Should people rethink the colonization of Mars? Mars shouldn’t be colonized at least for now. People shouldn’t colonize Mars since they might ruin Mars after what we have done to Earth, going to Mars also will be a waste of money at the time, and do people really need to colonize since we have a planet that is twice the size.
Look what people have done to Earth, now think about what Mars might look like when people go to Mars. People have polluted Earth so much that 6.7% of people die from ambient air pollution which is about 100,000,000 people. Since people have started global warming in about 1975 and is now growing faster and faster. It wouldn’t take long to pollute it and especially since Mars is 53% of the Earth. When people go to Mars they will already be polluting since rockets cause 5% of pollution so when hundreds of people start going to Mars the air won’t even be close to clean. In conclusion People will take another planet and just ruin it.
…show more content…
People have a lot of problems that they have caused for example a lot of animals have become endangered since people have been tearing down habitats for resources. People can change those problems with all the money they have and even do something small like planning urban growth carefully. Habitat loss is just one of many big problems that Humans have made. All of those problems are good things money can go towards at the time. If people need to go to Mars on the other hand for some reason than that obviously is something you would want to spend one billion dollars on. All in all rite now going to Mars in a couple years might not be something that people should spend their money
In conclusion, colonizing Mars is a terrible idea There is no known natural source of water, Once you get there you cannot come back , and If you get sick, the astronauts
Safely landing and returning humans from Mars, the closest Earth-like planet in our solar system, would be the biggest accomplishment for generations. It would capture the imagination of not only our nation, but the world. From the initial launch, to the six month transit, to the landing. would help to inspire new technologies for generations. The technology used to get the crew there and back, would eventually find it's way into the private sector and enhance to lives of the average person or household. Yes, it would be expensive: however the payoff would be worth the risk. When our space program was in its infancy, racing against the Russians, it suffered many setbacks. We lost several spacecraft to explosions on the launch pad, and lost crew members to horrific fires, as was the case in the Apollo program. Millions of dollars were poured into the space program during that time, a lot of money for that time period. Eventually it overcame its failures to succeed when it mattered.
Most of the mistakes made on Earth would not be repeated again on Mars. Mars should be colonized, as with the Moon. Inhabiting giant asteroids, other planets and moons and space stations in constant orbit around planets and moons would help solve the problem of overcrowding and world hunger. While it'll be extremely risky, expensive and take many years, but colonizing Mars will be a major factor in the long run. They are almost certain that it will happen eventually if all goes well, and I'm at least sure that it is possible. Space exploration is getting better and cheaper all the time. We still have to develop a lot of technology to be in a position where it is actually possible. Once we are at that stage, it will be relatively easy to go on and colonize the rest of the planets and moons within this solar system. Hopefully one day this will lead us to a point where we can move on to other solar systems and allow our evolutionary chain to expand and continue throughout the Universe. Earth will not be around forever. The main advantage to colonizing Mars is that we, as a species, we will survive the end of the world on Earth. The surface area of Mars is the same as the land area of Earth so that is a doubling of the available land for human use. Physical strength might well be reduced, but in a lower gravity environment, there will be less day to day stress on your body, so your organs should
“Why We shouldn’t Go To MARS” by Gregg Easterbrook gives reasons for why going to Mars is a waste. On the contrary, “Remarks at the Dedication of the Aerospace Medical Health Center by JFK” by President John F. Kennedy demonstrates how there are many benefits of going to Mars. However, the Political Cartoon represents the amount of money being misspent for a hopeless mission. Twenty people have died going to space. Space exploration has taken away more than enough lives. One more life is not worth it. The sadness and grief that is felt when a family member is lost in space, is much more valuable than going to Mars. If the journey to Mars is the cause of deaths and injuries, it should definitely be avoided. There should be no doubts about saving lives! Ultimately, the space program is a waste of money and effort, so going to Mars should be an avoidable
Now we are a step closer to making it our second planet that humans have lived on. But there is a problem! We as in humans have spent billions upon billions of dollars on the trips to the moon and sending a drone to Mars, Pluto, etc... But why are we trying to find a way to get to another planet and not trying to save this one. Lets fast forward a couple thousand years right! We have made our way to Mars and concurred it. What are we going to do to our sweet mother earth. Are we going to leave it destroyed or will we still care. The only thing that is going to happen if we come to Mars is the same thing that happens on Earth. We are going to destroy Mars as well. We are going to live there and then destroy it in a mater of millions of years. Why do we have to move to another planet when we can just stay and fix
Terraforming Mars is one of the most controversial topics on our journey to outer space. The scientific community is unsure of the moral impact of terraforming. Some people and scientists such as SpaceX and Nasa think that it is the right thing to do. However, others disagree. For Philosophy Now, Paul York argues that “While at first sight it might seem as though human beings ought to be able to do whatever they like with a ‘dead’ planet, ... it is by no means a straightforward ethical matter, and may even be morally wrong – a massive act of vandalism, in fact.” Robert Sparrow, a philosophy professor at Monash University in Melbourne, Australia, argues that “we should leave Mars alone and drop any and all ideas about terraforming the red landscape”.
