

Neil deGrasse Tyson Doesn't Think Elon Musk's SpaceX Will Put People On Mars - austengary
http://www.businessinsider.com/neil-degrasse-tyson-elon-musk-spacex-2013-8#ixzz2f9RnZzqG

======
dalke
I interpreted it as saying that there's no market reason to put people on Mars
first, so SpaceX as a corporation wouldn't do it.

But my understanding is that Elon Musk has a personal reason for going to
Mars, and that SpaceX's commercial efforts are being used to fund that private
goal.

Exploration is not Tyson suggests, solely a government-sponsored activity.
Private and philanthropic societies have funded many explorations. The
National Geographic Society and The Explorers Club continue to fund
exploration.

------
hannibal5
Tyson is right from business perspective. There is no business value in going
to Mars. There are only rocks there and even if you sell ad space from the
rocked and get sponsor, it will not cover the risk × value. If business is
going into space, it's going to near earth asteroids. Cheap to operate lifting
capability is essential to everything related to space and SpaceX is doing
right thing there.

I don't think manned mission to Mars should be priority for NASA either. "You
absolutely have to have person there to decide what to do" argument is not
convincing if you would spend the same amount of money for robotic missions to
Mars and it's moons.

~~~
dalke
I agree. I think James Cameron's trip to the Challenger deep in 2012 is quite
apropos. No one had been there since the Trieste in 1960, though there were a
couple of ROV visits.

I believe it's not that we couldn't have put more people there, but rather
that there's no good scientific (or government/military) reason to do so. ROVs
have been more cost effective.

