Why It’s Wrong We Send Robots To Mars And Why People Should Not Follow

In Easter Island, i can imagine the Rapanui people cut the funding for their maritime research and development programs and allocated the resources for the benefit of the population.

Cutting down NASA funding and dispersing it among the population is incredibly short-sighted. You are essentially arguing that any form of spending that doesn't directly alleviate human suffering is worthless, a priori. By this argument, hunting down the last Dodo was completely justified, because it satisfied the immediate needs of the people.

This is a very naive and dangerous line of thought. If you are genuinely concerned for the welfare of the population, find renewable, long-term solutions for the problem and stop shooting Dodos - because anyone can do that.

I can assure you that as long as i'm around you'll have one vote against cutting NASA funding, despite the costs to global "humanitarian efforts" such as yours.

reply to post by Required01


All of the things the OP listed are all of the best reasons to go to mars...
This place is sucking more and more everyday and were all getting a bit stir crazy with each other.

reply to post by Required01


So because our short-term future looks bleak to you this means sacrificing our long-term future? Congratulations, YOU are part of the problem with humanity (kidding of course).

Mankind needs a LONG TERM outlook and part of that is getting off this planet. This planet has limited space and limited resources AND, in the event of asteroid impact, gamma ray burst, etc is EXTREMELY vulnerable. Spreading ourselves across the cosmos is a great way to ensure the survival of our species and the first step to interstellar travel is these baby-steps (the moon, Mars, etc).

What part of getting to fly around in Star Ships, see the galaxy, meet aliens, visit the holodeck, and own your own replicator doesn't appeal to you? Well I don't mean you personally, I mean future humans in a few centuries might get to do those things but only IF we keep spending money on space exploration and technology.

This planet can't sustain us forever... you're just not thinking fourth dimensionally!

reply to post by Required01


Look, the money isn't launched into space, it's put back into the economy.

Think, if the U.S. removed the church from tax exemption, than it would be possible to launch a rover like curiosity every two weeks.

Nasa may hide stuff from us, but it isn't throwing away money

you all need to see that "where over 50% of our taxes goes" video.


the federal government takes like 3 trilling or something, of all our taxes, to just lock away, virtually and fake.


think about when your pay gets cut, or they raise taxes.

"sorry we have to let you go, we gotta shut it down, we gotta cut your pay"

lies

they have so much money, almost every single problem in america could be fixed, yet they continue to steal, yes STEAL our taxes (would you pay if you didn't have to?)

to spend them on things the simply DO NOT WORK, and things that WE THE PEOPLE, DO NOT WANT.



no taxation without representation.



i don't see representation, i see oppression and robbery.


the economy is bad because every single day "they" hammer it into everyones heads/

"on the news today, things are REALLY bad, the economy oh noes"


its a lie.


gas prices.


also a lie.


they could make it 1$ a gallon with the money they steal, and don't get me started on how they suppress new technologies from the public, like free energy.


they can afford it all, but they are greedy and would rather shut down schools and hospitals, and then spend millions upon millions on "get learned" programs for kids that don't do well in school, because school sucks, and is rigged to be difficult.

school is a place of learning, but no. not any more.

peace.

People gonna make war and People gonna seek knowledge

Which do you support?

Originally posted by Required01

This has nothing to do with banging rocks, it has to do with being selfish and not helping people who live in poor conditions.

I think the U.S. should rather spend that 2 billion on there own people, improving healthcare, providing jobs, etc instead of 1 robot that could very well have crashed during landing and been lost!

Actually, you got it all backwards ... we need MORE, not less of this.

You don't understand the basics of economics, which is why you have this position of yours ... but it is precisely this robot, that gives jobs to millions of people, around the world. It is the "closing" down on projects, and "saving" money to make a profit, that is the cause of the current problems.

reply to post by Required01


There is nothing wrong with spending money in a constructive manner, to explore the universe, to learn, to improve technology, to allow for expansion into space.

In fact, this attitude is the same one that could be used to help third-world countries. Taking the attitude that we should stifle productive activities is, in fact, one way to hurt third-world countries.

reply to post by Required01


Have you seen that they're developing electronic sand-storms to deliver to Mars, as well? Popular Science did an article on it last month...nanotechnology with the latest AI, so as to navigate all kinds of terrain and conduct the research by itself. They expect it to be ready in about 40 years. Imagine the time and expenses that goes into THAT kind of project...

Hate to burst your bubble op.
But there are three ways we
can fix these problems:

1: Start killing ppl of
2: No more kids for atleast 20 years.
Or, we can start moving of this rock...

What happen after you have filled the cup
and then try to poor in more?
Or try to split a cake in even smaller pieces?

Cant pick 1 or 2 right.

Soo we have to send stuff away. And even
go there ourselfs.