Talk:Space Shuttle to Mars

A U.S. congress person is more likely to cut his or her throat than to approve a one way manned mission to Mars.--Farred 06:47, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

And other U.S. congress persons might not. It depends on how this enterprise is put into a context and, for the first degree, on the public opinion. Do you know something about the latter? -- Rfc 18:39, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

• I should qualify what I wrote. Until there is sufficient development of our knowledge, capabilities and the industrial infrastructure on Mars (which could be placed by artificially intellegent remotely operated devices) that a colony on Mars could survive and prosper, congress will not aprove a one way manned mission to Mars. I do not know much about congress, but I feel confident in that. If I am wrong, it could be demonstrated by congressional action to the contrary. Until then my belief is firm.--Farred 11:24, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Well, that is exactly what we are doing here: Collecting knowledge and finding ways to ensure the prosperity of a Martian colony. Eric's proposal might just be a piece of the big enterprise. He himself states, the proposal is just a thought, a beginning. Naturally, it is not a very good plan to go to Mars only in order to die there. It is, too, not a very good plan to go there and come back after a short time. A much better plan is to go there, stay there, and build another civilization. That is my favorite view to a manned one-way mission. I personally would never ever go there with a return ticket, because it is too dangerous to do the trip twice. For me, it makes no sense to head for Mars just for the fun of it. From a scientific point of view a manned return mission makes no sense at all, and I hope the congress people think alike. So it depends on how this enterprise is put into a context. -- Rfc 20:04, 5 May 2009 (UTC)