Amazon.com Widgets
  • It's called colonization

    It worked well on earth (look at the history of damn near every group of people). Why would we not one day apply it to other planets? It makes economic sense to not shuttle people back and forth, which in turn speeds up the timetable for colonization.

    Mars or anywhere else, there's likely going to be a lot of one way trips.

  • Humanity needs to explore. Whatever the cost.

    Humanity has always had the urge to explore. We have gone to the moon successfully and got humans back safely. It seems strange not to let humans take risks and sacrifices, like dying on Mars. The reason is that we do not have adequate technology for the job, so staying on the Martian surface is our only option for now.

    We as a species would not exist in the place we were in if it wasn't for the brave ventures into the unknown. There are pros and cons for living on Mars, but in the end, not only is it a great triumph, but a great sacrifice.

    And staying on Mars is a sacrifice worth taking.

  • To Infinity and Beyond

    I agree with sending people to mars. I think its a good idea because we can explore more of our solar system and we can advance our technology to its fullest. Sure some people might say its a bad idea to send people to mars for the rest of their lives, but its their choice to go. I also think that its a good way for mankind to explore our universe. Although there are many dangers f flying to mars it is all about trying and trying over again. I agree with this text and hope we can finally explore

  • It's up to them.

    Given what we know and are able to do now, it seems like that kind of mission would be necessary for establishing more permanent colonies on Mars. It would be wonderful if things changed and those people were eventually able to come back, but if they choose out of their own free will to make that sacrifice to help space exploration progress, I don't see why they shouldn't be allowed to.

  • Yes we should

    It is their choice and they can go if they want to. They would have to have major commitment to do this though. I think it would be fun though even though you would never return home ever and never see my friends and family. It would be great research use though.

  • This website has all the proof you will need.

    I'm not a writer but I am researcher on this topic. Overpopulation is already a problem like most know. Not many people would want to go there because of cautions. If we take precautions such as gravity, oxygen, and living conditions people don't have to return to Earth. Earth is the most suitable planet for humans yet or we know, but at this point in time it is becoming small. Yet we could build structures on oceans before we do that, so there is a back up, but mars gives us much more room and doesn't interfere with oceanic life. Disregard the ocean for now. Mars is definitely possible with current technology. We send people there, they use technology for survival. In other words they would not die. If we continuously send resources there it would not be a "suicide" mission. If someone is willing to go there for the first time is sacrificing one man worth it. Honestly life is too valuable for me to sacrifice but if someone is willing to do that why don't we go right ahead? Chances are the person that goes there would able to stay there for years. All we need to do is supply people to mars. If we get people there they have limited oxygen but if oxygen. We would have to supply oxygen to the men for at least 3 months considering other rockets would land themselves on mars. Also anyone who delivers the oxygen needs to stay there. It is possible and we should go there. We just need to wait until we have enough oxygen and how many people are willing to live on mars. It's either that or we should wait until we can get to mars and back. No doubt we should go. The problem is we should go: eventually. I want to see what happens in the next 20 years. It would make much more sense to go back to the moon first and try to live there because we can come back. Proof is mars is possible with current technology and we should go if someone is willing to die for it but that is highly unlikely. It is possible if someone is up for it. I personally rather have the person live. Before mars we should test colonization on the moon, then try it for mars in case something goes wrong they could come back. Once it is definite for the moon next stop is mars. It is much more possible than people think to go to mars. The last question that I may or may not have mentioned before is "How many people are willing to stay on mars". If the answer is yes then I believe we will reach mars in 10-20 years. If it is no we might have to weight 20-50 years max for point of return. My answer is why wait?

  • Needed for research

    We landed on america, we landed on the moon. There have been many casualties but it has been for the better. These people want to do this and we should therefore certainly not stop them. For the most part, these people have spent their lives searching, dreaming about Mars. It is their passion. It is in everyone's interest, the volunteers included, to feed their imagination. This trip, in my opinion should be fully warranted.

  • Knowledge and Understanding is important.

    Also, if they are willing to risk their lives, they should get the chance to go. Where would Earths development be if we wouldn't take risks and explore the world a.K.A. Earth.
    We have visited the Moon, then why should something stop us to travel to Mars?
    The future will be the perfect timing to explore and develop our knowledge about the Universe. If we have the chances to go to Mars, we should go. Even if it there isn't any chance for the travelers to come back to Earth.
    You may think that if the astronauts die on Mars, how will we get the information that they gathered? There is ways for us to communicate, and it is enough as long as it all goes well on the trip.
    People who are ready to sacrifice themselves for the development and understanding of the Universe should go. It sounds crazy, but as I have mentioned, PEOPLE who are WILLING to die for this, should get the chance.

