I accept that human space flight to Mars is not optimal from a scientific perspective due to possibilities for contamination and cost. But I also think there is a better argument to be made for boots on Mars than what appears in this article.
For one, the new technology needed for manned space flight is more likely to have medical and defense applications. But mkre importantly, boots on Mars would be a huge political victory.
Think about it like this: corporations sponsor Formula 1 cars because the prestige and visibility they get has all sorts of benefits. A manned mission to Mars would be like the holy grail of marketing. It would be like putting a permanent ad in the history books that every literate human on Earth will see for the next thousands and thousands of years. It's not unreasonable to say that the good publicity from this will prolong the lifespan of the nation, and that's something that I'd expect Congress to pursue.
For one, the new technology needed for manned space flight is more likely to have medical and defense applications. But mkre importantly, boots on Mars would be a huge political victory.
Think about it like this: corporations sponsor Formula 1 cars because the prestige and visibility they get has all sorts of benefits. A manned mission to Mars would be like the holy grail of marketing. It would be like putting a permanent ad in the history books that every literate human on Earth will see for the next thousands and thousands of years. It's not unreasonable to say that the good publicity from this will prolong the lifespan of the nation, and that's something that I'd expect Congress to pursue.