{{
`${userDetail.user.displayName}${userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode ? `#${standardizeBungieGlobalCode(userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode)}` : ""}`}}
{{getUserClans()}}
2/8/2018 11:14:16 PM
22
How come 49 years after the moon landing still no human has set foot on Mars?
I watched the Mars colonization Elon Musk SpaceX whatever docu series on Netflix, and someone mentioned this.
In 1969 after the moon landing would anyone have thought that we (humans) won't have set foot on Mars almost 5 decades later? In 5 decades we could and should have achieved much more in space. I know some people think money for space exploration is wasted money, but it's not. We need to leave Earth at some point.
I hope Elon Musk and his SpaceX achieve their goal of colonizing Mars. I saw how one of his "recycle rockets" came back down to Earth. It was pretty epic.
-
6 RepliesEdited by OLDSCRATCH4: 2/8/2018 11:25:57 PMThe difference between going to the Moon and going to Mars, is the difference between crossing a two foot wide stream and, well, going to the moon. It's not just a matter of "Hey, let's build a bigger Gas tank!".
-
14 RepliesBecause its alll green screened in a studio.
-
Edited by michael: 2/11/2018 1:22:44 AMnasa gets very minimal government funding. as far as i’m concerned the US beat the soviets to the moon and after that there became bigger priorities than space.
-
Look up the reason we even went to the moon in the first place.
-
We don’t have the technology yet for return flights from the Mars surface. We are closer than ever but leaving a planet is far different then leaving a moon with little gravity. Plus the space race was also very costly, too costly. Musk and others like him are trying to make it as cheap as possible
-
7 RepliesBecause it's far and would take a long time to get there. The isolation of the astronauts would probably take too much of a toll on them. I think there is also a problem with having the fuel to return.
-
We only went to the moon because we were in a pissing match with Russia. Once we made it and they gave up, America turned it's back on long distance space exploration. Once another country we're not allies with starts trying to reach other planets with manned crafts we'll probably get it done within a year of announcing the mission.
-
1 ReplyWhy don’t we just take Mars, and move it somewhere else!
-
We went to the moon because we thought it was made out of cheese. It is all about priorities.
-
We're not in competition with another country to go to Mars like we were with the moon. The only competition is the competition between all the "colonize Mars" aerospace companies, including SpaceX, Boeing, and JPL.
-
In addition to the already posted responses, the moon was kind of "the goal" at the time. We had nations competing to see who would get their first. So Mars? Yeah, no one is really competing for it. I bet that as soon as one country/individual send a human to mars, the rest of the world will want to do the same.
-
Probably because it would cost a fortune. It's a hell of a lot farther than the moon. It would take months to get there and get back. That's months worth of supplies. For that length of time, you would need gravity, or else all the astronauts would develop atrophy.
-
Getting to Mars isn't the issue. It's getting back.
-
No other country had plans to go to mars so we didn’t care.
-
Because Earth is flat, the moonlanding was fake and mars doesn't really exist!
-
2 RepliesNot much of a reason to waste cash on it, from what the robots gathered we ain't getting anything useful by going there. And it's also pretty damn difficult to do.
-
I saw the Falcon Heavy from my house.
-
Priorities
-
To far away. We don’t have a rocket powerful enough to take us to mars and back. Mars is ridiculously far away. Let’s say earth is LA and the moon is San Francisco, using that estimate Mars would be Toronto Canada.
-
Money. Lots o money
-
It's logistically impossible with today's technology. It is realistically idiotic for anyone to go there. There is nothing there to sustain life. It's financially irresponsible when money is needed to make life here liveable for scores of people.
-
Comes down to money really.
