society in which money is the measure of all things, human and divine
is a culturally and spiritually bankrupt society.

And here we are in the middle of designing all new space
architecture built around a poorly designed, if not completely
idiotic.....goal.

It's called commercialization, but it really means confiscation.

A society in which money is the measure of all things, human and divine
is a culturally and spiritually bankrupt society.

So if a proper goal for space revolves around our energy future, then
should we pursue fusion or solar types of solutions? I would think
solar power is the true long term solution due to the simplicity of
the technology and abundance of source.

The proper goal is for the rich to get richer faster.

A society in which money is the measure of all things, human and divine
is a culturally and spiritually bankrupt society.

But what the hell, set a goal that puts the two in competition and
let the best man win.

Corporations take all, people are slaves, experimental disposables.

A society in which money is the measure of all things, human and divine
is a culturally and spiritually bankrupt society.

A competition to see who can 'save the future' first!!!
While transforming America into the energy supplier
....the next Saudi Arabia....of the future.

Wet back manual labor.

Now that would be inspirational. Imagine the sound bites!

whips slapping backs

That's the future I want, and ya know, the way the world
works is this. If enough want that future badly enough
....it'll happen.

The future is owned, copyrighted and patented by the corporate fascists.

A society in which money is the measure of all things, human and divine
is a culturally and spiritually bankrupt society.

The world is what we make it.

A society in which money is the measure of all things, human and divine
is a culturally and spiritually bankrupt society.

wrote in message
oups.com...
You know, I think this is an excellent question, an adventure this big
should be justified, we should not do this just because we want to,
there should be a reason to the Moon and Mars and I feel there is one,
a reason that cannot be denied.
We must go there, it's for our own survival, I do ask that our
national goal be changed from simply going to the Moon and Mars to the
goal of actually colonizing at least Mars; we must start thinking in
terms of longer than our lifetimes.

In the near term, the Moon is a better place to colonize. Does Bush's plan
get us any closer to that? Bush's plan seems to be to repeat Apollo with
vaporware talk of habitats. I would prefer to see more concrete talk about
habitats. I think that the third mission should be a 6 month mission.

In the 60's, many people were gung-ho about the space program because they
expected steady improvement from Apollo to something better.