I pointed earlier to an MIT student project that simulated a base on Mars similar to that proposed by the Mars One organization.  (See the Mars simulation paper (pdf)).  Mars One chief Bas Lansdorp responds in the comments to this post: MIT Analysis Paints Bleak Outcome for Mars One Concept – SpacePolicyOnline.com .

Stewart Money also considers the “bleak” description as overly pessimistic: The Mars One Plan: Bleak? or Needs to be Tweeked? – Innerspace.net

There is no doubt that Mars One is risky concept, and if it is to ever gain real traction, it will have to endure a lot more scrutiny than presented in the MIT study.  It should probably begin with a clear statement that Mars One is meant as an evolving concept, in which the final product may differ considerable from what has initially been put forward on a time frame which like all space projects, is subject to change.  At the same time, its many critics might want to at least consider how much of the risk to any future Mars mission, whether one way of with a return ticket, could be reduced through advancing the Technological Readiness Level (TRL) of some of the core technologies the MIT team identifies.

Finally, they might want to ask why the U.S. is committed to a very different, but perhaps even more financially implausible plan.