Zubrin: Mars Is Our Goal

New York Times ^ | December 9, 2003 | Bob Zubrin

[Cincinatus' Wife]

the Editor:

Re "Fly Me to L 1," by Buzz Aldrin (Op-Ed, Dec. 5):

A project to build a space port in a region of space called L 1 would be a costly diversion.

Mars holds the key to knowledge of the diversity of life in the universe, and is thus the true goal for our manned space program.

NASA needs to carry out plans, not build things. America reached the Moon in the 1960's because the space agency had its eye firmly focused on a real mission with a presidential deadline. Under those circumstances, NASA was forced to develop an efficient plan to achieve that mission, and then driven to build a coherent set of hardware elements to carry out that plan.

If President Bush is willing to provide that kind of direction, we can have humans on Mars within a decade.

ROBERT ZUBRIN
President, Mars Society
Indian Hills, Colo., Dec. 7, 2003

[Cincinatus' Wife]

***"But Robert Zubrin, president of the Mars Society, cringes at the thought of putting the moon first and settling for a robot's exploration of the red planet instead of humans. "For the president to go to Kitty Hawk and stand in the footsteps of the Wright brothers on the 100th anniversary of their flight and the 200th anniversary of Lewis and Clark's expedition and proclaim humans to the moon in 20 years is farcical," Zubrin said. "Really, how do you inspire the youth of today with a challenge repeating feats their grandparents did?" Whatever Bush decides, if anything, and whether he announces it at Kitty Hawk or later, one thing is certain: It won't be the last word on the subject, Zubrin said, laughing hard."*** AP Source

nasawatch:Editor's note: How Mars Society President Bob Zubrin expects that such repeated hostile remarks will affect White House decision makers in anything other than a negative way utterly escapes me. A rational person would embrace this (potential) renewed attempt at rejoining a program of exploration as a first step towards other destinations - such as Mars. They would then work to help make that effort as productive as possible such that Mars becomes a real option. Alas, that is not Zubrin's style. In my opinion, the best thing Bob Zubrin can do to advance the prospects of a human mission to Mars right now is to sit down and shut up.

__________________________________________________________

space.com: 10 Reasons to Put Humans Back on the Moon (And it isn't about "searching for diversity of life.") A lunar return strengthens national security, and economic and commercial development. Science, education and national pride are nice side benefits.

[GeronL]

If its not for a step towards Mars and then farther, then its pointless.

[Cincinatus' Wife]

If Zubrin can't see the value of stepping on the Moon (to develop technology and gain experience) in order to get to Mars and beyond, he's not only stubborn, he's blind.

[GeronL]

If Bush announces the Moon as the GOAL, then Zubrin would be right... right?

[Cincinatus' Wife]

You have to have a GOAL. Zubrin wants to take the ball and go home if the first quarter isn't played on his field.

[GeronL]

Zubrin only wishes it was his field... he runs a club for goodness sakes. =o) He doesn't need to be taken seriously... what we need is to have people in NASA who actually have vision and a speech by Bush won't change anything.

[GeronL]

I think L1 would be a good place to build a station that would be used as a launch point for Maes shots

[Moonman62]

A lunar return strengthens national security,

How so? It only takes up half a degree in the sky, it isn't maneuverable or stealthy, difficult to defend, and weapons would take days to arrive on earth.

and economic and commercial development.

The first moon program didn't do much for either. Why would this be any different?

Science, education and national pride are nice side benefits.

One has to wonder how Ben Franklin, Thomas Edison, Albert Einstein, Richard Feynman, and others ever became educated scientists without a taxpayer financed moon program. Ben Franklin did it with only one year of formal schooling.

[Cincinatus' Wife]

Space Station II? The Moon is more practical. We can develop it's resources, do astronomy and learn to live and work off planet.

[Cincinatus' Wife]

How so? It only takes up half a degree in the sky, it isn't maneuverable or stealthy, difficult to defend, and weapons would take days to arrive on earth.

It will serve as a staging ground, a fuel depot and let's say, "an eye in the sky" against stealth attacks on our orbiting military and commercial assets.

[Cincinatus' Wife]

Commercial and economic - The first moon program didn't do much for either. Why would this be any different?

Apollo was a race to go and get back. This time we go and stay.

[Cincinatus' Wife]

Re education. - There will always be geat minds Moonan62, but to inspire educational excellence in large numbers a country needs to do great things.

[Moonman62]

"an eye in the sky" against stealth attacks on our orbiting military and commercial assets.

What do we do when the "eye" is on the other side of the earth from where we need it?

[Moonman62]

Re education. - There will always be geat minds Moonan62, but to inspire educational excellence in large numbers a country needs to do great things.

Did the literacy rate go up after the first moon program? Are there countries without space programs with high literacy rates?

[Cincinatus' Wife]

Maybe that's where it will be needed. A nice quite place to swoop around from.

However, if you're concerned about transmissions from the far side, I believe relay satellites would be in place.

[Cincinatus' Wife]

Well, Moonman I can see you just don't like the idea of exploration and national security but here goes - developing nations do have the advantage of inspiring their youth in educational pursuits.

[Moonman62]

However, if you're concerned about transmissions from the far side, I believe relay satellites would be in place.

Why not use satellites all the time then? Hint: that's what we do now.

[Moonman62]

Well, Moonman I can see you just don't like the idea of exploration and national security but here goes -

I like those ideas just fine. I just don't think a new taxpayer funded manned lunar program is the right way to go about it. Jimmy Carter moved our spy capabilities to space. It was an abysmal failure from which we're still recovering.

developing nations do have the advantage of inspiring their youth in educational pursuits.

Even nations without manned space programs?

[Cincinatus' Wife]

If third world nations or even second tier nations' youths are inspired by our super-power status, it is because of our demonstration of it's value. It' has not been lost on their leaders.

[Cincinatus' Wife]

(AFP/File/Joel Klamar)