Mars is barred: why we shouldn't go to the red planet
Discussion
Here is a pod cast and to be honest I can't agree more about why we shouldn't go to the red planet.
https://www.theguardian.com/science/audio/2018/oct...
https://www.theguardian.com/science/audio/2018/oct...
deckster said:
Also, posting a link to a half hour audio programme and saying 'I agree' is the height of laziness. If you want to discuss anything raised in there, you're going to have to do the work and pull out the bits that you think are worthy of debate.
That’s what a Scientist has to do, hungry for knowledge and critically think and review evidence which my friend is not apparent in most of these sudo Science postings. It takes effort thought and insite. If I repeated part of an argument of why I support the view I would get just as much abuse as I getting now which reflects the ignorance of the issues. Einion Yrth said:
It says that you're a tedious miserable git with whom no-one wishes to engage.
Ignorance is no excuse for abuse. It was posted to debate a valid and alternative view. I did not ask YOu to debate with ME but around the podcast where Scientists yup real Sientists putthier case forward. Clearly it’s too much to expect a reasoned balanced response. The Wookie said:
Einion Yrth said:
It says that you're a tedious miserable git with whom no-one wishes to engage.
+1 I’d rather attempt a reasoned debate with my Mum about her motorway lane discipline
Evanivitch said:
Toaster said:
That’s what a Scientist has to do, hungry for knowledge and critically think and review evidence which my friend is not apparent in most of these sudo Science postings. It takes effort thought and insite. If I repeated part of an argument of why I support the view I would get just as much abuse as I getting now which reflects the ignorance of the issues.
So why have you posted an opinion piece?CrutyRammers said:
"Jems"? "sudo"? "insite"?
Do us all a favour and go read the dictionary for a bit, rather than the Guardian, eh?
Hmmm well whilst my spilling ain’t wot u fink it shud be I Cldn’t give a flying fig. So big boy go and listen to the pod cast and post somfink intelligent about it if you can, the pod cast scientists are not Guardian journalists. Do us all a favour and go read the dictionary for a bit, rather than the Guardian, eh?
Some Gump said:
It's a guardian podcast where one contributor is "a contributor to the guardian who blogs about mars". It's hardly Hawking vs Elon Musk.
My null hypothesis is that listening to it would be a waste of time. That you have read it and were not inspired enough to at least bullet point the top 3 discussion points supports that view. It's not ignorance to spend your time in the way that you expect to be best use of it.
You will see if I had bulleted it I would have been flamed, so I tried self discovery for those with inquisitive open minds clearly it’s the anti Science forum with individuals wishing to be spoon fed. My null hypothesis is that listening to it would be a waste of time. That you have read it and were not inspired enough to at least bullet point the top 3 discussion points supports that view. It's not ignorance to spend your time in the way that you expect to be best use of it.
Oh in case you havent been in touch with news Hawkin is dead and Musk’s posts are a bit
Edited by Toaster on Monday 22 October 10:14
Beati Dogu said:
It wasn’t meant to reach the planet Mars. It was the Falcon Heavy rocket they were testing and demonstrating, not the payload. I’m not sure why this is so hard for some people to comprehend. They’re either being thick or just trolling I guess.
The Trolls can read what has been reported that musk states:We decided to send something unusual, something that made us feel," he said. "The payload will be an original Tesla Roadster, playing [the song] 'Space Oddity,' on a billion-year elliptic Mars orbit."
Hmmm maybe they are not trolls after all. Just to add having an alternate view to the flock of sheep doesn’t make anyone thick. In fact as a Scientist it makes them annoyingly different
Edited by Toaster on Tuesday 23 October 08:24
KrazyIvan said:
Halb said:
Toaster said:
Here is a pod cast and to be honest I can't agree more about why we shouldn't go to the red planet.
https://www.theguardian.com/science/audio/2018/oct...
why shouldn't we go?https://www.theguardian.com/science/audio/2018/oct...
Kccv23highliftcam said:
Toaster said:
Beati Dogu said:
It wasn’t meant to reach the planet Mars. It was the Falcon Heavy rocket they were testing and demonstrating, not the payload. I’m not sure why this is so hard for some people to comprehend. They’re either being thick or just trolling I guess.
The Trolls can read what has been reported that musk states:We decided to send something unusual, something that made us feel," he said. "The payload will be an original Tesla Roadster, playing [the song] 'Space Oddity,' on a billion-year elliptic Mars orbit."
Hmmm maybe they are not trolls after all. Just to add having an alternate view to the flock of sheep doesn’t make anyone thick. In fact as a Scientist it makes them annoyingly different
Edited by Toaster on Tuesday 23 October 08:24
Eric Mc said:
The best thing on threads like this is to just ignore them as they rapidly become personal and pointless. Whenever I see a thread started by this particular poster, my heart sinks as I know it will degenerate pretty rapidly.
In my opinion, the Science Forum is suffering as a result and I am increasingly becoming less enthusiastic about posting on it.
