Count me in.
It would depend on how good the digital initiative is. I don't want to give up my games.
|
Mars is a desert, with no atmosphere. What's the allure?
It's like....living in your basement on house arrest for 1 year to get there. If there's anybody else in the capsule with you, there's gonna be a homicide. If you're alone,....it's weirder.
Then you get there, there's nothing there but red sand. There aren't even any Martians. No women. Mars really does need women. But not really either. It's sand.
But hey,...you can jump real high.
I might be down for this, but if it were Barsoom... that WOULD be cooler.
I am down for the Adam/Eve option too, especially with a Molly Ringwald clone.
If I can still get the internet, I'm in.
What do you mean there's a 20-minute speed-of-light delay?
Screw it, then. I can't snipe with that ping.
Where do I sign up? “Grand Potentate and Supreme Emperor of Mars, Chancellor Skull” has a nice ring to it.
Director of Sales
|
Not I, and I find it to be a rather silly idea, despite the fact that I am usually a big proponent of developing human space travel.
Even though explorers in the past traveled, for example, to the south or north pole, knowing they might never return, and thousands of immigrants moved to the US in the 18- and 1900's, knowing they would never see their homeland again, the human psyche has seemingly changed enough that a one-way ticket off the planet is not acceptable.
The flaw in this thinking is that the polar and other earthbound explorers of the past knew that they might not return, not that they would not return. Furthermore, while I'm sure that those explorers had the "Spirit of Discovery" (or whatever), there was almost always a very strong financial reason for them to go off gallivanting in search of new lands to explore.
It would be much more rational for us to look to creating some sort of platform in orbit around Mars, from which we could study, experiment, and explore. A place were we could send some strong-hearted, intrepid explorers to boldly go where to man has gone before.
Then you get there, there's nothing there but red sand. There aren't even any Martians. No women. Mars really does need women.
No women?
|
Mars is a desert, with no atmosphere. What's the allure?
It's like....living in your basement on house arrest for 1 year to get there. If there's anybody else in the capsule with you, there's gonna be a homicide. If you're alone,....it's weirder.
Then you get there, there's nothing there but red sand. There aren't even any Martians. No women. Mars really does need women. But not really either. It's sand.
But hey,...you can jump real high.
Incorrect heathanson,
Mars is a Planetary Permafrost Glacier. The Vallis Marineris is an equatorial band of chemical oxidation. Basicly the soil is iron and water. every fifty thousand years solar activity peaks and the dihydrogen monoxide bond is sufficiently excited by solar radiation to achieve molecular fission so the Iron steals the oxygen atom. At the current rate it will take 8 billion years to split the permafrost superglacier at the equator into polar glaciers.
The Article at the head of this thread was annoying. For four years I've been hitting people over the head with the idea of a Space Commonwealth where we spend the next hundred years sending coal to dump into the martian atmosphere from orbit to achieve global warming so we can grow plants - aint no fossil fuel there so we must grow that sugarcane on mars; then a hundred years sending ten million colonists one way with a years supply of food each in their own habitat lander and basic tools to achieve a basic existance. All up colonization of the Moon in the first hundred years, and colonization of Mars in two hundred years for a cost of 20 billion billion dollars.
And what do we get? engineers with their own little one way mission for themselves - "I'd go one way alone cause I know no we have no chance of achieving anything great as a nation or as a world."
|
|
Meh. Why the hell does everyone want to live on a planet, anyhow? They're the most inefficient use of materials possible. To hell with Mars, I want to head for the asteroids. Raw metals and other construction materials, dirty snowballs, and all that.
Water crisis for the flatlanders? Section chunks of a snowball off and sling them back at the planet. Materials for industry? Chew into a nickel-iron asteroid. No worries about getting hurt by stupid things like falling down the stairs. Slap a sufficient layer of concrete-like goop (moondust apparently makes awesome concrete) on the outside to block radiation, and the majority of your worries can be dealt with.
You can even make and deploy big solar panels far beyond what's feasible on a planet. Turn your habitat into the center of a radiation-eating flower.
Before I had a kid, I would have said yes.
|
|
Mars is a desert, with no atmosphere. What's the allure?
