English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

2006-07-06 11:43:22 · 14 answers · asked by ridcully69 3 in Science & Mathematics Astronomy & Space

Eric 1, Have you been to Vegas. LiL Italy' cost over 12 Billion Dollars, or so i've been told. If I'm wrong, tell me!!!
About 55 Billion(US) to colonize Mars, About 15 Billion(US) to build a Moon base!

2006-07-06 11:59:43 · update #1

So far Eddurd is winning! But "WHY" have humans not gone to Mars? If you say technology,(I have more computer power in my watch than the Apollo rockets had) you are wrong, givern enough money & will, we could have been on Mars 1980 (latest). So why are we not??

2006-07-06 12:26:36 · update #2

14 answers

You would need a lot of food, oxygen, water, etc. for the trip there and the trip back.

2006-07-06 11:54:34 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Because the people with the money don't have will to go.

Back in the 1960's, the race to the moon was largely a political battle. The USA and the Soviet Union were each trying to prove to the rest of the world that their way of life was superior to the other's. Getting to the moon first was meant to demonstrate superior technology, superior people, and a better and stronger country than "those other guys".

The actual scientific return was marginal. We learned a few new things, but at a high cost. In the 70's and 80's, we used more unmanned probes, getting more information at less cost.

For humans to go to Mars, someone would have to have a compelling reason that would convice others, especially the people who control the money.

Going to Mars would be a wonderful accomplishment, but there are a lot of problems on Earth that need attention as well.

2006-07-06 18:53:20 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

There are immense hurdles we must overcome to get humans to Mars. Yes, we have had rovers and and landers at Mars, but we still have accidents getting there succesfully at times. Also, the amount of time it takes to get there is quite long and people may not want to be gone for that long. Being in space for that amount of time also is something we must learn to overcome and deal with because it does have effects on the human body which can be quite harmful. Besides that, we need to develop many systems to help the humans survive on a trip that long since we will not be able to send supplies in short time so everything must go at once. We will reach Mars one day soon I believe however. We can do it.

2006-07-06 18:50:02 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Money and technology and time. The trip there would take close to a year. To provide food and drink for that long for a team of humans while protecting them from radiation is a HUGE undertaking.

2006-07-06 19:33:20 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

We have the technology to get it done. What is holding us back is the political to justify tax money or private investment to get the task done.
Think about it. Can you tell an investor why it would be worth it to go to mars? Can you justify to the EU, (UK doesn't have that kind of money) what is in it for them to spend taxpayer money to go to mars?

2006-07-06 18:52:19 · answer #5 · answered by eric l 6 · 0 0

1. It is too expensive at this time.
2. We haven't invented an engine that would consume less fuel or a more efficient, cheaper, type of fuel.
3. There's a little problem called breathing...

2006-07-06 18:48:22 · answer #6 · answered by PuttPutt 6 · 0 0

Our current state of technology is simply not developed enough to get humans there safely.

2006-07-06 18:51:54 · answer #7 · answered by habaceeba 3 · 0 0

Politics.... If the governments of the world stopped bickering with each other - think where we'd be now!!! Certainly not sitting watching eastenders!!

2006-07-06 18:57:19 · answer #8 · answered by want_to_explore_life 3 · 0 0

We have got as close as we can get, but there is the question of heat and highly toxic gas! There are many photos of the surface though.

2006-07-06 18:48:34 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Seriously, what would the point be? Apart from wasting a lot of money and hopefully, not too many lives to tell us it's inhospitable, what would be the point??????
Peace.

2006-07-06 19:20:49 · answer #10 · answered by angieasee64 6 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers