Hi Mark,

Ok, before we can go on - everybody crack out their thesis!

Why is everybody so uptight? It is amazing how everybody personalizes and gets into these ridiculous little spats over matters of little consequence.

I read the Zubrin piece and his emotional, uptight tone is what weakened his entire presentation.

Emotion is viewed as a personal weakness when presenting professionally. If I go up before a group of colleagues - I would still be smiling politely if they said I was related to a goat. The man who can smile at his detractors is that much more powerful and it shows a certain confidence and mastery over the topic discussed.

Zubrin should have had someone edit his piece and rebuttals and go through it with a marker extracting the tone.

Calm confidence especially annoys ones detractors and they usually step up their rhetoric - only pointing out their own imbalance on the issue.

I read Alex' post too, and the two of you have to step back - and relax. This is not a peer reviewed journal, but should be friendly place of healthy debate where we don't get into credential showing, published paper counts, or institutional prestige issues.

I am not saying this because I am against Zubrin or MarsDirect, as a matter of fact I am all for sending a mission to mars by Christmas of next year if it were possible.

Robotic exploration is a poor substitute for real scientists digging deeply with powerful tools in spots that strike their fancy.

If smaple return is in the way - just push it out of the way. The scientific way to pass an obstacle is to go around it. By addressing sample return you give it a priority and credibility which it is not really due.

The mars debate should be focused solely on propulsion, ship design, mission goals and cost distribution.

Sample return is just a stumbling block that wastes time. Even if it brought back a cement truck full of regolith - the results will be inconclusive as to life on mars and other issues.

Here's a tip for you, Zubrin and other mars proponents - mars is valuable not for life but for the unknown elements which may be harvested there.

That's the way you generate corporate sponsorship. Folks at Dupont, or other chemical companies would like to hear about potential benefits from studying the possible unique isotopes of martian counterparts to our own.

A new trylon, nylon or orlon (and the accompanying marketing billions) may be just an analysis and a 33 million mile trip away...

If Zubrin and others started spinning these possibilities - I assure you the 'Real World' would start to stand up and take notice - they would barrel over any sample return hesitation in a flash.

There's nothing like money to open closed doors.

Best wishes,

SDAI-Tech1