Jump to content

  • Log In with Google      Sign In   
  • Create Account


#Actualslicer4ever

Posted 02 December 2012 - 11:48 PM

But on a two-way ticket.


This is an important point. The trip to Mars should not be a one-way thing. As I remember hearing, they were wanting to do it as a reality show, and the one-way thing was pure exploitation, in my opinion.

If we are to go to Mars, it should not be solely for the purpose of making a reality TV show about it.


you're forgetting about the shear amount of money required to do this, the only way it will get done, is by taking a step and doing it, and if that step requires essentially creating an truman show, well, it's a start.

the only possible other alternatives for generating the resources are either an extremely valuable/plentiful resource is discovered, and corporations want to mine it(such as Helium-3 on the moon), or over population/pollution forces us to leave or die, or lastly some really really rich people decide to say fuck it, let's go!.

#1slicer4ever

Posted 02 December 2012 - 11:48 PM

But on a two-way ticket.


This is an important point. The trip to Mars should not be a one-way thing. As I remember hearing, they were wanting to do it as a reality show, and the one-way thing was pure exploitation, in my opinion.

If we are to go to Mars, it should not be solely for the purpose of making a reality TV show about it.


you're forgetting about the shear amount of money required to do this, the only way it will get done, is by taking a step and doing it, and if that step requires essentially creating an truman show, well, it's a start.

the only possible other alternatives for generating the resource are either an extremely valuable/plentiful resource is discovered, and corporations want to mine it(such as Helium-3 on the moon), or over population/pollution forces us to leave or die, or lastly some really really rich people decide to say fuck it, let's go!.

PARTNERS