How do you feel about people willing to give up everything for a 1 way trip to mars?

[FenrirWolf]

You keep calling it stranding, but when the goal from the beginning is a one-way trip you can't really consider them stranded in the sense that it wasn't the intended consequence.

There is always the question of whether such a colony would survive past the first generation, or even the first year of its founding. But what is not in question is the possibility of their return. That has already been determined as 0 for that particular mission.

Of course the other thing in question is if Mars One could even make that kind of mission happen. Time will tell in that regard.

[Motokid600]

But it IS stranding. You cannot sugar coat that. If something goes wrong those people die a slow, painful death with the whole world watching. Just put a return vehicle in orbit and an ascent vehicle on the ground. Problem solved.

[vger]

We cannot screw this up. We cannot afford to kill human beings in space. It must. Not. Happen. If we can help it. The entire world will be watching every second. If we strand humans on Mars and there's an accident.. you can forget sending any more humans back for a long time.

Last time I checked, rockets have exploded with people on them. We're still putting people in space.

And as sadistic as it sounds, when things go wrong, it'll only make it safer for those who come after, because we can learn from the mistakes.

[pxi]

I half suspect when it happens, it'll go the way Australia was colonized - court-ordered transportation, but that does presuppose a cheaper method of getting people into space.

Regardless of how it was to happen though, if it doesn't directly impact you or me, it's not my place or yours to dictate what people do with their lives. Some would call it a one-way death trip. Others would regard it as one of the few great adventures left.

Personally I have a high regard for anyone with that sort of pioneering spirit.

[razark]

We cannot screw this up.

We have. We will. Many times over, probably.

We cannot afford to kill human beings in space.

We have. We will. Many times over, probably.

It must. Not. Happen.

It has. It will. Many times over, probably. Get used to the idea, or get out of the game. People will die. Columbus lost one-third of his ships on his first voyage across the Atlantic.

A one way trip is a ridiculous, archaic notion that shouldn't even be considered. Especially this day and age.

A one way trip may be our best option for the foreseeable future. If people are willing to accept that, why do you insist that they be stopped? What risks are you willing to accept? If you want anything even close to Columbus's two-thirds ship survival rate, you're going to be waiting a long time, and spending a lot of money. There's never going to be any certainty of making the voyage, much less the return trip.

[vger]

Also if you compare humanity's space travel as a whole, compared to when we were exploring the Earth (particularly when it comes to sea voyages), we have a pretty darned good safety record.

[Brethern]

But it IS stranding. You cannot sugar coat that. If something goes wrong those people die a slow, painful death with the whole world watching. Just put a return vehicle in orbit and an ascent vehicle on the ground. Problem solved.

Why would they die a slow painful death? If someone happens that they can't fix it they open the airlock and die quickly.

Most of what we have in this age exists because people shed their blood to earn it.

You want progress? If you're not prepared to die for it you're not going to get it.

[FenrirWolf]

Also if you compare humanity's space travel as a whole, compared to when we were exploring the Earth (particularly when it comes to sea voyages), we have a pretty darned good safety record.

Ain't that the truth. As sad as the losses we have incurred are, we're rather fortunate to not have lost many more lives.

[Motokid600]

No.. you all must understand what I'm saying is we have to do everything in our power to keep humans alive in space. If we send humans to Mars without a way home.. we haven't done everything in our power. And litsen.. I want to go to Mars. Stop picking my posts apart. I'm on the right side here. All of you should know better then anyone that once astronauts die progress is haulted, delayed, postponed.. whichever word you like.

Accidents happen and people will die yes. But again we have to do EVERYTHING in our power to prevent these accidents and if they do occur provide contingencies. You send people on a one way trip you fail at the latter.

Edited April 28, 2014 by Motokid600

[Brethern]

No.. you all must understand what I'm saying is we have to do everything in our power to keep humans alive in space. If we send humans to Mars without a way home.. we haven't done everything in our power. And litsen.. I want to go to Mars. Stop picking my posts apart. I'm on the right side here. All of you should know better then anyone that once astronauts die progress is haulted, delayed, postponed.. whichever word you like.

Accidents happen and people will die yes. But again we have to do EVERYTHING in our power to prevent these accidents and if they do occur provide contingencies. You send people on a one way trip you fail at the latter.

I think you need to enter the real world sometime soon. We want mars colonized, we better be prepared to let the first ones there die. There's no two ways about it.

