|
|
Post by movieliker on Jun 3, 2020 18:56:41 GMT
5 reasons why going to Mars is a terrible idea;
What do you think?
|
|
|
|
Post by shannondegroot on Jun 10, 2020 18:55:56 GMT
My friend told me a few months ago that going to Mars is not a good idea.
|
|
|
|
Post by Arlon10 on Sept 5, 2020 0:17:21 GMT
Did you know that an entire 30 minute news broadcast, if converted to plain text, would fill about one half of one page of a newspaper? There was a time people preferred text based communications because the information was more complete, easier to handle, and far less expensive.
It's disturbing how young people today waste so much bandwidth watching silly 5 minute "videos" whose message would take 15 seconds of text.
That video is a particular waste of bandwidth because it is not well titled. It isn't about "going to" Mars, it's about colonizing Mars, which is much different. Going to Mars could mean merely deeper mining than robots have already accomplished.
There is much more known about radiation, weightlessness, and other problems that have been studied by people on space stations, especially the ISS where several people have spent nearly a consecutive year. A Mars mission would likely be a little longer than that though. Of course work on space stations cannot reveal everything there is to know about space, but life on Earth has unknowns as well.
The most obvious reason for people not going (also not clear from the title what about that) was not even mentioned. How do you bring something back worth more than robots have already discovered? It would cost orders of magnitude more to send people, what is the payback?
The internet is a wasteland where videos like that one feature people who would not have been allowed on TV, and couldn't think clearly enough to write for a newspaper.
Nevertheless you can use internet searches to find lots of really interesting information fast if you just do not click on any videos.
Did you know the next Mars rover will be assisted by a "helicopter"? Actually it's a small drone barely large enough to carry cameras. Try searching the internet to learn more and see how much you can learn in as little bandwidth as possible.
|
|
|
|
Post by politicidal on Sept 5, 2020 1:42:51 GMT
So par for the course with everything else we're doing these days?
|
|
|
|
Post by onethreetwo on Sept 5, 2020 1:50:58 GMT
Did you know that an entire 30 minute news broadcast, if converted to plain text, would fill about one half of one page of a newspaper? There was a time people preferred text based communications because the information was more complete, easier to handle, and far less expensive. It's disturbing how young people today waste so much bandwidth watching silly 5 minute "videos" whose message would take 15 seconds of text. That video is a particular waste of bandwidth because it is not well titled. It isn't about "going to" Mars, it's about colonizing Mars, which is much different. Going to Mars could mean merely deeper mining than robots have already accomplished. There is much more known about radiation, weightlessness, and other problems that have been studied by people on space stations, especially the ISS where several people have spent nearly a consecutive year. A Mars mission would likely be a little longer than that though. Of course work on space stations cannot reveal everything there is to know about space, but life on Earth has unknowns as well. The most obvious reason for people not going (also not clear from the title what about that) was not even mentioned. How do you bring something back worth more than robots have already discovered? It would cost orders of magnitude more to send people, what is the payback? The internet is a wasteland where videos like that one feature people who would not have been allowed on TV, and couldn't think clearly enough to write for a newspaper. Nevertheless you can use internet searches to find lots of really interesting information fast if you just do not click on any videos. Did you know the next Mars rover will be assisted by a "helicopter"? Actually it's a small drone barely large enough to carry cameras. Try searching the internet to learn more and see how much you can learn in as little bandwidth as possible. I suspect the ultimate goal is control and land. First person there gets it, right? Supreme Ruler of Mars has a nice ring to it. |
|
|
|
Post by Arlon10 on Sept 5, 2020 9:04:42 GMT
Did you know that an entire 30 minute news broadcast, if converted to plain text, would fill about one half of one page of a newspaper? There was a time people preferred text based communications because the information was more complete, easier to handle, and far less expensive. It's disturbing how young people today waste so much bandwidth watching silly 5 minute "videos" whose message would take 15 seconds of text. That video is a particular waste of bandwidth because it is not well titled. It isn't about "going to" Mars, it's about colonizing Mars, which is much different. Going to Mars could mean merely deeper mining than robots have already accomplished. There is much more known about radiation, weightlessness, and other problems that have been studied by people on space stations, especially the ISS where several people have spent nearly a consecutive year. A Mars mission would likely be a little longer than that though. Of course work on space stations cannot reveal everything there is to know about space, but life on Earth has unknowns as well. The most obvious reason for people not going (also not clear from the title what about that) was not even mentioned. How do you bring something back worth more than robots have already discovered? It would cost orders of magnitude more to send people, what is the payback? The internet is a wasteland where videos like that one feature people who would not have been allowed on TV, and couldn't think clearly enough to write for a newspaper. Nevertheless you can use internet searches to find lots of really interesting information fast if you just do not click on any videos. Did you know the next Mars rover will be assisted by a "helicopter"? Actually it's a small drone barely large enough to carry cameras. Try searching the internet to learn more and see how much you can learn in as little bandwidth as possible. I suspect the ultimate goal is control and land. First person there gets it, right? Supreme Ruler of Mars has a nice ring to it. That's what the "International" in "International Space Station" was supposed to prevent. Whichever flag planters get there first will depend on internationally developed technologies. That calls into question any "kingdom" being recognized. It's like Antarctica in that the scientific value is more important than any political considerations and science is international in nature. Mathematics typically translate into any language flawlessly.
