It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

MarsOne Hoax Or the Real deal? (Delayed dates etc)

page: 1
7

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 12 2015 @ 09:13 AM
link   
I realise a search for Marsone brings up older threads but they have been inactive for some time. Besides none seemed to bring up the important issue of the second delay (this time by 2 years)

So as you all know Mars One has been claiming that within ten years it will put some people on mars to live there, followed by a new group two years later, and so on.

They have had lots of crowd funding campaigns and claimed they were in talks with LockHeed Martin for rocket design parts, and have former Nasa scientists giving advice, and they have frequent speeches around the world.
Along with a supposed rigorous round of applicants chosen from around the world, where they supposedly had hundreds of thousands of applicants.

All sounds legit right? until you think with your head. How are they going to do in ten years what Nasa who have been doing this for half a century, are still 20 years away at least, maybe 30 from doing.

Their required budget is 4 billion which may seem a lot, but considering it costed 20 billion to take people to the moon, how on EARTH with that kind of peanuts (and it is peanuts astronomically), are they going to run this operation to mars with 4 billion, which includes the several unmanned voyages in the decade before it (they are planning several unmanned ones to set their satellites above mars and to drop their robot rovers etc, apparently robots are going to build the dwelling habitats on mars before the people land!)

Add into the fact that recently, there is yet a SECOND set back this time 2 years (so 2 years into the project and it has already been set back twice),
www.dailymail.co.uk...
along with the adimittal from one of the participants that there isnt really much of an interview at all for the so called chosen astronauts, and how the whole thing doesnt seem very professional or genuine at all.
medium.com...

Those delays which were announced earlier in 2015 arent just a delay for the final landing but a delay of 2 years for everything, even the unmanned satellite is now set back by 2 years, and just last month (september), they announced that they suspect there may be more delays.
To me, it sounds quite franky like the biggest scam of the century.

The icing on the cake is they claim their main bulk of funding will be how everyone will be tuned into the mars landing and they will make billions in reality tv rights, but the more you think about it - who on earth is going to want to watch a handful of people, dying on a rock millions of miles away. Because in essence that is what it will be.
edit on 12-10-2015 by lamplighters because: (no reason given)




posted on Oct, 12 2015 @ 09:17 AM
link   
smelled like a semi-hoax/money scheme from the start, and I doubt if any government would allow them to shoot people off to Mars for a suicide trip (except in assisted suicide countries/U.S. states). No Mars for you! Hopefully NASA's new emphasis on a Mars mission will leave this one in the red dust.



posted on Oct, 12 2015 @ 09:20 AM
link   
a reply to: lamplighters

I really wish them success...I really do but I just don't know anymore. My hat's off to them for trying though.



posted on Oct, 12 2015 @ 09:26 AM
link   

originally posted by: lamplighters
The icing on the cake is they claim their main bulk of funding will be how everyone will be tuned into the mars landing and they will make billions in reality tv rights, but the more you think about it - who on earth is going to want to watch a handful of people, dying on a rock millions of miles away. Because in essence that is what it will be.



Are you kidding?


This will be the REAL LIFE "Truman Show"!

Can you imagine if (that is, if they are allowed to), one of the astronauts becomes pregnant?

Screw Big Brother. Imagine if someone DOES get physical? Violent? Homicidal?


Hell ya! My American Fat A$$ (Trademark Pending) will be GLUED to the TV...popcorn, beer, gun, and football in hand!!!



posted on Oct, 12 2015 @ 09:29 AM
link   
We could already have colonies on Mars if science and NASA gave a #. They dont.

MarsOne probably is a scam but hopefully itll make NASA see they need to do something, ffs.



posted on Oct, 12 2015 @ 09:30 AM
link   

originally posted by: nullafides

originally posted by: lamplighters
The icing on the cake is they claim their main bulk of funding will be how everyone will be tuned into the mars landing and they will make billions in reality tv rights, but the more you think about it - who on earth is going to want to watch a handful of people, dying on a rock millions of miles away. Because in essence that is what it will be.



Are you kidding?


This will be the REAL LIFE "Truman Show"!

Can you imagine if (that is, if they are allowed to), one of the astronauts becomes pregnant?

Screw Big Brother. Imagine if someone DOES get physical? Violent? Homicidal?


Hell ya! My American Fat A$$ (Trademark Pending) will be GLUED to the TV...popcorn, beer, gun, and football in hand!!!



Actually the rule is for the first few years no babies i remember reading it in the faq for the application process, i can link it if you want
However, when you think of it - its pretty ridiculous, if somebody did get pregnant, how is anyone on earth going to do anything about it? shake their fist at them over a delayed webcast? Lol!



posted on Oct, 12 2015 @ 09:31 AM
link   

originally posted by: lightedhype
We could already have colonies on Mars if science and NASA gave a #. They dont.

MarsOne probably is a scam but hopefully itll make NASA see they need to do something, ffs.


Yeh i think its ridiculous that Nasa have quoted 30 years when its been like half a century already since we went to the moon, i know if they wanted to they could do something in a couple of years.

But the point is, if a company with the resources of Nasa need 30 years, how is a company like MarsOne out of nowhere going to do it in 10



posted on Oct, 12 2015 @ 09:34 AM
link   
a reply to: lamplighters


Is this in the correct forum



posted on Oct, 12 2015 @ 10:28 AM
link   
This sounds like a hoax and anyone that keeps track of science should know it. the vast majority of exploration in space continues to be automated. We have to many problems with sending people there until they get more preparation, perhaps a permanent station operated by robots with some kind of artificial intelligence and sending supplies ahead of time beforehand so they'll be waiting to maintain actual life.

