NASA's new plans for mars.

originally posted by: Aliensun
a reply to: anonentity

You said:
"Surely the first step for the colonisation of Mars would have to be, biological. An extremophile probably genetically engineered to push out oxygen . Or some gas that would envelop the planet, then the terraforming might start . The temperature goes up and then liquid water etc."

Heck! I have the old VCR movie of that event. Arnie did it in Total Recall..

Why do people rattle on about what NASA says it will do way down the road in making way again to the Moon? "Oh, forget the Moon," they say, "let's shoot for Mars...(some day so far into the distance future you can't even conceive of being alive then)." Why no solid discussions about triangles, the US Space Force's plans to control all space out to the Moon and the very idea why they don't really seriously talk about mining the Moon and with what equipment? Can you just imagine the Moon as a military base as the Space Force did back as early as 1989 and the possibility of triangles zipping up there in a few hours, loading up with some of those rare materials and zipping back for a pittance of the cost of a conventional rocket? Well, maybe you can't but the people with the triangle fleet would think that was a good use for them. As for Mars, they've been there, surely.

Well yeh, if triangles exist outside of the imagination, but remember not one piece of verifiable hardware...ever, plenty of sightings, over time with the crafts changing styles and dimensions, but in the end its light they are seeing. If you see light, bouncing of a something it could be anything.

My monies on some kid dreaming and somehow manipulating Telluric currents, Either way someone's consciousness interplaying with the world, because they haven't found out yet that they cant do it. That's why their are hotspots. www.drywind.net... confines-of-the-fallen-ones/659/

originally posted by: Blue Shift
Sure, the dreamers would love to go to Mars. But somebody's gotta pay for it.

Isn't humanity's long quest to explore and understand the universe through scientific discovery worth the cost?

The answer is... no.

Far lees that we bail out corporations with, far less than we use for war for Oil that we no longer need. Far less than we spend on cancers we cause for profit. All these things destroying the planet we live on and yet some say look no further for a place of safe haven for when we destroy our world.

originally posted by: anonentity
a reply to: roth1

Surely the first step for the colonisation of Mars would have to be, biological. An extremophile probably genetically engineered to push out oxygen . Or some gas that would envelop the planet, then the terraforming might start . The temperature goes up and then liquid water etc. This could all be done by seeding from space, and doesn't require people to risk their lives. Since the moon is closest why not colonise that first , then at least you have a stepping stone, their is no logic, in this mission. But with the moon all the gear gets tested.

Yes the moon would seem logical as it is closer, but should be just a stepping stone. Once in space different propulsion systems can be used. Mars has an environment more friendly to colonization because it has an atmosphere at least and it can be converted into something with future science. The moon is not conducive to that. Underground is also an option as things progress.

a reply to: Blue Shift

Absolutely correct. I'm tired of hearing about space. We can't even fix the problems at home and here we are trying to find ways onto other worlds.... It's absolute insanity. Nothing we find in space is going to further our philosophical and ideological development down here.

Stick a fork in us, we're done.

originally posted by: Aedaeum
a reply to: Blue Shift

Absolutely correct. I'm tired of hearing about space. We can't even fix the problems at home and here we are trying to find ways onto other worlds.... It's absolute insanity. Nothing we find in space is going to further our philosophical and ideological development down here.

Stick a fork in us, we're done.

Perhaps if the politicians go to space and see the Earth as a single beautiful and fragile planet without any borders, they will have a cardinal change of mind.

Anyhoo, spaceflight has furthered out knowledge and technological progress (including advancements in medicine that saves people's lives), so it does have beneficial effect.

originally posted by: Aedaeum
a reply to: Blue Shift

Absolutely correct. I'm tired of hearing about space. We can't even fix the problems at home and here we are trying to find ways onto other worlds.... It's absolute insanity. Nothing we find in space is going to further our philosophical and ideological development down here.

Stick a fork in us, we're done.

If we spent the money we spend trying to fix the problems we have at home on space, we would be on Mars by now. I'm not saying that we shouldn't try to fix the problems we have on Earth -- I'm all for that. However, the money spent on space exploration is relatively low compared to the money spent on the social ills of Earth.

