Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 1
Saru

78,000 people apply for trip to Mars

49 posts in this topic

Honestly, sending us 'old folks' to colonize a planet would be one heck of a dumb move. Even if any of us 50+ folks would agree to go (and I doubt many would) the physical stamina needed just isn't there.

Oh I don't know Lilly, I'm pretty sure the gravity is much lower on Mars - we could rediscover our childhoods, imagine batting a home run 10 miles up the road :w00t:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They should name this first colonization to Mars, Roanoke 2. It's gonna be interesting to see how history repeats itself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We can make air and water, usa's nuclear subs do. For food hydroponics.

If we could make it on Mars, why couldn't we make it on Earth. If we could there wouldn't be famine and pollute air and water.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is completely idiotic notion to consider one way trip to Mars a suicide mission. Sure there will be no return, but that is a necessary first step in practical colonization of another world, and people sent there are not expected to die in 1st year after their arrival, they are expected to put grounds for future mass colonization. It's like labeling first europeans who went in Australia or Americas as suidicers. The basis of suicide is desire to end ones life, and those guys would be leaving earth to begin a life.

Absolutely! I was halfway through typing a very similar response. This is only the second time in all of human existence that someone will have the opportunity to be the first to set foot on another world! What's more amazing is that this time, the opportunity is being extended to the common man! Who wouldn't want to forever be recorded as the first human being to land on the red planet?

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh I don't know Lilly, I'm pretty sure the gravity is much lower on Mars - we could rediscover our childhoods, imagine batting a home run 10 miles up the road :w00t:

You know those golf balls the hit into orbit on the moon. The truth is they didn't go any further than they would have on earth.

The pods they,ll be living in would be temp. Structures. Plenty of sand there to make a dome. To redeation proof it they need lead.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We didn't even attempt to colonize the moon which is much closer to earth, and we're looking to put people on Mars! Makes no sense to me at all.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The fact of the matter is that these applicants were all charged $33 US application fee. This is a scam considering that the applicants already pledged their lives when applying, should not be charged anything in my opinion.

Mars One stated that they would get their funding from the Media and promoters alike. And how about those poor applicants that are rejected from the program? Do they get a refund? Not!

78,000 applicants X $33 US = $2,574,000

Expected applicants 500,000 X $33 US = $16,500,000 of pure profit..

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You know those golf balls the hit into orbit on the moon. The truth is they didn't go any further than they would have on earth.

Alan Shepard (Apollo 14) hit two golf balls on the moon. After taking his second shot, Shepard observed the ball seemed to travel for "miles and miles and miles."

http://io9.com/5654009/apollo-astronaut-really-did-hit-lunar-golf-ball-for-miles-and-miles-and-miles

To redeation proof it they need lead.

Theoretically, almost any material can be used for radiation shielding if employed in a thickness sufficient to attenuate the radiation to safe limits.

Lead and concrete are among the most commonly used materials.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Every since these numbers as to how many applicants have applied hit the news, it's made me quite thoughtful in regarding this matter.

In regards to the Mars One project, I just find it absolutely incredible. I have been watching the applicant videos on the Mars One website. (You can rate these videos by the way.) The videos are about one minute long and underneath the video is some blurb from the applicant.

I find it very interesting to learn of some of the reasons why these people are so keen on going to Mars. However, I also find it very sad that these people may not realise their own possibility of dying. None of them seem to appear to have any clue as to the mechanics of getting to Mars, surviving the trip and also surviving the landing. Mars has no atmosphere. Mars has no magnetic field. And I'm pretty sure that Mars is a 'dead' planet. The Mars One website states the following:

" Mars One is a not-for-profit organization whose goal is to establish a human settlement on Mars through the integration of existing, readily available technologies from industry leaders world-wide."

So, with 'existing' technology going to Mars and colonizing it is possible? Really? Is that so? Either they know something that the rest of us don't or someone somewhere is seriously doing some crack-pipe dreaming.

We are still using fossil fuels. But yet we have 'existing' technology to get to Mars.

One of the questions on the application form is: 'What kind of sense of humour do you have?' (From what I have read, there are only three questions asked).

Hasn't anyone picked up as to why that particular question is asked? For one of Humans greatest achievement, like -the biggest thing- we would have done in our entire history, there is a question on a application form about having a sense of humour.

Really? How does that relate to anything? I think I may know why: Because the whole thing is going to turn out to be a big joke.

Maybe it's just me, but I would really like to know just -how- this all could be actually possible.

Though, I will add that in regards to the videos of the applicants, much kudos as they have had the balls to video themselves and put it on the Internet. I'd never have the guts to do that.

Kind Regards.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Alan Shepard (Apollo 14) hit two golf balls on the moon. After taking his second shot, Shepard observed the ball seemed to travel for "miles and miles and miles."

http://io9.com/5654009/apollo-astronaut-really-did-hit-lunar-golf-ball-for-miles-and-miles-and-miles

Theoretically, almost any material can be used for radiation shielding if employed in a thickness sufficient to attenuate the radiation to safe limits.

Lead and concrete are among the most commonly used materials.

That might be true. But, you can't see through lead and concrete. How ever they use lead in the process of making crystal. I have seen a crystal glass you could stand on and not break it. This was some twenty years ago, and the salesman even stood on it to prove it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would Still Go just for the Lunch,and the Almost Crash landing ! THats going to be a Blast ! :tu:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

We can make air and water, usa's nuclear subs do.

No they do not.

We've been through this once before (HERE). They make oxygen FROM water. Why would a submarine which is totally surrounded by the stuff need to make water?

Edited by Waspie_Dwarf
added link.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No they do not.

We've been through this once before (HERE). They make oxygen FROM water. Why would a submarine which is totally surrounded by the stuff need to make water?

