New Poll: Moon Yes, Mars No

Status
Not open for further replies.
W

wvbraun

Guest
From nasawatch.com:<br /><br /><i>"Endorsement of the space program in general is very strong, with 69% of Americans voicing their support. Interest and excitement about the Vision for Space Exploration is strong for near-term aspects of the plan (65% of Americans responded positively) and for returning to the Moon. This is not true for plans to send humans to Mars, which is seen as involving much more risk (only 18% of Americans responded positively)."</i><br /><br />Link<br /><br /><br />Interesting. I always thought it would be the other way round ("Been there, done that"). It's certainly good news for NASA.
 
N

najab

Guest
This isn't that suprising - people generally think of the Moon as somewhere that we can go and <i>do</i> something, even establishing permanent settlements. Mars is seen more as a 'flags and footprints' mission - at a much greater cost.
 
H

halman

Guest
wvbraun,<br /><br />The Moon is Unfinished Business, Mars is Research And Investigation. If we give the perception that we are finished with the Moon, (Been there, done that,) then we give the perception that space exploration is without substance, merely an exercise in publicity.<br /><br />Reasons I think people may have for this attitude:<br /><br />Most people want to see some kind of reward for our investment, and the Moon is the most likely place to find rewards in the forseeable future. We make ourselves out to be so powerful and knowledgable, yet we still have not created any kind of an outpost on the Moon. Before we go any furthur, lets find out just how good we are. Where IS Mars, anyway?<br /><br />(An intelligent person I know just discovered that the Sun is a star. This person is about 24.) <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> The secret to peace of mind is a short attention span. </div>
 
S

SpaceKiwi

Guest
I'm in the Moon camp also. We need to get proficient in our own backyard before venturing further afield.<br /><br />I don't think there is anything significant to be gained from conquering Mars first. The life question might get answered definitively, but then what? It would perhaps be philosophically significant, but adds little to the greater ET discussion. Unless, of course, the little green men really were. <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><em><font size="2" color="#ff0000">Who is this superhero?  Henry, the mild-mannered janitor ... could be!</font></em></p><p><em><font size="2">-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------</font></em></p><p><font size="5">Bring Back The Black!</font></p> </div>
 
A

arobie

Guest
<font color="yellow">(An intelligent person I know just discovered that the Sun is a star. This person is about 24.)</font><br /><br />Yeah, it's pretty sad. <br /><br />The other day I had to tell someone in my Algebra II class that we haven't been to Mars yet.
 
L

lunatic133

Guest
Ha yes at my graduation party I actually had to inform my cousin (who is my age) that we don't go to the moon anymore, and she looks at me all confused and is like "We don't? ... Why not?" and I said "Good question."<br /><br />You know I'm all about Mars when Mars is in my face. Over the summer when I worked for Zubrin I was a Mars freak. In January 2004, when the rovers landed, I was Mars obsessed. In August 2003 when it was the closest it had been in 10,000 years or whatever, Mars was all I would talk about. But during other times when the red planet is not right there in front of me flashing, well, red, then I find I really focus more of my attention on the moon. I have no idea why. There's just such an allure of going there, that I've felt since even before I cared about space exploration. I guess I always will be a lunatic at heart <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" />
 
H

halman

Guest
lunatic133,<br /><br />Perhaps your fascination with Mars is a result of its prominence in mythology, (the 'bringer of war',) the vast amount of fiction which has used Mars as a setting, or an instigator, or the mere fact that Mars is the only place besides the Moon that we have been able to observe the surface of from Earth. Although Jupiter is usually much more prominent in our skies than Mars, it is hardly ever mentioned in science fiction. Only Venus comes close to Mars as a hypothetical source of alien life, or potential candidate for colonization.<br /><br />Strangely enough, the Moon is the symbol of inaccessability, even though it is the only body to show a visible disk. The Moon is a place that we cannot get to, whereas Mars is a mythical realm, where anything is possible. (To take the pre-1950 point of view.) Although the Sun shows a visible disk, it has not been widely thought of as being a 'place'. (Arthur C. Clarke has written some stimulating fiction addressing the possibility of life existing in suns.) <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> The secret to peace of mind is a short attention span. </div>
 
T

toymaker

Guest
"Perhaps your fascination with Mars is a result of its prominence in mythology"<br />Well in my view, Moon is more like an possiblity of industrial use, more short term practical applications.<br />When it comes to the rather romantic and fascinating prospects of colonisation and creating new societies I think Mars a lot more "human friendly" then the Moon.
 
