This is a great video. The guy has presented facts during the whole video, and based on the facts, he made an opinion. How can this be buffoonery? The above two comments show no facts, and a lot of opinion.
Yes it may me hard. But I ask you sir, do we do this because the are no problems to solve? No, it is my dream to go. So for science, lets go. Also sir. your idea of offspring in space is nixed by a little pink pill.
that good news girl and boy!!!!!!!!!!!they could play with each other while they hearding to mars...... if you cant have sex forget about it........ no man will travel for three year without having sexxx. i cannot even think life without sex!!!! IAM THINKING PRACTICLY ALLRIGHT.
indeed it isnt within our grasp to successfully send a manned mission to mars yet, but perhaps in the next 50 years or so, with developments in technology and the changing of the world economy, we will have a better chance with better methods and technology.
The variable specific impulse magnetoplasma rocket, which is to be tested on the international space station, has the potential to take a ship to mars in 1 month. This would lessen radiation exposure on the trip there. As for the cost of returning, I might say why return? 30 people can go to mars for the price of bringing 6 back. Let them make a go of it the same way the first European settlements in North America took place -- well, not quite the same way.
i think humanity eventually needs to move off of earth, i am not sure mars is a good candidate for our migration. we have at least 4 million more years to figure out where to go if we don't kill ourselves first. i agree with the speaker that we should begin terraforming and colonization with machines, it is cheaper and more efficient and also less risky. better AI programs in the future could easily make machines the pilots and humans just cargo.
very interesting slides and info.Good case for having machines do our exploring.
However, it's irresponsible to quote figures in 2036 dollars (which is impossible to relate to in 2010) who knows a cigarette pack may cost several million dollars in 2036 - so the projected cost is meaningless.
As for the 'money' argument, USA already pays massive money for other 'risky activities' like WAR! I really hope that people will accept to support this idea!
Dude! You missed the purpose of colonizing Mars. You should realise and evaluate the importance of moving our species in other places. That is increasing our chances of survival.
People are not going to build a city on Mars straight away. We need to play, experiment with small colonies first and then extend it to a full colonisation of Mars.
I dont say that I do not love Earth but if a fucking comet comes in our orbit... its a shame to extinguish with one go. Mars will be a second chance.
You make good valid points. However, I believe it should be up to human volunteers to decide whether they want to go to Mars. And if this happens, I would advise that we give them our best wishes and not try to restrict them. They will know the risks, and if they accept these risks--than I will not stop them.
how about building up a functioning robot colony on the Mars first. If that works, you could maybe send humans on Mars .. but that could take another century.
If humanity wants mars colonized bad enough, it will happen. Look at the Wright Brothers. 200 years before that they thought that flight by man was impossible, and we're thinking that colonizing Mars is impossible. This will be done, because of the big Helium 3 deposits in the Moon. If we can get those Helium 3 deposits, We're on our way to colonizing Mars. Maybe even Mercury if we wanted to. We are on our way to becoming a massive space empire.
you have no idea. the wright brothers did a shit. it is even possible that they didn't even put a engine on a plane at frist. we will newer know. it's all about propaganda and media in the US. and what the hell do you think should we do with helium 3? tell me. you are talking like a sientist but you don't know anything. we should go to mars now and not if we know how to use helium 3. we can't even fission deuterium before 2050. how long should we wait? until 2300 when we know everything?
I dont understand where he is getting these figures from, there have already been suggested plans for reaching mars that only cost 5 billion, and can be ready to launch within a few years
Yes you said it best. Why not try to solve the 'impossible' problems of going to mars. WE have proven that anything impossible can and will be made possible.
It's true that we shouldn't wait for mars colonization in the next 100 years. But this guy is extremely pessimistic by saying that it would never be possible. If we would have a stable colony on the moon the costs for colonizing mars will decrease We cab build a moon base within something like 2 decades, That's at least a beginning. When we have a stable and wel settled colony on the moon we can think about Mars. But I really don't think we can do this in the distant future.
you sir are "self-accomplished" you've made your contributions to science...i applaud you. But for you to discourage human colonization in space is bulfoonery. If we stay on earth we will eventually destroy ourselves. Human history has always shown the need and imperative nature of human exploration. By us (humans) remaining stagnant on earth will create create discontent, frustration and escalate even more wars...thus destroying ourselves.
