What Our Depictions of Mars Tell Us about Ourselves - Essay Example

What Our Depictions of Mars Tell Us about Ourselves Name Institution Tutor Date Introduction The Red Planet or Mars is undoubtedly a place that puzzles the human mind. Aristotle through his cosmos model believed that Mars existed. He further made predictions about the location of Mars a year later (Wudka, 1998). Recently, Scott Kelly an American astronaut descended back to earth after spending an entire year on the planet (Gupta and Strickland, 2016). Kelly spoke to CNN correspondents about his experience. When asked about his perception of the planet, he stated that if humans can land and stay on the planet, they are bound to experience Martian gravity, which is beneficial (Gupta and Strickland, 2016). A big question that arises is; why is there so much fixation about Mars. It is now seventy years since the first man visited Mars, yet the missions have not stopped. Up till now, the key objective of making the planet a home for man has never been met. This essay argues that despite the fact that no human has officially shifted their residence from earth to Mars, people are still obsessed by the planet. The paper therefore asserts that the depictions about Mars indicate that humans are not realistic. Astronauts go through so many challenges in order to prove that they can survive on Mars. Throughout history, the extent to which humans have sort to justify the potentiality of the planet for human inhabitation is immense. For instance, Greshko, (2015) discloses that a mission to Mars necessitates the crew to conduct every activity in low or zero gravity, even when performing simple tasks such as taking a shower. A case in point is the year 1988 when Sue Eley decided to shower in a small glass in order to stimulate weightlessness. What is evident is that as Greshko, (2015) argues, humans are still not humans on Mars. The extent to which people strive to prove the possibility of life on Mars, is a forced notion. Taking a shower inside a small glass to create buoyancy indicates just how difficult it is for man to survive on the planet. Despite the discovery of such hitches, human are still fixated with the view that they can still make the planet Mars a safe haven. This indicates just how unrealistic human beings are. A mission to Mars is definitely not cheap. According to Brown, (2012) it is actually difficult to estimate the price tag for the explorations. Several countries across the globe have made it a priority to discover the planet. For instance, the Planetary Society (2016) records that Russia has made several attempts to visit Mars, some have been successful while others have failed. NASA has for many years also launched numerous missions to Mars. In 1970 a typical visit to Mars cost the agency a total of $1 billion. Today a budget of over $10 billion is used. The International Space Station (ISS), estimated that for a period of ten years, the organization would use $10 billion for its projects to Mars, however the budget exceeded and was ten times more ( Wall, 2012). The high investment put on the missions should raise an alarm. If governments are realistic, the funding of expeditions to Mars should be stopped. This is because, for 70 years now, no tangible findings have been disclosed by the missions. Imperatively, the continued visits to Mars by Astronauts indicates the unrealistic nature of human beings. A prominent definition of insanity by Einstein is that it involves doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results (Bradley, 2013). It is evident that the missions to Mars can be associated with insanity which when critically analyzed indicate the incapability to think and act realistically. The long-term objective of the human explorations and spaceflight activities to Mars has been to extend the permanent resident of human beings to a new and habitable planet which according to Astronauts, Mars is the most suitable location (Wall, 2012). For many years now, this objective has not been met. This is because no humans have been transferred from earth to Mars. Interestingly enough, scientists incessantly invest on technology that can take them to Mars. This idea ultimately seems like a never ending fallacy which is an indication of how unrealistic human beings can get. A mind-blowing assertion that supports the notion that man’s expeditions to Mars point out his/her unrealistic nature, is the fact that scientists have also used robots to explore Mars. Viking and Sojourner are examples of space robots that were sent to Mars (Vogt, 2001). The rationale behind sending the robots was to support human exploration of the planet. Mann (2013) however questions the logic behind sending robots to Mars as opposed to sending more humans. The explorations done by sending robots do not provide any tangible information to support the idea that man can survive on the planet for a very long time (Mann, 2013). Sending more robots indicates just how unrealistic humans can get. Scott Kelly the American astronaut who recently landed from Mars after staying for an entire year has proven that man cannot live comfortably on Mars. In the interview, Kelly stated that he experienced health challenges during his expedition. Interestingly enough the Astronaut stated that he wanted to retire from his career (Gupta and Strickland, 2016). One would argue that the decision by the Kelly to retire may have been instigated by the challenges he encountered during the expedition. Nevertheless, it apparent that humans cannot elude the fact that Mars is inhabitable. Mann, (2013) asserts that even if scientists are able to send humans to Mars, it is difficult to sustain them there. This is because, in order for man to remain alive on Mars, they require numerous supplies such as oxygen, food and shelter and most significantly fuel. Continued investment and missions to Mars indicate that humans are unrealistic. Conclusion The above discussion asserts that the depictions of humans about Mars signify the inability to be realistic. Indeed, curiosity about the Red Planet has existed for many years. However, man has failed in his attempts to prove that Mars can be a second home. The paper has elaborated some of the key challenges that astronauts face during their expeditions which indicate that man cannot occupy the planet. Additionally, missions to Mars are very expensive yet agencies such as NASA still ask for funding for the projects. Sending robots to explore Mars also shows just how difficult it is for man to survive on Mars. The paper therefore propagates that we have to be realistic. This is because most missions to Mars have failed to prove that man can be a resident on the planet. Consequently, it is important to avoid insanity which is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. References Brown, E2012, Is exploring Mars worth the investment? National Geographic Bradley, M 2013, Overcoming the Curse on Humanity, WestBow. Cramer, J 2001, How Alien Would Aliens Be? iUniverse. Gupta, S and Strickland, A 2016, Scott Kelly answers your questions about life in space, Mars mission, Retrieved on 4th November 2016 From Greshko, M 2015, Here's Why There's Still Not a Human on Mars, National Geographic Missions to Mars. Mann, A 2013, Why We Can’t Send Humans To Mars Yet (And How We’ll Fix That), Explore Mars. Vogt, G 2001 Space Robots, Capton Publishers.  Wall, M 2012, Should NASA Ditch Manned Missions to Mars? Space.com. Wudka J, 1998, Aristotelian Cosmology, Wudka. Read More