|
|
|
|
Post by movieliker on Sept 5, 2020 21:32:31 GMT
Did you know that an entire 30 minute news broadcast, if converted to plain text, would fill about one half of one page of a newspaper? There was a time people preferred text based communications because the information was more complete, easier to handle, and far less expensive. It's disturbing how young people today waste so much bandwidth watching silly 5 minute "videos" whose message would take 15 seconds of text. That video is a particular waste of bandwidth because it is not well titled. It isn't about "going to" Mars, it's about colonizing Mars, which is much different. Going to Mars could mean merely deeper mining than robots have already accomplished. There is much more known about radiation, weightlessness, and other problems that have been studied by people on space stations, especially the ISS where several people have spent nearly a consecutive year. A Mars mission would likely be a little longer than that though. Of course work on space stations cannot reveal everything there is to know about space, but life on Earth has unknowns as well. The most obvious reason for people not going (also not clear from the title what about that) was not even mentioned. How do you bring something back worth more than robots have already discovered? It would cost orders of magnitude more to send people, what is the payback? The internet is a wasteland where videos like that one feature people who would not have been allowed on TV, and couldn't think clearly enough to write for a newspaper. Nevertheless you can use internet searches to find lots of really interesting information fast if you just do not click on any videos. Did you know the next Mars rover will be assisted by a "helicopter"? Actually it's a small drone barely large enough to carry cameras. Try searching the internet to learn more and see how much you can learn in as little bandwidth as possible. I guess you didn't see this thread; 5 good reasons why going to Mars is a GOOD IDEA; What do you think? |
|
|
|
Post by Arlon10 on Sept 5, 2020 22:33:43 GMT
Did you know that an entire 30 minute news broadcast, if converted to plain text, would fill about one half of one page of a newspaper? There was a time people preferred text based communications because the information was more complete, easier to handle, and far less expensive. It's disturbing how young people today waste so much bandwidth watching silly 5 minute "videos" whose message would take 15 seconds of text. That video is a particular waste of bandwidth because it is not well titled. It isn't about "going to" Mars, it's about colonizing Mars, which is much different. Going to Mars could mean merely deeper mining than robots have already accomplished. There is much more known about radiation, weightlessness, and other problems that have been studied by people on space stations, especially the ISS where several people have spent nearly a consecutive year. A Mars mission would likely be a little longer than that though. Of course work on space stations cannot reveal everything there is to know about space, but life on Earth has unknowns as well. The most obvious reason for people not going (also not clear from the title what about that) was not even mentioned. How do you bring something back worth more than robots have already discovered? It would cost orders of magnitude more to send people, what is the payback? The internet is a wasteland where videos like that one feature people who would not have been allowed on TV, and couldn't think clearly enough to write for a newspaper. Nevertheless you can use internet searches to find lots of really interesting information fast if you just do not click on any videos. Did you know the next Mars rover will be assisted by a "helicopter"? Actually it's a small drone barely large enough to carry cameras. Try searching the internet to learn more and see how much you can learn in as little bandwidth as possible. I guess you didn't see this thread; < video 5 good reasons why going to Mars is a good idea > What do you think? I did watch that video. It was as much a waste of bandwidth as the other one. The first reason is ridiculous. Mars might be the "most" habitable planet after Earth in reach, but it still is not really habitable enough. I think it's important to be good stewards on Earth since it is our only hope. There was a TV show called The 100 about a nuclear war that ruined the Earth for some long uncertain period of time. Some people living in space stations were the principal survivors. That's science fiction. If humanity is not clever to avoid such a disaster then it isn't likely to be clever enough survive on Mars, which is already almost impossible. Should life have existed on Mars at any time it really would not answer many questions people have about life. So reason #2 is weak. Reasons #3 and #4 are almost the same reasons. Although the early space program probably did do wonders for the early computer industry, all that technology has essentially peaked. The drone headed for Mars isn't exactly leading the drone industry. It is unique in that the atmosphere on Mars is so thin and not helpful, but the lower gravity alleviates some of that. I don't see that being of much necessity to the industry on Earth. To answer why climb Mt. Everest George Mallory famously said, "Because it's there." I suspect that if anyone goes to Mars that will be the one reason. I cannot agree that it's a good one. Did you read my reply to the other video? I mentioned the main reason for not going to Mars. Robots have already gathered most of the science possible. They have proved capable as humans for that sort of task. Mars has some, if not much, scientific interest like Antarctica, but much more difficult to reach. So send robots already.