Ideas such as colonizing another planet is not unheard of and if humans do not consider the possible impacts in a new environment, this can be detrimental. The article “A NASA-Funded engineer's plan to colonize Mars” from CNN was written by Kate Springer in 2017. One statement that made was, “I believe building in space is going to become commonplace in less than 50 years. There's an abundance of energy and materials (in space) -- all we have to do is design self-replicating factories and build a lot of objects. In a short time, our capability to manufacture in space will be many
To sum up, comparing the money to spend bettering the Earth or colonizing Mars, it would be wiser and safer to spend it on Earth. What is more, even if the people, who design the project, are assent to pay of high amounts, still it is not achievable to reach high amounts without sufficient investments. As known, space research in the past has carried out by governments such as United States of America and Russia, which are financially strong. SpaceX does that kind of comprehensive research and carry out the Mars project as a company, so it does not have the financial resource as much as the big governments have and that is why there should be investors for the projects execution. The companies SpaceX and Orbital got more than 700 millions dollars from NASA to help improve their delivery systems and the money that received was less than half of what they needed (National Aeronautics and Space Administration, 2017,
In a letter that Ta-Nehisi Coates once wrote to his son he said “It is so easy to look away, to live with the fruits of our history and to ignore the great evil done in all of our names. But you and I have never truly had that luxury” (Coates). In his letter, Mr. Coates warns his son to never loose the internal battle between indifference and what is right. This is a constant struggle society faces around the world, and often loses. The battle against indifference has been a losing battle in the past and even more recently throughout the world and as society loses to indifference it gains guilt as if guilt were war debt. The guilt of society is growing at an exponential rate, where countries around the world would rather stick their heads
But what about a planet more than 200 times farther away. If we can colonize on Mars the whole world will believe that anything's possible. People will never give up and keep trying to reach their goals. Although people on Earth may be mad that scientist used 6 billion dollars, but it went to good use. It was used to giving hope and making people believe. Now we should go reach our dreams by going to Mars.
Why should humans colonize Mars? Humans should colonize Mars for their own well being. If humans want their future offsprings to be alive and well throughout the years then they need to find out how to colonize Mars and they need
Humans have always been interested in the idea of exploring space. the scientists, astronauts and researchers have spent decades looking for life on other planets. Mars is the most favorable place in the solar system, other than Earth, for human habitation. It is also the closest planet to Earth. Even though some researchers claim that exploring Mars will help us to understand the Earth better, and a manned mission to Mars is better for humanity, opposing sending a manned mission to Mars for these reasons: because the cost of the exportation is not worth the risk involved. this exploration will have a negative effect on Americans. Mars exploration should be halted because of the cost to the economy, the risk to society and the lack
A 325 meter long meteorite by the name of Apophis is due to fly by Earth in 2029 and will come back around in 2036, but will miss again. At least it is predicted to miss, but then might return in 2068. According to NASA, the chance of the collision happening in 2068 is predicted to be at approximately 1 in 300,000 of hitting Earth, straight on. You decide if that sounds like an intimidating chance. Personally, I don’t think it’s worth the risk, however small. We have options. We could just stay here and hope for the best as pollution gets worse and global warming rises, or we could colonize Mars. Take into consideration that Mars is not only one of our closest neighboring planets, but also has similar conditions to Earth. I know, it sounds all dusty and dry, but that doesn't mean we can’t make a few Earth-like changes. This is terraforming, changing another planet with potential for life to fit the needs of us humans. By terraforming Mars, we will be able to colonize it to ensure safety for the human race. Because we all want to be safe right?
Should we really send people to Mars? After considering Andy Weir's statement regarding travel to Mars, I am of the opinion that we as a nation should not fund a manned mission to Mars in the near future because it will be expensive, dangerous, and robots could do the same things as humans. With one mission to mars, it will be enough to discover but the risks you might take will be dangerous and could cause your life.
With this thesis I wanted to create a broader view on the systems behind all the critiques on volunteerism projects in order to contribute to projects that are both beneficial for volunteers as well as for host communities. The theoretical aim of this thesis was to contribute to the scientific debate on how volunteerism projects impact volunteers and host communities, through showing how this impact is influenced by processes of liminality and Othering. On top of that, I wanted to question the notion of “giving aid” as the starting point of volunteerism projects. The story represented two groups; volunteers and host communities, who joined volunteerism projects with good intentions. Some, however, unaware of the unintended consequences and how their expectations would work out.