J

jcdenton

Guest
<font color="yellow">Perhaps your fascination with Mars is a result of its prominence in mythology</font><br /><br />The main reason why Mars is the most fascinating object to space enthusiasts is because of its terrain's similarity to Earth's deserts, that and it likely being the only other planet in the Solar System that we can ever live on.<br /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>
 
H

halman

Guest
jcdenton,<br /><br />It is very unlikely that unprotected humans will ever be able to survive on Mars. Terraforming is a hypothetical method of gradually transforming an environment into one similiar to Earth's. The process may take centuries, and is likely to require enourmous investment. Terraforming Mars is a romantic ideal, with no practical purpose.<br /><br />Someday, humans will live on Mars, Mercury, the Moon, Ganymede, Titan, and possibly Venus. With adequate supplies of energy, humans can live anywhere, and will, if the race is to survive. We will create life support systems, just like we do on Earth. I'll bet that where you live, most houses have heating systems, or cooling systems, or both. Without air conditioning, much of Arizona is uninhabitable by unprotected humans in the summer. A naked human being in Michigan in January does not have much life expectancy.<br /><br />There are already people on Earth who rarely are exposed to the natural environment. They go into their garage, get in their car, open the garage door, start the car, drive to an underground, climate controlled garage, get out of their car, walk to an elevator, and ride to the floor that their office is on. In the evening, the process is reversed. Certainly, this is an extreme example, but this is the direction that we are headed. We are evolving into a narrow range of temperature tolerance, inability to withstand direct sunlight, and eventually will require an artificial environment no matter where we live. As long as we maintain the ability to create that environment, we will be able to live anywhere.<br /><br />Discussions of what the space program should focus on next are being distorted by romantic ideals which have no basis in fact. Mastering the Moon means mastering the majority of the environments that we are ever likely to face. Living on Mars will be much more like living on the Moon than it will be like living on Earth, at least for the forseeable future. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> The secret to peace of mind is a short attention span. </div>
 
I

ilbasso

Guest
Another reason Americans might favor the Moon is our short attention spans and our need for instant gratification. Notwithstanding the development time needed to even prepare for the missions, Americans will simply lose interest in a space voyage that involves 6 months of "nothing happening." We can be walking on the Moon in 3 days from launch...and Americans couldn't even be bothered to care much about that by the time Apollo 16 and 17 came around.
 
S

spacester

Guest
The results of this poll exactly reflect what I've been saying here for years. How often have I heard the bemoaning cry of "if only the general public supported space flight . . . " around here?<br /><br />Do not confuse ignorace with apathy. <br /><br />Especially when the ignorance is on the individual level and the apathy is on the group level.<br /><br />Just because Bill Smith doesn't know squat about space doesn't mean his town doesn't love the idea of space development and exploration.<br /><br />(I've tried to explain this before, now at least I have some evidence to back it up. Happy Day!) <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>
 
H

halman

Guest
spacester,<br /><br />Captializing on the publicity surrounding the announcement of a new direction in space exploration is imperative. Keeping the focus on immediate goals is the best way to avoid discord between advocates of space flight. I have read a poll that the majority of Americans support the space program, but that only a minority support an increase of spending on it.<br /><br />We can argue about efficiency at NASA, whether the private sector would give more bang for the buck, or why the sky is blue, but that will only serve to alienate the public. The government is going to spend hundreds of billions of dollars on various programs, no matter what. Getting a larger chunk of that for space exploration can be justified in numerous ways, which I am sure that we are all familiar with. Convincing the public that spending on space exploration will provide more long-term benefits than spending on defense, or drug enforcement, or studying esoteric questions in high energy physics is the most important thing that we can do to support progress in getting off of this planet. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> The secret to peace of mind is a short attention span. </div>
 
H

halman

Guest
vishniac,<br /><br />The government can make huge advances in space exploration, if that is what the public wants. Without public support, the space program is just treading water, spending billions of dollars going nowhere. We can captialize on the knowledge and experience that we have gained immediately, by spending more to allow new development, or we can go on treading water. The longer we tread water, the fewer resources will be available to make progress in any direction.<br /><br />I believe that a government program could have a permanent base on the Earth's Moon in 25 years. How long will it take if we wait for the private sector? <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> The secret to peace of mind is a short attention span. </div>
 
S

serak_the_preparer

Guest
I've always felt a return of men to the Moon would precede any manned mission to Mars - precisely because we have done it before, but can't do it now. The Moon is a benchmark a space program can use to prove itself capable of getting men from Earth to another celestial body. And we know it can be done because we've done it before.<br /><br />If any space agency in the world ever decides to tackle an important manned mission beyond Earth-orbit on its own, the Moon is the likely target. As part of a team effort, led by Americans or Europeans or Russians or some combination thereof, however, Mars might get the edge under certain circumstances. Still, in the long run it still looks like the smart money is on a return to the Moon.
 
