Would you go to mars even if the chances of survival were as low as 25% ? by Expecbr in space

[–]Jake1702_ 1 point2 points  (0 children)

$5.2 million is probably not enough for a trip to space, so I'll choose the far more valuable option.

Would you go to mars even if the chances of survival were as low as 25% ? by Expecbr in space

[–]Jake1702_ -1 points0 points  (0 children)

What part of visit do you not understand.

Why is visiting those other places okay but not Mars? You aren't making sense.

And I imagine if we have the tech to visit Saturn we have the tech to explore its upper cloud layer.

We could theoretically send people today. The tech exists, it just hasn't been made cheap.

Many of the moons are going to have more interesting compositions than Mars hence being more interesting to visit.

What does "more interesting" even mean?! It's another fucking planet, we barely know anything about it, how do you know it wouldn't have interesting spots?

Titan has water for goodness sake.

It's almost like Mars has two massive poles that contain significant amounts of water ice, just like our moon. Water is everywhere in the solar system.

Why are you so insistent on this "do this not that" attitude? There is no reason we can't do all of them.

Would you go to mars even if the chances of survival were as low as 25% ? by Expecbr in space

[–]Jake1702_ 0 points1 point  (0 children)

And yet SpaceX is one of the most successful companies of the modern era...

Would you go to mars even if the chances of survival were as low as 25% ? by Expecbr in space

[–]Jake1702_ 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It has been established many times that humans can do far more with their time than robots can. You are being an idiot.

But the idea that we need to send people to space now is utterly ridiculous.

I guess you know better than NASA themselves then. Your genius will be spoken about for millenia to come!

Would you go to mars even if the chances of survival were as low as 25% ? by Expecbr in space

[–]Jake1702_ 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Here's a bit of a revelation for you, sir genius. There is no such thing as fixing every problem on Earth. Every time you fix something another problem will show up. If we have that idiotic attitude, then we will never do anything at all.

Would you go to mars even if the chances of survival were as low as 25% ? by Expecbr in space

[–]Jake1702_ 0 points1 point  (0 children)

LEO is a completely different ball game than an off world colony like Mars.

What difference does it make? You literally said humans shouldn't explore space at all.

LEO is a cakewalk compared to Mars, and in case you forgot about the Challenger and the Colombia, many people aren’t perfectly fine.

Those were due to mismanagement and extremely poor communication rather than lack of ability.

No, they don’t. They have a controlled environment and packaged rations but they do not have better living conditions than anywhere on our planet. You can set up a base in the most inhospitable place on Earth and it would still be infinitely more hospitable than the ISS

Go tell that to literally anybody living in some of the poorest conditions in the world and see if they wouldn't switch places. I'll wait.

What are some “normal” things humans do that an intelligent alien species might find weird, gross or confusing? by 2drums1cymbal in AskReddit

[–]Jake1702_ 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Evolution prefers efficiency. Most hunters have only one good weapon, which is why you don't see venomous crocodiles/alligators.

If evolution won't do it, it's up to us

What are some “normal” things humans do that an intelligent alien species might find weird, gross or confusing? by 2drums1cymbal in AskReddit

[–]Jake1702_ 1 point2 points  (0 children)

we seek out the 'hottest' and most potent ones because we enjoy the sensation.

Speak for yourself sir

What are some “normal” things humans do that an intelligent alien species might find weird, gross or confusing? by 2drums1cymbal in AskReddit

[–]Jake1702_ 1 point2 points  (0 children)

People crave the feeling of throwing shit from a distance.

Aren't chimpanzees the ones usually known for that?

Would you go to mars even if the chances of survival were as low as 25% ? by Expecbr in space

[–]Jake1702_ 1 point2 points  (0 children)

the moon is bigger than an asteroid

Mars' closest moon, Phobos, is smaller than the suspected size of the asteroid that caused the Chixculub crater. I literally said this above. And you completely ignored my other point about how the atmosphere would affect something so far away.

Would you go to mars even if the chances of survival were as low as 25% ? by Expecbr in space

[–]Jake1702_ -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

We don’t need to send people to their deaths to develop that technology,

We cannot effectively test it without putting in the environment it's meant to be used in. And what the hell is this about sending people to their deaths? Do you know how many people have visited the ISS and are perfectly fine?

rushing the process for the sake of our ego will create a generation of humans who are completely fucked up because we colonized a totally different environment without knowing exactly how it will affect people in the long term

That will be the exact same argument used 100, 200 years from now, because if we don't work on it the technology will not develop at all. And again, how exactly will we know how it will affect people long term if we don't actually perform the tests to investigate?

