[kiwichick]

@ t

much as I would agree with you , and I always thought we would build a moon base first, isn't one of the problems with the moon the lack of h2o?

[Cog]

@ t

much as I would agree with you , and I always thought we would build a moon base first, isn't one of the problems with the moon the lack of h2o?

Also cosmic radiation and micrometeorites. Its a pretty harsh place. Depends on how much money you want to spend on it.

[dinopello]

Rush Limbaugh: NASA’s lying about flowing water on planet “to advance leftist agenda”

On his radio program Monday, Rush Limbaugh claimed that NASA’s announcement of the discovery of flowing water on Mars is part of some larger plan by the Obama administration “to advance the leftist agenda.”

[Sixstrings]

Rush Limbaugh: NASA’s lying about flowing water on planet “to advance leftist agenda”

On his radio program Monday, Rush Limbaugh claimed that NASA’s announcement of the discovery of flowing water on Mars is part of some larger plan by the Obama administration “to advance the leftist agenda.”

Here's the audio clip:

Rush Limbaugh: Water On Mars Is Part Of Leftist Plot
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T1JhQYtDcIE

Limbaugh says NASA has been corrupted by the current administration, and that nasa has been "making up" and fudging temperature data. Limbaugh says that the Obama admin will use the water on mars thing as a climate change agenda thing.

[Sixstrings]

Nasa faces contamination dilemma over Mars water investigations
Curiosity rover already on red planet cannot study streaks left by flowing water because it could be carrying bugs from Earth

...

The problem is how to find life without contaminating the planet with bugs from Earth.

Researchers at the space agency are keen for the Curiosity rover to take a closer look at the long dark streaks created by liquid water running down craters and canyon walls during the summer months on Mars.

But the rover is not sterile and risks contaminating the wet areas with earthly bugs that will have hitched a ride to the planet and may still be alive.

...

Because they are wet at least part of the time, they will be designated as special regions where only sterile landers can visit. But such a restriction could hamper scientists’ hopes of looking for current life on Mars.

“There will be heated discussions in the next weeks and months about what Curiosity will be allowed to do and whether it can go anywhere near the RSLs,” said Andrew Coates of University College London’s Mullard space science laboratory.

...

An organisation called the committee on space research (Cospar) draws up the rules on what is called planetary protection, which exist to prevent missions from Earth contaminating the pristine environments of other worlds.
http://www.theguardian.com/science/2015/sep/29/nasa-crossroads-mars-water-without-contamination-curiosity-rover

Oh for goodness sake. They've got a star trek federation "prime directive" policy thing.

My tax dollars paid for that rover, it ought to go over and look at the water.

Seriously, the rover should have been made as sterile as possible to begin with but now that it's there, go ahead and use it.

It's already theorized life transfers between worlds anyway, via comets. So okay now we've got a rover there. So drive it on over and look at the hydrated salts, that's what I think.

edit: philosophically, one can't assume we should keep the universe un-touched. For all we know, our purpose could be to spread life.

[AgentR11]

A manned mission to Mars from what I have heard is extremely extremely difficult.

Getting there isn't particularly difficult. Getting BACK is the problem child.

If you think about how we test manned systems... how do you test and certify to US/EU standards a return system that has to land on another planet, get assembled, then beaten on by horrific weather, BEFORE its rockets get turn on? Need I remind folks, we lost a shuttle because a stupid piece of rubber gasket got too cold? IN FLORIDA.

Manned mission to Mars is thus a non-starter for US/EU space flight. We talk big, because we have gotten used to doing so about projects far in the future that everyone with a calculator knows can't happen. Budget issues will come along and kill them long before anyone has to hop on top of a rocket for the big trip.

OTOH... seriously. China. Not because they're advanced, but because they could very well find it in themselves to make the one decision that allows for a real manned mission to Mars.

Go and stay.

Even if you're committing to periodic resupply missions as opposed to trying to leverage indigenous materials; go and stay still works. As long as that mars-o-naught doesn't have to light off a rocket that's been frozen to hundreds below, blasted with sand, and suffered the stresses of a reentry and landing before hand; the mission can work.

otoh, I'm not quite sure what the VALUE of a manned mission to Mars is; when you could put dozens or likely even hundreds of rovers on the surface for the same price.

[Apneaman]

There may be flowing water on Mars. But is there intelligent life on Earth?

While we marvel at Nasa’s discoveries, we destroy our irreplaceable natural resources – so we can buy pre-peeled bananas and smartphones for dogs


http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfre ... ign=buffer

[AgentR11]

Apneaman... the answer is simple. No. There is no intelligent life on Earth. We're barely sentient enough to have vanity, and that vanity allows us to pretend that we are intelligent. Not even just talking wisdom or something abstract. Just flat out brain capability.

We are the most intelligent varmint on Earth, that is true enough. But being the fastest sloth in the zoo isn't much of an acknowledgement of great speed; its just a comparative of really, really slow animals. We are that fastest sloth; whether we can survive our vanity long enough to become the next iteration, will perhaps determine whether there will be hope for intelligence in a million or few years.

It could also be that honestly, intelligence is a bad investment of body energy, evolutionarily.

[onlooker]

Yes it is looking more and more that NASA is living in a world of fantasy. With so many problems here on Earth, it would seem the height of folly to waste time, energy and resources on anything akin to space exploration.

[SeaGypsy]

Like about 90% of human activity, pointless generation of jobs. Not fair to single out space industries, satellite com's are way cool & a product of space fantasy turned reality, & way more efficient than tower or cable terrestrial gear.

Another aside is there would be people thinking poisoning this planet could turn out to be hugely profitable, thus off earth living tech winds up being on earth living essentials.