T

toymaker

Guest
"I believe that a government program could have a permanent base on the Earth's Moon in 25 years. How long will it take if we wait for the private sector? "<br />Calculate the cost of this base, and give it as a prize for a private corporation which builds such a base in 20 years ?
 
W

wvbraun

Guest
"..it will take centuries"<br /><br /><br />I don't think so. Technological progress is accelerating exponentially. We simply can't imagine which tools the settlers living in the second half of this century will have at their disposal. Mars will be terraformed in this century.<br /><br />Arthur C. Clarke: <i>"People tend to overestimate what can be accomplished in the short run but to underestimate what can be accomplished in the long run."</i>
 
F

frodo1008

Guest
While I have the greatest of respect for Dr. Robert Zubrin and the people who follow his views (such as The Mars Society) I have to still differ with them in the relative importance of the moon and Mars in the future of the human expansion to the solar system. This even though I have read several of Zubrin’s books and even have them available as treasured additions to my own extensive space oriented library. <br />It is the moon NOT Mars that is the most important to the human development of space. <br /><br />There are many reasons for this position, some obvious and some not so obvious:<br /><br />The most obvious advantage to travel to the moon is the great difference in the distance from the Earth to the moon and the distance from the Earth to Mars. The moon is about 250,000 miles from the Earth, and Mars is some 60 million miles from the Earth at its closest approach to the Earth.<br />These distances then further translate into other measurements of travel. The most obvious of these being travel time. To put it into its simplest terms: travel to the moon takes a few days while travel to Mars takes many months with the currently available chemical rocket engine propulsion systems. Even if (with its own time, money and safety constraints) nuclear propulsion systems are developed for travel to Mars the travel time to Mars is still at least 10 times the travel time to the moon.<br /><br />These far greater travel times to Mars then result in other problems. One is the far greater expense of human beings traveling over such vast distances and times in space. Even the safety of such human travel over months and millions of miles becomes in itself an enormous problem in quality control (an area that I spent some 25 years of my working carrier of some 38 years in aerospace helping to make the very rocket engines that have thus far put human beings into space). We were able to safely (with great difficulty, and a lot of very hard work and determination) get the Apoll
 
B

bobvanx

Guest
Wormholes!<br /><br />Plunk a couple a hundred wormholes on Mars, the other ends on some icy minor planet. Crack the water ice into hydrogen and oxygen, shuttle the oxygen to Mars.<br /><br />Heck, find the oxygen layer on Jupiter and let the pressure differential do the work for you.<br /><br />Breathable atmosphere on Mars just as fast as you can transport it!
 
N

no_way

Guest
<blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr /><p>These far greater travel times to Mars then result in other problems. <p><hr /></p></p></blockquote><br />Such as signal roundtrip time which allows teleoperated equipment for moon. Teleoperated/teleassisted robotic equipment we know how to build reliably, fully autonomous is much tougher, especially in uncontrolled environments.
 
M

mental_avenger

Guest
I am still amazed by the attitude of the short-sighted (can only see as far as the Moon) people.<br /><br /><font color="yellow">The Moon is Unfinished Business, Mars is Research And Investigation. If we give the perception that we are finished with the Moon, (Been there, done that,) then we give the perception that space exploration is without substance, merely an exercise in publicity. </font><br /><br />Not at all. By looking onward to Mars, we are showing that we are able to keep things in perspective, learn from experience, and move forward.<br /><br /><font color="yellow">Most people want to see some kind of reward for our investment, </font><br /><br />I have seen that posted many times, but I have yet to see any back-up for it, with regards to the Moon. Perhaps the advocates feel if they say it often enough, others might actually believe it.<br /><br /><font color="yellow">and the Moon is the most likely place to find rewards in the forseeable future</font><br /><br />Only if we are hobbled by short-sighted people.<br /><br /><font color="yellow">We make ourselves out to be so powerful and knowledgable, yet we still have not created any kind of an outpost on the Moon.</font><br /><br />If there had been a valid reason, we would have done so.<br /><br /><font color="yellow">Before we go any furthur, lets find out just how good we are.</font><br /><br />One more time. The Moon is not a viable test bed for going to Mars, and there is no other body in our Solar System that would be a site for an manned outpost or colony.<br /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p style="margin-top:0in;margin-left:0in;margin-right:0in" class="MsoNormal"><font face="Times New Roman" size="2" color="#ff0000"><strong>Our Solar System must be passing through a Non Sequitur area of space.</strong></font></p> </div>
 