[Motokid600]

I think you need to enter the real world sometime soon. We want mars colonized, we better be prepared to let the first ones there die. There's no two ways about it.

.. what?! There's no two ways about it?! I'm sorry I refuse to believe that. We're humans not monkeys. We should be prepared to let them die? You say that.. and then say I should enter the real world? Take a step back and look at what you just typed. I cannot believe I read that on this forum of all places.

You dont send people into space without a way home. Even IF the plan is to stay. You still provide contingencies should the worse happen.

Edited April 28, 2014 by Motokid600

[vger]

.. what?! There's no two ways about it?! I'm sorry I refuse to believe that. We're humans not monkeys. We should be prepared to let them die? You say that.. and then say I should enter the real world? Take a step back and look at what you just typed. I cannot believe I read that on this forum of all places.

You dont send people into space without a way home. Even IF the plan is to stay. You still provide contingencies should the worse happen.

I think you really need to read some history. If there's any old-world parallel for space travel, it's the ocean. The ocean was downright deadly and could snap a ship in half on a whim. There was practically no job more dangerous than sailing, but able-bodied people LEAPED at the chance to go out onto the high seas, whether it be for fame, fortune, or just some healthy adventure.

I think you greatly underestimate the ambition of humans. And really, if we only did things after we were 100% sure it was safe, we wouldn't even know how to use fire.

Edited April 28, 2014 by vger

[Motokid600]

I think you need to realise that history is history and were talking about the future. Ambition? I'll be the first one to raise my hand to go to Mars for the rest of my life. But I'm not going unless there's a way to get back should an accident happen that'll cut that life short. You don't need to be stupid to be ambitious.

We are human beings we WILL go to Mars and we WILL do it right.

[vger]

I think you need to realise that history is history is history and were talking about the future. Ambition? I'll be the first one to raise my hand to go to Mars for the rest of my life. But I'm not going unless there's a way to get back should an accident happen that'll cut that life short. You don't need to be stupid to be ambitious.

We are human beings we WILL go to Mars and we WILL do it right.

Well for the sake of your argument I hope someone steps up to the plate then. As it is now, Mars One is the ONLY option on the horizon. And one of the only reasons the voyage is even remotely feasible is because there isn't extra money being spent on an 'ejector seat.' Perhaps if they get more funding, that will be possible. Either that, or someone else needs to give us an alternative mission, and I don't see that happening anytime soon.

[Duxwing]

I would go in a heartbeat.

-Duxwing

[Brethern]

.. what?! There's no two ways about it?! I'm sorry I refuse to believe that. We're humans not monkeys. We should be prepared to let them die? You say that.. and then say I should enter the real world? Take a step back and look at what you just typed. I cannot believe I read that on this forum of all places.

You dont send people into space without a way home. Even IF the plan is to stay. You still provide contingencies should the worse happen.

Like I said you live in a fantasy world, Anyone who goes to mars should be going with the knowledge that it would be a one way trip. You send people there thinking they are coming home you're setting them up for many psychological problems.

[Motokid600]

Like I said you live in a fantasy world, Anyone who goes to mars should be going with the knowledge that it would be a one way trip. You send people there thinking they are coming home you're setting them up for many psychological problems.

I'm sorry, but that whole statement is just completely backwards...

Edited April 28, 2014 by Motokid600

[pxi]

I have a question for Motokid600:

If I, as a single entity, had the means to send myself to Mars, with an appropriate amount of gear for a sustainable life on Mars, but no method for an immediate return to Earth, would you oppose this?

And if so, how, and why?

Edited April 28, 2014 by pxi

[stijnovic]

Leaving everything behind to live in a new world is not a new concept. I admire the people who have the will, courage and devotion to do this!

[Brethern]

I'm sorry, but that whole statement is just completely backwards...

Let's see someone goes to mars which is a multi month journey one way. Assuming that everything is successful and that the ship launches have the same success rate as the apollo program You're looking at minimum or people living on mars for at least half a year.

Let's analyze that shall we? You're living on a planet that has no breathable atmosphere, you're going to be in an enclosed space that just might have a larger area than a large camper trailer. after life support food and experiments. Which you're going to be sharing with at least one other person maybe more. If you start feeling claustrophobic there's no going outside for air, outside requires you to be inside a suit.

