PLEASE HELP Refer to the ideas you just noted to determine and state whether you agree or disagree that humans should travel to Mars. Justify your position by referencing your notes about a “Common Idea,” “Differing Idea,” and “Understanding,” as well as ideas and information from the source notes.

here :)

Explanation:

why : 1. Discovery and Scientific Knowledge:  Mars is the most scientifically interesting location in our solar system that humans can reach in the foreseeable future.  Although robotic exploration of Mars over the past 50 plus years has provided us with a wealth of information and incredible discoveries, most experts agree that it will probably take human explorers to determine whether there ever was or even still is life on Mars and to conduct many other scientific investigations that are not possible with robots alone.

2. Inspiration and Innovation: Space exploration is widely recognized to be one of the most effective ways to inspire students to become interested in STEM education and it is a well-known driver of technology and innovation.  Returning to the Moon after 50 years is unlikely to require major advancements in technology.  In contrast, an ambitious mission to the next frontier of Mars will inspire new generations of engineers, scientists, physicians, innovators, educators, and industrialists to reach for the stars.

why not: Not only is Mars very far away, it also lacks breathable air, usable water, and protection from the sun. A round-trip to Mars would take about 18 months, and there isn’t enough room on current spacecraft to carry all the food, water, and other items humans would need to survive.

Answer

Based on ideas and information from all three texts, we should not travel to Mars. As stated in “Should We Terraform Mars?” and “Mars,” there is much to be gained by simply studying the planet from afar. “Mars” also states that we don’t even currently have the technology to get to the planet. In contrast, “Why Mars?” lists several key benefits of traveling to Mars, such as “innovation” and “collaboration.” However, those benefits do not seem to outweigh the negative effect human settlement could have on the planet, which is the contamination of existing life-forms.

Explanation:

got it right on edmentum

he can eat everything and drink whatever he wants

explanation:

the answer is a)   a sentence of death costs the state "almost three times as much as a sentence of life in prison" (delon 147)