XPost: sci.space.policy, sci.physics   
   From: invalid@invalid.com   
      
   On 10/12/2016 4:12 PM, Fred J. McCall wrote:   
   > Serigo  wrote:   
   >   
   >> On 10/11/2016 11:01 PM, Fred J. McCall wrote:   
   >>> 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.   
   >>>>>   
   >>   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>> 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.   
      
   >> silly.   
   >>  remember that any human on Mars must stay below surface 95% of the   
   >> time to avoid radiation.   
   >>   
   >   
   > Bullshit, troll.  Shielding vehicles is easy.   
   >   
   >   
      
   cant use lead, must use water.  OR bury it below ground.   
      
   try to keep up.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)