The life issue will have to be settled with robots. You send humans to Mars and you contaminate it. If humans die on Mars due to microbes you have lost all public support for space exploration for everal hundred years.
Chris writes: And if there is no life on Mars how many years do you feel we should waste?
Barry replies: If there is no life on Mars (and that could take quite a while to prove, perhaps fifty years), we should then send a human scientific mission if there are finnancial resources to do so. The Moon would be a great place to start and rehearse for a trip to Mars. Plus it would be a great place to set up a sample receiving laboratory.
"BTW, I've state I dont feel yopu can reasonably discribe a year long mission as Flags and Footprints."
Barry says: Doesn't matter how long it takes to get there if all you are going to do is an Apollo style survey and leave, that would be just just "flags and footprints". If you are talking about a stay of a few weeks or months, I would agree that the scientific payoff would be worth it." But then why send any other human missions after that? What purpose would it serve other than draining every possible dime out of the economy? At this stage of our soceital woes, it is a mere nobel fantasy.
BD
Space/Science » in reply to re: This is a red herring: It's not an either or question. We can both look for Martian life and Explore the surface with Humans.
re: Humans cannot look for life on Mars...they would contaminate the planet
The whole thread (50 posts)
- The Moon
- Strategic Choices
- re: The Moon or Mars
- re: The Moon or Mars their changing perceptions
- re: Flags and Footprints or finding the orgins of life itself?
- re: This is a red herring: It's not an either or question. We can both look for Martian life and Explore the surface with Humans.
- Amazing, isn't it!
- Romanticism Is A Poor Basis For Making Major Resource Commitments