Humanity will self destruct whether we stay here on earth or expand. to other planet. We don't leave behind the destructive behavior of mankind simply because we leave earth.
@cyprezz the destructive nature of man is the fact that we compete for limited resources. if mankind had free reign over the solar system we would have near infinite resources as compared to now, everyone could be a billionare. it would take a very very long time before our population grew enough to even make a dent in the resources within our solar system outside of earth. earth is a very tiny place with next to nothing for raw materials in comparison.
First, the cost of a Mars expedition shown in this video is biased. Technology is advancing fast, and with the colonization of moon, costs would reduce drastically. Second, how much money do you think USA waste on wars? "The cost of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan could total $2.4 trillion through the next decade". thats a lot of zeros too, dont use it to manipulate the viewers...
And if it all depended by pesimistic sceptics like this one, Humans would not ever advance as species. I can see how if the guy that made this video lived 200 years ago, he would say that creating a flying machine is something impossible because this or that or whatever pesimistic crap he could come with
NASA is planning to return to the moon and build a moonbase before going to mars for a reason, the Helium-3 mined on the moon will provide spaceship fuel and greatly reduce cost for trips to mars. because of this, the cost will be in the billions NOT Trillions.
agreed. and even if not economically, we will profit and develop as species if we are able to do so. not all the profit should be counted as the ability to acquire cola drinks and a big car. It will be a footstep for mankind to expand to other planets, which will prevent our unavoidable extinction if we remained in this planet
i know what your saying, but you casnnot deny that money and profits are an impotant factor, if we are going to spend trillions going there it will be good to know that we on earth will eventualy get tens of trillions back. What do you mean about cola drinks and abig car though(what planet are you fronm) the profit should be invested in good things like making cars more economicl viable and less harmfull like what the rest of the world is making,m only americans are still into big pointless cars
yeah, I do not deny that profit is important too, because it would keep the interest of the world in the project. Forgive me about the sarcasm of the soda drinks, was not meant towards you but rather towards the typical ignorant thinking of the masses (one that can allow Bush to spend -waste- trillions of dollars on the war on Iraq and Afganistan)
yes i totaly agree with you, the colonization of the moon would cost alot too, but the profit outcome would be benificial for future misions and the future of civilisation in general. Q. Do you you know when the plan to send prbe to EUROPA because that place is just as interesting as mars?
you seem to read my mind, always been extremely interested in Europa, as it has, in my opinion, more probabilities than mars to host primitive life forms. too bad it is considerably farther than mars for a manned mission, It will prolly be the next step. As for the probe, I heard something a year ago, time to do some extra research
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
what about Krypton , naboo, tatooine,coruscant?
are we gonna colonize them too?
they wanna change the future of the humans... ???AHAHAHAHAHHA!!!!
lets help be4 the ppl dying in africa , south america china mongolia etc etc..when everybody is gonna be alright then we think about bulshit like that.
Humans don't serve any useful function on earth lets all go the mars and the moon (^_^) In a made up survey Nobel winners support maned space exploration 20 to 1. Vereous ion engines would allow non synced transit to mars and faster too. The dinosaurs died because they did not colonize mars, we must learn from there mistakes. I would rather spend trillions making stuff in space than destroying stuff with war. Someone needs to find an asteroid to unite the world defeating. China can help to.
it is far from bullshit, idiot, dont you know that all the potential spinoffs from working in space are probably one of the best chances of helping starving poeple in those helples countries in africa and other continents. Anyway china is not really one of those country's, it has a space agency of it's own and also south africa does because it is the most advanced african country it will benifit from it. Surley it's good to know that at least one african nation does enough for itself 2b civil
Whast you fail to take into consideration is that if we dont colonize other planets "WE WILL GO EXTINCT!!!!!!" there's too many tragedies that can befall a single planet.