Besides -- if we mandate to ourselves that we must fix all problems at home before even thinking about space exploration, then there will never be a time that we get around to thinking about space exploration.

originally posted by: Soylent Green Is People

originally posted by: Aedaeum
a reply to: Blue Shift

Absolutely correct. I'm tired of hearing about space. We can't even fix the problems at home and here we are trying to find ways onto other worlds.... It's absolute insanity. Nothing we find in space is going to further our philosophical and ideological development down here.

Stick a fork in us, we're done.

If we spent the money we spend trying to fix the problems we have at home on space, we would be on Mars by now. I'm not saying that we shouldn't try to fix the problems we have on Earth -- I'm all for that. However, the money spent on space exploration is relatively low compared to the money spent on the social ills of Earth.

Besides -- if we mandate to ourselves that we must fix all problems at home before even thinking about space exploration, then there will never be a time that we get around to thinking about space exploration.

I wish the people who say we shouldn't spend money on space would put their own money where their mouth is, never listen to another weather forecast, look at satellite pictures of the weather, use GPS on their phone or other devices, use satellite TV or internet. Technically since NASA is so heavily involved in improving modern aviation, they shouldn't fly in a plane either. I mean, if you want to walk the walk and not just talk the talk, then you had better be willing to give up major benefits that save and improve lives. Did your doctor order a stereotactic large-core needle biopsy? Decline it; that technique exists thanks to technology developed for the STIS camera of the Hubble Space Telescope. It's not just small stuff like scratch resistant lenses and dust busters.

Thanks to having Ted Cruz in charge of oversight, NASA can kiss any intentions for plans like these goodbye.

Ted Cruz won't approve any funding for ambitious NASA exploration and science programs.

originally posted by: aboutface
Funny thing about the Mars Mission is that an article just came out about it and might be worth reading:

Julie Payette, former Canadian astronaut, says Mars mission is going nowhere

She says the technology simply does not exist to get anyone there.

That reminds of Virgil Ivan Grissom AKA Gus Grissom. Besides being a very smart mechanical engineer he was a Mercury project astronaut. He worked on simulations for the Apollo project and when he had serious doubts and became vocal about NASA not having the technology to put a man on the Moon before 1970 he suddently died.

Grissom was killed along with fellow astronauts Ed White and Roger Chaffee during a pre-launch test for the Apollo 1 mission at Cape Canaveral Air Force Station (then known as Cape Kennedy)

a reply to: ngchunter

Space exploration and using space as another medium for necessary advancements are fundamentally different. There is absolutely no benefit in space exploration outside of curiosity. Using space as an external medium to supplement our limited space/mechanics here on earth however, I fully support. Please don't get the two confused.

originally posted by: babybunnies
Thanks to having Ted Cruz in charge of oversight, NASA can kiss any intentions for plans like these goodbye.

Ted Cruz won't approve any funding for ambitious NASA exploration and science programs.

Says Cruz in the statement:

We must refocus our investment on the hard sciences, on getting men and women into space, on exploring low-Earth orbit and beyond, and not on political distractions that are extraneous to NASA’s mandate.

Didnt take long to prove your obvious bias wrong....

Cuz actual research on someones views is much harder then just mud slinging and parroting everything you hear negative about Cruz.....

originally posted by: Christosterone
The current administration has NO interest in traversing the expanse of space.
Our own NASA director stated his primary mission was to "make muslim countries feel good about their contribution to science and mathematics(ie space travel)."
Newsflash: sumerians invented the number zero and have contributed nothing but a cult of death since this...

Newsflash: Most of the brightest stars in the sky have Arabic names. I'd ask you if you knew the reason why but I doubt you know much about that history.

Basically, records kept by Arab astronomers were used because at the time Europe was just coming out of "the Dark Ages".

In case you didn't know, there are groups in the middle east who do not teach the average kid there about that glorious period in Arab history when they were the center of much of the intellectual world.

Why? Because it undermines the dogma they teach and keeps them ignorant so they strap bombs onto themselves in the name of a twisted form of Islam.

Their golden age of reason is kept from them so they assume it's always been this way and that the only way to move forward it to harken back to the same bloody time in history that groups like ISIS use to enflame passions and hatreds.

Its a war for their minds and right now groups like ISIS are winning because no one has fought them on that battleground.

But president obama ended our plans to return to space...its pathetic that with a paltry $20-40B we could return to the moon and we did not continue neither the ares v nor the constellation programs...and i only use the term paltry due to the cost as related to our gdp...

