Is that literally all it takes to make ASA?

No. Acetylsalicylic acid replaces salicylic acid, because the side effects are worse. Otherwise, we'd be popping SA pills instead of ASA pills.

Air, land and water are just too different.

Jesus H Christ, but that's a huge spread. Do anthropologists actually know anything?

Now, but not Back In The Day (I was there; I remember).

But conservatives don't trumpet "tolerance" (which has been redefined to mean 'pushing our agenda') as a core value.

But they do concern risk-averse insurance companies.

GM (and Ford, with the Pinto) is probably thinking about how many lawsuits would be filed because of the defective part, and the average payout. If the estimated cost of the lawsuits is more than the cost of recalls, they don't fight the recalls.

2.6M registered owners. Even if only 30% of the owners return them for the warranty fix, that's still 780,000 cars worth of expense. For 13 deaths over a 10+ year time span.

And they want to recall 2.6M cars??? No wonder American made stuff is so expensive...

Details, details, details... (The ISS is 495 short tons, for just 6 people.)

I know what I meant. Apparently I didn't do as good a job of explaining it as I thought I did.

It appears that you think I know that I meant something like "chemistry will be different on Mars".

This is the crucial sentence: Handwavium to convert chemical transformation formulas into actual non-laboratory processes.

Electrolysis systems for 6 people on the ISS are going to be radically different in scale than those for a bunch of colonists.

That's the key word: scale.

The Handwavium comes in the paragraphs in and around this sentence:

The equipment (and spare parts, and maintenance, and assembly and repair, etc) needed to do all that stuff will be much more complicated on Mars than you think.

On Earth, we can send out some geologists or a surveying crew, rent or buy heavy machinery, parts, drilling mud, explosives, etc of a variety of forms from a jillion different sources.

OTOH, every bit of every kind of stuff needed on Mars will have to be sent at the beginning (whether on one ship or multiple doesn't matter), and that will drive up the cost of the expedition to absurd heights.

National Pride and bureaucratic inertia are two factors which can keep some big project going well past it's Sell By date.

Why did Boeing cancel it's 2027 project? Why have there been no other SSTs (either European or American) since then?

Because they aren't economical.

This is the Handwavium:

A few shovel digs and up comes potable water?

In reality, it'll be akin to strip mining.

You're saying that right now we can send 10 people to Mars?

Or that we need some advance in technology to simultaneously send 10 Curiosity rovers?

Or something else?

I'll disagree until you show me some evidence. Presumably you think the same way.

You agree with me, but seem to be fighting anyway.

Go back and read my original post on cost:
http://science.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=4874589&cid=46442899

some problems' only solutions are sooo expensive that the problem isn't worth solving.

See, we agree!!

OTOH, technology marches on.

Now that Pratt & Whitney has developed a supercruise engine for the F-22, if Boeing demonstrates that the 787's carbon fiber body is durable, then combining those technologies with NASA's boom reduction research the concept of supersonic passenger aircraft could be brought out of mothballs (especially for long Asian and Pacific routes).