15

To my knowledge, most governments throughout the world seem to run institutions that give recommendations regarding safety and wellbeing of their citizens when travelling abroad in one form or another, issuing public safety warnings, health recommendations, and alike. With Mars One project having completed the application proceedings and already moved past round one of the selection process, it seems a bit too late to give any official government recommendations regarding application now, so my question is:

Have any governments issued public warning, recommendation, or an official statement regarding further involvement of its citizens with this venture, or announced their intention to do so in the near future?

Please note that I'm not excluding the possibility of any such recommendations issued in the future, but my question is, if any of them have done this already, or plan to do so. If yes, then please provide links to most relevant excerpts from any such official statements or government order and a list of public offices tasked with preparing them.

For background, here's a relevant blog article explaining this issue in a bit more detail: Mars One: Should I Stay or Should I Go?

TildalWave
  • 75,950
  • 13
  • 274
  • 455

1 Answers1

1

As difficult to answer as this question is (how can one know that a government hasn't and just not publicised it well?) here's a good first step in looking for the answer.

http://www.google.co.uk/search?q=link%3Awww.mars-one.com+inurl%3A.gov&oq=link%3Awww.mars-one.com+inurl%3A.gov

That google search looks for any webpage that has .gov in it's url that links to the mars one website. Currently it brings up a single youtube video of a mars one applicant (god knows how that has .gov in the url).

This suggests to me that no government has released anything about mars one. That's been index by google. That has a link to the mars one website. That they've put in their .gov site. - hey I said it was a first step, not perfect!

ThePlanMan
  • 4,421
  • 19
  • 40
  • 3
    .gov is a US-only domain. Some countries have .gov.[countrycode] subdomains (e.g. the UK), but many don't. – Hobbes Feb 05 '15 at 12:02
  • I'm sorry but this doesn't answer my question. The search you did is non-exhaustive and it's not even constructed properly (its single result doesn't indicate that what search was intended has actually been completed). I think you meant to do this search? Either case, it would assume too many things that needed to be true (among which also what Hobbes mentions), for its results to be conclusive. – TildalWave Feb 06 '15 at 07:02
  • This wasn't meant to be a complete answer, just a first steps. I posted it as an answer so it might help other construct a more complete answer. – ThePlanMan Feb 06 '15 at 16:06
  • @FraserOfSmeg That's not how our Q&A works though. I appreciate your interest but answers are supposed to be as complete as possible because now this thread is marked as answered by the system, and I disagree with that. See [Answer] for more info. Cheers! – TildalWave Feb 06 '15 at 18:43
  • @TildalWave how is this question answerable other than with an incomplete answer? Unless a someone finds a 'yes' answer than the question is only answerable by omnipresence. That was my rational for sharing a partial answer. – ThePlanMan Feb 06 '15 at 19:05
  • @FraserOfSmeg A negative answer could be helpful if it exhausted options of finding an answer, or at least made a reasonable effort to do so. Alternatively, an otherwise informed on the matter source such as, say, a space policy analyst could have insider information since this would hardly be something that nobody would be willing to talk about, at least in unofficial capacity. It's also possible that policy makers had this or anything similar on their agenda but was dropped, or just mothballed, but there would be records nonetheless. Or perhaps an answer explaining why there isn't an answer? – TildalWave Feb 06 '15 at 19:21
  • @Tidalwave - I see. Thanks for reading my comment as it was meant, I re-read it and it comes across quite adversarial which wasn't my intention! – ThePlanMan Feb 07 '15 at 01:02