Elon Musk: How To Get Humans On Mars

First of all, the cost of getting to Mars is too high. Most people do not have the money. It would be unfair if only wealthy families get to go to Mars. People back on Earth who can only afford for one person to go on the trip will miss their family. The trip back home

One of the most important steps mankind has ever made is space exploration. On February 20th, 1962, John Glenn became the first person to orbit the earth. This was a major redemption for the U.S, since just a year before Yuri Gagarin from Russia became the first man to go to space. Glenn’s accomplishment threw America ahead in the famous Space Race with the U.S.S.R. Recently, NASA announced that they plan on having a manned mission to Mars by 2035. However, there 's a lot of competition. Quite a few nonprofit and for-profit organizations believe they can get people to Mars sooner and cheaper than NASA. If NASA is the first organization to have a successful manned

Money is a huge problem when it come to going to space. It would cost $230 billion to go to Mars. To put this into perspective, the government makes $4.1 trillion in taxes each year and our country owes China $19 trillion. There is no way that we could do a manned mission to Mars with all that money we owe. We could spend our money on feeding and sheltering the poor as well. This shows that going to Mars is way too expensive and it would be a huge waste of money if anything went wrong. With everything we can do with money on Earth, going to Mars is a huge waste of time and resources.

But what about a planet more than 200 times farther away. If we can colonize on Mars the whole world will believe that anything's possible. People will never give up and keep trying to reach their goals. Although people on Earth may be mad that scientist used 6 billion dollars, but it went to good use. It was used to giving hope and making people believe. Now we should go reach our dreams by going to Mars.

Added to the economic costs to America, a venture to Mars causes substantial risk to the society. The environment and society are very important to human survival on Earth. Even though some people feel that exploring Mars may help understand the Earth better, and going to Mars will be a great scientific milestone, in my opinion exploring Mars is a bad idea. The atmosphere on Mars is about 100 times thinner than earth and it is not suitable for us to breath. It contains about 95% of carbon dioxide and little or no oxygen. This will make it very difficult for humans to survive there. Unlike Mars, which is not protected and is exposed to everything, the Earth is protected by the ozone layer. Exploring Mars will be dangerous to humans and very expensive to taxpayers. This will take years of planning and the mission will take years instead of days. The astronauts who go there may run out of oxygen and even fall sick. They will be unable to just return at any time. They have to wait until the earth aligns with Mars before they can return. All this could take months or even

Colonizing Mars would not only be a scientific breakthrough, but it would be extremely beneficial to the human race and their future. Mars would help humans in many ways by providing a planet for humans to fall back on if any bad event were to happen to Earth. Colonizing Mars would prove to be very helpful and rewarding. Also, many engineers and scientists like Elon Musk, founder of Space x and Tesla, are on board are on board with this futuristic idea.

Some citizens believe that NASA is a waste of time. Some would venture to say the program has “no practical use to mankind” and the $17 billion of taxpayers money is put towards failed projects and a hope to get to another planet (Government funding). Every time the program goes into space there is no guarantee they will find something new. Spending money on ineffective trips is pointless for the taxpayers; every time the astronauts go into space they go to the same places making no progress. Since the United States is tied with NASA, the program prevents branches of the government placing space work with another agency, which prevents progress with other space agencies (Government funding). Before going into space, NASA should try to solve problems on Earth first. Such as making a car that doesn’t use gas or pollute the air, finding ways to fix the ozone layer, making less pollution by using renewable resources. Instead of going to Mars, solving issues such as global warming is very important to the Earth. Global warming and climate changes are very important to keeping the Earth a safe, healthy place to live. With the debt America is already in, spending more money to send people on the same missions into space over and over again is just spending more money than the States cannot

In the article, entitled “The dream of sending people to Mars is a little closer, Obama says”by Newsela discusses, Barack Obama said America is looking for way to reach Mars. First, Newsela points out Neil Armstrong is said we need more men to get to space and on to mars. The author also indicates the ISS can be the whole bottom part of this mission. In addition, the text states in Barak Obama presidency he cancelled a program aimed at returning astronauts to the moon, instead he chose to go farther into space and this angered some people., Finally, Newsela concludes another U.S. mission is planned for the 2020s, but it will not send people as far as Mars and they will go beyond the moon.

Richard, an author for the website GOVTEEN Global Community, wrote an article briefly explaining why we as a nation, should not go to Mars. Some of the key points of his argument against going to Mars stressed that the financial cost would be too high, it would require several new spacecraft and ground habitats, and several new technologies that currently do not exist. He also was concerned about the budget cuts that have already stripped the National Aeronautical Space Administration (NASA) to a shell of what the space program used to be. He also stressed that we are still in an armed conflict that has put a strain on our nation, economically and emotionally.