He is lying or misinformed when he says that there are no resources on Mars. NASA are planning to produce all the water and oxygen whilst on the surface from the CO2 in the air and water ice under the surface as well as the fuel to return back to earth. As for no point colonizing space the earth was hit by an asteroid that killed the dinosaurs then it would be the end of the human race unless other planets were colonized. Plus it would revolutionize technology doing this.
dude 5.5 trillion dollars probably wont be THAT much money in 2036, cuz everything will be more money. this guys on crack, dont listen to him he is old and senile
yes i agree and he used all the zeros to make it seem like alot more. Just look at money people pump into wars, the iraq war should be a good example of spending (wasting) money
The sequencing of the human genome cost over $1Billion, but next year the cost will be brought down to about $1000. Technology gets cheaper over time. The first computers cost millions and filled entire buildings. Now they can fit in the palm of your hand, have tens of millions of times more computing power, and can be <$100. Regardless of what NASA says, crews don't have to be co-ed. Just look at ships and submarines. Besides, ever heard of birth control, or surgical sterilization?
Many of the points seem unreasonably pessimistic and some are just incorrect. The point about having to bring along ALL materials, specifically comes to mind. Mars contains all of the raw ingredients for life, and with sufficient tech they could be extracted and utilized on site, instead of being lugged along for the whole trip.
Also... these things called contraceptives were invented a while back, in case you missed it. I'm not sure what all that stuff about babies was.
The only reason Mars won't be colonized is because fucking greedy assed company's want to much money, and don't want to spend it all going there, unless they get some massive profit.
All this pessimistic criticism is only based on a specific plan presented by NASA. Believe me, old man -- when the human race NEEDS to go to Mars, we'll put a little more money into our gameplan!
What precisely possesses you to believe that just because sex in space is possible that the female occupants of such a mission would be impregnated instantaneously after liftoff? I don't know if you've heard but we have these things called condoms and Mifepristone now. Even if we assume your wildly pessimistic value of $5T is correct, this is what, $1T more than the ill conceived and disastrously failure plagued war in Iraq that the American public seems only too eager to fund?
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Seems stupid to try to escape to Mars because we've trashed Earth - what's to prevent Mars from getting trashed too? Maybe we should figure out how to stay alive on Earth.
This is a great video. The guy has presented facts during the whole video, and based on the facts, he made an opinion. How can this be buffoonery? The above two comments show no facts, and a lot of opinion.
leveni111 3 months ago
Yes it may me hard. But I ask you sir, do we do this because the are no problems to solve? No, it is my dream to go. So for science, lets go. Also sir. your idea of offspring in space is nixed by a little pink pill.
otatoptoh 6 months ago
that good news girl and boy!!!!!!!!!!!they could play with each other while they hearding to mars...... if you cant have sex forget about it........ no man will travel for three year without having sexxx. i cannot even think life without sex!!!! IAM THINKING PRACTICLY ALLRIGHT.
tinkerbell6245 1 year ago
that good news girl and boy!!!!!!!!!!!they could play with each other while they hearding to mars......
tinkerbell6245 1 year ago
The First step is not only the hardest, but also the greatest part in any begining.
That's why people will go to Mars even there will be no way back.
And I belive the Astronauts will get well instructed how to use condoms in space... no worries about that ))))
PleasureTV 1 year ago
indeed it isnt within our grasp to successfully send a manned mission to mars yet, but perhaps in the next 50 years or so, with developments in technology and the changing of the world economy, we will have a better chance with better methods and technology.
eonblueeulogy 1 year ago
The variable specific impulse magnetoplasma rocket, which is to be tested on the international space station, has the potential to take a ship to mars in 1 month. This would lessen radiation exposure on the trip there. As for the cost of returning, I might say why return? 30 people can go to mars for the price of bringing 6 back. Let them make a go of it the same way the first European settlements in North America took place -- well, not quite the same way.
pclulow 1 year ago
Did it ever occour to you that the return trip could be made possible thanks to the resources already there?