M

mental_avenger

Guest
<font color="yellow">It is very unlikely that unprotected humans will ever be able to survive on Mars.</font><br /><br />I agree. However, a light suit and helmet, with O<sub>2</sub> supply and people will be able to work on the surface of Mars fairly easily.<br /><br /><font color="yellow">Terraforming is a hypothetical method of gradually transforming an environment into one similiar to Earth's. The process may take centuries, and is likely to require enourmous investment.</font><br /><br />Probably more like several thousand years.<br /><br /><font color="yellow">Terraforming Mars is a romantic ideal, with no practical purpose. </font><br /><br />Depends on the future. There may come a time when it will not only be desirable, but possible.<br /><br /><font color="yellow">Someday, humans will live on Mars, Mercury, the Moon, Ganymede, Titan, and possibly Venus. </font><br /><br />We might have outposts on most of those, but unlikely for colonization, except of course for Mars. Jupiter's radiation makes the surface of Ganymede deadly, and Titan is 9.5 times further from the Sun, receiving 1/90<sup>th</sup> the solar energy and light. Venus is too hostile at this time, and Mercury probably won't be good for much more than Solar observatories, and those don't necessarily have to be manned.<br /><br /><font color="yellow">We are evolving into a narrow range of temperature tolerance, inability to withstand direct sunlight, and eventually will require an artificial environment no matter where we live.</font><br /><br />Evolving? There hasn't been time for that. Although most people choose comfort when they can, humans can still withstand terrible conditions and survive, and often do. Don't confuse choice with ability.<br /><br /><font color="yellow">Discussions of what the space program should focus on next are being distorted by romantic ideals which have no basis in fact. </font><br /><br />I agree. The <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p style="margin-top:0in;margin-left:0in;margin-right:0in" class="MsoNormal"><font face="Times New Roman" size="2" color="#ff0000"><strong>Our Solar System must be passing through a Non Sequitur area of space.</strong></font></p> </div>
 
M

mental_avenger

Guest
<font color="yellow">Well, we'd like to get working on a permanent space infrastructure so that we can go to the Moon, the Asteroids, Mercury, the gas giants, and beyond, in addition to Mars. </font><br /><br />And you claim that you don't advocate something that will not produce ROI for a long time.<br /><br /><font color="yellow">and I haven't seen convincing arguments that a straight shot for Mars will provide us with the means of providing value to Earth in anything like the near- or medium-term</font><br /><br />A permanent, viable colony on the other end would be a great start.<br /><br /><font color="yellow">Not asteroid watch, not resources, not rocket fuel.</font><br /><br />Although I have seen a lot of speculation on such resources, I have yet to see a viable plan for that for the Moon. The infrastructure to even begin producing resources from the Moon would cost thousands of times more than the same stuff from Earth, for a very very long time.<br /><br /><font color="yellow">The Moon is the fastest way to start returning value to the people of Earth.</font><br /><br />As if Earth needs anything from the Moon.<br /><br />Mental Avenger says: <i>”If there had been a valid reason [to build an outpost on the Moon], we would have done so.”</i><br /><font color="yellow">That comment betrays a woefull ignorance of the circumstances of how our space program has gotten to where it is now. </font><br /><br />On the contrary. Everything we have done in space so far has had a valid reason, at least to the people who approved and built it. Whether it was beating the USSR to the Moon, or developing satelite technology to watch TV, we did so because we had a good reason to do so. If national defense (or asteroid defense) had warranted a base on the Moon, we would have built one.<br /><br /><font color="yellow">Don't forget asteroidal bodies[for an outpost or colony]; there are some nice ones out there. </font>/safety_wrapper> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p style="margin-top:0in;margin-left:0in;margin-right:0in" class="MsoNormal"><font face="Times New Roman" size="2" color="#ff0000"><strong>Our Solar System must be passing through a Non Sequitur area of space.</strong></font></p> </div>
 
N

najab

Guest
><i>If we are able to develop the technology to make a 100% certain asteroid defense for Earth, then I might be inclined to slow down on the Mars mission. Until then, time is of the essence.</i><p>If it were an either/or situation I would agree. However, if we were to start on building a 'safe haven' for the human race on Mars and at the same time we were to start building a asteroid defence network - which would we finish first? Given the fact that it's likely that establishing a permanent, entirely self-sufficent colony on Mars is likely to be a 50-100 year job, I'm willing to bet that the defence network will be online <b>long</b> before the colony.</p>
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts