But I think that an interesting and random new site would also benefit the mission because unidentified finding would trigger our research and bring us one step further to our knowledge of Mars. My viewpoint regarding Jun and Maria's argument is that first we should do some associated failure rate experiments on Earth. If the occurrence distinction of failure rate experiments is obvious, we should decide on using the option that has the less failure rate first, the other option second. But if the distinction is not obvious, we should decide by seeking the main goals and what we would like to find out most from this mission, and then decide which option achieves the goals and the objectives most fully. From the soil-dust experiment, scientists can find signs of life, realize what kind of climate changes would turn Mars into what it is now, find the hidden resources on Mars, and find the ingredients for the fuel that rockets need and other resources that can be developed.
Humans have to go exploring the red planet.
That is because we must have a newer and further aim to go after. If we keep our exploration on Mars, maybe in a few hundred years later Mars might be so too. If we succeed, we will be honored by the humans that will one day be on there. Our cong ratulations to all the Winners, the quality of the entries we received was very high. It is great to know that so many keen young people all over the world know so much and are so enthusiastic about Mars Exploration.