Mars One is a mission that has been privately funded to develop the first colony of humans on Mars by 2027. The mission is intended to explore the origins of life and our solar system. While this is an ambitious project, the Mars One Mission should not be attempted until the risks are better understood because a failed mission will result in loss of lives, time and resources. There are potentially multiple steps that could fail at any point in the mission. Even a small mistake can result in the loss of human life. It is a risky mission, possibly endangering lives and wasting billions of dollars on an endeavor has some fairly significant problems. The risk is not worth the cost - the cost of human lives, first and foremost, and funding for …show more content…
Those supporters might say that we will learn and improve medicine to help cure the world’s diseases and technology that will enhance the human race. In response to this, the opposing supporters of this mission might say do we really know what we are looking for in order for improvements? Or are we just being misleaded by theories? We are just spending billions and billions of dollars on something that may or may not be there. What if we don’t find anything? That will be a colossal waste of money and time. Why don't we just explore our ocean? It is a fact that we know more about the surface of Mars than the sea, which is seventy-one percent of our earth. It also contains ninety-nine percent of the world’s living space. Why don’t we just explore that? We are staying on our own planet. With some of the technology and future technology that we will have, the budget won’t be nearly as much, and the risks and stakes of failure and losing lives will decrease …show more content…
This will help us have a more advanced understanding of the universe more and have a place to colonize if the earth perishes. However, this is true, but it is without a doubt, more expensive to send humans into space than robots. Humans need larger spacecrafts, food, water, air, environmental control systems, sanitation facilities, safety equipment, etc. All of these necessities are very expensive and far less expensive when it comes to robots that do not need as much to function properly, so robots are more cost efficient. To propose an argument for colonization on Mars, why can’t we just stop the environmental issues we are causing that will lead to the “end of the world”, such as pollution. With the technology we have, we certainly can prevent ourselves from damaging the earth more than we already have. It is fair to say that if we continue our bad habits, we will need another place to live. If we find a way to stop our habits, we will be able to remain on earth for a longer period of time. Ultimately, the Mars One mission has many known and yet to be discovered problems. The risk analysis has not been fully assessed. If everything goes according to plan, the mission will be considered successful. However, there are many places where the mission can fail. These failures can result in
Scientific Capability.” (Tennessean) People today are not as excited about going to other places in space. Human space travel has been stunted by recent political changes in America. With that, the people that actually want to go to other places in space mainly want to see humans go somewhere new. Some people want other things to go in place of humans. “Unlike robots, only people have the intelligence and expert knowledge needed to unravel these mysteries.” (Mindell) If humans don’t go to other places in the solar system, this takes away the experience and awe of knowing that people can go to amazing places like the moon and Mars. While I think robots and technology should be used in exploration of space. I think it’s important to keep the human element involved directly. So people can see that nothing is quite impossible.
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.
Some people’s counterarguments saying that it’s pointless and it provides no benefits to us shows that there is a lack of knowledge about space exploration among most people .The ‘Space Race’ i.e. the competition to travel to the moon, was the first political issue that actually became a rivalry between countries. Everybody seems to forget that if we weren’t able to go to space, we wouldn’t have discovered traces of water on other planets such as mars- On the 9th of December 2013; NASA reported that there was once a freshwater lake on the surface of Mars, and there are still traces of water in its atmosphere. This ultimately means that there could possibly be habitable planets in our universe, in our solar system! This could provide a place to go if there in any supernatural disaster, like an earthquake, tsunami or even an asteroid as
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.
In conclusion, colonizing Mars is a terrible idea There is no known natural source of water, Once you get there you cannot come back , and If you get sick, the astronauts
However, there are several arguments against humans colonizing Mars. One of these is that it would be remarkably expensive. A single spacesuit costs about two million dollars, and the fuel required in the ships is millions more (Walker NP). The entire trip would amount to one hundred billion dollars. The cost of the equipment needed on Mars itself would have to be added in as well. Colonists would have to establish a permanent base with a source of water, food, and air, or be able to consistently resupply from Earth. This would cost billions more and require a massive amount of resources. The price of going to and staying on Mars would definitely be quite high.
Exploration is a key aspect to ensuring the constant and consistent development of the human race, but is it really necessary to branch out into the cosmos rather than focusing on the Earth itself. Expanding is essentially the ability to understand the unknowing and to grasp unworldly ideas, but without the means to reach those goals: justification, funding, and manpower, what is the point of committing funds to an unforeseen mission such as Space Exploration. Space Exploration is an issue that Humanity faces because it targets the what ifs about the future rather than focusing on the dangers of the present. Drought, famine, poverty, and war, will all continue to plague the world, and will remain tackling issues on present day Earth, and by using immense funding and manpower on what is not certain, is detrimental to humanities growth. Although, yes, NASA has created breakthroughs with innovations in relation to technological advancements, it is not certain that exploring space will ensure new innovations, because space itself is still theoretical and far too vast for ideal comprehension. Proper funding is mandatory for growth and expansion, but not important for the funding of Space exploration, rather it is more important to focus on pressing matters ranging from genocides: The Rwandan Genocide, to extreme poverty and famine: humans on Earth who do not have enough to live. If funding is granted to Space exploration by the public, it will remove essential funding to those
Humans have always been interested in the idea of exploring space. the scientists, astronauts and researchers have spent decades looking for life on other planets. Mars is the most favorable place in the solar system, other than Earth, for human habitation. It is also the closest planet to Earth. Even though some researchers claim that exploring Mars will help us to understand the Earth better, and a manned mission to Mars is better for humanity, opposing sending a manned mission to Mars for these reasons: because the cost of the exportation is not worth the risk involved. this exploration will have a negative effect on Americans. Mars exploration should be halted because of the cost to the economy, the risk to society and the lack
Why should humans colonize Mars? Humans should colonize Mars for their own well being. If humans want their future offsprings to be alive and well throughout the years then they need to find out how to colonize Mars and they need
Ideas such as colonizing another planet is not unheard of and if humans do not consider the possible impacts in a new environment, this can be detrimental. The article “A NASA-Funded engineer's plan to colonize Mars” from CNN was written by Kate Springer in 2017. One statement that made was, “I believe building in space is going to become commonplace in less than 50 years. There's an abundance of energy and materials (in space) -- all we have to do is design self-replicating factories and build a lot of objects. In a short time, our capability to manufacture in space will be many
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
The Mars One company, is a private non-profit organization. Because the mission was announced two years ago, it has yet to reach its full potential. According to Neil deGrasse Tyson, an astrophysicist and director at the Hayden Planetarium, the Mars One mission seems very unrealistic because of the timescale that they have provided (Tyson.) The Mars one team plans on having the first four individuals land on the surface of the planet by 2027. This timescale is unequivocally unrealistic due to the fact that it takes several years to train astronauts, develop the space suits, and test the necessary equipment. According to the National Aeronautics and Space Administration it takes approximately two years to individually
It is unbelievably expensive to reach Mars. To reach Mars the cost is billions of dollars to send just a couple people to Mars. It will cost more than 4 times the money it took to reach the Moon to reach Mars, since Mars is so far away. Furthermore it would cost way too much money, and therefore NASA or any other international space station should not send astronauts to Mars. Compared to the amount of money it takes to reach the Moon this expeditions cost is outrageous. If we obtain the money for this expedition and it fails, billions of dollars would be
Why did Columbus travel west? Why did Marco Polo head east? Because it is that pull, that unknown, that prospect of adventure that compels humans to seek new frontiers to explore.