  • If people who are ready and trained volunteer to go to Mars, they should be allowed to.

    Also, if they are willing to risk their lives, they should get the chance to go. Where would Earths development be if we wouldn't take risks and explore the world a.K.A. Earth.
    We have visited the Moon, then why should something stop us to travel to Mars?
    The future will be the perfect timing to explore and develop our knowledge about the Universe. If we have the chances to go to Mars, we should go. Even if it there isn't any chance for the travelers to come back to Earth.
    You may think that if the astronauts die on Mars, how will we get the information that they gathered? There is ways for us to communicate, and it is enough as long as it all goes well on the trip.
    People who are ready to sacrifice themselves for the development and understanding of the Universe should go. It sounds crazy, but as I have mentioned, PEOPLE who are WILLING to die for this, should get the chance.

  • +200,000 People Agreed

    +200,000 People said 'Yes' to take a one way trip to Mars. It's Important for Us to do this. I don't know how many people they are planning to send. But That would be a minimal amount. And What you are guys going to do? Stop those people from going? They have something that is called Freewill. The can choose to do whatever they want especially something this Revolutionary and an impact on History.

  • Why is Getting to Mars so Difficult? A Look at the Barriers Standing in our Way http://space.about.com/od/mars/a/Why-Is-Getting-To-Mars-So-Difficult.htm

    It is just not a matter of not being able to return; even if they wanted to return, they would have to stay on Mars for about one and one-half years before the alignment of Mars and Earth would allow a return trip. There is no way they would be able to live on Mars for more than a few weeks, maybe a month or two.

    Mars is 150 times further away from the Earth than the Moon. So the rocket would need much more fuel, which means much more weight. And, no one knows for sure how much fuel might be needed to make course corrections during the flight. No one knows for sure if the space ship could have enough shielding to protect the crew from the Sun's energetic solar wind or the micrometeorites.

    The problem of food, air, and water has not been solved. Some nut cases say they could take plants with and produce both food and oxygen; but,the volume of plants needed is very large. And,keeping those plants alive until you get to Mars is a huge problem. And, then watering them on the ship and when you get to Mars. They would have to build a green house on Mars immediately; but, how. There is no space ship now or most likely ever that will be big enough to get all that stuff to Mars.

    The above problems are insurmountable at this time. Then there is the problem that the human body cannot survive prolong periods of weightlessness; humans need the same gravity as on earth or the body starts breaking down. And, NASA has not even been able to create gravity in a small spaceship or a space station. Yes, there are lots of wild plans on how it can be done; but, nothing has been build or tested yet.

    Too many people have been watching too many Star Treks and Star Wars movies, including all the people at NASA.

  • No that is not fair

    No they should not be forced to be there until they die. I don't think there are any evidence that support that if you go to Mars then you have to be there forever because of some possible danger that might occur if you return, or whatever the cause may be. Considering what I just said there is nothing at all that should prevent people from returning from Mars.

    Posted by: neso
  • What about their families

    We know how to get to Mars but we don't know how to get back to Earth. Most people have a family on Earth. If they went we couldn't get them back to see their families and they might never see their family again. A family member might die while they are gone and would not have even gotten a chance to say good-bye, and they won't be able to make up the time they lost with that family member because they died.

  • Mars is not a Prison Colony

    If travel to Mars eventually occurs, it should be a privilege or a vacation destination, not a prison colony. Further, unless it is created as a prison colony for only lifers, people would be allowed to come back at the end of their sentences. These people would also still need guards, and guards should not be banished for life.

  • Biggest risk ever.

    The idea of sending humans to mars is ridiculous, if things dont turn out the way you need them to be, lets say oxygen or food dont produce as we thought, you're in for a big death toll for all these humans. You cant go on with this at all.

  • The people are idiots of the government

    These people want to go to Mars and never return. Obviously they are idiots. Do they not know of the experiments that are taking place on Mars as we speak. This is all another conspiracy by the government we all have to much trust in. The reason the government doesn't want them to come back is because they are afraid. If they do return they will tell what they saw on Mars. Chances are if they do live eventually one will happen to see the wrong thing and government can and will kill them and get away with it. Hasn't the government caused enough harm to Americans? Now your willing to walk in to the biggest conspiracy/ death trap of them all. It's a no win situation.

  • wait until they can return...

    Sending people to Mars, even if they want to go, is horrible. They will not return, they will obviously get sick and nothing to help them....So they will die on Mars. Whoopie! Wait until the technology permits them to land, stay a bit and return. Otherwise just send prisoners on death row to their death on Mars!!!!

