This is a super intersting panel, but you could spend just a little bit more time on presentation. Some more light on the panelists. A decent amount of mics for everyone. A cam, that is not mainly filmig peoples heads. Cued sheets etc. It's about an hour of work. That would be really great. Other than that, thank you very much for the very intersting insights! :)
Yeah, that constriction of his vocal cords tells you he's one of the majority of the population who finds public speaking more terrifying than almost anything else.
Also, remember this is a guy who released the patents of the most famous bought car in the world. Just released them... no fuss. If he went to mars and made discoveries and developed new tech this will have huge implications for the rest of us. He will likely just release everything they know and make a better world back here on earth! the exact same that NASA did. but NASA works very very slowly.
What are they protecting? Im glad to see ethical issues being observed but why is it being so restrictive so we can't even do anything, not jealous is it?
its clear that there is living biology life outside of our planet that would suffer do to certain life forms that thrive on Earth. We do not own space, and to introduce hostile biology would be....without deeper reflection. That said, if we were to develop anti gravity fields which would be so self containing, then we could consciously visit many locations without worry....i would think.
LOL, their has been life on mars the first lander showed a voel type critter similar to a mole irratated by the viberation of the craft. They also filmed a bird on mars that made a sound to fly on as the atmosphere was too think to allow flight. No one has discussed any other life on mars other than trees. We have a base on Mars already and the moon. It is a bit late to discuss any of this.
I don't like the idea that ipotetical Martians bacteria have rights, what about real earth bacteria who will save it from extinction, and how you now that earth bacteria that reaches Mars would thrive, not only survive for a year or two, but multiplicate and disperse their self onto the planet surface.
The bureaucratic hurdles thrown up by planetary protection entities, and the public outcry based on media scaremongering that will surely happen should a Mars mission become imminent, are things I've been wondering about ever since I've known about Elon's ambitions to go to Mars. I have never heard him address these questions publicly but would be interested in what he has to say (anybody have a link?). The back-contamination problem could be dealt with by sending people one-way (I would go, and I'm sure there are plenty of other, actually qualified, people who would). But the forward contamination problem will be insurmountable for reasons given in the video. While I agree with Zubrin and others that the knowledge and "added value" we'd get from having people doing in-situ research is well worth the risk of forward contamination, I'm pessimistic that these viewpoints will win the day with the bureaucracy. Especially when these concerns can be hijacked by opponents of the Mars program for political reasons. All of this, in conjunction with the technical and financial challenges of a humans-to-Mars mission, leads me to believe we will not get there in this iteration of human civilization. I've just come to this conclusion in the past hour watching this video, which has made for a depressing day. Returning to the moon bores me almost to tears but I think this is the only goal we can actually achieve within the financial and bureaucratic constraints of the present day. The only hope, as I see it, is if China declares that they are going to send people to Mars. That might shake things up enough to generate some true momentum at NASA.
the public, fueled by the media, will only be afraid of back contamination - mars coronavirus - which as you say is easily remedied with a one way trip. Only scientists will really care about forward contamination, and scientists are a lot easier to reason with and more likely to accept consensus. I am sure there will be some scientists arguing that it shouldn't go ahead due to risks of forward contamination, but I expect a lot of them can be satisfied by putting in place mitigation steps, and the remaining will be in a small minority.
I know Zubrin is getting tired of explaining this same ass concept lol. mars and earth is already in close contact with each other. and has been for millions of years. if there ever were a chance of cross contaminations it's already happened. in other words, we are mars and mars is us. same with the moon.
no we d be in caves starving because the spear is to new fangled for them and we wouldn't actually starve because we d freeze to death first because we might catch something by wearing furs
glen crawford - Or might contaminate the cave by starting a fire, or risk 2-way contamination by moving somewhere else! If the lawyers had had their way, humans would never have left Africa, & the future Native Americans would NEVER have come to “America”. 2nd song in the video expresses my thoughts on this issue - m.ua-cam.com/video/2ZRDWOB9L-Q/v-deo.html
Sci-fi writers are somewhat to blame here just some people are so easy to scare and there are a lot of cracks that evil diseases can slip through so it is an impossible temptation for them.
Opinion the astronauts will either be sick or dead what time they get back to Earth. Or pretty much they all know they've come in contact with something.
Artificial gravity space labs to study Mars from orbit first and then colonize. While we're at it, maybe we can build rotating habitats for a lot of people to live off the Earth. Perhaps taking on the Moon first. Anyway, it's good to see that people are talking and considering issues seriously.