Yes, we have. Yet the shows on nuclear subs. Clearly state that they make their own water. Besides the shuttle made its own water. The only water they carried was for the station. Seems you need an engine or a power generater to make your own water. Further the apollo ships didn't carry water. They taped their engine for it. The only apollo that needed tp store water was 13 and that is because they had to shut down their engine. I will take the shows word over yours becaue you have been wrong before.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow ! THats not quite a mouth full . :cry:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No they do not.

We've been through this once before (HERE). They make oxygen FROM water. Why would a submarine which is totally surrounded by the stuff need to make water?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We didn't even attempt to colonize the moon which is much closer to earth, and we're looking to put people on Mars! Makes no sense to me at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

They turn the salt water into usable drinking and washing water. Sure they do. Just because a submarine is surrounded by salt water doesn't mean its usable for much.

Earth and moon will eventually be toast by our own sun. Makes all the sense in the world. We need to start somewhere. This planets on a deadline believe it or not

Edited by rustygh

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So when I said that NASA will soon come to an end,they approach the human population & ask them if they want to commit suicide & go to Mars.Thanks NASA!I know that NASA stands for 'Need Another Seven Astronauts'! Go at your own risk.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So when I said that NASA will soon come to an end,they approach the human population & ask them if they want to commit suicide & go to Mars.Thanks NASA!I know that NASA stands for 'Need Another Seven Astronauts'! Go at your own risk.

WOw ! Thats not NASA`s way in any shape or form ! THey are why we are where er are today in our quest for Space and exploration. No one on this planet will disagree on that one ! NASA still Rocks ! Were just in a low point as far as commitment !

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

78000 idiots

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

whats the gain being the first 78000 people on mars i think its joke

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Welcome to the Forum Lex540 ! Well until we invent mass transit to Mars the only thing going to Mars are our little probes ! THe Manned missions is far,Far away !

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Yes, we have. Yet the shows on nuclear subs. Clearly state that they make their own water.

The make their own DRINKING water by PURIFYING salt water. A big difference. Go back and look at the link to my original post. I showed, with sources, that you were wrong. You made claims then, as you are now, that your sources did not provide. The big difference between you and I is that I don't make stuff up and then claim I saw it in TV, I provide sources for my claims.

Besides the shuttle made its own water.

Correct, water is a waste product of the power cells which generate electricity by reacting hydrogen and oxygen together (see HERE). The thing is that the amount of hydrogen and oxygen you have to carry is equal in mass to the water you generate. The shuttle needed to supply 7 people for maybe 2 weeks, not dozens of people for months or years. That is why submarines don't use this technique and instead PURIFY the water that surrounds them.

The only water they carried was for the station.

They didn't even carry water for the station. The fuel cells provided more water than was need for the shuttle crew. Before the ISS this water was dumped over board. This "waste" water is what the shuttle provided to the station.

Lost water will be replaced by carrying it over from the Shuttle or from the Russian Progress rocket. The Shuttle produces water as its fuel cells combine hydrogen and oxygen to create electricity, and the Progress rocket can be outfitted to carry large containers of water.

Source: Science at NASA

Seems you need an engine or a power generater to make your own water.

You need a fuel cell.

Ask yourself the following question: a nuclear submarine gets all the power it needs from a nuclear reactor, it is surrounded by water, why would it need to carry vast quantities of a highly explosive gas (hydrogen) and fuel cells to make water when it is surrounded by the stuff? How does that make any sense?

Further the apollo ships didn't carry water.

Correct.

They taped their engine for it.

Wrong.

The Apollo Service Propulsion System used a mixture of hydrazine and unsymmetrical dimethylhydrazine for fuel and nitrogen tetroxide for oxidiser. These are toxic.

They carried hydrogen and oxygen for the fuel cells in the same way the shuttle did and it was this that provided the water.

Service Propulsion System

The 20,500-pound-force (91,000 N) SPS engine was used to place the Apollo spacecraft into and out of lunar orbit, and for mid-course corrections between the Earth and Moon. The engine used was an AJ10-137 engine[6] using Aerozine 50 as fuel and nitrogen tetroxide (N2O4) as oxidizer. The propellants were pressure-fed to the engine by 39.2 cubic feet (1.11 m3) of gaseous helium at 3,600 pounds per square inch (25 MPa), carried in two 40-inch (1.0 m) diameter spherical tanks.

Source: Wikipedia

The only apollo that needed tp store water was 13 and that is because they had to shut down their engine.

Nearly right. In fact the engine wasn't in use at the time. They were coasting towards the Moon. The service module engine would next have been fired to place the spacecraft in lunar orbit (which of course it never did). The service module engine was not used again because it was not known how badly damaged it was.

What exploded on Apollo 13 was an oxygen tank. As I have already shown above this was not needed for the service module engine. It was needed however for the fuel cells. It was the shutting down of the 3 fuel cells that led to the shortage of water.

I will take the shows word over yours becaue you have been wrong before.

Yes I have been wrong before but far fewer times than you. The other difference between you and me is that I admit when I'm wrong. I don't get proven wrong and then repeat the same mistakes in another thread. I don't just make up stuff and then say "I saw it in TV". You don't have to take my word because I provide sources, you NEVER do. If you choose to believe your self over reliable source that is your choice, but I will continue to put right the misinformation you post in topic after topic. I don't post for your benefit, I post for others that deserve the truth.

Edited by Waspie_Dwarf
typo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

You were correct, after I did some more research. How ever they should to fuel cells. Because the steam noise can be detected by sonar and the salt trail can also be detected. Your links did not help two years .

My point was we know how make water.

Edited by danielost

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 1

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.