Will we ever see a man on Mars in our lifetime?

>>7972487
If you live long enough, maybe...
Although I doubt you will see the American flag when man arrives on Mars.

>>7972487
>be 42yo
>know you will die before man sets foot on mars or man returns to the moon

It is quite possible that neither thing will ever happen.

>>7972515
The chinese are putting a man on the moon in about 5 years

>>7972515
If NASA honors their word and does it by 2035 you will be 61. If not yeah you'll probably be dead before it happens.

>>7972546
Source

>>7972487
We've seen a man in Uranus already.

>>7972546
We will face social collapse in three years.

Mad max does not send man to mars.

It could very well happen by the year 2030.

File: surprised-hippo.jpg (184KB, 1280x851px) Image search: [Google]

184KB, 1280x851px

>>7974044

>>7972546
lies :o

>>7972487
I don't know... and neither does anyone else on this board. Now fuck off.

>>7975332
A bit salty, don't you think?

We haven't even been to the moon! You expect us to get to mars?

>>7974061
The Chinese surprised the world when they disclosed they had a UV observatory on the Moon. As for collapse, these are not always immediate. Rome rotted from the core and collapsed from the periphery. China might lose Tibet, Takla Makan and more and still keep on launching.

They still have a lot of production and with all the stolen secrets they have they will have a competitive advantage for decades. Also lack of ethical inhibitions will give them an edge in genetic engineering.

>>7972487
>Technical difficulties
>Ethical problem of NoReturn trip, refer to problem 1
>Ethical problem of contamination as Mars got water and (thin) atmosphere
>Plus length of the travel, you could even die between the liftoff and the landing, if there is any.

I'd say nope

>>7975601

Reviewed for Chinese approach:

>>Technical difficulties
Try, and try again. Obtain what is needed of knowhow from abroad. Try more and don't broadcast too many of the failures. Take the Soviet approach and announce launches once the launches are successful. Launchpad fireballs with live cremation of taikonauts will be secret.


>>Ethical problem of NoReturn trip, refer to problem 1
Indeed, what ethical problem. Just try some more.

>>Ethical problem of contamination as Mars got water and (thin) atmosphere
As if they care any more than about the people who lived in Tibet.

>>Plus length of the travel, you could even die between the liftoff and the landing, if there is any.
Landing failures will be covered up. With too many failures they will only announce once landing is successful.

Easy.

>>7975601
Have you seen the documentary 'The Mars Underground'? Gives me hope of it's possibility.

>>7975638
>The Mars Underground
It is on YouTube. Trailer looks intriguing but short on how to do it: https://youtu.be/VTGCHEJI7Rw

>>7975583

The west will collapse soon, China will go with it

>>7972546
Where is their moon rocket?

>>7975583
Implying usa has ethics either

>>7972546
The japs, chinese, indian, russians and yes even NASA has plans to return to the moon

>>7973958
Fourth phase of lunar program (嫦娥-4 工程)—to be launched in 2024 with CZ-7: manned mission and permanent bases (月面驻留)

http://news.sina.com.cn/c/2005-11-04/16507359756s.shtml

2040-2060 for manned mission to mars and return. http://military.china.com/zh_cn/news/568/20060214/13091486.html

File: 1451241915111.png (99KB, 480x480px) Image search: [Google]

99KB, 480x480px

>>7972546

>>7972546
>>7973958
>>7975825
>man on moon in 5 years
>really?
>no, more like 8, 24-44years

That's also fucking illegal. The Outer Space Treaty has shit in it to prevent large scale changes to the environments of anything off Earth. And, China fucking signed that shit.

File: 1414434227738.gif (3MB, 352x288px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 352x288px

>>7975907
>China
>caring about environmental treaties, ever

File: Claymore.jpg (18KB, 450x334px) Image search: [Google]

18KB, 450x334px

>>7975798
Either?

Ethics in the US is a rather murky affair. Gene therapy is a big no no but injecting radioactive material into orphans is ok. There are many things about the US I have difficulties in understanding.

>>7975825
>military.china.com
Moon: the new Tibet? That reminds me the US worked on the Claymore mine for lunar purposes.

>>7975918
If they break the treaty we are allowed to nuke the shit out of them.

>>7976025
>There are many things about the US I have difficulties in understanding.

You only need to understand 1 thing. That is money. If money is to be made in large quantities, the laws will be changed to allow the exploitation of that resource. This can be poisoning the public, going to war, or raping the land. They really don't give a flying fuck otherwise.

>>7976053
And we'd get nuked back. Do you honestly think they're going to sit back and say "chio sheng ni koi ping pong... (oh shit man, we can't fire back because we broke the treaty...)? War is not always an immediate or prudent response to a broken treaty, especially with the notion of mutually assured destruction floating around.

>>7975825
>2060 for manned mission to Mars
JUST

File: d04.jpg (40KB, 680x443px) Image search: [Google]

40KB, 680x443px

>>7976053
>Nuking China

>>7972546
Chinese economy is in freefall
The regime is cracking down on all dissenters, reporters, activists
Xi Jinping is killing off party leaders and consolidating his control and he has the backing of the PLA
China is taking territory in the South China Sea from other nations and arming the newly acquired islands, the US is posturing with overflights and have our carriers parade around
They are on the verge of a complete collapse and unlike the USSR when it collapsed the Chinese leadership will lash out as it goes down
China with a moonbase, not happening anytime soon, and following a collapse probably never

Russia has a better shot, but they just slashed their space budget and pushed a Mars Mission out to the 2040's or 2050's

The US no longer has the will to mount a mission, worried about SJW, BLM and $15 minumum wage

Best prospects for a Mars Mission lie solely with private capitalistic enterprise, find a way to make a profit and off they go

File: 1457149132954.gif (976KB, 350x253px) Image search: [Google]

976KB, 350x253px

>>7977428
>mars profitable

Start mining asteroids

Mars is only worth something as a refinery/logistics hub for the belt

>>7975907
>Outer Space Treaty has shit in it to prevent large scale changes to the environments of anything off Earth

no. it doesn't

it only prevents nations from claiming resources.

Not private parties.

>>7972487
But why? What can a person do that a robot can't?

Musk will drive a Tesla on Mars, before any national space agency puts a man on Mars.

>all heil Emperor Musk I of Mars.

>>7977444
checkd

when it comes to exploration and experimentation, going by today's technology, just about everything can be done better by a human.

File: Solar System.png (4MB, 5668x2140px) Image search: [Google]

4MB, 5668x2140px

>>7977432
Mars will essentially be an interplanetary truckstop

>>7975907
Implying anyone in 100 years will give a shit about some stupid peace of paper.

If Germany gave a shit about the treaty of Versailles WWII would have never happened

>>7977712
It's alien cointel, to fool ET into thinking Earth is a welcoming and homely planet.

>>7977428
north Korean economy is pretty much collapsed and they were still able to make a nuclear weapon. They, like Chinese leaders, can afford to steamroll their people.

>>7977444
>What can a person do that a robot can't?
- create enthusiasm for technology in general and space projects in particular
- provides far better propaganda, though unmanned trips should not be dismissed
- handle unexpected situations far from earth requiring local autonomous decisions
- improvise

>>7977444
Get humans to Mars and back alive, is part of the science. e

>>7978342
>write his name in piss in the regolith

>>7977437
>it only prevents nations from claiming resources.
>Not private parties.
The treaty is like two pages long. You could at least TRY reading it before asserting what it does and doesn't say.

>>7977444
>What can a person do that a robot can't?
Move at speeds greater than 5km/yr
Perform complex, scientific experiments.
Pick themself up off the ground.
Fix damaged equipment.
Study the impact of space on human health.
Operate during loss-of-signal.
Travel long distances.

Seriously, A person can do more work in a day than most probes can do in a year, and they can perform tasks that are far beyond the dexterity of any robot.

>>7972487
What's the point anyway? We're never going to colonize space unless we invent some new technology that makes reaching space dirt cheap.

Currently that doesn't seem likely.

So even if we do send people to Mars it will likely just be a political stunt.

>>7972487

We already had.
Matt Damon just came back last year.

>>7977432
livable mars is worth the property value of an entire planet.

>>7979865

How far away are we from being able to make a space elevator?

>>7978342
>cool robots don't create enthusiasm for technology

>>7975802
NASA has no plan at all for going to the moon
SLS has 4 launches planned in the next 10 years, 2 of which are unmanned and 2 of which are makework

>>7977428
People talking shit about China have no clue how bad things have gotten in the west with decades of marxist rule
Leading politicians openly say that western nationalities don't exist, and we should be mongrelized out of existance, and that borders shouldn't be defended or laws upheld.

>>7980538
Mars will never be livable
Building habitats near earth will be cheaper and better, plus you don't have 30 minutes lag when you want to communicate.

>>7975907
are you seriously the same dumb motherfucker that came on 5 days ago bitching about the outer space treaty? you don't know how international law works. stfu.

