Wednesday, September 20, 2006

Why "The Moon Before Mars" Argument Makes Sense Authentic NASA Toys and Replicas
Out of the Cradle points to an article published by the Planetary Society Blog which reviews arguments for both the "Moon first" and "Mars first" crowd.

Although colonizing Mars would be much faster if we directly visited the planet first, any major crisis developed on the world would spell an inevitable set back for the space program (and the colonization of our Solar System).

Mars is at its closest 38 million miles away from Earth, and if any crisis happens upon that world, a rescue mission will be a couple years away. This would spell doom for not only the future colonists, but result in the quest for space to be delayed another generation.

The Moon is a lot closer to the Earth, and although the surfaces of Mars and the Moon differ greatly, it would provide a "beta environment" for us to learn how to survive off world before our species decides to settle on other planets millions of miles away.

Although going to Mars may be critical for our species, going to the moon first makes more sense.

Want more space geek news? Then subscribe below via email, RSS or twitter for free updates!

Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

Prefer another service? How about via RSS or follow Colony Worlds on Twitter!

No comments:

Post a Comment

You can either visit the stars or watch them from afar.

But if you choose the former, you'll definitely get a better view.

~Darnell Clayton, 2007

Note: You do not need a Blogger account in order to comment, but you do need to solve the universal puzzle below.