Eric my friend you state I am mentally ill you state that this is a science forum so I am quizzical as to why you haven’t debated the OP I couldn’t care less if you agree or do not agree. However there is an argument that humans shouldn’t go to Mars I’m not saying it’s not do-able but Robotic exploration can achieve the same results without contaminating another pristine planet. The link before this suggests that there is some scientific evidence that humans came from Mars or at least microbes did. Can you not debate that, tbh I do not think you can you have an accountant’s head that says your view is right. So why not just try a little my friend go on you know you want too. In my opinion, the Science Forum is suffering as a result and I am increasingly becoming less enthusiastic about posting on it.
Edited by Toaster on Tuesday 23 October 09:37
Johnniem said:
Eric Mc said:
Are we discussing space programmes in general now?
It's a worthwhile discussion but the thread title seems to be specifically about Mars missions.
If we are going to debate whether money should be spent on "space" (whatever that means) then by all means do so - but I think a separate thread would make a lot more sense.
If you apply my comments to the Mercury mission (not Mars) then the comments still apply. The cost should still be spent on more important, earth based, problems. It's a worthwhile discussion but the thread title seems to be specifically about Mars missions.
If we are going to debate whether money should be spent on "space" (whatever that means) then by all means do so - but I think a separate thread would make a lot more sense.
Eric Mc said:
The big mistake made by the dinosaurs is that they had no programme in place to track NEOs.
Other space based science that has helped us a lot relates directly to observing atmospheres of other planets as they can provide simpler and easier to understand models of how atmospheric winds and cyclonic patterns arise and evolve (Jupiter/Saturn/Uranus/Neptune) or the effects of CO2 in a planet's atmosphere (Venus).
Mercury is turning out to be interesting as it seems to possess an outsize iron core - much larger than would be expected from such a small world. Knowing how planetary cores are formed will obviously help us understand how our own core evolved and what may happen to it in the future.
Mars has taught us the importance of planetary magnetic fields and how they act as a protector from the solar wind.
The discovery of the radiation belts surrounding the earth was one of the first discoveries of the space age. And that is a very good example of "pure" science in that it was totally unexpected.
The list goes on (and on).
Humans like Dinosaurs would become extinct even if we could track one right now, its unlikely we could play space invaders and shoot a NEO out of its trajectory Boom we would all be gone.Other space based science that has helped us a lot relates directly to observing atmospheres of other planets as they can provide simpler and easier to understand models of how atmospheric winds and cyclonic patterns arise and evolve (Jupiter/Saturn/Uranus/Neptune) or the effects of CO2 in a planet's atmosphere (Venus).
Mercury is turning out to be interesting as it seems to possess an outsize iron core - much larger than would be expected from such a small world. Knowing how planetary cores are formed will obviously help us understand how our own core evolved and what may happen to it in the future.
Mars has taught us the importance of planetary magnetic fields and how they act as a protector from the solar wind.
The discovery of the radiation belts surrounding the earth was one of the first discoveries of the space age. And that is a very good example of "pure" science in that it was totally unexpected.
The list goes on (and on).
Evanivitch said:
So I should spend half an hour listening to the opinion of a Biomedical Imaging specialist on a topic that has nothing to do with her area of expertise?
I'll pass.
yes you should try: those discussing the issue are:I'll pass.
1) Hannah Devlin is the Guardian's science correspondent, having previously been science editor of the Times. She has a PhD in biomedical imaging from the University of Oxford.
2) Ian Sample is science editor of the Guardian. Before joining the newspaper in 2003, he was a journalist at New Scientist and worked at the Institute of Physics as a journal editor. He has a PhD in biomedical materials from Queen Mary's, University of London.
3) Lewis Dartnell who's research is in the field of astrobiology and the search for microbial life on Mars
So we have 3 Scientists one of who will know more about Mars than I dare suggest you, which is why you should spend 1/2 hour you never know it may make you curious to learn more.
Ian974 said:
Toaster said:
umans like Dinosaurs would become extinct even if we could track one right now, its unlikely we could play space invaders and shoot a NEO out of its trajectory Boom we would all be gone.
That would be unfortunate. Perhaps developing a method of travelling to another planet in case something like this happens in the further future might be beneficial, possibly somewhere like mars?Talksteer said:
Not remotely true, the first rock to be tracked and warnings be given took place in 2009.
It is just a matter of distance vs size which determines what we can and can't do about an incoming rock.
With a space telescope located away from the earth we should be able to see the section of the sky that we can't see easily from earth and getting more telescopes into space will improve our ability to divert objects.
With megaton nuclear weapons and existing space rockets we could divert rocks in the order of a few km in size over the course of a year,
If we had routine access to space from reusable super heavy rockets we could do even better.
Maybe not:It is just a matter of distance vs size which determines what we can and can't do about an incoming rock.
With a space telescope located away from the earth we should be able to see the section of the sky that we can't see easily from earth and getting more telescopes into space will improve our ability to divert objects.
With megaton nuclear weapons and existing space rockets we could divert rocks in the order of a few km in size over the course of a year,
If we had routine access to space from reusable super heavy rockets we could do even better.
Nasa's plan to deflect deadly asteroid will not work on asteroid that could collide with Earth, study finds
If the asteroid Bennu collided with Earth, it would have an impact 80,000 times stronger than the bomb dropped on Hiroshima
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/asteroi...
https://www.llnl.gov/news/scientists-design-concep...
Gassing Station | Science! | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff