• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

NASA's rover Curiosity lands on Mars [W:206]

Does the term, "been there done that" ring a bell?

We haven't "been there, done that". Curiosity is a portable laboratory on wheels, capable of not only retreiving soil, atmosphere and rock samples, but also capable of performing sophisticated testing and sending the results back to earth. This is the first time a robotic space device has been landed in a pin-pointed location for specific targeted testing protocols, and the first time a robotic space device can perform those targeted testing protocols itself.

No, we haven't "been there, done that". And it's awesome.
 
I never thought id see it....a landing on mars
 
We haven't "been there, done that". Curiosity is a portable laboratory on wheels, capable of not only retreiving soil, atmosphere and rock samples, but also capable of performing sophisticated testing and sending the results back to earth. This is the first time a robotic space device has been landed in a pin-pointed location for specific targeted testing protocols, and the first time a robotic space device can perform those targeted testing protocols itself.

No, we haven't "been there, done that". And it's awesome.

Yes we really have been there done that.

"The Mars Pathfinder conducted different investigations on the Martian soil using three scientific instruments. The lander contained a stereoscopic camera with spatial filters on an expandable pole called Imager for Mars Pathfinder (IMP),[5][6] and the Atmospheric Structure Instrument/Meteorology Package (ASI/MET)[7] which acts as a Mars meteorological station, collecting data about pressure, temperature, and winds. The MET structure included three windsocks mounted at three heights on a pole, the topmost at about one meter (yard) and generally registered winds from the West.[8]

The Sojourner rover had an Alpha Proton X-ray Spectrometer (APXS),[9] which was used to analyze the components of the rocks and soil.
The rover also had two black-and-white cameras and a color one. These instruments could investigate the geology of the Martian surface from just a few millimeters to many hundreds of meters, the geochemistry and evolutionary history of the rocks and surface, the magnetic and mechanical properties of the land, as well as the magnetic properties of the dust, atmosphere and the rotational and orbital dynamics of the planet. The rover had two black and white 0.3-megapixel cameras on the front (768 horizontal pixels × 484 vertical pixels configured in 4×4 pixel blocks), coupled with five laser stripe projectors, which enabled stereoscopic images to be taken along with measurements for hazard detection on the rover's path. On the back, near the APXS and rotated by 90°, there was a third camera of the same specifications which supported taking colour images. This back colour camera provided images of the APXS's target area and the rover's tracks on the ground, and had sensitivity to green (12 pixels out of the 16 total pixels in each 4×4 pixel block), red (2 pixels), and blue (2 pixels), with the blue-sensitive pixels being sensitive to infrared as well. However, all cameras had zinc-selenide lens which blocked blue light below 500 nm, thus only allowing infrared wavelengths to reach the blue pixels. All three cameras were CCDs manufactured by Eastman Kodak Company, and were controlled by the rover's CPU. They all had auto-exposure and bad pixel handling capabilities, and the image parameters (exposure time, compression used, etc.) were included in the transmitted images as part of the image header. The rover could compress the front cameras' images using the block truncation coding (BTC) algorithm, but it could only do the same for the back camera's images if the colour information was discarded. The cameras' optical resolution was sufficient to resolve 0.6 cm details across a 0.65 m range.[10]
"
 
The MSL mission also implemented a new landing system capable of delivering the MSL to the surface of Mars. I'm totally stoked to hear about any kind of biological signals or signs of past life on the Planet. One theory suggests that Mars used to have liquid oceans composed of water, which would be amazing. Astronomy is my second favorite science behind biology. Both of them fascinate me.
 
Yes we really have been there done that.

"The Mars Pathfinder conducted different investigations on the Martian soil using three scientific instruments. The lander contained a stereoscopic camera with spatial filters on an expandable pole called Imager for Mars Pathfinder (IMP),[5][6] and the Atmospheric Structure Instrument/Meteorology Package (ASI/MET)[7] which acts as a Mars meteorological station, collecting data about pressure, temperature, and winds. The MET structure included three windsocks mounted at three heights on a pole, the topmost at about one meter (yard) and generally registered winds from the West.[8]

The rover also had two black-and-white cameras and a color one. These instruments could investigate the geology of the Martian surface from just a few millimeters to many hundreds of meters, the geochemistry and evolutionary history of the rocks and surface, the magnetic and mechanical properties of the land, as well as the magnetic properties of the dust, atmosphere and the rotational and orbital dynamics of the planet. The rover had two black and white 0.3-megapixel cameras on the front (768 horizontal pixels × 484 vertical pixels configured in 4×4 pixel blocks), coupled with five laser stripe projectors, which enabled stereoscopic images to be taken along with measurements for hazard detection on the rover's path. On the back, near the APXS and rotated by 90°, there was a third camera of the same specifications which supported taking colour images. This back colour camera provided images of the APXS's target area and the rover's tracks on the ground, and had sensitivity to green (12 pixels out of the 16 total pixels in each 4×4 pixel block), red (2 pixels), and blue (2 pixels), with the blue-sensitive pixels being sensitive to infrared as well. However, all cameras had zinc-selenide lens which blocked blue light below 500 nm, thus only allowing infrared wavelengths to reach the blue pixels. All three cameras were CCDs manufactured by Eastman Kodak Company, and were controlled by the rover's CPU. They all had auto-exposure and bad pixel handling capabilities, and the image parameters (exposure time, compression used, etc.) were included in the transmitted images as part of the image header. The rover could compress the front cameras' images using the block truncation coding (BTC) algorithm, but it could only do the same for the back camera's images if the colour information was discarded. The cameras' optical resolution was sufficient to resolve 0.6 cm details across a 0.65 m range.[10]
"

I missed the part about having wheels, a complete robotic laboratory and the ability to scoop up soil samples, then do a series of complex, sophisticated testing procedures to analyze the samples, including searches for evidence of biological activity. And of course, digitized b/w and color cameras and video capability far beyond anything we've ever shipped into space before.

