More than 1,000 advance to 2nd round for trip to Mars
Last summer, more than 200,000 people applied for a one-way ticket to Mars. This week, 1,058 of them were selected to move on to the next round.
The applications — all in video form — were not sent to NASA, or another national space agency, but to a nonprofit organization called Mars One. Based in the Netherlands, Mars One has the unusual goal of turning the colonization of Mars into a reality show with a global audience.
The call for applicants to move to Mars went out in April. Anyone older than 18 was invited to send in a video in which they explained why they wanted to go to Mars, and how they felt about never returning to Earth. They were also asked to describe their sense of humor.
In this first narrowing down of future Mars colonizers, the Mars One team focused on choosing people who were physically and mentally capable of becoming human ambassadors to Mars, Bas Landsorp, co-founder of Mars One, said in a statement.
Those who were taking the mission less seriously were excluded.
The pool of selected applicants includes 472 women and 586 men. More than half of them are younger than 35, but 26 are older than 56. The oldest applicant to move on to the next round is 81.
The contenders hail from 107 countries. The United States is the most heavily represented, with 297 applicants moving on to round two. Canada had the second biggest showing, with 75 applicants.
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.
- Oregon mulls law limiting antibiotic use on livestock
- Buffalo weighs public boarding school proposals for at-risk kids
- Federal highway fund shortage batters states
- 3 found dead in California tire shop fire
- Maybe Manhattan coyote just wanted a good mocha latte
- AG misled Congress on spying dispute, Bush-era report says
- Experts met in Nepal week ago to discuss earthquake they knew would rip into Kathmandu
- Study a surprise: Commercial bees unfazed by pesticides
- Senate ends five-month wait, confirms Lynch as U.S. attorney general
- Magma chamber spied under Yellowstone volcano
- Bomb threat clears Statue of Liberty