1. Breen 1
Robert Breen
Professor Loudermilk
English 112
11 March 2011
Mars is More than a Candy Bar:
Why NASA Should Send a Manned Mission to Mars
Aliens vs Humans: Nowhere to Run
What if Earth were to be attacked by a hostile group of extraterrestrials (E.T.s)? Naturally, we
would try to fight them off, but suppose these extraterrestrials were so highly advanced that we stood
no chance? Panic would ensue with everyone on Earth attempting to band together and flee to safety.
But where would this safehouse be? If NASA had been given the opportunity to send a manned mission
to Mars and establish a base of operations, the safehouse could be there. The E.T.s would be unlikely to
ever find the group of survivors unless they came close to the planet, which they probably would not do
because Mars is generally known for being desolate and uninhabitable; the perfect hiding place.
However, since Congress has not provided the means for NASA to send a manned mission to Mars and
establish a base of operations, this refuge would not be available for human survivors to flee to,
resulting in the end of humanity. This is just one of the hypothetical reasons why NASA should send a
manned mission to Mars; to establish a home away from home. But many factors stand in the way of
creating this planetary “panic room.”

2. Breen 2
To the Moon...and Beyond
Presently, NASA is doing the best it possibly can to get a manned mission to the Red Planet
underway. NASA, which stands for National Aeronautics and Space Administration, is “the federal
agency that institutes and administers the civilian programs of the U.S. government that deal with
aeronautical research and the development of launch vehicles and spacecraft.” (Dictionary.com). In the
mid-1960's, NASA began sending the first spacecraft to Mars in an attempt to gather as much data as
possible.
It all started with the Mariner 3 and 4 missions in 1964. Then, after a success by Mariner 4,
NASA sent 4 more unmanned crafts to Mars over the course of 7 years. With each launch, the goals
became loftier and loftier. Mariner 9, which was launched in 1971, “became the first artificial satellite
of Mars when it arrived and went into orbit, where it functioned in Martian orbit for nearly a year.”
(Mars Exploration). Several years later, NASA again upped its game by sending the Viking missions.
This time their goal was to put unmanned spacecraft on the surface of the Red Planet.
This was done successfully in 1976. “Besides [just] taking photographs and collecting other
science data on the Martian surface, the two landers conducted three biology experiments designed to
look for possible signs of life. These experiments discovered unexpected and enigmatic chemical
activity in the Martian soil, but provided no clear evidence for the presence of living microorganisms in
soil near the landing sites.” (Mars Exploration).
More recently, NASA has sent the Spirit and Opportunity rovers to Mars. These two rovers
were similar to the Viking missions in that they were to conduct scientific studies and map out the
planet, but they lasted much longer. Launched in 2003, the two rovers remained active until 2009. After
getting stuck in soil though, Spirit has now become a stationary science platform.
In 2008, NASA launched its most recent Mars rover, entitled Phoenix. The primary goal of

3. Breen 3
Phoenix was not to explore the planet like Spirit and Opportunity had, but to search for possible signs
of life. It did this successfully by uncovering what appeared to be ice while digging on the planet. The
Phoenix mission ended when the solar powered craft lost contact with the sun during the Martian
winter. The craft remained unresponsive even after the winter had ended and in 2010, NASA declared
the Phoenix rover dead. As for the immediate future, plans are in the works to launch a new rover to
Mars. This rover will be called Curiosity. The launch is set for November 2011, but that is subject to
change at any time.
NASA, We Have a Problem
Once Man successfully landed on the Moon in 1969, the next frontier we set our sights on was
the Red Planet. Mars is shrouded in mystery and a manned mission to Mars has been the dream of
everyone from Arthur C. Clarke to Carl Sagan. There is so much we still have to learn about our Solar
System, and Mars is the most logical place to begin. For all we know, Mars could be where it all
started.
Mars is one of the few terrestrial planets in our solar system, and is conveniently located near
Earth. That makes it a prime location for an off-Earth terrestrial base. The International Space Station
(ISS) could be thought of as an off-Earth base, but it is not terrestrial, and therefore has limited
capabilities. If there were hostile extraterrestrials lurking in the furthest outreaches of the galaxy and
they had their sights set on destroying Earth, humanity, as a whole, would need a place to escape to.
Mars could very well be our refuge from total annihilation. The Moon would be one option, but being
so close to Earth, it would likely be involved in the alien attack.
Presently, there is an on-going debate about whether NASA should send a manned mission to
Mars. For many years now, scientists all over the world have dreamed of one day sending a manned
mission to the Red Planet. We now have the technology to allow for such a venture and it is because of