Please watch the Mars undergound documantary firs.
LouistheHedgehog 1 year ago
i think humanity eventually needs to move off of earth, i am not sure mars is a good candidate for our migration. we have at least 4 million more years to figure out where to go if we don't kill ourselves first. i agree with the speaker that we should begin terraforming and colonization with machines, it is cheaper and more efficient and also less risky. better AI programs in the future could easily make machines the pilots and humans just cargo.
greycloud24 1 year ago
It called taking risks if we never did this you would not be in the Americas. To explore is ALWAYS a RISK.
legocloneguy22 1 year ago
very interesting slides and info.Good case for having machines do our exploring.
However, it's irresponsible to quote figures in 2036 dollars (which is impossible to relate to in 2010) who knows a cigarette pack may cost several million dollars in 2036 - so the projected cost is meaningless.
JamesBasilWillock 1 year ago
As for the 'money' argument, USA already pays massive money for other 'risky activities' like WAR! I really hope that people will accept to support this idea!
christosorestis 2 years ago
Dude! You missed the purpose of colonizing Mars. You should realise and evaluate the importance of moving our species in other places. That is increasing our chances of survival.
People are not going to build a city on Mars straight away. We need to play, experiment with small colonies first and then extend it to a full colonisation of Mars.
I dont say that I do not love Earth but if a fucking comet comes in our orbit... its a shame to extinguish with one go. Mars will be a second chance.
christosorestis 2 years ago
You make good valid points. However, I believe it should be up to human volunteers to decide whether they want to go to Mars. And if this happens, I would advise that we give them our best wishes and not try to restrict them. They will know the risks, and if they accept these risks--than I will not stop them.
pluto4847 2 years ago
Comment removed
deadman1144 2 years ago
how about building up a functioning robot colony on the Mars first. If that works, you could maybe send humans on Mars .. but that could take another century.
whatsthatstick 2 years ago
If humanity wants mars colonized bad enough, it will happen. Look at the Wright Brothers. 200 years before that they thought that flight by man was impossible, and we're thinking that colonizing Mars is impossible. This will be done, because of the big Helium 3 deposits in the Moon. If we can get those Helium 3 deposits, We're on our way to colonizing Mars. Maybe even Mercury if we wanted to. We are on our way to becoming a massive space empire.
Starfflame214 2 years ago
Oh by the way a shuttle load of Helium 3 would power the US for a year.
Starfflame214 2 years ago
you have no idea. the wright brothers did a shit. it is even possible that they didn't even put a engine on a plane at frist. we will newer know. it's all about propaganda and media in the US. and what the hell do you think should we do with helium 3? tell me. you are talking like a sientist but you don't know anything. we should go to mars now and not if we know how to use helium 3. we can't even fission deuterium before 2050. how long should we wait? until 2300 when we know everything?
swunt10 2 years ago
I dont understand where he is getting these figures from, there have already been suggested plans for reaching mars that only cost 5 billion, and can be ready to launch within a few years
ShadowAngel24 2 years ago 4
instead of saying this is impossible why not try to figure out how to solve thease "impossible" problems
lerox22 2 years ago 3
@lerox22
Yes you said it best. Why not try to solve the 'impossible' problems of going to mars. WE have proven that anything impossible can and will be made possible.
pluto4847 2 years ago
It's true that we shouldn't wait for mars colonization in the next 100 years. But this guy is extremely pessimistic by saying that it would never be possible. If we would have a stable colony on the moon the costs for colonizing mars will decrease We cab build a moon base within something like 2 decades, That's at least a beginning. When we have a stable and wel settled colony on the moon we can think about Mars. But I really don't think we can do this in the distant future.
dekippiesip 2 years ago
you sir are "self-accomplished" you've made your contributions to science...i applaud you. But for you to discourage human colonization in space is bulfoonery. If we stay on earth we will eventually destroy ourselves. Human history has always shown the need and imperative nature of human exploration. By us (humans) remaining stagnant on earth will create create discontent, frustration and escalate even more wars...thus destroying ourselves.
dynamiz77 3 years ago 18
@dynamiz77
Humanity will self destruct whether we stay here on earth or expand. to other planet. We don't leave behind the destructive behavior of mankind simply because we leave earth.
cyprezz 1 year ago
@cyprezz the destructive nature of man is the fact that we compete for limited resources. if mankind had free reign over the solar system we would have near infinite resources as compared to now, everyone could be a billionare. it would take a very very long time before our population grew enough to even make a dent in the resources within our solar system outside of earth. earth is a very tiny place with next to nothing for raw materials in comparison.
greycloud24 1 year ago
First, the cost of a Mars expedition shown in this video is biased. Technology is advancing fast, and with the colonization of moon, costs would reduce drastically. Second, how much money do you think USA waste on wars? "The cost of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan could total $2.4 trillion through the next decade". thats a lot of zeros too, dont use it to manipulate the viewers...
ProFF77 3 years ago 17
And if it all depended by pesimistic sceptics like this one, Humans would not ever advance as species. I can see how if the guy that made this video lived 200 years ago, he would say that creating a flying machine is something impossible because this or that or whatever pesimistic crap he could come with
ProFF77 3 years ago 5
sex space babies ... what's up ... who's the first! :D
notNEWW 3 years ago
what country do you come from? ... umm... earth...that's hot
notNEWW 3 years ago
We haven't even inhabited the moon yet. Wtf are we talking about Mars for?
FilmPA 3 years ago
NASA is planning to return to the moon and build a moonbase before going to mars for a reason, the Helium-3 mined on the moon will provide spaceship fuel and greatly reduce cost for trips to mars. because of this, the cost will be in the billions NOT Trillions.
Joe35983 3 years ago
not only that but we will evetually profit from the moon
bloty02 3 years ago 4
agreed. and even if not economically, we will profit and develop as species if we are able to do so. not all the profit should be counted as the ability to acquire cola drinks and a big car. It will be a footstep for mankind to expand to other planets, which will prevent our unavoidable extinction if we remained in this planet
ProFF77 3 years ago 5
i know what your saying, but you casnnot deny that money and profits are an impotant factor, if we are going to spend trillions going there it will be good to know that we on earth will eventualy get tens of trillions back. What do you mean about cola drinks and abig car though(what planet are you fronm) the profit should be invested in good things like making cars more economicl viable and less harmfull like what the rest of the world is making,m only americans are still into big pointless cars
bloty02 3 years ago
yeah, I do not deny that profit is important too, because it would keep the interest of the world in the project. Forgive me about the sarcasm of the soda drinks, was not meant towards you but rather towards the typical ignorant thinking of the masses (one that can allow Bush to spend -waste- trillions of dollars on the war on Iraq and Afganistan)
ProFF77 3 years ago
yes i totaly agree with you, the colonization of the moon would cost alot too, but the profit outcome would be benificial for future misions and the future of civilisation in general. Q. Do you you know when the plan to send prbe to EUROPA because that place is just as interesting as mars?
bloty02 3 years ago
you seem to read my mind, always been extremely interested in Europa, as it has, in my opinion, more probabilities than mars to host primitive life forms. too bad it is considerably farther than mars for a manned mission, It will prolly be the next step. As for the probe, I heard something a year ago, time to do some extra research
ProFF77 3 years ago
we can't use helium 3. why are al americans talking about helium 3? it is just stupid.
swunt10 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
what about Krypton , naboo, tatooine,coruscant?
are we gonna colonize them too?
they wanna change the future of the humans... ???AHAHAHAHAHHA!!!!
lets help be4 the ppl dying in africa , south america china mongolia etc etc..when everybody is gonna be alright then we think about bulshit like that.
