Exploring Mars A Waste Of Money?

[Atheist-Lite]

The money should have been spent on a serious attempt at mapping the climate change issues here from low earth orbit. It would also have been better spent on undersea robots to examine the degrading ocean environments here. Mars is not going to provide further worthwhile or radical insights into local climate issues. And studying Mars atmosphere from orbit would have been a far cheaper way of obtaining necessary data should any small inputs from external environments proved to have been useful in tackling life critical issues here on this world. It is a example of good years hubris. A monstrous waste of time and effort in the light of a rapidly closing window before the biosphere here begins to crash bigtime.

[Xamonas Chegwé]

The money should have been spent on a serious attempt at mapping the climate change issues here from low earth orbit. It would also have been better spent on undersea robots to examine the degrading ocean environments here. Mars is not going to provide further worthwhile or radical insights into local climate issues. And studying Mars atmosphere from orbit would have been a far cheaper way of obtaining necessary data should any small inputs from external environments proved to have been useful in tackling life critical issues here on this world. It is a example of good years hubris. A monstrous waste of time and effort in the light of a rapidly closing window before the biosphere here begins to crash bigtime.

Fuck that! It could have been spent on booze, drugs and pizza!

[Atheist-Lite]

The money should have been spent on a serious attempt at mapping the climate change issues here from low earth orbit. It would also have been better spent on undersea robots to examine the degrading ocean environments here. Mars is not going to provide further worthwhile or radical insights into local climate issues. And studying Mars atmosphere from orbit would have been a far cheaper way of obtaining necessary data should any small inputs from external environments proved to have been useful in tackling life critical issues here on this world. It is a example of good years hubris. A monstrous waste of time and effort in the light of a rapidly closing window before the biosphere here begins to crash bigtime.

Fuck that! It could have been spent on booze, drugs and pizza!

A very good point in view of the fucked up situation.

[Coito ergo sum]

The money should have been spent on a serious attempt at mapping the climate change issues here from low earth orbit.

That is already being done. http://climate.nasa.gov/

It would also have been better spent on undersea robots to examine the degrading ocean environments here. Mars is not going to provide further worthwhile or radical insights into local climate issues.

Already being done, too. It's not about doing just one thing.

And, why don't you comment on the boatload of other wasteful government spending, and suggest that THAT money go to this other type of stuff? see www.cagw.org I mean, this argument comes up, invariably, with respect to any space-related endeavor, but almost never comes up when folks are talking about the billions sunk into failed "green companies" or wasteful "Stimulus" spending.

I'd prefer they left Solyndra alone and not fucking subsidize corn ethanol, and double down on space exploration. At least something would be achieved besides lining the pockets of cronies.

And studying Mars atmosphere from orbit would have been a far cheaper way of obtaining necessary data should any small inputs from external environments proved to have been useful in tackling life critical issues here on this world. It is a example of good years hubris. A monstrous waste of time and effort in the light of a rapidly closing window before the biosphere here begins to crash bigtime.

We already have a few orbiters studying the atmosphere and mapping the planet http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mars_Recon ... ce_Orbiter and Mars Express and Mars Odyssey -- then add to that the two previous rovers....

[pErvinalia]

The money should have been spent on a serious attempt at mapping the climate change issues here from low earth orbit. It would also have been better spent on undersea robots to examine the degrading ocean environments here. Mars is not going to provide further worthwhile or radical insights into local climate issues. And studying Mars atmosphere from orbit would have been a far cheaper way of obtaining necessary data should any small inputs from external environments proved to have been useful in tackling life critical issues here on this world. It is a example of good years hubris. A monstrous waste of time and effort in the light of a rapidly closing window before the biosphere here begins to crash bigtime.

For the nth time, cut the fucking military budget and stop the corporate handouts. Why should science/engineering suffer when there is a much more malignant scourge on our societies that needs lancing?

[Coito ergo sum]

I am a supporter of the idea of exploration, curiosity and inquisitiveness for its own sake and I think this mission is just astonishing.

But what next? A manned mission?

Yes, that should be, but it won't be, due to the shortsightedness of the populace, and the myopia of their elected officials. The cancellation of the US's Constellation program put an end to that. We won't go to Mars (manned) without first getting our space legs back on a shorter Moon trip. That's been set back at least a decade if not two, because they canceled the only program going.