4. Breen 4
this fact that astronomers are making a strong push to get a mission underway. There is a lot of time
required for such a mission, and therefore astronomers want to get started as soon as possible. “A
human mission to Mars is technologically feasible, but hugely expensive requiring enormous financial
and political commitments.” (Schulze-Makuch and Davies). Finances are among the chief decision
factors when it comes to space missions of any kind. However, politicians and other government
officials who are in charge of setting the budget for NASA and as such, their agenda, oppose the idea.
They feel it costs too much and that there are better uses for that money elsewhere in the nation. With
Obama ending the current program and starting a new, cheaper one, NASA's hope for funding for a
mission to Mars anytime soon is gone. “The new plan proposes to contract with private companies to
design and develop vehicles for human flights to low Earth orbit (LEO) and the International Space
Station.” (Spudis).
I Say Yes, You Say No
Despite the obvious benefits a manned mission to Mars would have to the scientific
community, there are many who are opposed to the idea. Their reasons behind this position vary. Some
say the mission would be too dangerous. Out of all of the unmanned rovers we have sent to the Red
Planet, “the success rate stands at only 50 per cent.” (Webb). Others say it would cost too much and
with funding tight already, it would be imprudent to waste valuable money on a risky project. “Based
on three successful missions in the past 11 years (Mars Pathfinder and the Spirit and Opportunity
missions) and two failures (Mars Polar Lander and Beagle 2), the dividing line between triumph and
disaster falls somewhere around the $200 million mark, excluding launch costs” (Webb).
Some scientists are not against the mission necessarily. They just would like to prolong it in
order to conduct smaller missions in an attempt to make the larger mission safer and increase the
chances for success. “NASA committee thinks that many smaller missions – including visiting
asteroids – would be needed before heading to Mars.” (Small steps). Most recently, President Obama

5. Breen 5
has decided to focus NASA's attention more on research than exploration. “In a speech given at the
Kennedy Space Center last month, President Obama reaffirmed his administration's decision to cancel
Constellation, NASA's program to create new vehicles for human flights to the moon and Mars. If
implemented, this decision will guarantee a decade of non-achievement by NASA's human spaceflight
program, at a cost of more than $100 Billion.” (Spudis). Obama is playing it safe, which in this
economy probably is not such a bad idea. At least this way we will have results of something instead of
a possible failed shuttle launch resulting in time and money wasted. The only downside to no-risk
endeavors is the minute amount of praise worthy achievements they result in.
Amidst all the negativity behind a mission to Mars, there are those who do support the idea.
They see the mission as our first chance to finally learn more about our solar system. Also, it would be
a way to continue on with the research of the previous missions. Kenneth Chang, a writer for The New
York Times, says in an article NASA's Viking mission in 1976 placed two unmanned spacecraft on
Mars, but failed to locate any evidence of carbon-based molecules (A13). Later on in the article, he
states “Now some scientists say that conclusion was premature and perhaps even incorrect. They
suggest that building blocks – known as organic molecules, although they need not come from living
organisms – were indeed in the soil, but that they were inadvertently destroyed before they could be
detected.” (Chang). They also cite that we have sent successful unmanned mission to Mars, so it is time
to up our game. For many years we have only learned about the history of Earth in depth. It is time to
learn more about our planetary neighbors. For all we know, there may have been a thriving civilization
on Mars thousands of years ago. Perhaps that is why there is intelligent life on Earth today. It could
have traveled from Mars during a time when Mars was reaching a point of being inhabitable. Even if
that idea turns out to be false, there is always the chance that water, in some form, and life, most likely
microbial, currently exists on Mars. If that turns out to be true, scientists could take the microbial life
from Mars back to Earth and study it in more detail. Perhaps the extra oxygen in Earth's atmosphere

6. Breen 6
would allow the microbial life to develop and evolve further.
Cutting the RedTape to the Red Planet
There are other space agencies that exist all over the world, but NASA is the one currently
publicly considering a manned mission to Mars and is therefore receiving a lot of flack from the media
and politicians. I support NASA's desire for a manned mission to Mars. I feel that it is the right thing to
do for many reasons. It would almost be a crime to deprive humanity of a potentially once-in-a-lifetime
opportunity to learn more about the Universe and possibly the history of Man and life as we know it.
Also, the discoveries and inventions that will come from designing and building the equipment for the
journey would likely impact the future of science. The information Curiosity, the new rover scheduled
for launch in late 2011, could potentially discover is priceless. “Curiosity will study larger features in
the rocks, including their appearance and structure, to create a complete package of information[.]”
(Parry). With such complete information, NASA scientists should have no problem determining if Mars
ever supported life, or if it could potentially support it today.
I think NASA is doing the best it can to get this mission underway with the limited resources
they have available. With the way our government is set up, there is so much red tape to have to cross
over that it takes a long time to get anything of any value done. Budget cuts hamper every step they try
to make, but despite these odds, NASA remains passionate about their goal and will continue to fight
for it all the way to the end. “We make our world significant by the courage of our questions, and by
the depth of our answers.” (Sheehan and O'Meara 272). Is there life outside of Earth? One never knows
until one sets out to explore.
What Can They Do? What Can We Do?
As with any large organization, NASA is not perfect. They have made mistakes, and still have
room for improvement. One way to improve not only the organization, but the mission to Mars itself, is

