Mars and Island One

From: Ryan Z [mailto:ryjaz@...]

> Both of those are great books, but I always feel it is
> best to hear all sides of the argument. So include in
> that the Case for Mars by Robert Zubrin

In my opinion, the arguments he makes against orbital settlements in
that book (as well as in Entering Space) are ad hoc, specious, and
biased. He sometimes argues from incredulity, looking at issues he sees
as no problem for Mars as insuperable difficulties when it comes to
orbit. He says orbital settlement will never happen because the assumed
business plan (SPS) is flawed, and then proceeds to argue that the
settlement of Mars can proceed with no business plan at all. He
habitually makes "straw man" assumptions when analyzing O'Neill's work.

Getting the arguments from the other side would be a good thing if the
other side were making legitimate, sustainable arguments. In my
opinion, Zubrin does not do this.

Regards,

Mike Combs