That's a bit more exciting than a windsock.
 
I missed the part about having wheels, a complete robotic laboratory and the ability to scoop up soil samples, then do a series of complex, sophisticated testing procedures to analyze the samples, including searches for evidence of biological activity. And of course, digitized b/w and color cameras and video capability far beyond anything we've ever shipped into space before.

That's a bit more exciting than a windsock.


OK Dianna, I give up. You are obviously very excited about spending billions of dollars to find out what we already know. we will use cool new ways to learn the same stuff but still, it is very exciting AND we can definately afford it right now as America goes over a fiscal cliff.:roll:
 
OK Dianna, I give up. You are obviously very excited about spending billions of dollars to find out what we already know. we will use cool new ways to learn the same stuff but still, it is very exciting AND we can definately afford it right now as America goes over a fiscal cliff.:roll:

Excellent. I knew you'd come around. :)
 
More should be learned from this venture than the past 40 years about Mars. NASA has shown it can be effective. My generation can now look forward to other quests into space instead of the bleek future NASA had not long ago. Curiosity will collect Martian samples including water, minerals, organics, and other rocks. It answers the age old question(s) of whether Mars has, can, or could maintain any life.

So, none, in other words.
 
2.6 Billion -- Obviously I can think of numerous, better, ways to waste that amount of money.
 
OK Dianna, I give up. You are obviously very excited about spending billions of dollars to find out what we already know. we will use cool new ways to learn the same stuff but still, it is very exciting AND we can definately afford it right now as America goes over a fiscal cliff.:roll:

I hate this argument. The Mars Science Laboratory was initiated in 2004 and landed on Mars several days ago. In that elapsed time for one of the most significant scientific projects we have embarked on in the United States for quite a few years it cost $2.6 billion. That averages out to about $325 million a year. So I want to ask you if you think that the federal budget, and the future solvency of the United States rests upon a budgetary outlay of $325 million? Of course not. If we had even a mild increase in our NASA budget, created big and exciting contracts for emerging space development corporations (like a lunar base, like a Lagrangian point fueling station, like putting a mass driver on the moon...), we would accelerate the expansion of our space frontier and its eventual exploitation and settlement.

NASA is .48% of the federal budget let's shove the hysterics about the looming national debt catastrophe.
 
To get back to a more substantive opinion on the actual mission. I was ecstatic and watched the landing live from their video stream, and was an avid follower starting more than a few years ago. That being said I'm slightly uncomfortable with the attention and enthusiasm being lavished on another robotic exploratory mission from the general public. While I obviously support the mission and its scientific endeavors I think we need to finally shake or placid complacence with a robotic and purely scientific approach to space. It is still ostensibly one of the founding mission objectives of NASA to open up space for human exploration and colonization and I believe that objective is eminently achievable for us and within our lifetimes.
 
2.6 Billion -- Obviously I can think of numerous, better, ways to waste that amount of money.

Yep, for example we could hold the country hostage again and drive down our credit rating ... or take another 150 meaningless votes to repeal Obamacare!
 
Yep, for example we could hold the country hostage again and drive down our credit rating ... or take another 150 meaningless votes to repeal Obamacare!

Or feed the hungry, maybe save some lives with vital medications - crazy ****, man, crazy ****!
 
Or feed the hungry, maybe save some lives with vital medications - crazy ****, man, crazy ****!

Scientific exploration and the incentivization of the development of space technology for current as well as future generations should cease because that paltry sum could go towards food programs? That is horrendously depressing logic.
 
Or feed the hungry, maybe save some lives with vital medications - crazy ****, man, crazy ****!

I'd rather explore Mars (and the rest of space).
 
You should reread that post. There's plenty to be excited about.

Alright, let's take a look.

How will knowing that "Nasa is effective" benefit me or really anyone for that matter? How will "rock samples" from Mars benefit me or anybody? How will knowing whether Mars does or has ever sustained life benefit me or anybody?
 
Alright, let's take a look.

How will knowing that "Nasa is effective" benefit me or really anyone for that matter? How will "rock samples" from Mars benefit me or anybody? How will knowing whether Mars does or has ever sustained life benefit me or anybody?

Well - it just will - because well - it just will - okay.
 
Alright, let's take a look.

How will knowing that "Nasa is effective" benefit me or really anyone for that matter? How will "rock samples" from Mars benefit me or anybody? How will knowing whether Mars does or has ever sustained life benefit me or anybody?

So you oppose all programs that do not have a direct and immediate causal benefit to yourself?
 
So you oppose all programs that do not have a direct and immediate causal benefit to yourself?

Obviously I oppose the repeatative flushing of billions down the proverbial space-toilet.
 
Obviously I oppose the repeatative flushing of billions down the proverbial space-toilet.
What if we discover a way to mine extremely valuable minerals and space and then we earn billions and billions from that.
 
Obviously I oppose the repeatative flushing of billions down the proverbial space-toilet.

Because they yield no benefits? Without even going into the wider and more far flung mission we should be pursuing the advances in computing, material sciences, global positioning systems, intelligence platforms, etc have no value to you? It has been an incredibly valuable program and we never know what we will uncover. As we gain a better understanding of the geology of these planets and asteroids it impels other spinoff activity. Ever heard of Planetary Resources for example?
 
I just feel they shouldn't dump money into it when our nation - and the world, really - is so volatile.

People complain about the president's vacation costs - because it's excess while we're at war, etc. . . well space exploration is an excess as well given the circumstances.
 
Back
Top Bottom