3 ms·
> Prove it. Until you do, I disagree. Well I can't personally __prove__ it, but I believe the general belief in the science community of prolonged space-travel
by smtddr 14y ago
> Prove it. Until you do, I disagree.
Well I can't personally __prove__ it, but I believe the general belief in the science community of prolonged space-travel is that it will most likely mess you up. Probably in more ways than we've even thought of. I don't think, at least with today's tech, that a human can travel to Mars and back and be perfectly okay.
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/space/space-dangers.html http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/space/space-dangers.html
http://www.cracked.com/article_19158_the-6-weirdest-dangers-space-travel_p2.html http://www.cracked.com/article_19158_the-6-weirdest-dangers-...
- danielweber 14y agoA lot, not all, but a lot of those people popped up after Bush 41 said that we were going back to the moon and to Mars. NASA heard it was a JFK mission, going to be completed regardless of cost, and told their project managers to put as many things into the mission critical path so they would get funded. When they returned to Congress with a 30-year $450 Billion plan, it was funded with 0 dollars. To be fair, we don't know what 3/8 g will to do someone after a year. For all that it's important, though, it's comical that we haven't put some spinning Skylab space stations up to find out.