Zurich212 3 years ago
Humans don't serve any useful function on earth lets all go the mars and the moon (^_^) In a made up survey Nobel winners support maned space exploration 20 to 1. Vereous ion engines would allow non synced transit to mars and faster too. The dinosaurs died because they did not colonize mars, we must learn from there mistakes. I would rather spend trillions making stuff in space than destroying stuff with war. Someone needs to find an asteroid to unite the world defeating. China can help to.
zyxwvutsrqponmlkh 3 years ago
it is far from bullshit, idiot, dont you know that all the potential spinoffs from working in space are probably one of the best chances of helping starving poeple in those helples countries in africa and other continents. Anyway china is not really one of those country's, it has a space agency of it's own and also south africa does because it is the most advanced african country it will benifit from it. Surley it's good to know that at least one african nation does enough for itself 2b civil
bloty02 3 years ago
Whast you fail to take into consideration is that if we dont colonize other planets "WE WILL GO EXTINCT!!!!!!" there's too many tragedies that can befall a single planet.
Joe35983 3 years ago
He is lying or misinformed when he says that there are no resources on Mars. NASA are planning to produce all the water and oxygen whilst on the surface from the CO2 in the air and water ice under the surface as well as the fuel to return back to earth. As for no point colonizing space the earth was hit by an asteroid that killed the dinosaurs then it would be the end of the human race unless other planets were colonized. Plus it would revolutionize technology doing this.
lemdixon01 3 years ago 11
Agreed
Joe35983 3 years ago
yes i agree, it is in are nature to explore and expand, the humman race is not like a tortoise
bloty02 3 years ago 2
dude 5.5 trillion dollars probably wont be THAT much money in 2036, cuz everything will be more money. this guys on crack, dont listen to him he is old and senile
gibbsies 3 years ago 4
yes i agree and he used all the zeros to make it seem like alot more. Just look at money people pump into wars, the iraq war should be a good example of spending (wasting) money
bloty02 3 years ago
The sequencing of the human genome cost over $1Billion, but next year the cost will be brought down to about $1000. Technology gets cheaper over time. The first computers cost millions and filled entire buildings. Now they can fit in the palm of your hand, have tens of millions of times more computing power, and can be <$100. Regardless of what NASA says, crews don't have to be co-ed. Just look at ships and submarines. Besides, ever heard of birth control, or surgical sterilization?
manofsan 3 years ago 7
"Humans don't serve any useful function is space" BULLSHIT
Joe35983 3 years ago 2
Many of the points seem unreasonably pessimistic and some are just incorrect. The point about having to bring along ALL materials, specifically comes to mind. Mars contains all of the raw ingredients for life, and with sufficient tech they could be extracted and utilized on site, instead of being lugged along for the whole trip.
Also... these things called contraceptives were invented a while back, in case you missed it. I'm not sure what all that stuff about babies was.
Rustpuke 3 years ago 10
The only reason Mars won't be colonized is because fucking greedy assed company's want to much money, and don't want to spend it all going there, unless they get some massive profit.
Alaron251 3 years ago 5
and there will be a profit
bloty02 3 years ago
All this pessimistic criticism is only based on a specific plan presented by NASA. Believe me, old man -- when the human race NEEDS to go to Mars, we'll put a little more money into our gameplan!
dudeihavenoalias 4 years ago 9
What precisely possesses you to believe that just because sex in space is possible that the female occupants of such a mission would be impregnated instantaneously after liftoff? I don't know if you've heard but we have these things called condoms and Mifepristone now. Even if we assume your wildly pessimistic value of $5T is correct, this is what, $1T more than the ill conceived and disastrously failure plagued war in Iraq that the American public seems only too eager to fund?
10mintwo 4 years ago 2
I think I would have ended it "Humans don't serve any useful function (period)."
jonahansen 4 years ago
so where will peoplegdo when the polution of humans on earth forces earth to self destruct
phillipv18 4 years ago
Out of the frying pan into the fire.
pyramidpress 4 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Seems stupid to try to escape to Mars because we've trashed Earth - what's to prevent Mars from getting trashed too? Maybe we should figure out how to stay alive on Earth.
jonahansen 4 years ago
i agree with you
Dotdot09 3 years ago 4
Why? When there are some many planets to use? :P
Alaron251 3 years ago
I would think that if or when we colonize mars, we would learn from the mistakes we made on earth
Joe35983 3 years ago