Again you didn't address the fundamental mental disconnect. A permanent presence on Mars costs less than a permanent presence on the Moon because Mars has easily available resources. It also can cost less to send material oneway to Mars by using aerobraking unavailable on the Moon. It's fine to say you don't want to spend the money on Mars. Many people feel similarly about space in general. The strange thing is that you somehow see spending megabucks on the Moon is OK. Again please explain this seeming inconsistancy. You raised the commerical appeal issue and I already addressed it in a minimal way, but did not catch a direct reply from you. Posting a seeming copywrite violation of someone else's essay on the issue does not indicate any individual thought on your own part.
Regards,
Mark
Space/Science » in reply to re: What's A Second Home For Humanity Worth?
But You Don't Mind Spending a Trillion On The Moon?
The whole thread (56 posts)
- Update: Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter converted to a Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter???
- re: Update: Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter converted to a Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter???
- I'll have to appall you with my ignorance
- re: I'll have to appall you with my ignorance
- A bigger worry
- "I don't know who Tom Matula is"
- re: "I don't know who Tom Matula is"
- Thanks for the heads-up on Tom Matula
- re: "I don't know who Tom Matula is"
- re: I don't know who .......
- Then You Haven't Looked
- re: Then You Haven't Looked
- OK Then
- Mark: You take the first punch and then I'll go in for mop up
- OK Then
- CATS
- re: Then You Haven't Looked
- I also did the Google search
- re: "I don't know who Tom Matula is"
- re: A bigger worry
- "I don't know who Tom Matula is"
- A bigger worry
- Correction: I meant "MSL" not "MSR" (too many TLAs) (n/t)
- re: I'll have to appall you with my ignorance