Then there's the boredom. Any experiments and maintenance required is going to take a few hours a week at best, any exercises you have to do daily are going to become a chore. Your downtime is going to be spent playing games. Assuming you had the foresight to bring along a few games and a huge selection of mods for them how long before you're bored of them?

Then there's the food and water situation, since it's going to take at least a year to get a relief ship there everything is going to be rationed. Then finally the people. You could have your girl/boyfriend with you and your best friend besides that even then there's a good chance you're going to become mortal enemies within a few months.

Even when friends live together here things get hairy now imagine living with them in a large camper trailer and not being able to go anywhere else.

Oh and did I mention that you're going to start remembering everything you could be doing on earth? That game you really wanted to play that got released two months after you left? that concert you wanted to go to? swimming? surfing? skiing?

It will happen, and once you start thinking about it things get worse.

However if before you leave you accept the fact that it's a one way trip and you're dead you aren't going to be experiencing any of those things.

[Motokid600]

I have a question for Motokid600:

If I, as a single entity, had the means to send myself to Mars, with an appropriate amount of gear for a sustainable life on Mars, but no method for an immediate return to Earth, would you oppose this?

And if so, how, and why?

Why would I oppose it? Show me where I said I'm against going to Mars.. did I say that? Go to Mars without a contingency plan sure. Just know that if there's a terminal accident it's the end of your mission and your life.

@Brethren:

...All I'm saying is to provide a means for the people on the surface to get off the surface and back into orbit where... should they need too. Hop in a return module. Now there may be 20, 30 people after awhile on this colony. Every lander that brought a set of people has an ascent stage just like the LEM.

You talk of the comforts of home. And you honestly think that it'd be GOOD for mental health if these people were told there is no way back what so ever? That once your rocket leaves the pad that is the last time you will see the Earth and all these pleasantries again? And that's GOOD for mentality? You have it backwards..

So instead you launch with the intention and desire to live on Mars for the rest of your days. But you know should something occur that threatens to cut these ambitions short there is a contingency plan. A way home. This is BAD for your mental state? I refuse to believe that.

Again fellas I'm for Mars here. I'm the first one to raise my hand to go on a mission for the rest of my life. But I like living. So I wouldn't go unless there was a way to get back. But think about this.. your all so brave. "Oh pick me pick me I'll go. Oh.. But there's no way back.. well that's okay I'm going to MARS I don't care." Massive dust storm the likes of which we've never seen comes along and wipes out the life support for the colony. You got 30 minutes of air in your suit. So as you sit there asphyxiating I bet your gonna wish you had a way home at that point.

Edited April 28, 2014 by Motokid600

[pxi]

Why would I oppose it? Show me where I said I'm against going to Mars.. did I say that?

I did not insinuate that you were against going to Mars. As I understand your position, you are against sending humans to Mars without a method of return.

Go to Mars without a contingency plan sure. Just know that if there's a terminal accident it's the end of your mission and your life.

Ok, so it is acceptable in your view for an individual to go on a one-way trip. Grand. Now if I said people (plural), as opposed to an individual:

You dont send people into space without a way home. Even IF the plan is to stay. You still provide contingencies should the worse happen.

So it seems the problem arises when we send more than one person? At what point do we arrive at the critical mass where individuals lose their right to make this choice for themselves?

[Motokid600]

.. What does number of people have to do with it? How did you get this..

So it seems the problem arises when we send more than one person? At what point do we arrive at the critical mass where individuals lose their right to make this choice for themselves?

You dont send people into space without a way home. Even IF the plan is to stay. You still provide contingencies should the worse happen

From that? Wrong quote maybe?

[TechnicalK3rbal]

It would be amazing to go to an other planet...

But it seems kind of stupid going there knowing you're going to die. It should be like the Apollo program, the people want to stay alive, and NASA wants to do everything possible to keep them alive.

[pxi]

.. What does number of people have to do with it? How did you get this..

From that? Wrong quote maybe?

I am quoting your own statements.

You dont send people into space without a way home.

This statement seems inconsistent with your later response to my query.

Go to Mars without a contingency plan sure. Just know that if there's a terminal accident it's the end of your mission and your life.

If you want to clarify your position, fine, but as it stands, you seem to find it unacceptable for multiple individuals to be sent on a one-way trip, but acceptable for a single individual.

I find this somewhat logically inconsistent.