|
|
|
|
Post by movieliker on Sept 5, 2020 22:56:32 GMT
I guess you didn't see this thread; < video 5 good reasons why going to Mars is a good idea > What do you think? I did watch that video. It was as much a waste of bandwidth as the other one. The first reason is ridiculous. Mars might be the "most" habitable planet after Earth in reach, but it still is not really habitable enough. I think it's important to be good stewards on Earth since it is our only hope. There was a TV show called The 100 about a nuclear war that ruined the Earth for some long uncertain period of time. Some people living in space stations were the principal survivors. That's science fiction. If humanity is not clever to avoid such a disaster then it isn't likely to be clever enough survive on Mars, which is already almost impossible. Should life have existed on Mars at any time it really would not answer many questions people have about life. So reason #2 is weak. Reasons #3 and #4 are almost the same reasons. Although the early space program probably did do wonders for the early computer industry, all that technology has essentially peaked. The drone headed for Mars isn't exactly leading the drone industry. It is unique in that the atmosphere on Mars is so thin and not helpful, but the lower gravity alleviates some of that. I don't see that being of much necessity to the industry on Earth. To answer why climb Mt. Everest George Mallory famously said, "Because it's there." I suspect that if anyone goes to Mars that will be the one reason. I cannot agree that it's a good one. Did you read my reply to the other video? I mentioned the main reason for not going to Mars. Robots have already gathered most of the science possible. They have proved capable as humans for that sort of task. Mars has some, if not much, scientific interest like Antarctica, but much more difficult to reach. So send robots already. You are not looking at the big picture. Mars is the first step towards living in outer space, colonizing other planets, mining the vast natural resources available in outer space, and eventually traveling to other solar systems and galaxies. Besides, this planet (Earth) and star (Sun) are not going to last forever. If we as a species are going to outlive this planet and star, we need to be able to live in outer space, colonize other planets, and travel the Universe. |
|
|
|
Post by Arlon10 on Sept 5, 2020 23:40:59 GMT
I did watch that video. It was as much a waste of bandwidth as the other one. The first reason is ridiculous. Mars might be the "most" habitable planet after Earth in reach, but it still is not really habitable enough. I think it's important to be good stewards on Earth since it is our only hope. There was a TV show called The 100 about a nuclear war that ruined the Earth for some long uncertain period of time. Some people living in space stations were the principal survivors. That's science fiction. If humanity is not clever to avoid such a disaster then it isn't likely to be clever enough survive on Mars, which is already almost impossible. Should life have existed on Mars at any time it really would not answer many questions people have about life. So reason #2 is weak. Reasons #3 and #4 are almost the same reasons. Although the early space program probably did do wonders for the early computer industry, all that technology has essentially peaked. The drone headed for Mars isn't exactly leading the drone industry. It is unique in that the atmosphere on Mars is so thin and not helpful, but the lower gravity alleviates some of that. I don't see that being of much necessity to the industry on Earth. To answer why climb Mt. Everest George Mallory famously said, "Because it's there." I suspect that if anyone goes to Mars that will be the one reason. I cannot agree that it's a good one. Did you read my reply to the other video? I mentioned the main reason for not going to Mars. Robots have already gathered most of the science possible. They have proved capable as humans for that sort of task. Mars has some, if not much, scientific interest like Antarctica, but much more difficult to reach. So send robots already. You are not looking at the big picture. Mars is the first step towards living in outer space, colonizing other planets, mining the vast natural resources available in outer space, and eventually traveling to other solar systems and galaxies. Besides, this planet (Earth) and star (Sun) are not going to last forever. If we as a species are going to outlive this planet and star, we need to be able to live in outer space, colonize other planets, and travel the Universe. Physically traveling to other habitable planets is not possible. To get to them in one generation would require speeds that, even if you had enough fuel to reach and you don't, would be prone to total destruction on encountering the slightest pebble of space debris. A bullet traveling at normal bullet speeds might put a tiny hole in the hull. A bullet with a relative speed near the speed of light or, if it might be possible, higher speeds would ignite a nuclear reaction, ripping the entire vehicle to shreds. To get to other planets in more than one generation would require a ship of such enormous size and consumption of energy that no fuel supply could be adequate. That is even taking into consideration the "recycling" possible with on board farms.
