New Member

--- In spacesettlers@yahoogroups.com, "Richard" wrote:

> > There is nothing that Mars has that Earth needs.

> How do you know this? You keep saying this. We do not know what is
> on Mars.

Planets are formed from the same processes. Take a Mars rock and you
can find the same elements on Earth. Everything that is in the Martian
atmosphere is also available on Earth. The majority of wealth is now
created from intellectual property and there are no intellects on Mars.

That leaves only one logical prospect in which the two planets can
differ: life.

You don't need a whole society and industrial infrastructure on Mars
in order to collect Martian life samples and ship them back to Earth
where whole armies of scientists are at the ready to investigate and
develop new products.

Surely, you're not advocating that we'll discover new elements on Mars.

>> What riches are there to be made on Mars? None.

> All right, I've heard enough. You say None. Prove it.

I just did above.

> But I don't treat my own opinions as holy writ. In fact, I try not
> to let my opinions covience me.

That's an odd perspective. If I told you that people don't walk on
ceilings but on floors, you'd treat that as an opinion. Is everything
subjective and nothing absolute.

Mars is comprised of the same elements as Earth. There may be some new
mineral compositions but I don't see their extraction forming the
basis for the development of a Martian society. I don't see extraction
from the atmosphere as amounting to much, and the big unknown, life,
can be studied and duplicated on Earth. The logical possiblities are
addressed until nothing is left. If you can conjure up some magic that
is beyond logic then feel free to disregard all of the above as being
less than holy writ.

> Did it ever occur to you that a large scrap betweren pro-Mars and
> pro-habitat types over which should be the Only True Path may well
> end up with the public at large saying to "To hell with all you
> crazies.

Is it better to let the romantics in the Mars movement, whose visions
are filled with Robinsonian fantasies, sell the public a bill of
goods, break the treasury, and doom space activities for much longer
than the post-Apollo era because Mars will fail to deliver on anything
more than a Flag and Footprints basis.

Better to win those Mars romantics over to a plausable mission that
can lay a solid basis for future missions.

> > Habitats make sense and Mars is a socialist fantasy. Habitats have
> > proximity to Earth for quickness and ease of travel to and fro.
> > They have ready access to variable gravity. They can provide
> > energy to Earth's markets as part of the trade equation thus
> > enabling them to import goods that they can't manufacture
> > efficiently in orbit. They avoid the autarkic destiny of Mars.

> Again, proof??

That's quite the rejoinder. It's apparent that your threshold for
proof is so high that only going to Mars, implementing your dream, and
failing at it will be convincing. Or will you then offer us the
socialist excuse, "well, we just didn't do it the right way, so we
should try to do it again but the right way this time . ." ad
infinitum until the end of time.

I'm not quite certain why you find my above statement to be
unconvincing. Let's deconstruct it:

Do you believe Mars is closer to Earth than settlements will be?
Do you believe that Mars has access to variable gravity?
Conversely, do you believe that Habitats won't have access to variable
gravity?
Do you believe that access to variable gravity won't enable
manufacturing technologies that are impossible on Earth or Mars?
Do you believe that Mars can provide energy to Earth?
Do you believe that Habitats won't be in a position to provide energy
to Earth?
Do you believe that balance of payment issues are irrelevent to space
development issues and that Habitat exports to Earth are meaningless
as a basis for developing space-based assets, culture and
civilizations? IOW, Habitats and Mars are equally likely because it
won't matter that one is earning its way and the other is a fiscal
sinkhole because people on Earth will be more than happy to funnel
trillions to develop Mars for no other reason than to simply develop Mars.

Do you believe that Mars can replicate all of the complex industrial
and supply chains on Earth in order to avoid an autarkic future?

What levels of proof do you require? This tactic of your strikes me as
the same tactics a child would use when they don't like the
conclusions they're faced with.

Go ahead, break apart the reasoning. Point out the faulty premises
above. I'd be surprised at how you're going to show that Mars is
closer to Earth than Habitat will be, but I look forward to your attempt.

Tell us what level of proof you require.

On a personal and subjective level, your response is exactly the type
I get when debating with Mars Advocates. They have nothing of
substance to back up their case, so they get surly and still hold onto
their socialist dreams, even in the face of a more rational alternative.

Mars is a religion for a lot of these folks, and nothing will shake
their faith.

> I can just see Tangoman in space attempting to singlehandedly
> blockade Mars and shoot down anybody trying to go there.

The ad hominem attack, the last refuge of the logically exhausted
debater.

> Can't you see it is way too early to decide?

Absolutely not. The time is ripe to squish the Mars meme before it
ruins us all. Someone should have done the same with the Dutch Tulip
Mania in the 1600s, or the Jim Jones Cult in Guyana. Some things
simply don't make sense and a Mars civilization and terraforming
clearly falls into that category.

TangoMan