  • No travel to mars

    Because if you go to mars you will never go back home
    you will die, no food, no one will get you, you will be single, scared, and you will never have a house, you'll sleep on the hot sand of mars, you might be crazy to go over there.

  • Why in the world?

    If we can get them there, we should be able to get them back. It may require advances in tech to do that (faster space shuttles/ships/whatever) but most of the people that want to leave have family that they would leave behind. Not worth it to me. Nope nope nope.

  • Jumping too far ahead.

    If we can't yet colonize on the moon, what makes you think we can do it on Mars? If those people were to go to mars, they would need the supplies and the oxygen to sustain them for decades! Currently, we are unable to replicate that kind of environment on our own moon, which is much closer than mars. So if we can't even do that, what makes anyone think they can do it on a much further and more dangerous area. It is a suicide mission. Nasa first needs to be able to do this on a small scale before taking such a jump.


Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
Anonymous says2013-05-18T09:54:44.263
This is a great time to be into astromony.I am 44 years old @ hope I live long enough to see this happen.Men were born to explore @ thats all there is to it.
GWL-CPA says2013-09-23T00:14:49.777
Part I

Neither NASA nor anyone else in the World has a spaceship capable of a manned mission to Mars even as a one-way trip and no manned missions to Mars have ever been tried.

So talking about a manned mission to Mars is currently Science Fiction, since it can’t be done at the present time. Therefore, the possibility of a manned mission to Mars only exists in one’s imagination, which makes this topic question a science fiction question at this time.

Please read the following definition of Science Fiction:

“Science fiction is a genre of fiction dealing with imaginative content such as futuristic settings, futuristic science and technology, space travel, parallel universes, extraterrestrial life, and paranormal abilities.”
http://en.Wikipedia.Org...

Anonymous stated:

“Humanity needs to explore. Whatever the cost. Humanity has always had the urge to explore. We have gone to the moon successfully and got humans back safely. It seems strange not to let humans take risks and sacrifices, like dying on Mars. The reason is that we do not have adequate technology for the job, so staying on the Martian surface is our only option for now.

We as a species would not exist in the place we were in if it wasn't for the brave ventures into the unknown. There are pros and cons for living on Mars, but in the end, not only is it a great triumph, but a great sacrifice.

And staying on Mars is a sacrifice worth taking.”

I would be more than happy to send this kid to Mars if it were possible and let him die there. Well, his parents would have to give him permission to go to Mars and die for no reason.

And, his/her statement that staying on the Martian surface is our only option for now is retarded and blatantly false.

NASA has no intention of sending anyone to Mars that cannot return safely to earth. So, the other alternative is that we wait until technology has advanced far enough to allow a round-trip manned flight to Mars where people don’t have to stay on Mars and die. This is the main reason that NASA is projecting a manned round-trip Mars mission for some time in the 2030’s; but that date assumes that NASA has the technology by then.

Again, NASA still does not know if they can solve the human obstacles to deep space human flights, e.G., radiation, lack of gravity, etc. If these human obstacles can’t be solved, only unmanned missions will be made into deep space with robotic rovers, e.G., Curiosity.
Http://en.Wikipedia.Org... (rover)

“The Challenges of Deep Space Exploration”
http://www.Explorecuriocity.Org...

As far as safety, 18 astronauts have died in spaceflights. The Shuttle killed more people (14 people) than any other space vehicle in history. And, ten or more have died in training.

“Let me spell it out for you: out of five Shuttles–Columbia, Challenger, Discovery, Atlantis, and Endeavor—two met a disastrous and fiery fate. That’s a 40% vehicular failure rate (updated) and a flight failure rate of 1.5%. This would have grounded any other vehicle permanently. “http://www.Forbes.Com...

There are about 1.7 billion people that fly on 25 million commercial flights annually. That is an average of about 68 people per flight (i.E., 1.7 billion divided by 25 million). If 1.5% of those flights crashed or 375,000 flights (25 million flights multiplied by 1.5%) flights, that would equate to approximately 25,500,000 deaths per year (i.E., 375,000 flights multiplied by 68 or average people per flight). No nation would allow any airline with a death rate of 1.5% to fly those planes. That airline would be grounded until all the problems could be fixed and verified.

“According to the agency's count, 401 people died on commercial and charter planes in 2011 around the world, down from 726 in 2010.” That is about one death per every 7.1 million passengers or 0.00001408% versus NASA’s record of 1.5%, which is 106,500 times greater (1.5% divided by 0.00001408%) than flying commercially.

Read more: http://www.Nydailynews.Com...
Http://www.Nydailynews.Com...
Http://answers.Yahoo.Com...

