Mars Rover Makes Its First Moves Forward

AP/Yahoo ^ | 1-19-2004 | Andrew Bridges

[RightWhale]

That's correct. There are more than 10, though. The question is asked on nearly every Mars thread, but it seems like there are 50 of these unreasonable posters.

[ambrose]

Life is not sustainable on Mars for one thing.

Says who?

[Professional Engineer]

human and life are not synonyms.

[ambrose]

Nothing that a space suit and oxygen mask can't handle. A modified scuba diving suit would probably suffice. The actual living areas would be underground.

[old-ager]

> I find these cutesy names off-putting

Ditto. These people are so close to their work and way of life that it's a fetish. Perhaps understandable in light of the level of dedication required to make this stuff work. But wierd. To several generations, "outer space" and other planets were places of magic and excitement. But I think really they are, while possibly interesting, really just "places" -- where there is no life of any kind.

[squarebarb]

Great Economy sounds like a commenter that was moved to chat not too long ago, a post asking for advice on how to write articles and sell them. She/he/it got lots of honest advice, then began to gratiuitously insult everyone who answered he/she/it with the wierdest, non-sequitur insults.

[old-ager]

> The actual living areas would be underground.

Sounds really nice 8-o

Sounds like you were a sci-fi reader as a child.

Nothing wrong with that -- but remember what the "fi" stands for.

[jslade]

Am I the only one in the world who doesn't give a rat's turd about what is on Mars? And who resents every penny my taxes used towards this mission?

I'm with you pal. If we have to spend the money, there is so more worthy goals we can spend it on.

[ambrose]

good science fiction often ends up as science fact

[pianomikey]

Awwww... do we have to buy Mars from the french, too??

[Professional Engineer]

I did read. You said life. Mars may not support human life, but that does not translate to NO life.

[Batrachian]

"But I think really they are, while possibly interesting, really just "places" -- where there is no life of any kind."

Although I dislike the silly names, I'm a big space buff and NASA supporter. I don't think there is or ever was life on Mars, but I do believe, admittedly without proof, that there is life elsewhere in the universe. My reasoning is that the chemicals and processes of life are present in many places throughout the universe. They're almost, dare I say it, universal. That we do know, and it doesn't seem right to write off the possibility of life off the Earth when we've only been doing serious science for a hundred years or so. It's only in the last few years that they've been able to prove that there are planets around other stars, after all. What will be discovered in the next 100 years?

And if it's somehow true that there is no life anywhere else in the universe, then I say it starts and spreads outward from here.

[ambrose]

The purpose? Who knows. You go there because it is there and because we can, the benefits will follow.

That's our destiny.

[Joe Hadenuf]

Does the human need for oxygen, and the lack of it on Mars, mean anything to you?

Using this reasoning, I guess we should have never explored the oceans of our own planet.