We’ve had the technology to create artificial gravity since the 1960’s, but we haven’t even tried (microgravity was “advertised” as a “feature” on the ISS). So, why is there a need now to test the effects of certain levels of gravity for multiple years before we can send people to Mars? And, since the moon has
@@TraditionalAnglican You make good points but perhaps very minimal rotating habitats with the idea of expanding into space. There are materials we can work with. First rotating habitats can be labs and factories where scientists and engineers will live. Some of them will be space hotels. Some of them will help industrialize the Moon and work on asteroids and comets... Some of them will be sent out to Mars to study it from orbit... So I think that there are other good options available to us. We need to calm down and realize that the truth might be in figuring out the best plan - and it may not be the plan of our preference. I have nothing against Zubrin personally and I was very excited about all of it after reading his book and listening to his talks.... But there are a lot of other very smart people there who present alternative options on the matters and point out some problems. We need to pay attention to them as well and not to embrace a plan that seems good but may turn out to be bad.
Vahan Good - NASA has had 45 years to build rotating habitats, but hasn’t. Because of the Coriolis Effect, we’d have to build a station with a diameter of at least 200 meters in order to study the effects of LOW gravity. That would be prohibitively expensive at present NASA launch costs ($10K/kg) unless we used in situ (moon & NEO asteroids) utilization of resources. Doing this would probably be as hazardous as simply going to & living on Mars & using the materials available on Mars. If we had the launch capability to do that, we’d most definitely have the capability to send a spacecraft to & from Mars that had artificial gravity. And, why place humans in Martian Orbit where they’d be exposed to deep space cosmic rays & wouldn’t be able to use in situ resource utilization when they could avoid the radiation by living underground, growing food in greenhouses & making rocket fuel & other supplies from the resources available on Mars?!?
Right on, Doc. Bob Zubrin.
This is a super intersting panel, but you could spend just a little bit more time on presentation. Some more light on the panelists. A decent amount of mics for everyone. A cam, that is not mainly filmig peoples heads. Cued sheets etc. It's about an hour of work. That would be really great. Other than that, thank you very much for the very intersting insights! :)
May I humbly suggest videoing the talks in at least 720p (ideally 1080p) as some of the slides aren't legible :(
I agree. The poor quality video ruins a good presentation..
Bob making some great points as usual. Must get his new book!
He knocked it out of the park, as usual!
That first guy sounded like he was giving his presentation at gun point lol. Calm down buddy.
He probably hasn't done much public speaking. Not everyone can be like Zubrin.
Yeah, that constriction of his vocal cords tells you he's one of the majority of the population who finds public speaking more terrifying than almost anything else.
Lol you're a bad man
Luv Ya Dr. Z💯💯 You're a Credit to Humanity Sir ! ! !
Also, remember this is a guy who released the patents of the most famous bought car in the world. Just released them... no fuss. If he went to mars and made discoveries and developed new tech this will have huge implications for the rest of us. He will likely just release everything they know and make a better world back here on earth! the exact same that NASA did. but NASA works very very slowly.
Yes we ve lost far too much ground already. But it will be great when it finally gets on.
It's just great to hear from people who know what they're talking about
I think the aspect ratio of the video is wrong. The people look too tall an thin. Can someone check this and fix is if true?
8.8K Subs !!! come on guys !!!!!! they should be 100K + Lets get this out more !!!! We need this !!!
Super video. Thank you..
What are they protecting? Im glad to see ethical issues being observed but why is it being so restrictive so we can't even do anything, not jealous is it?
How is Elon's Space X Subservient to these Rules and Regulations ? Is he a Member ?
43:28
Word!
"Achieving Earth independence"... earth is independent. He means overcoming earth dependence or achieving moon/Mars independence.
uhg, who let the lawyer in?
yeah I too thought so
its clear that there is living biology life outside of our planet that would suffer do to certain life forms that thrive on Earth. We do not own space, and to introduce hostile biology would be....without deeper reflection.
That said, if we were to develop anti gravity fields which would be so self containing, then we could consciously visit many locations without worry....i would think.
LOL, their has been life on mars the first lander showed a voel type critter similar to a mole irratated by the viberation of the craft. They also filmed a bird on mars that made a sound to fly on as the atmosphere was too think to allow flight. No one has discussed any other life on mars other than trees. We have a base on Mars already and the moon. It is a bit late to discuss any of this.
LOL indeed
I don't like the idea that ipotetical Martians bacteria have rights, what about real earth bacteria who will save it from extinction, and how you now that earth bacteria that reaches Mars would thrive, not only survive for a year or two, but multiplicate and disperse their self onto the planet surface.