Of course space travel is much more dangerous than taking a commercial plane trip; but, NASA takes every precaution to ensure that astronauts are not killed. So, NASA will not have a manned mission to anywhere, especially a deep space mission, e.G., Mars, until they are reasonably sure that nobody will die. Anyone that does not understand this is not dealing with a full deck. Most likely they don’t care because they are science fiction junkies and ignore the reality of the dangers of manned space travel, especially deep space manned missions.

After rereading Anonymous’ post, I should have told this immature person that he/she was a stupid moron. Since I don’t know his/her age, I can only assume based on his/her remarks that he/she is very young and uneducated. His/her statements are nonsensical and just flat-out retarded; basically statements made by a very young immature person with a limited knowledge of humanity, science, value of human life, or anything else for that matter.

What sane mature person is going to make a statement that humanity needs to explore, whatever the cost. What sane person would think that dying on Mars was worth the sacrifice? Sacrifice for what?
GWL-CPA says2013-09-23T00:17:51.403
Part II

We haven’t explored all the deepest parts of Earth’s oceans and seas because it is too dangerous and expensive. Why is trying to explore deep space, which is more dangerous and expensive than exploring the deepest parts of our oceans and seas, worth whatever economic costs are incurred and human lives that are lost? That statement alone reflects his/her immaturity and science-fiction mentality. He/she probably loves reruns of Star Trek and Star Wars.


Even his statement that humanity has always had the urge to explore is nonsense.

Most people throughout history have not had the urge to explore. Comparatively speaking, very few people compared to the total population on earth have been explorers, e.G., Christopher Columbus, James Cook, Hernan Cortes, Leif Eriksson, etc. As far as the humanity being explorers, sixty-two percent of people in the United States live in the same state they were born in. Most live within 30 miles of where their mothers live. Most other people in other parts of the world live within 30-50 miles of where they were born. This was also true in ancient and medieval times.
Http://news.Wustl.Edu...
Http://www.Statisticbrain.Com...

Most famous explorers went exploring because they believed there were huge economic rewards to be gained, e.G., gold, spices and slaves.

I am pretty sure that if these famous explorers had not gone exploring for wealth that humanity would have survived. So, that statement by Anonymous is also nonsense.

There are no economic rewards to be gained by exploring deep space or even Earth’s moon that will even begin to recover the total cost involved, not to mention the meaningless loss of human lives. The USA alone has already spent at least $486,000,000,000 or $486 billion in the last 57 years.
Http://www.Thespacereview.Com...

NASA will most likely have to spend at least another $500 Billion to fund a manned mission to Mars, which will raise the total costs to about $1,000,000,000,000 or $1 Trillion dollars.

There is no way the USA will ever recover $1 Trillion dollars by exploring space, e.G., manned mission to Mars or Europa or to mine asteroids. And, anyone that tells you otherwise is a liar.

Mining asteroids, planets, and Earth’s Moon and terraforming planets are all science fiction nonsense, especially terraforming. People that believe that these things will one day be possible have been watching or reading too much science fiction.

The physical realities e.G., energy required to launch heavy objects into deep space, fuel required to direct spaceships to planets, e.G., Mars, and return them to back to earth can’t be done given current technologies and propulsion systems. The first rocket engine was invented in 1926, about 87 years ago. Rockets have improved, but there are theoretical limits to chemical rockets.
Http://inventors.About.Com...

“Forget space travel: it’s just a dream”
“The clash of two titans - physics and chemistry - are major barriers to human space travel to Mars and beyond, and may well make it impossible ... At least with existing technologies…The laws of physics are immutable. According to these laws, accelerating that large mass and fighting against planetary gravitational fields requires a tremendous amount of energy.

Now consider the laws of chemistry. You can’t change them by legislation. The energy content that can be liberated from rocket fuel, and the propulsion force that can be generated, depend on the mass of the fuel, the molecular bond energies and the temperature at which the chemicals burn.

Scientists and rocket engineers have known this for more than a century and have worked hard to optimize all the parameters. But at the end of the day, there is only so much that you can get out of the rocket fuel – and it’s not enough.”
http://www.Cosmosmagazine.Com...

So, we have the physical limitations of physics and chemistry that will limit the size of spaceships and payloads. Then we have the limitations imposed by the effects on the human body cause by space travel e.G., radiation, gamma rays, and lack of gravity.

Right now, talk about manned mission to Mars or into deep space are just science fiction. We will have to wait and see if NASA actually is able to have a manned mission to Mars sometime in the 2030's. I doubt it; but a lot can change in a two or more decades.

Anyway, way too many science fiction junkies in the world; they need to check in with reality.