There is no manned Mars program in the offing. We were lied to when they canceled Constellation, and Obama said he was canceling the Moon but giving us the solar system and he talked about a manned mission to Mars and to an asteroid. We have neither in the works, more than 3 years later. Not even a plan to develop a plan.

Sure, but what after that?

A Moon Base.
A space station at a Lagrange point around the Earth.
Regular flights to and from the Moon, and harvesting lunar resources.
A Mars base, with a view toward long term harvesting of Martian resources.
Exploration of Jupiter.
Permanent space colonies and settlements.
The first interstellar missions...first robotic, and then manned.

I can't imagine mass migration or anything like that. Those science fiction scenarios were great but I suspect they were fantasy. Some people seem to see humanity's future and its salvation in space, but it doesn't seem realistic to me.

Best we try to limit the damage at home before it is too late. If it isn't already.

"People who view industrialization as a source of the Earth's troubles, its pollution, and the desecration of its surface, can only advocate that we give it up. This is something that we can't do; we have the tiger by the tail. We have 4.5 [now 7] billion people on Earth. We can't support that many unless we're industrialized and technologically advanced. So, the idea is not to get rid of industrialization but to move it somewhere else. If we can move it a few thousand miles into space, we still have it, but not on Earth. Earth can then become a world of parks, farms, and wilderness without giving up the benefits of industrialization."
Isaac Asimov, speech at Rutgers University

"One of the most thoughtless statements, parroted ad nauseam ever since rational concern for our environment exploded into an emotional syndrome, calls Man the only animal that soils its own nest. Every animal soils its nest with the products of its metabolism if unable to move away. Space technology gives us for the first time the freedom to leave our nest, at least for certain functions, in order not to soil it."
Krafft Ehricke, "Extraterrestrial Imperative" in
Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, 1971

"Many of the problems that we have today may not have solutions on Earth. The solutions may lie only in leaving the planet behind. There's no way we can avoid tearing up the countryside for ores, for fuel, for raw materials here on Earth--short of everybody dying off."
Keith and Carolyn Henson in Worlds Beyond,
ed. New Dimensions Foundation, 1978

"Since, in the long run, every planetary civilization will be endangered by impacts from space, every surviving civilization is obliged to become spacefaring--not because of exploratory or romantic zeal, but for the most practical reason imaginable: staying alive... If our long-term survival is at stake, we have a basic responsibility to our species to venture to other worlds."
Carl Sagan, Pale Blue Dot, 1994

"I don't think the human race will survive the next thousand years, unless we spread into space. There are too many accidents that can befall life on a single planet. But I'm an optimist. We will reach out to the stars."
Stephen Hawking, interview with Daily Telegraph, 2001

"Let me end with an explanation of why I believe the move into space to be a human imperative. It seems to me obvious in too many ways to need listing that we cannot much longer depend upon our planet's relatively fragile ecosystem to handle the realities of the human tomorrow. Unless we turn human growth and energy toward the challenges and promises of space, our only other choice may be the awful risk, currently demonstrable, of stumbling into a cycle of fratricide and regression which could end all chances of our evolving further or of even surviving."
Gene Roddenberry, Planetary Report Vol. 1, 1981

"The Earth is just too small and fragile a basket for the human race to keep all its eggs in."
Robert Heinlein, speech

"There are so many benefits to be derived from space exploration and exploitation; why not take what seems to me the only chance of escaping what is otherwise the sure destruction of all that humanity has struggled to achieve for 50,000 years?"
Isaac Asimov, speech at Rutgers University

"Space exploration must be undertaken not only out of simple human curiosity but also to further the survival of the species. The twentieth century has seen the unprecedented development and proliferation of magnificent technologies. Many of them, through design, ignorance, or misuse, are capable of destroying life as well as enhancing it. Space exploration alone holds the promise of eventual escape from a dying planet, provided we wisely manage our resources in the meantime and actually survive that long."
Astronaut Edgar Mitchell, The Way of the Explorer, 1996

"In the long run, a single-planet species will not survive. One day, I don't know when, but one day, there will be more humans living off the Earth than on it."
NASA director Mike Griffin, quoted in "Mars or Bust,"
Rolling Stone, 2006

"There are three reasons why, quite apart from scientific considerations, mankind needs to travel in space. The first reason is garbage disposal; we need to transfer industrial processes into space so that the earth may remain a green and pleasant place for our grandchildren to live in. The second reason is to escape material impoverishment: the resources of this planet are finite, and we shall not forego forever the abundance of solar energy and minerals and living space that are spread out all around us. The third reason is our spiritual need for an open frontier."
Freeman Dyson, Disturbing the Universe, 1979

http://www.spacequotes.com/

These folks don't think it's unrealistic, and these folks don't lack the imagination to understand the necessity and the possibility of expanding beyond Earth. I wonder, we atheists and skeptics often cite prominent scientists and thinkers when they support our positions on atheism and against religion. Yet, on this issue of science, I see so many atheists and skeptics simply hand-wave away the views of the most prominent and foremost thinkers on the topic. Why do folks do that?

