More seriously, even with chemical propulsion, the worst case, you can get to Mars in about six months. Sure it's a hard problem, but that's all that it is. There's nothing impossible about getting to Mars. It would be nice to have some far faster means of getting there, but it's not necessary.
But, considering that's the way to go, can you estimate how much would that cost to assemble,test, launch, deploy, etc? Would the astronauts have canned food for a year or would have some sort of greenhouse to grow their own? Can they carry the necessary amount of fuel to be used in the years they'll spent on the trip? How much would the payload be.... How exactly would they avoid the martian windstorms(this might pose a problem specially to the launch back to Earth) and extreme temperature variations.. I'm just saying, we can't overlook the "details".
The majority of all the 'raw data' is available on line.
you can even go get your own if you like as it source is not begin hidden anywhere. It is right out in the open so to speak.
Now instead of using stolen 12 year old internal emails and docs which no longer have a clear chain of custody making their contents questionable to dispute man made global warming / climate change. Get a hold of the data and do your own analysis and present your findings along with your conclusions supported by that data.
The goal of science is to build better mousetraps. The goal of nature is to build better mice.