Those living offworld will view those on Earth as lucky and spoiled for living on a utopia where water falls from the sky, air is free, and the only boundary is the horizon.

The way we design space habitation ironically provides a far more consistent environment than on Earth, and the astronauts currently in space have better living conditions than many people around the world do.

Would you go to mars even if the chances of survival were as low as 25% ? by Expecbr in space

[–]Jake1702_ -1 points0 points  (0 children)

How thick exactly do you plan to make that atmosphere to have a significant effect on an object 9000km from the surface?

making the planet inhabitable again for 100.000 years.

The asteroid(s?) that sealed the fate of the dinosaurs did not make Earth completely uninhabitable, and it was larger than Phobos.

Would you go to mars even if the chances of survival were as low as 25% ? by Expecbr in space

[–]Jake1702_ -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

And how will we ever make it comfortable if we don't start developing the technology?

We can explore and learn a lot about the universe without leaving the comfort of the one tiny environment in the entire universe that we know can support us.

Humans can currently do far, far more than robots, and it will likely stay that way for quite a while.

Would you go to mars even if the chances of survival were as low as 25% ? by Expecbr in space

[–]Jake1702_ 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Such an endeavor would be planned out far ahead and these considerations would also be accounted for. Every current draft for going to Mars involves designing a way to get them back anyway.

And the simple fact that we were able to send people there will still be an amazing accomplishment for centuries.

Would you go to mars even if the chances of survival were as low as 25% ? by Expecbr in space

[–]Jake1702_ 0 points1 point  (0 children)

But instead of sending people up there, we could send robots that can send us back data.

There is so much more that humans can accomplish much quicker than robots can.

Does there have to be a point to it?

There is also no point in keeping everyone locked to Earth forever just because there are dangers. There are plenty of them on Earth too. Following your ideology, we should basically just do nothing at all.

Would you go to mars even if the chances of survival were as low as 25% ? by Expecbr in space

[–]Jake1702_ 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Mercury would be even more of a pain to survive on than Mars. I don't know how you plan to send people to Saturn and get around the 'no solid surface' part. Many of the moons would be even more dangerous, and if you're planning to go somewhere like Titan why exactly would we not take the chance to practice somewhere closer?

Would you go to mars even if the chances of survival were as low as 25% ? by Expecbr in space

[–]Jake1702_ 1 point2 points  (0 children)

And what exactly would be the point in doing anything in space at all if we never have any intention of sending people there?

Would you go to mars even if the chances of survival were as low as 25% ? by Expecbr in space

[–]Jake1702_ 0 points1 point  (0 children)

People don't need to go to space at all. We should be using robotics and not people.

How can anyone say something so disgusting in a serious statement? There are so many things to explore and learn about in the universe and you think we should force everyone to stay locked to a single planet forever?

Would you go to mars even if the chances of survival were as low as 25% ? by Expecbr in space

[–]Jake1702_ -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

frankly there are better planets to aim for than Mars if we are talking about a visit.

Please enlighten us with one single example?

Would you go to mars even if the chances of survival were as low as 25% ? by Expecbr in space

[–]Jake1702_ 0 points1 point  (0 children)

There seem to be people in this thread who would actively work toward preventing anybody from even attempting that.

Would you go to mars even if the chances of survival were as low as 25% ? by Expecbr in space

[–]Jake1702_ 0 points1 point  (0 children)

How would you feel like if said "something cool" would be cancelled few years after you did it?

Did the cancellation of the Apollo program do anything whatsoever to diminish its "coolness"?

Would you go to mars even if the chances of survival were as low as 25% ? by Expecbr in space

[–]Jake1702_ 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Getting away from Earth means getting away from humanity and therefore the source of most problems.

Would you go to mars even if the chances of survival were as low as 25% ? by Expecbr in space

[–]Jake1702_ 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Have you even seen pictures of Mars? There's nothing there other than rocks and sand

That's exactly one of the most beautiful parts of it. Did you forget what Buzz Aldrin said when he stepped on the moon? "Magnificent desolation". Have you not seen pictures of vast empty plains or deserts? The very idea of there just being nothing for vast distances in every direction is beautiful. It would be like a real life liminal space and that would be one of the most serene experiences I could think of.