Constellation was a bloated over budget program that went nowhere because it was never intended to do anything but enrich Bush's buddies in the aerospace industry. See also his father's "Mars Mission" plans from his presidency.

Not only that but it killed the Terrestrial Planet Finder program which had it been built might have discovered life on a planet around a nearby star by now. Instead they funneled that money as well as money which had been destined for other astrophysics missions into Constellation and the Shuttle which was already scheduled for retirement:



SLS and Falcon Heavy are more than capable of lifting the equipment and materials needed to assemble a Mars spacecraft. Both are on track and under budget and I guess you didn't see the Orion capsule already had one engineering test flight.

In science we actually use facts not conjecture to prove our point so, I suggest you stop getting your space news from fox news:

originally posted by: ngchunter

originally posted by: Soylent Green Is People

originally posted by: Aedaeum
a reply to: Blue Shift

Absolutely correct. I'm tired of hearing about space. We can't even fix the problems at home and here we are trying to find ways onto other worlds.... It's absolute insanity. Nothing we find in space is going to further our philosophical and ideological development down here.

Stick a fork in us, we're done.

If we spent the money we spend trying to fix the problems we have at home on space, we would be on Mars by now. I'm not saying that we shouldn't try to fix the problems we have on Earth -- I'm all for that. However, the money spent on space exploration is relatively low compared to the money spent on the social ills of Earth.

Besides -- if we mandate to ourselves that we must fix all problems at home before even thinking about space exploration, then there will never be a time that we get around to thinking about space exploration.

I wish the people who say we shouldn't spend money on space would put their own money where their mouth is, never listen to another weather forecast, look at satellite pictures of the weather, use GPS on their phone or other devices, use satellite TV or internet. Technically since NASA is so heavily involved in improving modern aviation, they shouldn't fly in a plane either. I mean, if you want to walk the walk and not just talk the talk, then you had better be willing to give up major benefits that save and improve lives. Did your doctor order a stereotactic large-core needle biopsy? Decline it; that technique exists thanks to technology developed for the STIS camera of the Hubble Space Telescope. It's not just small stuff like scratch resistant lenses and dust busters.

Starred!

originally posted by: Aedaeum
a reply to: ngchunter

Space exploration and using space as another medium for necessary advancements are fundamentally different.

No, they are not. They are directly tied to each other. Hubble is space exploration, not exploitation, yet it has yielded the technology necessary for some medical diagnostics, such as the stereotactic large-core needle biopsy. If your doctor suspects breast cancer and orders that procedure, decline it. Hey, if you want to insist that there is "absolutely no benefit in space exploration outside of curiosity" then you should be prepared for the consequences of putting your money where your mouth is, even if it kills you.

a reply to: ngchunter

*facepalms*

Again, you're not understanding. How long have we been looking at the stars? Probably from the moment we were able to ask "Who am I?".

Telescope is nothing more then an advanced pair of binoculars. I have no problem with observing the universe, exploring the universe however, I do have a problem with.

Just to make it easier for you, I'm using the first definition of the word, which is on dictionary.com

to traverse or range over (a region, area, etc.) for the purpose of discovery

Hopefully that clears up your misconceptions. Again, big difference between observation and traversing. I do not support going to other planets (traversing/ranging over space), which as I already said, serves no other purpose than curiosity.

And please don't be childish and say things like "Oh, but you have to traverse space to be in it in the first place". If that's going to be your response then intelligent conversation is not possible.

a reply to: roth1

hah.. I am in Orlando now and did the Kennedy Space Centre tour yesterday. after watching the lead up to the creation of the shuttle (when the technology didnt exist then either) and after watching the movies about what theyre expecting to do for a Mars mission - i think theyve got it in the bag.

originally posted by: Aedaeum
a reply to: ngchunter

*facepalms*

Again, you're not understanding. How long have we been looking at the stars? Probably from the moment we were able to ask "Who am I?".

Telescope is nothing more then an advanced pair of binoculars.

That's more than over-simplifying things. You stated you had a problem with exploration missions, of which Hubble is one. You are attempting to move the goalposts now that your claim has been shown to be false. We do get tangible earth benefits from space exploration and exploration missions. STIS wouldn't even exist (and neither would that biopsy technique) if not for the fact that we had the space shuttle and Hubble, two very expensive space exploration programs.

