>chump desperate for name recognition makes loud, empty boast

This is simply not news.

>>20318
Uh, what? Elon Musk is already world-famous, and his boast (while obviously a boast) is not "empty" seeing that SpaceX had the first demonstration of a reusable launch system last year.

>>20304
That's really dumb when the rest of the world's priorities involve setting up a moon base.

related
>>17732

>>20340
The moon has a much lower gravitational field. People would have to continually exercise if they ever wanted to return to Earth. We also do not know all the effects micro-gravity has on the human body, they would have to carefully monitor their PR. It's much more ambitious to live for an extended period on the Moon than to briefly visit another planet. Also no atmosphere and space debris a real danger.

>>20377
It would behoove the Americans (NASA, private companies, The Air Force et. al.) to take a look at some of the ESA proposals to use a hypothetical moonbase as a launching point for a mars mission (among many other things). We already know that the moon at least has water and raw minerals enough to make it worth it (without even discussing the scientific possibilities of He-3 and advanced solar/microwave tech). It makes economic sense to invest more in the moon than mars if you want to see actual scientific and possibly monetary returns on your investment beyond 'goodwill of all mankind' shit. Unfortunately I think many Americans are stuck in the 20th century mentality about planting flags before everyone else and aren't thinking ahead.

>>20304
BOY HE ABOUT TO DO IT!!!

>>20304
>will he do it
It depends on how many people he can get interested and if SpaceX can perfect reusable rockets

>>20318
>chump desperate for replies makes loud, empty post

you are not entirely wrong, though he does do a lot of noise for investments, but that's what business is like, and you can hardly call it "empty boast". It's a regular boast, and it's good for business

>>20377
>The moon has a much lower gravitational field
The gravity on Mars is only about 1/3 of that on earth (compared to 1/6 of an earth g on Luna), and the 6 month trip each way in microgravity would compound that. Exercise will be necessary regardless.
The effects of microgravity are somewhat understood by now - loss of muscle mass, loss of bone density, vision deterioration from fluid pressure on the eyes, radiation exposure. This would be worse for a Mars trip because the duration is so much longer - the only reason to have very long stays at a moon colony would be launch costs, not technical feasibility.

A moon colony is arguably more technically feasible, unless the Mars mission is prepared to be hugely risky. The Mars mission is 6 months each way and 18-20 months for the planets to realign for the return trip, if anything goes wrong the astronauts are almost guaranteed to die. Mars astronauts would need to bring more supplies and backups for any system that could potentially fail. If something goes wrong with a moon colony or if supplies run short a return trip is only 3 days, and a resupply mission only limited by how long it takes to prepare the launch.

>>20533
This.

The moon could also be used as a staging ground for future space expeditions because of the low gravity.

>>20741

Not if you understand orbital dynamics, the rocket equation and where all the industry is located.

>>20388
SHIT, HE TELLING THOSE NASA BOYS TO GET THE FUCK OFF HIS TURF!