1. Elon unveils his Mars plan in the fall.
2. New President is elected.
3. New President adopts Elon's plan.
4. Man lands on Mars in the next decade. Some Moon flight are thrown in too.

The future is written in stone.

/sci/ is by far the shittiest addition to 4chan. Kill yourselves.

>>7976087
Not that anon but a new one. MAD. Mutually assured destruction.Nuclear Winter.Human Extinction.

All these terms, ideas and the studies behind them came from the 1950's and 60's. Population levels were far lower than now, densities higher, technology weaker, economies softer and weapons tech in the stone age.

There is absolutely no doubt that the human race can survive all out, planetary-wide nuclear war. The MAD concept is outmoded and irrelevant.

Pop levels are far higher now, of course city densities are greater, but so is dispersal via urbanisation. The use of 5 or 6 mega weapons to eradicate London is fallacious due to cost and missile take down. It is not strategically viable. What IS viable is a large number of much smaller tactical missiles to remove command and control. A society that was prepared for war properly would have secondary and tertiary anti-missile systems in place ready for attack waves spaced over intervals of several months.

As you know (if you have eyes) industry is no longer centralised as it was in the 1950's-1970's (caveat: very heavy indus try yes, but debatable if that needed for survival). Energy supply is also no longer centralised (and this is a strong argument for supporting alternate energy sources) this is great for domestic fuel security.
I could go on-and on-and on-and on about how total nuclear war is winnable and survivable now, but cost is a major factor. Nth Korea has 6 weapons. It has taken 40 years to get those. It is STILL developing the delivery systems for accuracy. One patriot anti missile battery can neutralise THAT threat. Long range, accurate weapons that can actually 'get through' defense shields are very expensive. Would YOU want one of those (representing the collaborative output of decades of national effort) to kill 50,000 random numpties or several 100 top tier officers or politicians, the decision makers, the movers and shakers of society?

>>7982467
Just want to add this. If I was intent on attacking the substantive structure of 'the west' my first targets would be the Bahamas, Virginia islands, Lichenstein, Switzerland... Every single tax haven.

>>7982467
The nuke wizard from /k/ said nuclear winter is very unlikely, to the point where all major countries would have to agree to detonate their nukes in such a way to create it.

from archive: >>>/k/29478017

great thread, worth a read

File: akarin.png (114KB, 258x258px) Image search: [Google]

114KB, 258x258px

>>7972487
I un-ironically believe Trump would get us there during his terms in office.

[spoiler]Only Whites Desu wa![/spoiler]

>>7981180
>How far away are we from being able to make a space elevator?
Quite a while yet. Single walled carbon nano tubes (CNT) might be strong enough but we do not have the capacity to make single strands that long.

>>7981213
>>cool robots don't create enthusiasm for technology
In the already technologically interested circles, sure. In the wider society including those controlling the funding and in persuading people to go for a career in technology, probably not. This Tibetan monk chanting discussion board is nowhere near representative for society at large.

It feel strange even having to point out this.

My second thought: what would a 4chan like global society even look like??


>>7982413
>/sci/ is by far the shittiest addition to 4chan. Kill yourselves.
I just wanted to say a bright "Hi!" to /g/.

>>7982467

This is cool but also totally irrelevant to the initial question, which was "will the West start a nuclear war with China because they start mining moon rocks?".

The answer to that question is "no". The West wouldn't fire a single bullet over that, let alone a few hundred ICBMs. It anything, the West would just start mining moon rocks for itself since the treaty's been thrown out the window anyway.

>>7983371
That could still be messy and rather like the frontier mentality of the old wild west. "Accidents" could happen. Also this cold mean an insane space race to occupy strategically important areas, or land grab really, such as peaks of eternal light (PEL) on the Moon and the hydrocarbon lakes of Titan. Mars might have important areas with important mineral resources.. Also asteroids like Psyche are very metal rich and worth an absolute fortune and also able to destroy the Chinese neck grip on the rare earth metals.

>>7983293
u have no idea how science funding, nasa, the federal government, or project planning works

>This thread

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e-MMZX27nUo

>>7983293

The next President will be remembered in the same terms as we associate John F. Kennedy with space.

File: 1457699171792.jpg (111KB, 562x630px) Image search: [Google]

111KB, 562x630px

>>7983496
I believe you don't even know what your doing. You're leftists/progressives that get all their strength from words on paper instead of that fire that got us to where we are today. Your the incans and the myans okay, untill real people with some fight in them came and developed the shit out of them, ran those barbarians out and built what we now call America. America, the thing that BUILT nasa, BUILT government funed science BULT thu fedural gibsmedatment!

You don't know what your doing and we have to stop you.