Hopefully that clears up your misconceptions. Again, big difference between observation and traversing.

You're moving the goalposts, but just to get you to quiet down I'll give you another spinoff which you must now be willing to turn down, even if it means your death. McDonnell Douglas invented a Microbial Load Monitor for the purpose of monitoring potential biological contamination of the Voyager probes, and it doesn't get more "traversing" than that. The MLM was then adapted into the Vitek AutoMicrobic System in the 1980's for hospitals to use in the rapid identification of microbes as well as the identification of which antibiotics they are still susceptible to. This technology has since evolved and has been improved by combining with fluorescence technology to create the modern Vitek 2 system.

The Vitek equipment started out as part of the space program at McDonnell Douglas...
When identifying strains of bacteria, MicroScan took 16 to 20 hours, on average, Vitek took about four hours and Vitek 2 about two hours, she said.

www.bizjournals.com...

Speeding up this process can reduce hospital stays by allowing quicker identification and earlier treatment of infection. Merieux Vitek Inc. (formerly Vitek Systems, a subsidiary of McDonnell Douglas), Hazelwood, Missouri, manufactures a device that incorporates space technology to significantly reduce body fluid analysis time. The technology dates back to McDonnell Douglas' Microbial Load Monitor (MLM), developed for NASA's Voyager interplanetary exploration program to detect bacterial contamination aboard the spacecraft.

er.jsc.nasa.gov...
Nearly half of all microbiology labs use a Vitek machine. If you're ever hospitalized with any infection, be sure to insist that the lab use slower older methods that take 10 times as long. If you end up dying from infection because they didn't diagnose it properly in time or failed to find an antibiotic resistance mechanism that Vitek would have found, oh well. Your loss, you chose to insist on believing that exploration missions yield no tangible benefits for people on earth.

a reply to: ngchunter

This is a pointless debate... Medical advances have also been made because of the experimentation the Nazi's did on the Jews during the Holocaust. Should we continue to carry out immoral brutalization for the sake of "advancement"?

Just because we endeavor to do something and it happens to lead to positive results has no bearing on the endeavors intrinsic motive. Human history is littered with advances via questionable motives. We don't explore space to save lives, it's explored because of curiosity and nothing more.

For the record, the "goal post" was always the necessity of space exploration (the traversing of space for the sake of knowing the unknown), regardless of your misunderstandings. As it seems my point is lost on you, I will take my leave.

originally posted by: Aedaeum
a reply to: ngchunter

This is a pointless debate... Medical advances have also been made because of the experimentation the Nazi's did on the Jews during the Holocaust. Should we continue to carry out immoral brutalization for the sake of "advancement"?

Not only did you just try to move the goalposts AGAIN but now Godwin's law has been reached. You just tried to equate space exploration with the Holocaust. You should be completely ashamed of yourself. That is disgusting, unjustified, and insulting (both to Jews and to NASA). Space exploration is not "immoral brutalization." It isn't immoral at all. Let me remind the readers of this thread what you previously said. You said, and I quote:

There is absolutely no benefit in space exploration outside of curiosity.

That claim has been completely and utterly refuted. You will clearly deny it by any means necessary, including equating space exploration with the Holocaust.

We don't explore space to save lives, it's explored because of curiosity and nothing more.

Your original claim had nothing to do with motives, it had to do with results.

There is absolutely no benefit in space exploration outside of curiosity.

You are attempting to substitute claims rather than simply admitting you were wrong. Instead you elect to embarrass yourself in front of everyone by equating space exploration with the Holocaust. For the record, curiosity is what drives ALL fields of science and leads to advances in the human condition, whether via medicine or some other technological field. Maybe you're a member of some extreme religious sect that thinks space exploration is completely evil and should be stopped at all costs? It doesn't really matter, but honestly I can think of no other reason a person would even try to make such a ridiculous equivalence. I'm sure you'll try to walk it back now "it was only an example" or some such nonsense, but whatever your excuse it's pointless. Thanks for completely torpedoing your own argument by abandoning your original claim. I have met your goalpost, multiple times, and you just keep trying to move it. I will let you hang on your own words one last time.

There is absolutely no benefit in space exploration outside of curiosity.

QED.