[Atheist-Lite]

All this rocket fuel is wrecking the climate. It is time to reduce utterly these futile foolish attempts at conquering the vastness of outerspace and stop behaving like primitive apes.

[Coito ergo sum]

All this rocket fuel is wrecking the climate. It is time to reduce utterly these futile foolish attempts at conquering the vastness of outerspace and stopart behaving like primitive apes.

[Atheist-Lite]

All this rocket fuel is wrecking the climate. It is time to reduce utterly these futile foolish attempts at conquering the vastness of outerspace and stopart behaving like primitive apes.

What if it takes a thousand years to develop the first space elevator? You lack patience.

[fretmeister]

Should space exploration continue when there are problems on earth?

An answer from NASA: http://www.lettersofnote.com/2012/08/wh ... space.html

[fretmeister]

[Atheist-Lite]

A thousand years can be significantly reduced if some space elevator Wright brothers are about?

[pErvinalia]

We can't waste money on a space elevator. We've got an oversized military to fund. And GE needs to get tax credits. Screw science/engineering.

[Atheist-Lite]

We can't waste money on a space elevator. We've got an oversized military to fund. And GE needs to get tax credits. Screw science/engineering.

Asteroids don't wait. Revolution now. Get the scientists/engineers in charge or we're done for.

[Pappa]

I love the idea of space exploration, but I must admit to being more than a little ambivalent towards the robotic exploration of Mars. Unmanned missions just don't capture the imagination of the public in the same way either leading to lessening public support for the funding of space exploration.

I'd really like to see more low earth orbit projects developed commercially for the public. Not just paying 20m for a ride in an old Vostok missile either, I mean the development of space tourism made accessible for the masses. International Space Hotel - Zero gravity orgy anyone?

This kind of thing gets me pretty excited...

http://www.forbes.com/sites/alexknapp/2 ... -galactic/

Asteroid Mining Startup Planetary Resources Teams With Virgin Galactic

Asteroid mining startup Planetary Resources has announced that it has partnered with Virgin Galactic for its first step on its road to asteroid mining. According to a joint press release, the two companies have signed an agreement in which Virgin Galactic will launch Planetary Resources spacecraft into low Earth orbit, starting with the Arkyd-100 series of space telescopes. The telescopes will be launched on Virgin Galactic’s newly-announced satellite launcher, the LauncherOne.

“We are excited to announce this agreement with Virgin Galactic. LauncherOne has the potential to provide reliable and continuous launch service capability for small payloads. I expect Planetary Resources will launch several constellations of Arkyd-100 Series spacecraft in the coming years aboard LauncherOne,” Eric Anderson, Co-Founder and Co-Chairman of Planetary Resources said in the release.

LauncherOne is a two stage-launcher, which is carried into the upper atmosphere by Virgin’s WhiteKnightTwo, after which it then completes its journey into space. LauncherOne is capable of handling payloads of up to 500 pounds at a cost of less than $10 million. Virgin Galactic plans on there being “dozens” of launches of the spacecraft per year, and Planetary Resources first stage of business is putting many Arkyd-100s into orbit, both on its own behalf for its asteroid prospecting and for its commercial customers of the telescopes.

“We are developing the LauncherOne to deliver small satellites to LEO in a reliable fashion, with the capability to fly dozens of times per year. LauncherOne leverages our work in the area of commercial human spaceflight, and will provide reliable, regular launch opportunities to enable Planetary Resources to explore and develop valuable resources from asteroids,” said George Whitesides, President and CEO of Virgin Galactic in the release.

Planetary Resources isn’t the only customer for LauncherOne. Yesterday, the company announced others, including Skybox Imaging, GeoOptics Inc., and Spaceflight, Inc. The company also announced that its manned spacecraft, SpaceShipTwo, is on track for full powered flight, which should happen by the end of the year.