It's like....living in your basement on house arrest for 1 year to get there. If there's anybody else in the capsule with you, there's gonna be a homicide. If you're alone,....it's weirder.
Then you get there, there's nothing there but red sand. There aren't even any Martians. No women. Mars really does need women. But not really either. It's sand.
But hey,...you can jump real high.Incorrect heathanson,
Mars is a Planetary Permafrost Glacier. The Vallis Marineris is an equatorial band of chemical oxidation. Basicly the soil is iron and water. every fifty thousand years solar activity peaks and the dihydrogen monoxide bond is sufficiently excited by solar radiation to achieve molecular fission so the Iron steals the oxygen atom. At the current rate it will take 8 billion years to split the permafrost superglacier at the equator into polar glaciers.
The Article at the head of this thread was annoying. For four years I've been hitting people over the head with the idea of a Space Commonwealth where we spend the next hundred years sending coal to dump into the martian atmosphere from orbit to achieve global warming so we can grow plants - aint no fossil fuel there so we must grow that sugarcane on mars; then a hundred years sending ten million colonists one way with a years supply of food each in their own habitat lander and basic tools to achieve a basic existance. All up colonization of the Moon in the first hundred years, and colonization of Mars in two hundred years for a cost of 20 billion billion dollars.
And what do we get? engineers with their own little one way mission for themselves - "I'd go one way alone cause I know no we have no chance of achieving anything great as a nation or as a world."
Yeah, but there's no trees for firewood there. It's like Scotland, except no peat or cow s*%*e to burn for heat.
I think living next to a black hole would be a better idea.
|
|
Dude, Mars ain’t the kind of place to raise your kids.
In fact, it’s cold as hell.
But if you take fifty tons of coal launched every half hour and dump it into the martian atmosphere over the next hundred years, it wont be cold for long...of course this means Americans will have to pay 200 dollars per barrel of oil...considering Hardhat Hillary just threatened the Saudi Government for not lowering the price of Oil...
|
But if you take fifty tons of coal launched every half hour and dump it into the martian atmosphere over the next hundred years, it wont be cold for long...of course this means Americans will have to pay 200 dollars per barrel of oil...considering Hardhat Hillary just threatened the Saudi Government for not lowering the price of Oil...Dude, Mars ain’t the kind of place to raise your kids.
In fact, it’s cold as hell.
I thought this was the "you wanna go to mars" thread, not the political thread.
Dude, Mars ain’t the kind of place to raise your kids.
In fact, it’s cold as hell.
They say that Mars
Aint no place to start a familyRight down the line
Its been you and me
And lovin a music man
Aint always what its supposed to be
Oh girl you stand by me
Im forever yours...faithfully
|
|
I thought this was the "you wanna go to mars" thread, not the political thread.
YD is good at mixing his politics and such into all of his posts. If it weren't that he comes across as solidly believing in what he says, he might have the makings of a good troll. As it is, while I tend to look askance of the things he claims, I try to leave him alone.
I don't get why he's so thrilled by the idea of colonizing Mars, though. The sand there isn't just red; if I recall correctly, it will actually give you chemical burns if you were to touch it due to the strong oxidization. Colonizing planets in general is an awesome waste of resources. You're better off building habitats and shielding them from incoming radiation; it uses a lot less energy and material, can work a lot faster, and you can customize the living space a great deal more than you can living on a planetary surface.
Don’t mind Dingo’, he gets a little too much sun.
Personally, I’m all for the idea. Rocket a few supplies, then if all goes well send a person after it. If things are still kosher and they haven’t gone crazy, built a gun, and declared themselves supreme overlord or Mars, then send a few more people.
My only real problem is, before we send anyone, we should invest in sending a few nukes to the polar ice caps and wait for things to settle out.
...of course this means Americans will have to pay 200 dollars per barrel of oil...considering Hardhat Hillary just threatened the Saudi Government for not lowering the price of Oil...
=|
I'm sorry I was busy drinking, can you say that again?
Don’t mind Dingo’, he gets a little too much sun.
M-Theory invalidates your hypothesis.