However a large portion of the information they give the public is probably false including their recent claims to have found water there. Anyone that knows about how it snows in higher altitudes might wonder why. the reason is that at sea level on Earth water boils at 212 F or 100 C and melts at 32 F or 0 C but at higher altitudes melting temperature goes up and boiling down because of the thinner atmosphere. When the atmosphere gets thin enough, like on Mars water is impossible. They claim that it doesn't melt because it is salty which might be a partial explanation but not good enough especially since it is much colder there, in addition to the thin atmosphere. Even here when it gets cold enough salt water freezes at sea level.

Which raises the question, why are they putting trivial and false stories out like that?



posted on Oct, 12 2015 @ 10:40 AM
link   
a reply to: lamplighters

Undoubtedly, humans will be humans. Men and Women...eventually....will make the creature with two backs.

However, yes, at first, I'm certain they will follow "the rules"...



posted on Oct, 14 2015 @ 03:29 AM
link   
Think about it this way, even if the program doesn't get off the ground, which lets be honest given the gravity of the technological, financial and logistical effort required and the fact that the MarsOne group haven't address some key points and problems yet seem to be already heading towards the planning stages eg selecting candidates for mission, they did bring public interest in manned missions to mars to the forefront.

Now that NASA have come out and given a, basic, road map for their plans for getting Humans onto Mars i'm sure we can thank in part the Mark one group for rekindling peoples interest in Mars and space travel.



posted on Oct, 14 2015 @ 05:09 AM
link   
Without Elon Musk and Nasa they aren't going anywhere. LoL.
edit on 14-10-2015 by egidio88 because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 14 2015 @ 01:37 PM
link   

originally posted by: egidio88
Without Elon Musk and Nasa they aren't going anywhere. LoL.


How do you mean, no idea who the first two names are



posted on Oct, 14 2015 @ 06:11 PM
link   

originally posted by: lamplighters

originally posted by: egidio88
Without Elon Musk and Nasa they aren't going anywhere. LoL.


How do you mean, no idea who the first two names are


kidding me? ELON MUSK? Founder of TESLA and SPACE X? Space X is actually sending food to ISS, hahahha =) you should really look it up. Elon wants to get to Mars ASAP.

www.techinsider.io...
edit on 14-10-2015 by egidio88 because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 16 2015 @ 09:01 AM
link   

originally posted by: lightedhype
We could already have colonies on Mars if science and NASA gave a #. They dont.

MarsOne probably is a scam but hopefully itll make NASA see they need to do something, ffs.


There are two problems with this idea. One, NASA doesn't get to decide how their budget gets allocated. Two, NASA doesn't have the money to really do a Mars program even if it wanted to.

First, NASA doesn't just get a big check from the US government that they get to spend however they want. The agency's budget is set by Congress, which gets to decide what programs are and are not funded. While NASA does get to make a budget request to Congress, Congress ultimately has the final say about how much money the agency gets and what it spends the money on. Earlier this year, when the NASA budget went through the House Appropriations Committee, certain programs saw their budgets increased over the budget request, while other programs saw their budgets cut.

Some of these budget increases and cuts are ideologically political (the planetary science budget was, I think, pretty clearly slashed due to a proposed Earth science satellite to study climate change) and others are old-fashioned pork-barrel politics (while others might disagree, I think the SLS launch system falls into this category). Congressional representatives want to keep NASA centers and programs in their districts/states open for business, regardless of whether those representatives really care about and/or understand the goals of those centers and programs.

Second, NASA doesn't have the cash to run a Mars program. NASA's budget for 2015 was $17.5 billion dollars, which sounds like a lot, but it only amounts to 0.5% of the federal budget. To contrast this with the period of time when the Apollo program was in full-swing, NASA's budget as a percentage of the total federal budget peaked in the late 60's at just under 4.5% of the total.

That budget is spread out among a wide variety of science and engineering programs, from a few million dollars to do cost/benefit analysis for potential missions sometime in the coming decade to a couple billion dollars dedicated to supporting the space station program that's running right now. There isn't room in the budget to carve out the billions of dollars it would take to run a serious Mars program without scrapping essentially everything else.

If a Mars mission is what you want, you need to write your House representative and senators and let them know you think it is important. You can also support space advocacy groups like The Planetary Society.



posted on Oct, 18 2015 @ 11:19 AM
link   

originally posted by: PhloydPhan

originally posted by: lightedhype


Second, NASA doesn't have the cash to run a Mars program..


But the American government have no problem spending half a million on training 6 rebel fighters who then deserted/ were killed?

www.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on Oct, 18 2015 @ 05:45 PM
link   

originally posted by: lamplighters

originally posted by: PhloydPhan

Second, NASA doesn't have the cash to run a Mars program..


But the American government have no problem spending half a million on training 6 rebel fighters who then deserted/ were killed?

www.abovetopsecret.com...


I don't see how that is supposed to be a response to my comments. First, I never said that the US government doesn't have the money to fund a manned Mars mission, I said that NASA doesn't, and explained how their budgeting process works to support my reasoning.

Second, the Syrian training program you're discussing in the linked thread - the failure of which would be ridiculous if it weren't so pathetic - was run by the Defense Department, which has a fiscal 2015 budget of $598.5 billion dollars, or about 34 times NASA's budget. Pissing away $500 million on the program you're describing is, for the DOD, literally the same as me losing $20.

I never said there wasn't the money in the US to support a manned Mars program; I said that NASA doesn't have that money.



new topics

top topics



 
7

log in

join