Yahoo Answers is shutting down on May 4th, 2021 (Eastern Time) and the Yahoo Answers website is now in read-only mode. There will be no changes to other Yahoo properties or services, or your Yahoo account. You can find more information about the Yahoo Answers shutdown and how to download your data on this help page.
Am I right in thinking and believing that living on Mars would be a huge waste of time ?
No amount of technology will tame the Angry Red Giant in terms of making a life out there worth living.
2030 ? Nah, try 2130 and even then I have my doubts about whether we Humans will want to actually grow and experience family on that destitute barren planet.
I mean the obvious signs that its not meant to be colonised and lived on weren't so obviously apparent, i.e its next to non existent thin atmosphere, lack of global magnetic fields to prevent solar particles and those deadly cosmic rays resulting in enough radiation exposure to fry us, the extremely cold night temperatures and enough carbon dioxide to poision you, I'd have guessed an intelligent human being would opt out in wanting to go there.
Only an idiot would wish to live there.
so why are we in a hurry in wanting to waste trillions of tax payers money to go there when there are still humans on this planet who are dying from hunger ?
I just cannot see long term living on mars - it just wouldn't happen, at least not in the next 100 or so years.
Everyone who ever used q&a will have long passed away and our kids kids will most likely not want to live on mars given its unforgiving inhospitable and hellish conditions.
Mars is the way it is because its not compatible for human living.
So why the hurry to go there ? Why waste so much money ?
hi folks, two great answers so far , one by Mark big sky boat man and the other by daniel g.
your answers have allowed me to introspect, and think further about my own view on this.
lol great answer that ignoramus, thanks for your input..
interesting @ Brian
- ManuelLv 42 months ago
For you at this time I would say that anything we write (the people answering the original question)would probably be dismissed, for whatever reason that suits you. I wish you well in your pursuit of whatever it is you are chasing.
- Bulldog reduxLv 72 months ago
It would be a huge waste of time if you happen to be a burlesque dancer or tax collector.
- JimLv 72 months ago
I honestly think that there will need to be fusion power necessary for a Mars environment to be feasible. We will need constant large magnetic shields for radiation shielding. We will need heating, oxygen and water production, all requiring large amounts of energy.
- ?Lv 72 months ago
For a start, we can feed the Starving of the World and Solve all the World'd problems with a Fraction of what it would be to Colonise Mars
As is said, we are a Curious Race
Without the urge to Explore and Colonise
The Americas would still be unfound
Our world would probably still be thought of as Flat and Earth still at the centre of the Universe
So don't Knock it
Probes and Landers have proved their Worth
at a fraction of the price of sending Humans
So.........On to Mars
If we Started now, Mars could be completely Terraformed
Basically a second Earth
Mars lacks Mass
If it had 80% of Earth's Mass it would be Tectonically Active again
Warmer, hence wetter and with a thicker Atmosphere
We could work with that, Vegetation and Photosenthesis, along with the Oxygen frozen in the Substrate would make the Atmosphere breathable in the space of about 3, 000 years
For adding Mass, Mars has two Moons for a start that have no effect, Even Tidal
Phobos is the Larger and is slowly spiralling inwards
Retro rockets could slow it down to crash onto the surface
Diemos could join it too, or any passing Asteroids from the nearby Belt
It could be done with Enginuity and a little help from NatureSource(s): FRANCIS DRAKE HA HA !!
- ?Lv 62 months ago
men are explorers,least a percentage of them from 3 years old till old age, whom ma could not keep tied to stay in the crib using dads neckties ,robe, rope or sash ties for ten k years,,it must be in the biology,unless ma catches him down the stairs out the door he travels as as far as he can get before ma chases him down
mars had much more water salty water rivers lakes oceans m/b/illions of years ago for far longer than previously thought ( anton petrov videa) perhaps enough time for complex life to develop we have to explore it via a team to kick around dig chop drill down and meander far,taking samples pics video,then we find out my guess is we will land said team there w;in 5 years,
- 2 months ago
As science and technology progresses; the price to go to Mars will drop. It will be long after you and I are dead...for sure. I don't like the idea of living on Mars; but it is inevitable that man likes to explore foreign environments. Space is the final frontier; and man...like a cat; will satisfy curiosity. By 2050; Mars missions will be chump change cost compared to total revenue collected by government. I have had many visions of what the future holds. Soon: We shall have motor vehicles that launch into orbit; and set up future missions. As scientists figure out what they are doing; the cost of exploration drops. Just like you go to store and buy electronics; you notice the price drops over the years. That is because people get smarter over time; not dumber...and hopefully learn from mistakes. I would say the biggest obstacle to Mars settling is the less than 1.0g force of gravity that exists there. No one would be able to stay there long term on that point alone. The CO2 conversion to Oxygen is not a problem in my mind. I have some ideas on how to make oxygen to breathe there; since Potassium Perchlorate (KClO4) exists in very large quantities in the soil. So saying; yes Oxygen is on Mars; but in rock form. All you do is heat the Potassium Perchlorate in the presence of catalyst; and you have air to breathe. Yet; the weak gravitational pull of mars; could not contain any of the lighter gases like Oxygen, Only heavier gases like carbon dioxide. It may fully be a pipe dream; just as you think.Source(s): scientist with 3 years of college.
- SciencenutLv 72 months ago
It has been recently said that the USA spends more money on dog treats than on NASA. I agree with this. If we ever expect to raise the third world up to a first world level of prosperity, then we are going to need lots and lots of energy. Windmills and solar panels simply will not cut it.
I personally believe that the movie, "Elysium", starring Matt Damon and Jodie Foster, is a good representation of Earth's near future. Except that there won't be any huge orbiting habitat. Instead, a high IQ, high tech, high prosperity human society will arise on Mars, while the Earth wallows in squalor. In 100-200 years, humans on Mars will be sending fusion powered spacecraft to other star systems for the purpose of setting up new colonies of Earth life. By that time, humans will have colonized our entire solar system to a limited degree, and the atmospheres of the gas giant planets will be routinely harvested for obtaining Helium3 by the metric tonne to power our world wide fusion reactors and spacecraft. And Martian water is five times richer in Deuterium, the other necessary fusion fuel.
I believe that in ~500-1,000 years from now, all humans will be required to leave Earth, and we will then allow Earth to return to its previously wild state. Bison will again roam the plains of North America, and Aurochs will once again graze the grasslands of Eurasia. I can't wait. Please read the excellent book, "The Case for Mars", by Dr. Robert Zubrin, PhD, available on amazon and other places. Check out the ITER, under construction in the south of France: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ITER
A terraformed Mars:
- nineteenthlyLv 72 months ago
It won't actually happen of course, but there are plenty of harsh environments on Earth where people have lived. However, living in orbiting space habitats makes more sense. Someone once said maybe Mars would be like Australia - everywhere else has been settled (i.e. space) and there's no real need to live there, so it would have a small population. But statistically, the probability of living at a point in time when there's only one human-inhabited planet is only significant if we never colonise anywhere else.
- Anonymous2 months ago
Unless you want to live like the boy in the plastic bubble, yes.
- daniel gLv 72 months ago
For now, it would be like pioneers, finding new ways and technology to live on Mars. Yea, if humans quit killing the Earth, the future may even be like the movie 'Total Recall'.