|
|
|
|
Post by movieliker on Sept 5, 2020 23:54:35 GMT
You are not looking at the big picture. Mars is the first step towards living in outer space, colonizing other planets, mining the vast natural resources available in outer space, and eventually traveling to other solar systems and galaxies. Besides, this planet (Earth) and star (Sun) are not going to last forever. If we as a species are going to outlive this planet and star, we need to be able to live in outer space, colonize other planets, and travel the Universe. Physically traveling to other habitable planets is not possible. That attitude is the same attitude that said the Earth is flat, man will never fly, the Earth is the center of the Universe, etc That attitude the exact opposite of the attitudes of those who developed the airplane, discovered electricity, realized the Earth wasn't the center of the Universe, invented the combustion engine, the refrigerator, air conditioning, the telephone, space travel, etc. If every person had an attitude like you, the human species would already be extinct. -------- Space travel has already lead to many discoveries and inventions we enjoy today. Not only will man travel the Universe one day. The human species will benefit from all the discoveries and inventions that result from tackling and overcoming such challenges. |
|
|
|
Post by Arlon10 on Sept 6, 2020 0:05:46 GMT
Physically traveling to other habitable planets is not possible. That attitude is the same attitude that said the Earth is flat, man will never fly, the Earth is the center of the Universe, etc That attitude the exact opposite of the attitudes of those who developed the airplane, discovered electricity, realized the Earth wasn't the center of the Universe, invented the combustion engine, the refrigerator, air conditioning, the telephone, space travel, etc. If every person had an attitude like you, the human species would already be extinct. -------- Space travel has already lead to many discoveries and inventions we enjoy today. Not only will man travel the Universe one day. The human species will benefit from all the discoveries and inventions that result from tackling and overcoming such challenges. You utterly failed to explain how the necessary travel is possible today. If you must believe those obstacles will be overcome one day, good luck with that. So far it does appear technological advances have peaked. There are no more elements to add to the periodic chart. The top speed of CPUs has not improved in twenty years. Most significant advances against cancer also happened twenty years ago. While it is impossible to travel to other planets physically, there are ancient texts that suggest "spiritual" or "astral" travel to other planets is possible. If that's what you're counting on, good luck with that too. I think you'll need lots.
