Slashdot Mirror
'Sending Astronauts To Mars Would be Stupid' (bbc.com)
One of the first men to orbit the Moon has told BBC Radio 5 Live that it's "stupid" to plan human missions to Mars. Bill Anders, lunar module pilot of Apollo 8, the first human spaceflight to leave Earth's orbit, said sending crews to Mars was "almost ridiculous". From a report: NASA is currently planning new human missions to the Moon. It wants to learn the skills and develop the technology to enable a future human landing on Mars. NASA was approached for a response to Anders' comments, but hasn't responded.
Anders, 85, said he's a "big supporter" of the "remarkable" unmanned programmes, "mainly because they're much cheaper". But he says the public support simply isn't there to fund vastly more expensive human missions. "What's the imperative? What's pushing us to go to Mars?" he said, adding "I don't think the public is that interested". Meanwhile, robotic probes are still exploring Mars. Last month, the InSight lander, which will sample the planet's interior, successfully touched down at Elysium Planitia. Further reading: Bill Nye: We Are Not Going To Live on Mars, Let Alone Turn It Into Earth.
Anders, 85, said he's a "big supporter" of the "remarkable" unmanned programmes, "mainly because they're much cheaper". But he says the public support simply isn't there to fund vastly more expensive human missions. "What's the imperative? What's pushing us to go to Mars?" he said, adding "I don't think the public is that interested". Meanwhile, robotic probes are still exploring Mars. Last month, the InSight lander, which will sample the planet's interior, successfully touched down at Elysium Planitia. Further reading: Bill Nye: We Are Not Going To Live on Mars, Let Alone Turn It Into Earth.
Leaders lead, sheep follow.
Communications to Mars have stupid high latency. 4 to 24 minutes depending on where Mars happens to be.
As a result, the robots have to be incredibly paranoid and drive at a snail's pace. Put some people there and with good equipment they could get stuff done 20 times faster, not to mention doing things the robots aren't equipped for.
Put a small fabrication shop on Mars, and they'll be able to craft whatever tool's needed for the job on the spot if anything unexpected comes up.
Did somebody put something in the entire western world's drinking water, or why is everyone so ridiculously overly cautious and scared of literally everything nowadays?
Seriously, not trolling or anything... Hasn't anybody else noticed this trend?
Where's the spirit of "Worth it!"? ;)
I won't impose my maybe crass view on anyone, but IMHO a bit of pain or even dying isn't *that* bad, compared to never having actually lived at all. It's not like we are bad at making even more humans until we die in our own waste.
I'd rather live suicidal 40 years, than boring 120.
Things that were funded without public support: Bank Bailouts while ignoring illegal foreclosures Endless bombing of the Middle East and Africa Logistics support for Saudi Arabia's war against Yemen Ever increasing military budgets ...
was the reason for climbing Everest and is a good enough reason for going to Mars.
We also need to get off this planet before we are wiped out by an asteroid or something. Doing that in large numbers and creating a self sufficient colony on some other rock (preferably circling another star) will be very hard, a toe hold on Mars would be a great start.
All our missions to space aren't really the mission. The mission is really just an extension of what humans have always done, explored new places, learn stuff and then settle them. Going to mars doesn't have lots of value but developing all the technology to keep humans alive far from Earth for an extended period is part of our great mission. Humanity is pushing the limits of what is humanly possible so that we can later push even further. We're colonizing the solar system, the galaxy and then the universe while learning about it every step of the way. FTL travel seems unlikely and our bodies are weak but it's still not going to stop us for we will adapt to overcome these obstacles.
Besides, if we don't go to space, how are we ever going to find out what happens when we throw Alice into a black hole? ;)
Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
This is no different from any endeavor that is on the edge of what our abilities and technology allow. It can seem silly and fraught with far more risk than benefit. This is because the end benefit lies beyond our vision. Just like it did for the Wright brothers and those (and this wasn't a fringe minority) that felt, even after their success, that manned flight was dumb and too risky and provided little benefit.
One of human's worst traits is that we head in a direction before we're smart and/or wise enough to know the end result.
One of human's best traits is that we head in a direction before we're smart and/or wise enough to know the end result.
For better or worse, it's going to happen. It's going to happen because technology will make it possible. Right now technology is only in reach of governments and billionaires. And they are already talking about it and making not unserious plans. Once the technology threshold lowers, it's inevitable.
I suspect neither Bill (Anders or Nye) can understand that end point for the same reason that baby boomers have a hard time understanding millennials. Who in their right mind will live with their nose in their phone their entire life? Bill Bye thinks that living in domes and spacesuits makes living on Mars not worth it. For a lot of millenials today, that would hardly require a change in behaviour. There are a lot of people who would unquestionably go today. No, the end result is inevitable. Manned exploration will happen. Colonization will happen.
I agree on this part, but have you ever heard the good bit of advice about not putting all your eggs in one basket?
Knowledge is power; knowledge shared is power lost.
So the Apollo 8 astronaut doesn't know why the Apollo program existed?
Aside from the main reason of allowing the US to show of it's rocket and missile tech to the Russians without directly and obviously pushing the arms race, it got the entire country behind NASA. At it's peak in the 60's, NASA was drawing about 10% of the country's entire GDP and the public was still happy with it. Now with unmanned probes, the public for the most part doesn't know or care what NASA is up do. The budget is a tiny shadow of what it used to be and still draws public outrage.
A manned Mars mission is something that might once again unite people behind space exploration. It's worth it for the societal reasons alone if not for any scientific or technical ones. The 60's and 70's were a generation of hope and wonder partly fueled by "space age" excitement. We now live in tired and cynical times where society is falling apart.
It's sad that an Apollo astronaut doesn't get all that, but it's a sign of the times we live in today.