NASA and ESA have been the main factors of developing space ships that will reduce the factors of failure or risk of the mission. Technology is not the greatest problem itself, space agencies probably have enough technology to go to Mars, considering that our current cell phones have more technology more than Apollo 13 did. The challenge itself is to identify every risk and every step with its details and consequences. We always have to remember that before we can run, we have to walk, and before we can explore the space, we have to leave our planet and be confident about our surroundings. There are some pretty big gaps in our abilities, including the fact that we can't efficiently store the necessary fuel long enough for a Mars trip, more fuel means more weight, and more weight means more fuel to operate. We also don't yet have a vehicle capable of landing people on the Martian surface, and we aren't entirely sure what it will take to keep them alive once there. Sure fuel is not the only thing that human needs if they lived went to

“Is that so we should build a rocket ship to send Trump as the first astronaut to Mars.” said Obama. This was the order from Barack Obama himself. So we all paid our taxes to fund the trip to mars for Trump. Plan “A”was to have the rocket fly up pass that atmosphere and blow up mid way to mars. Plan “B” was to have Trump land successfully on Mars and have alien take him away and he will never show up again.

The company does not currently own space traveling equipment, as well as their sponsors that are helping to fund the mission a vital factor that determines if the mission even leaves Earth’s atmosphere. One of their major aerospace sponsors, “Paragon Space Development”, builds, test, and operates life support system. Furthermore, “Lockheed Martin”, is responsible for design, development, and manufacture of security systems. Mars One will be unable to purchase space traveling equipment with the current budget that they have, unless they are donated to the company. Even if this equipment is donated; it will not be tested in time for the initial launch. The Mars One mission has a miniscule chance of

Besides the fact that their core funding from a credible company is nonexistent, they rely mostly on the donations of their believers ,which is one of many hints of unprofessionality. In their financial page, Mars One says, “Mars One's funding model is based on the commercial value of that adventure, donations, and several other revenue sources.”. This is saying that indeed the company’s majour funding is from that of their gullible opportunist network. Instead of applying for scientific grants from companies and countries, they focus on their “Gullible Network” to provide the money needed. Dr Joseph Roche highlights this problem as well, stating that, “‘Community members’ can redeem points by purchasing merchandise like T-shirts, hoodies, and posters, as well as through gifts and donations: The group also solicits larger investment from its supporters.”. The last sentence, is pretty typical of a scam, using media hype and outlets, to entice more gullible supporters, thus gaining more revenue. By using the media, they may also gain credibility from companies that have no idea the true cost of making it to Mars. As an effect, people watching the media will assume that because of the undeserved credibility bestowed upon Mars One by those outlets, all of a sudden means that the should believe the same things. We see this time and time again, people have a tendency to rely on the outlets, meaning they take their word

Elon Musk, founder of SpaceX, has been trying to get a manned mission to Mars since 2002; it was the reason that he started his own business to build and improve on rocket technology.

Musk conceptualized a project called “Mars Oasis,” in 2001, in which he would “land a miniature experimental greenhouse on Mars that contained seeds and dehydrating gel, after hydrating the gel the seeds would grow on Martian soil” (McKnight, 2001). The project was to regain a dwindling public interest in space exploration and increase the budget of NASA. Musk quickly realized that the expense of getting to Mars was far greater than he expected and that there would need to be a breakthrough in rocket technology. Musk traveled the world meeting with different rocket builders and space engineers in hopes of finding the right rocket builder and the right price to make his project a reality but did not find a suitable candidate. Musk had the idea of creating a company that could build the rockets that he needed at a fraction of the cost. Musk saw opportunity where others saw dead ends. He hired renowned rockets engineers and opened a facility in El Segundo, California, called SpaceX. “Musk decided SpaceX’s first rocket would be named Falcon 1, a nod to Star Wars’ Millennium Falcon” (Vance, 2015). A few of SpaceX’s achievements include: the first privately funded, liquid-fueled rocket (Falcon 1) to reach orbit (28 September 2008), the first privately funded company to successfully launch (Falcon 9) orbit and recover a spacecraft (9 December 2010), the first private company to send a spacecraft 9Dragon) to the International Space Station (25 May 2012) and the first private company to send a satellite into geosynchronous orbit. In 2011, Musk stated that he hopes to “send humans to Mars’ surface within 10-20 years and believes that by 2035 at the latest, there will be