XPost: sci.space.policy, sci.physics   
   From: fjmccall@gmail.com   
      
   jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:   
      
   >In sci.physics Jeff Findley  wrote:   
   >> In article , invalid@invalid.com says...   
   >>>   
   >>> there is no reason for man to go to Mars.   
   >>   
   >> Opinion.   
   >>   
   >>> It is rocks and sand in a vaccum.   
   >>   
   >> False, Mars has a mostly CO2 atmosphere, albeit a very thin one.  If you   
   >> want rocks and sand in a vacuum, the moon is a better destination, but   
   >> even the moon looks to have water.   
   >>   
   >>> no food, no water, no air.   
   >>   
   >> There is a bit of water on Mars (e.g. polar regions) and again a CO2   
   >> atmosphere.  Food could be grown.   
   >   
   >Not without horrendous effort.   
   >   
      
   For some small value of 'horrendous'.   
      
   >>> send a robot.   
   >>   
   >> Been there, done that.  They're s-l-o-w and return very little science   
   >> compared to a manned mission.   
   >   
   >Wrong.   
   >   
      
   No, he's right and we know that for a fact.   
      
   >   
   >Robots return whatever science they are built to explore and work 24/7   
   >without need for food, air, water, potty breaks, or sleep.   
   >   
      
   And humans working ordinary shifts can cover more ground and   
   accomplish more in a few weeks than your toaster can do in years.   
   Humans can also deal with things 'outside' the program by reacting to   
   the data as they collect it.   
      
      
   --   
   "Ignorance is preferable to error, and he is less remote from the   
    truth who believes nothing than he who believes what is wrong."   
                                  -- Thomas Jefferson   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)