anyway, the latest news on the mission to mars is that NASA is having to deal with major ethical questions. according to the AP, one of these questions is "How do you cope with sexual desire among healthy young men and women during a mission years long?" my boss suggested sending stephen hawking, since "he probably can't have sex" and "who would be attracted to him?" wow. maybe he's right. but if we've learned anything from the movies "Mission to Mars," "Red Planet," or really just "2001: A Space Oddysey," any ambitious mission like this will be subject to "go terribly awry," and become a "a catastrophic and mysterious disaster."
so what does this mean? even if you send someone up that is terribly attractive, something is bound to go wrong. maybe space radiation will cure stephen hawking into a handsome horny genius. also, why would you send someone on a mission like this with the same voice as HAL 9000? it really just doesn't make any sense. if you send stephen hawking, we'll be in deep shit.
my recommendation?
2 comments:
Ha! And some good photoshopping, to boot.
Is this the final post?
Post a Comment