7. Breen 7
to redesign the mission to be one-way. “A one-way human mission to Mars would not be a fixed
duration project as in the Apollo program, but the first step in establishing a permanent human presence
on the planet.” (Schulze-Makuch and Davies). Another way in which NASA could improve would be
to test things more frequently before sending them out on a mission. This would increase the likelihood
of success on a given mission and it would save time and money in the long run. The only downside to
more testing is the high cost in both time and money. With tight budgets and a stiff competition to be
the first at everything, testing often gets rushed through in order to beat everyone else to the launch.
NASA has also attempted to make cost effective and time-saving changes in their upcoming Mars
Science Laboratory mission using the Curiosity rover. Speaking at the National Air and Space Museum
in Washington, D.C., Doug McCuistion, director of the Mars Exploration Program said, “To determine
if a particular area has samples worth collecting, Curiosity will have a 'chemistry camera' that allows it
to shoot a laser at a rock, creating plasma it can analyze before driving over.” (Parry, MSNBC) This
way only samples that contain elements that could indicate organic molecules would be collected and
retained for study. The information Curiosity will uncover could change everything we presently know
about Mars.
But NASA cannot do this alone. They need the support of everyone to help keep interest in
space exploration thriving. One way the public can help out is by serving as an ambassador for NASA.
This job entails spreading the word about NASA and its programs to people who may not be informed
and trying to create interest and support for the continuation of the space program in general and Mars
exploration in particular. “These volunteers communicate the excitement of JPL's [Jet Propulsion
Laboratory, an offshoot of NASA] space exploration missions and information about recent discoveries
to people in their local communities.” (Ferrari and Sedlacko). Another way to get involved with NASA
is by joining the Haughton-Mars Project (HMP) and traveling to the Arctic to conduct experiments.
“The Haughton-Mars Project (HMP) is an international interdisciplinary field research project centered

8. Breen 8
on the scientific study of the Haughton impact structure and surrounding terrain, Devon Island, High
Arctic, viewed as a terrestrial analog for Mars.” (Mars Institute, Canadian Space Agency, SETI
Institute, and NASA). This would help advance research about living on Mars and would thus help
make the dream of a manned Mars mission a reality.

9. Breen 9
References
Chang, Kenneth. “Accepted notion of Mars as lifeless is challenged.” New York Times 4 Sept. 2010:
A13(L). Gale Opposing Viewpoints In Context. Web. 5 Feb. 2011.
Ferrari, Kay, and Daniel Sedlacko. “The Solar System Ambassadors Program.” Redirect. 10 Nov. 2010.
Web. 02 Mar. 2011. <http://www2.jpl.nasa.gov/ambassador/>
“Mars Exploration: Missions.” Mars Exploration Program. Web. 20 Feb. 2011.
<http://mars.jpl.nasa.gov/missions/past/mariner3-4.html>
Mars Institute, Canadian Space Agency, SETI Institute, and NASA. "About the Haughton-Mars
Project." HMP Research Station | Haughton-Mars Project. 2008. Web. 08 Mar. 2011.
<http://www.marsonearth.org/about/>.
“NASA.” Dictionary.com Unabridged. Random House, Inc. 20 Feb. 2011. <Dictionary.com
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/NASA>.
Parry, Wynne. “Next up for Mars missions: the search for life.” 19 Jan. 2011. MSNBC.com
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/41159462/ns/technology_and_science-space/
Schulze-Makuch, Ph.D, Dirk and Paul Davies, Ph.D. “To Boldly Go: A One-Way Human Mission to
Mars. Journal of Cosmology Vol 12. pp. 3619-3626 Oct.-Nov. 2010
Sheehan, William and Stephen James O'Meara. Mars: The Lure of the Red Planet. Amherst, NY:
Prometheus, 2001. Print.
“Small steps for humankind, a giant leap to Mars.” New Scientist 203.2720 (2009): 7. Academic
Search Complete. EBSCO. Web. 5 Feb. 2011.
Spudis, Paul D. “NASA's mission to nowhere; Big, fat, pointless and expensive describes plan to
twiddle our fingers.” Washington Times [Washington, DC] 1 June 2010: B01.
Webb, Jeremy. “Editorial: Science thrives as NASA succeeds on Mars.” New Scientist 198.2658
(2008): 5. Academic Search Complete. EBSCO. Web. 5 Feb. 2011