|
|
|
|
Post by movieliker on Sept 6, 2020 0:22:29 GMT
That attitude is the same attitude that said the Earth is flat, man will never fly, the Earth is the center of the Universe, etc That attitude the exact opposite of the attitudes of those who developed the airplane, discovered electricity, realized the Earth wasn't the center of the Universe, invented the combustion engine, the refrigerator, air conditioning, the telephone, space travel, etc. If every person had an attitude like you, the human species would already be extinct. -------- Space travel has already lead to many discoveries and inventions we enjoy today. Not only will man travel the Universe one day. The human species will benefit from all the discoveries and inventions that result from tackling and overcoming such challenges. You utterly failed to explain how the necessary travel is possible today. If you must believe those obstacles will be overcome one day, good luck with that. So far it does appear technological advances have peaked. There are no more elements to add to the periodic chart. The top speed of CPUs has not improved in twenty years. Most significant advances against cancer also happened twenty years ago. While it is impossible to travel to other planets physically, there are ancient texts that suggest "spiritual" or "astral" travel to other planets is possible. If that's what you're counting on, good luck with that too. I think you'll need lots. Nobody knows YET how to travel fast enough to accomplish intergalactic travel. That doesn't mean they won't develop or discover how to, in the future. Before man knew how to fly, nobody knew how to do it. ------ On top of that, living in outer space means man can place space stations farther and farther out. And just go from one station to the next, traveling farther and farther away from Earth. Stocking space stations makes more sense than just going far --- fast. |
|
|
|
Post by Arlon10 on Sept 6, 2020 0:34:56 GMT
You utterly failed to explain how the necessary travel is possible today. If you must believe those obstacles will be overcome one day, good luck with that. So far it does appear technological advances have peaked. There are no more elements to add to the periodic chart. The top speed of CPUs has not improved in twenty years. Most significant advances against cancer also happened twenty years ago. While it is impossible to travel to other planets physically, there are ancient texts that suggest "spiritual" or "astral" travel to other planets is possible. If that's what you're counting on, good luck with that too. I think you'll need lots. Nobody knows YET how to travel fast enough to accomplish intergalactic travel. That doesn't mean they won't develop or discover how to, in the future. Before man knew how to fly, nobody knew how to do it. ------ On top of that, living in outer space means man can place space stations farther and farther out. And just go from one station to the next, traveling farther and farther away from Earth. Stocking space stations makes more sense than just going far --- fast. No, that is not possible. The more stations you have where sunlight is no use for energy the more energy you will waste, not less. Also the number of stations you would need to build would exhaust available resources on Earth long before it reached another planet The space programs are shutting down because the work that can be dome already is. Things are wrapping up now. Notice no one is talking about the drone on its way to Mars. That's because no one cares. Even you don't care enough about it to write a report.
|
|
|
|
Post by movieliker on Sept 6, 2020 0:40:03 GMT
Nobody knows YET how to travel fast enough to accomplish intergalactic travel. That doesn't mean they won't develop or discover how to, in the future. Before man knew how to fly, nobody knew how to do it. ------ On top of that, living in outer space means man can place space stations farther and farther out. And just go from one station to the next, traveling farther and farther away from Earth. Stocking space stations makes more sense than just going far --- fast. No, that is not possible. The more station you have where sunlight is no use for energy the more energy you will waste, not less. Also the number of stations you would need to build would exhaust available resources on Earth long before it reached another planet The space programs are shutting down because the work that can be dome already is. Things are wrapping up now. Notice no one is talking about the drone on its way to Mars. That's because no one cares. Even you don't care enough about it to write a report. Arlon, all you are doing is saying why they can't do stuff. Pessimism never accomplished anything. |
|
|
|
Post by Arlon10 on Sept 6, 2020 0:57:25 GMT
No, that is not possible. The more station you have where sunlight is no use for energy the more energy you will waste, not less. Also the number of stations you would need to build would exhaust available resources on Earth long before it reached another planet The space programs are shutting down because the work that can be dome already is. Things are wrapping up now. Notice no one is talking about the drone on its way to Mars. That's because no one cares. Even you don't care enough about it to write a report. Arlon, all you are doing is saying why they can't do stuff. Pessimism never accomplished anything. And no, you are not promoting good stewardship of the Earth or any sound economy.
|
|
|
|
Post by movieliker on Sept 6, 2020 1:03:09 GMT
Arlon, all you are doing is saying why they can't do stuff. Pessimism never accomplished anything. And no, you are not promoting good stewardship of the Earth or any sound economy. This has nothing to do with stewardship of the Earth or any sound economy. |
|
|
|
Post by Arlon10 on Sept 6, 2020 1:19:02 GMT
This has nothing to do with stewardship of the Earth or any sound economy. And that is the problem.
|
|
|
|
Post by movieliker on Sept 6, 2020 1:25:20 GMT
This has nothing to do with stewardship of the Earth or any sound economy. And that is the problem. No. It's about learning new things, developing better technology, expanding horizons, and investing in the future. |
|
|
|
Post by The Herald Erjen on Sept 6, 2020 9:48:42 GMT
I suspect the ultimate goal is control and land. First person there gets it, right? Supreme Ruler of Mars has a nice ring to it. That's what the "International" in "International Space Station" was supposed to prevent. Whichever flag planters get there first will depend on internationally developed technologies. That calls into question any "kingdom" being recognized. It's like Antarctica in that the scientific value is more important than any political considerations and science is international in nature. Mathematics typically translate into any language flawlessly. What do I need to do, Arlon? What do I need to do to wake you up? Take a baseball bat to your face?
|
|
