Another Mars mission waste of Money. 2.46 Billion dollars for a dead planet.People in need hr on Ear

[harmonica]

Here we have another Mars rover mission waste of money. To the tune of 2.46 Billion U.S. Dollars. Could this money not be spent here on Earth to feed many that need food and clean drinking water.? When is this waste of money to explore a dead red planet going to stop. How many of these rovers do we need.? Your thoughts on this matter.

You have an extraordinary limited view of things.
What Mars has to offer is off the charts to the continuation of our species.
We need to learn better about long distance space travel

A mission to Mars will be a suicide mission for humans. There is no oxygen, its to cold , and there is just to much ultravilolet radiation for humans to be exposed to. And once you land , you become to heavy to lift back off to get back to Earth!!.Not feaseble at all for humans to visit.

LOL..not much into science, are you? For example..if there is water on Mars..and there probably is..at least at the poles...you have oxygen available via electrolysis--Mars gravity is lighter than Earths..and a mission would probably land the same way we did on the Moon..with a light vehicle..and the bulk of the weight in orbit. Err..we would wear spacesuits right?

As one poster did point out..all the money will be spent here..providing jobs and serendipitous benefits of research to be applied here as well.

...we can't even put shuttles into near Earth space without them blowing up --and you think we can get to Mars?

Blowing them up..shuttles I mean/ You do know the success/failure percentages for shuttle missions don't support your contention, right?

No program is going to have 100% success..failures will occur..it's part of the process. Flights to Mars..possible. Sure..we have the tech..it's the will that's lacking.
Also..the money..always about the money.
The thing is...space travel and colonization is a generational effort..not a lot of humans have the vision to undertake a project that will benefit their great-grandchildren..but give nothing to them. Trying to sell a trillion dollar effort..for some pie in the sky 100 years from now..is tough sledding...LOL!~

....with the longer trip/etc problems are exponentially more --not less
....they are WAY over budget, behind schedule and had problems with just the James Web Telescope--with NO people going into space !!!!

The complexity and difficulty cannot be overstated,”

a measly $500 million. When that ballooned to $5 billion

NASA's James Webb Space Telescope Plagued by Delays, Rising Costs

 

[harmonica]

..but what was the return of the New World's value compared to the return of the Mars' missions ?
Spain got MUCHO $$$$$ from the New World--a LOT more than Columbus' trip cost

if that's the goal a moonbase should be priority

$$$ from the moon?? is that what you mean ?

that and you aren't going anywhere without one.,Manned mission to Mars is BS ..totally beyond our capability...makes me wonder what the purpose of bandying it about is

..we can't even put shuttles into near Earth space without them blowing up --so yes--there are limits to what man can do ...
..sailing on the ocean is a lot different than going to the Moon/Mars/etc ...
..sailing to America took NO man made power

Huh..do tell..and who built those ships again? How many sunk trying to do what Columbus got credit for? How many voyaged just to map the unknown? How many advancements in the art of sailing and ship construction were a direct result of repeated attempts at exploration?

Limits? I guess there are some...but we are no where near them.

The greatest limit we have..is people's shortsightedness and nay-saying.

James Webb Telescope--look it up

 

[22lcidw]

Here we have another Mars rover mission waste of money. To the tune of 2.46 Billion U.S. Dollars. Could this money not be spent here on Earth to feed many that need food and clean drinking water.? When is this waste of money to explore a dead red planet going to stop. How many of these rovers do we need.? Your thoughts on this matter.

You have an extraordinary limited view of things.
What Mars has to offer is off the charts to the continuation of our species.
We need to learn better about long distance space travel

A mission to Mars will be a suicide mission for humans. There is no oxygen, its to cold , and there is just to much ultravilolet radiation for humans to be exposed to. And once you land , you become to heavy to lift back off to get back to Earth!!.Not feaseble at all for humans to visit.

LOL..not much into science, are you? For example..if there is water on Mars..and there probably is..at least at the poles...you have oxygen available via electrolysis--Mars gravity is lighter than Earths..and a mission would probably land the same way we did on the Moon..with a light vehicle..and the bulk of the weight in orbit. Err..we would wear spacesuits right?

As one poster did point out..all the money will be spent here..providing jobs and serendipitous benefits of research to be applied here as well.

...we can't even put shuttles into near Earth space without them blowing up --and you think we can get to Mars?

Blowing them up..shuttles I mean/ You do know the success/failure percentages for shuttle missions don't support your contention, right?

No program is going to have 100% success..failures will occur..it's part of the process. Flights to Mars..possible. Sure..we have the tech..it's the will that's lacking.
Also..the money..always about the money.
The thing is...space travel and colonization is a generational effort..not a lot of humans have the vision to undertake a project that will benefit their great-grandchildren..but give nothing to them. Trying to sell a trillion dollar effort..for some pie in the sky 100 years from now..is tough sledding...LOL!~

We got lied to about the shuttle program as we are being lied to about the SLS/Orion program. We are to moribound with rules and laws and PC and quotas and more in a agency that is politically controlled by the politicians as their district/state revenue booster for space derived hardware. It is so bad that they had to finance two companies to build low earth orbit capsules without NASA control to send astronauts to the space station and low earth orbit cheaper. It is going to cost approx. 65 to 95 million dollars a person with those companies while if NASA did it would cost 300 to 500 million dollars per person. SLS and Orion is going to cost a lot of money. SLS may send up more weight to leave earth orbit but it is another white elephant like the space station. We can't stop going to MARS with unmanned craft because we will lose the ability to do so. Just like SLS was supposed to be operational several years ago our best engineers and scientists lived a generation ago. Now it is quota city.