The bureaucratic hurdles thrown up by planetary protection entities, and the public outcry based on media scaremongering that will surely happen should a Mars mission become imminent, are things I've been wondering about ever since I've known about Elon's ambitions to go to Mars. I have never heard him address these questions publicly but would be interested in what he has to say (anybody have a link?). The back-contamination problem could be dealt with by sending people one-way (I would go, and I'm sure there are plenty of other, actually qualified, people who would). But the forward contamination problem will be insurmountable for reasons given in the video. While I agree with Zubrin and others that the knowledge and "added value" we'd get from having people doing in-situ research is well worth the risk of forward contamination, I'm pessimistic that these viewpoints will win the day with the bureaucracy. Especially when these concerns can be hijacked by opponents of the Mars program for political reasons. All of this, in conjunction with the technical and financial challenges of a humans-to-Mars mission, leads me to believe we will not get there in this iteration of human civilization. I've just come to this conclusion in the past hour watching this video, which has made for a depressing day. Returning to the moon bores me almost to tears but I think this is the only goal we can actually achieve within the financial and bureaucratic constraints of the present day. The only hope, as I see it, is if China declares that they are going to send people to Mars. That might shake things up enough to generate some true momentum at NASA.
the public, fueled by the media, will only be afraid of back contamination - mars coronavirus - which as you say is easily remedied with a one way trip. Only scientists will really care about forward contamination, and scientists are a lot easier to reason with and more likely to accept consensus. I am sure there will be some scientists arguing that it shouldn't go ahead due to risks of forward contamination, but I expect a lot of them can be satisfied by putting in place mitigation steps, and the remaining will be in a small minority.
Treaties are just a piece of paper. We must not allow the greens to prevent us from going forth to the stars.
I know Zubrin is getting tired of explaining this same ass concept lol. mars and earth is already in close contact with each other. and has been for millions of years. if there ever were a chance of cross contaminations it's already happened. in other words, we are mars and mars is us. same with the moon.
We would all be living in our parents basement with these pin heads looking for some one to sue.
no we d be in caves starving because the spear is to new fangled for them and we wouldn't actually starve because we d freeze to death first because we might catch something by wearing furs
glen crawford - Or might contaminate the cave by starting a fire, or risk 2-way contamination by moving somewhere else! If the lawyers had had their way, humans would never have left Africa, & the future Native Americans would NEVER have come to “America”.
2nd song in the video expresses my thoughts on this issue - m.ua-cam.com/video/2ZRDWOB9L-Q/v-deo.html
Looks like we need Microbiologists to debate this issue. along with Archomicrobiologists
Good job Doc.
Ugh. Use a damn microphone. MICROPHONE!!!!!
Some guys... Are germs crazys... Seeing germs everywere
Bill nye the engineer guy.not a scientist
Sci-fi writers are somewhat to blame here just some people are so easy to scare and there are a lot of cracks that evil diseases can slip through so it is an impossible temptation for them.
Opinion the astronauts will either be sick or dead what time they get back to Earth. Or pretty much they all know they've come in contact with something.
Why is NO ONE asking HOW Elon musk has gotten farther along the NASA in what 40 years
Artificial gravity space labs to study Mars from orbit first and then colonize. While we're at it, maybe we can build rotating habitats for a lot of people to live off the Earth. Perhaps taking on the Moon first.
Anyway, it's good to see that people are talking and considering issues seriously.
We’ve had the technology to create artificial gravity since the 1960’s, but we haven’t even tried (microgravity was “advertised” as a “feature” on the ISS). So, why is there a need now to test the effects of certain levels of gravity for multiple years before we can send people to Mars? And, since the moon has
@@TraditionalAnglican
You make good points but perhaps very minimal rotating habitats with the idea of expanding into space. There are materials we can work with. First rotating habitats can be labs and factories where scientists and engineers will live. Some of them will be space hotels. Some of them will help industrialize the Moon and work on asteroids and comets... Some of them will be sent out to Mars to study it from orbit...
So I think that there are other good options available to us. We need to calm down and realize that the truth might be in figuring out the best plan - and it may not be the plan of our preference. I have nothing against Zubrin personally and I was very excited about all of it after reading his book and listening to his talks.... But there are a lot of other very smart people there who present alternative options on the matters and point out some problems. We need to pay attention to them as well and not to embrace a plan that seems good but may turn out to be bad.
Vahan Good - NASA has had 45 years to build rotating habitats, but hasn’t. Because of the Coriolis Effect, we’d have to build a station with a diameter of at least 200 meters in order to study the effects of LOW gravity. That would be prohibitively expensive at present NASA launch costs ($10K/kg) unless we used in situ (moon & NEO asteroids) utilization of resources. Doing this would probably be as hazardous as simply going to & living on Mars & using the materials available on Mars. If we had the launch capability to do that, we’d most definitely have the capability to send a spacecraft to & from Mars that had artificial gravity. And, why place humans in Martian Orbit where they’d be exposed to deep space cosmic rays & wouldn’t be able to use in situ resource utilization when they could avoid the radiation by living underground, growing food in greenhouses & making rocket fuel & other supplies from the resources available on Mars?!?
27:00