Zubrin: 1. Simberg: 0.
Dr. Zubrin’s comments drew upon his knowledge and expertise in astronautics, while Simberg’s relied on analogies and rhetoric. I especially was convinced by Zubrin’s demolition of Simberg’s proposal for orbital fuel depots. He explained in clear, quantitative terms why the concept, if implemented, would be a waste of time and money. All Simberg could muster in its defense was the vacuous statement that trying to “open up space without them is like saying that we should have had no gas stations on the interstate highway system, and should instead have had everyone drive across the country in a gasoline tanker truck, or with expendable drop tanks.” Has he ever even read Zubrin’s Mars Direct plan, or NASA’s modified version of the scheme?
What neither of the gentlemen discussed here (though Zubrin has at great length elsewhere) is the potential social impact of humans to Mars. It would inspire a generation of future engineers and scientists, as was the demonstrable case of the Apollo program. Humanity’s long-term survival depends on its establishing other branches of civilization beyond the earth. We currently enjoy a window of opportunity in which to begin the colonization of the solar system. Mars is the natural first choice for a permanent extraterrestrial base. There is no guarantee that the will and the resources to enable us to branch out will be available indefinitely. We ought to take the initiative now to begin the settlement and commercialization of space.
Humans to Mars by 2020!