 

[harmonica]

Here we have another Mars rover mission waste of money. To the tune of 2.46 Billion U.S. Dollars. Could this money not be spent here on Earth to feed many that need food and clean drinking water.? When is this waste of money to explore a dead red planet going to stop. How many of these rovers do we need.? Your thoughts on this matter.

You have an extraordinary limited view of things.
What Mars has to offer is off the charts to the continuation of our species.
We need to learn better about long distance space travel

A mission to Mars will be a suicide mission for humans. There is no oxygen, its to cold , and there is just to much ultravilolet radiation for humans to be exposed to. And once you land , you become to heavy to lift back off to get back to Earth!!.Not feaseble at all for humans to visit.

LOL..not much into science, are you? For example..if there is water on Mars..and there probably is..at least at the poles...you have oxygen available via electrolysis--Mars gravity is lighter than Earths..and a mission would probably land the same way we did on the Moon..with a light vehicle..and the bulk of the weight in orbit. Err..we would wear spacesuits right?

As one poster did point out..all the money will be spent here..providing jobs and serendipitous benefits of research to be applied here as well.

...we can't even put shuttles into near Earth space without them blowing up --and you think we can get to Mars?

Blowing them up..shuttles I mean/ You do know the success/failure percentages for shuttle missions don't support your contention, right?

No program is going to have 100% success..failures will occur..it's part of the process. Flights to Mars..possible. Sure..we have the tech..it's the will that's lacking.
Also..the money..always about the money.
The thing is...space travel and colonization is a generational effort..not a lot of humans have the vision to undertake a project that will benefit their great-grandchildren..but give nothing to them. Trying to sell a trillion dollar effort..for some pie in the sky 100 years from now..is tough sledding...LOL!~

hahahahahah--they had test flights for the shuttle
you can't test flight to Mars
hahahahhahahahah

 

[DOTR]

Here we have another Mars rover mission waste of money. To the tune of 2.46 Billion U.S. Dollars. Could this money not be spent here on Earth to feed many that need food and clean drinking water.? When is this waste of money to explore a dead red planet going to stop. How many of these rovers do we need.? Your thoughts on this matter.

The lazy drag down the adventurous. People who cant feed nd water themselves are more like cattle. We already hand out food stamps, section 8, medicaid, welfare, unemployment, WIC...what the hell do you want?

 

[bripat9643]

You have an extraordinary limited view of things.
What Mars has to offer is off the charts to the continuation of our species.
We need to learn better about long distance space travel

A mission to Mars will be a suicide mission for humans. There is no oxygen, its to cold , and there is just to much ultravilolet radiation for humans to be exposed to. And once you land , you become to heavy to lift back off to get back to Earth!!.Not feaseble at all for humans to visit.

LOL..not much into science, are you? For example..if there is water on Mars..and there probably is..at least at the poles...you have oxygen available via electrolysis--Mars gravity is lighter than Earths..and a mission would probably land the same way we did on the Moon..with a light vehicle..and the bulk of the weight in orbit. Err..we would wear spacesuits right?

As one poster did point out..all the money will be spent here..providing jobs and serendipitous benefits of research to be applied here as well.

...we can't even put shuttles into near Earth space without them blowing up --and you think we can get to Mars?

Blowing them up..shuttles I mean/ You do know the success/failure percentages for shuttle missions don't support your contention, right?

No program is going to have 100% success..failures will occur..it's part of the process. Flights to Mars..possible. Sure..we have the tech..it's the will that's lacking.
Also..the money..always about the money.
The thing is...space travel and colonization is a generational effort..not a lot of humans have the vision to undertake a project that will benefit their great-grandchildren..but give nothing to them. Trying to sell a trillion dollar effort..for some pie in the sky 100 years from now..is tough sledding...LOL!~

hahahahahah--they had test flights for the shuttle
you can't test flight to Mars
hahahahhahahahah

Sure you can.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

The technology that it took to get to Mars can and is being used to improve life on this planet.

SOSHULISM!!!!

 

[harmonica]

..but what was the return of the New World's value compared to the return of the Mars' missions ?
Spain got MUCHO $$$$$ from the New World--a LOT more than Columbus' trip cost

if that's the goal a moonbase should be priority

$$$ from the moon?? is that what you mean ?

that and you aren't going anywhere without one.,Manned mission to Mars is BS ..totally beyond our capability...makes me wonder what the purpose of bandying it about is

..we can't even put shuttles into near Earth space without them blowing up --so yes--there are limits to what man can do ...
..sailing on the ocean is a lot different than going to the Moon/Mars/etc ...
..sailing to America took NO man made power

Huh..do tell..and who built those ships again? How many sunk trying to do what Columbus got credit for? How many voyaged just to map the unknown? How many advancements in the art of sailing and ship construction were a direct result of repeated attempts at exploration?

Limits? I guess there are some...but we are no where near them.

The greatest limit we have..is people's shortsightedness and nay-saying.

...material things have limits---metals have limits = you will not/can't change that
..this isn't Star Trek or Star Wars with make believe crap