Mars One Nonsense: R&D, 10 Years, Unmanned Test in 3 Years?

[Ryan_m_b]

I've pretty much ignored all this but increasingly I hear people talking about a company sending people to Mars as though it was a done deal. No one seems to stop and think how a company with no resources to speak of will perform the R&D and set up a Mars base in ten years.

Now they claim they'll launch an unmanned test in three years time and the media is lapping it up:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-24749687

Anyone else annoyed by this? I feel this is very damaging to public knowledge of science.

 

[phinds]

Anyone else annoyed by this?

yes

I feel this is very damaging to public knowledge of science.

Yes, that's why I'm annoyed.

It's like those CSI programs on TV. Actual juries now expect the prosecution to have all those whiz-bang forensic results and have no understanding that most of that stuff is made up for TV.

The Mars One nonsense makes it easier for people to believe in utter crap like Ancient Aliens ... hey, space travel isn't really all that hard.

 

[FlexGunship]

Let's wait until they fail to cast judgement. I believe their proposed plan is to contract SpaceX for all of the launch technology. Yes, that should be fantastically expensive... but not inherently impossible.

To be clear, I'm not saying it'll happen. I'm just saying I've got my fingers crossed.

 

[Ryan_m_b]

I'm not disputing the ability to launch and send something to Mars, it's their claim that they going to send a full habitat and a group of people when currently the best funded space agencies in the world have a 2/3rds success rate of sending machines smaller than cars.

 

[russ_watters]

Yes. In particular, the media has a duty to truth and that means they have a responsibility to be educated enough in science to report intelligently on science stories. Including ignoring sciencey stories that are actually just nonsense. That is not a duty taken seriously.

 

[russ_watters]

Let's wait until they fail to cast judgement.

No. The world is littered with sciencey claims, some of which have merit and some of which are nonsense. If we/the media had to wait until they failed before casting judgement, then they'd be reporting every perpetual motion machine claim as Revolutionary. A [strike]quality[/strike] mediocre scientist can make a judgement about the plausibility of outlandish claims and determine whether they are worthy of discussion. The media, lacking even mediocre scientists, fall for the best presented hype.

Yes, that should be fantastically expensive... but not inherently impossible.

What is your definition of "inherently impossible"? Is it just theoretically impossible? Why doesn't include financially impossible? If I told you I'm going to send myself to Mars in 5 years, would you take a wait and see approach?

 

[Ivan Seeking]

I've pretty much ignored all this but increasingly I hear people talking about a company sending people to Mars as though it was a done deal. No one seems to stop and think how a company with no resources to speak of will perform the R&D and set up a Mars base in ten years.

It's really not a big deal. Mars is a borough in Butler County, Pennsylvania, USA. You can even see the lander!

 

[Crake]

They're already getting paid by the applicants, right? Did anyone read their TOA? I wonder what will happen when they fail to accomplish that they've said they would.

 

[Ryan_m_b]

Yes. In particular, the media has a duty to truth and that means they have a responsibility to be educated enough in science to report intelligently on science stories. Including ignoring sciencey stories that are actually just nonsense. That is not a duty taken seriously.

Agreed. I'll also go further to state that if something like this becomes popular (doing the rounds on social network sites for example) it would be a good use of the media for them to do reports on why it is rubbish with interviews from actual experts in the field. I haven't seen a Mars one story yet that came with comments from aerospace agencies or other groups.

 

[Ryan_m_b]

They're already getting paid by the applicants, right? Did anyone read their TOA? I wonder what will happen when they fail to accomplish that they've said they would.

To my knowledge the applicants don't pay, Mars one is planning on making their money selling the tv rights. If you look at the article I posted above they claim that as the London Olympics made $4 billion in TV rights in a matter of weeks a reality TV Mars mission would make far more.

 

[MathJakob]

I think what will happen is the date of first launch will get pushed back and back due to budget costs and eventually they'll just cancle the whole thing, or they will succeed in sending the candidates to mars, only for the funding to run out a couple years later and the government will be forced to send supplies. I don't think the government could leave them there, they'd have to send supplies, the public outcry if they just disowned them.

I just think it's a highly ambitious plan with hopes that the public will front the cost. It would be far more plausible if a company such as Virgin or government NASA were behind it. I just don't think a standalone company with no money to front the cost is capable of such a task, at least maintaining it.

 

[Crake]

To my knowledge the applicants don't pay, Mars one is planning on making their money selling the tv rights. If you look at the article I posted above they claim that as the London Olympics made $4 billion in TV rights in a matter of weeks a reality TV Mars mission would make far more.

No, they actually pay for the application. I did a fast google search and found this link. One can read:

"Anyone 18 or older may apply, but the fee depends on a user's nationality. For Americans, it's $38; if you're in Mexico, however, it's a mere $15."

 

[BobG]

My prediction is that they reach Round 3 of the astronaut selection process, which will be broadcast as a reality TV series, but never actually reach the point of launching anything.

But if they did actually land colonists on Mars and depended on sponsors of a TV reality series to fund the supply missions, imagine how motivated the colonists would be to remain attractive to audiences. They'd do anything to avoid cancellation of their TV series!

 

[MathJakob]

My prediction is that they reach Round 3 of the astronaut selection process, which will be broadcast as a reality TV series, but never actually reach the point of launching anything.

But if they did actually land colonists on Mars and depended on sponsors of a TV reality series to fund the supply missions, imagine how motivated the colonists would be to remain attractive to audiences. They'd do anything to avoid cancellation of their TV series!

Yeh, like killing each other!

 

[DennisN]

My prediction is that they reach Round 3 of the astronaut selection process, which will be broadcast as a reality TV series, but never actually reach the point of launching anything.

That's my most optimistic prediction too. When I discussed this with my friends, I said that if the Mars One project ever manage to put up ANYTHING in Earth orbit, I'd be impressed. Don't get me wrong, I'm all for science projects, but this project smells very bad IMO. I call it Mars None .