[Cog]

This place never ceases to amaze and entertain me. The more progressive and liberal the member here, the more he hates space exploration. I have been pondering that and still can't cipher out why that should be. Perhaps someone can explain it to me.

Men explore and conquer the unknown if they are men. It is our nature to be inquisitive and overcome obstacles that get in the way of our understanding. Space exploration is difficult and risky. Precisely the sort of thing that men, if they want to call themselves men, should be undertaking.

[Outcast_Searcher]

Ion engines have very little to do with Earth-Mars, maybe of some assistance for fine tuning trajectories, but wont ever solve the problem of getting back. Thrust rockets, burn, a lot of stuff, including O2, which is free on Earth, unknown on Mars.

Mars will be a suicide mission. No return. Death by either radiation or system failure. The glamour from this side of that event is overwhelming.

My 10c- go on get on with it. The sooner that pipe dream dies the better. We need to wake up on this planet.

Sea, I respect many of your opinions for terrestrial issues. However, I'm not going to accept the "systems failure" opinion of someone who has vociferously argued on this site that the lunar landings are a hoax, unless you're ready to concede that the retroreflectors provide proof that there is man made equipment on the moon.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VmVxSFnjYCA

[SeaGypsy]

Whatever, man made equipment lol, where is the rover?

[AgentR11]

Men explore and conquer the unknown if they are men. It is our nature to be inquisitive and overcome obstacles that get in the way of our understanding. Space exploration is difficult and risky. Precisely the sort of thing that men, if they want to call themselves men, should be undertaking.

Ok.. Let me try something. I'm Bob the Gazillionaire, and I've decided that with my trillions upon trillions of dollars, I am deleting the budget obstacle excuse from sending humans to Mars. (My hunch is that 2 trillion USD buys the mission).

What is the mission statement.

Why is go and (attempt+fail)return better than go and stay, and why is either better than sending a blizzard of different rovers and stationary robotic labs?

Not to mention.. if you think Curiosity isn't sterile, I guarantee, John the Marsonaut is DEFINITELY not sterile.. or at least wasn't sterile when he got there. lol.

[onlooker]

I think one of the main problems with this mission, is how to deal with the unexpected. Like a rock or something hitting the ship, or a unexpected malfunction. Remember they will be so far away from any assistance or rescue. Then their is the capabilities of the crew to deal with the conditions of space travel as well as the long time of being away from Earth as well as dealing with each other. A daunting challenge but doable given adequate planning. We even seem to have the preferred propulsion system being the ionized Solar Sails

[Sixstrings]

Whatever, man made equipment lol, where is the rover?

Pics from the orbiting Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter satellite (2012). Showing the Apollo 15 landing site, the LRV rover to the right, descent stage in the middle and clearly visible tracks going back and forth (made when they were doing the mission, the buggy running around).

Apollo 15: Follow the Tracks


Apollo 15 landing site imaged from an altitude of 15.5 miles (25 km). The Lunar Roving Vehicle (LRV) is parked to the far right, and the Lunar Module descent stage is in the center. (M175252641L,R) Image credit: NASA Goddard/Arizona State University
https://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/LRO/news/apollo-15.html#.Vg5LJflVhBc

The LRV up close (pic taken during the mission):

Today, the Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter (LRO) celebrates its fifth anniversary in space. LRO launched from Florida on June 18, 2009. After a four-day journey, the orbiter successfully entered lunar orbit on June 23. In the succeeding five years, LRO has continued to shape our view of our nearest celestial neighbor.

LRO data has shown us the tracks and equipment left behind from the Apollo astronauts, created the most precise map of the lunar surface, discovered the coldest known temperatures in the solar system, mapped the distribution of hydrogen and possibly water mixed in the lunar soil, identified craters and many other exciting science discoveries
https://www.nasa.gov/content/lunar-reconnaissance-orbiters-view-of-tycho-central-peak

Apollo Landing Sites Revisited
https://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/apollo/revisited/#.Vg5Nt_lVhBd

[Sixstrings]

While we're onto the space topic, Pluto and its moon charon, from the new horizons flyby:

NASA took the new color image of Charon and composited it next to a recent, false-color image of Pluto to show the relative size of each world. Charon is roughly half the size of Pluto, making it the largest satellite relative to its planet in our Solar System.
http://www.theverge.com/2015/10/1/9433767/nasa-new-horizons-charon-color-hi-res-pluto

[Tanada]

Men explore and conquer the unknown if they are men. It is our nature to be inquisitive and overcome obstacles that get in the way of our understanding. Space exploration is difficult and risky. Precisely the sort of thing that men, if they want to call themselves men, should be undertaking.

Ok.. Let me try something. I'm Bob the Gazillionaire, and I've decided that with my trillions upon trillions of dollars, I am deleting the budget obstacle excuse from sending humans to Mars. (My hunch is that 2 trillion USD buys the mission).

What is the mission statement.

Why is go and (attempt+fail)return better than go and stay, and why is either better than sending a blizzard of different rovers and stationary robotic labs?

Not to mention.. if you think Curiosity isn't sterile, I guarantee, John the Marsonaut is DEFINITELY not sterile.. or at least wasn't sterile when he got there. lol.

With a 2 Trillion dollar budget I would develop the technologies needed to make a Mars mission self sustaining for as long as possible. No Star Trek Replicators, but some form of waste recycling and food production, air recycling and probably a suite of plant/animal species to provide the necessary components of self sustainability.

Once that is accomplished then the solar system is colonizable and best of all we could repair the damage we have done to the ecosystem of the Earth by using the developed strategies to lower our demands on the natural systems. We should be working on this self sustaining existence problem already, but having a Moon/Mars colony as the goal is inspirational and would cause a lot of young adults and kids to want to work on the problem and try and solve it.