Mars or Bust

Plants grow very well in sand and dust, take Israel, the whole country was mostly a desert with some swamps here anbd there filled with malaria flies, now however Israel makes all their own greens such as olives, cucumber, tomatoes etc.

And what does oxygen have to do with a nuke? the heat and impact a nuke creates are more than well enough to melt some ice, why do you think they actully believe they can move an asteroid headed for earth?

It wouldnt take that long to colonize mars either, if the atmosphere gets filled with the green house gas CO2 then planting engineered plants wil be no problem, making the planit habitable will take no more than 100 years and thats with the current technology. Also no gas will float away from Mars since it has its own atmosphere around it preventing that.

The only time taking step is heating up the planets wich itself could take a houndred years with current technology.

And sure it is a waste of money to go to Mars, countless billions spent on it by many countries. But it drives technology forward such as rocket engines, impulse drives, the new engine that runs on hydrogen and oxygen leaving a bi product of pure H2O, and other strong light weight materials such as kevlar.

Sure we waste alot of cash but arent we infact saving our selves from destroying ourselves with this new tech? face it, how long can earth have all those cars spewing CO2 into the atmosphere? Thats where an engine whose bi product is water comes in hand eliminating that problem.

Also I might add, USA are not doing everything by themselves, they have assistance from several countries wich in my eyes help foreign relations in the future so we wont have a real fallout here.

Besides, haven't u seen Star Trek? thats freaking cool :)
 
:wall:

This is some funny shit you guys are posting about terraforming! I mean, its like a bunch of internerds are trying to be rocket scientists or something! :D

Where to begin, where to begin...
Mars has an atmosphere already. It is just very, very thin and contains mostly nitrogen.

They need to pump CFCs not PFCs! The last thing Mars needs is a bunch of Private First Classes running around! You kill me Jebus!

Nukes are not combustion events! They are thermonuclear fission events,they do not need oxygen as a catalyst! And a nuclear explosion outside of an atmosphere would make an EM pulse primarily. Have you sens Ocean's 11? Like that thing they steal to knock out power. Or the one from Goldeneye. Or the one that destroyed civilization in Dark Angel.

True, Mars has a much weaker gravitational field. But it has one nevertheless, able to support an atmosphere and liquid water (hence the riverbeds). That is more than enough to sustain human life. Incidentally, a Nova program detailed how Mars's size (or rather the lack thereof) probably accounted for the loss of its atmosphere early on. Because the core of the planet cooled, the electromagnetic field no longer functioned. Without a field solar winds were able to strip off the atmosphere over millennia. Same would happen here if the core solidified. Which leads to my next point...

In order to create an atmosphere we would really need to restart a magnetic field on Mars, first and foremost. Without it, all the atmosphere we so painstakingly add would be sloughed off by the solar winds.

Second, Mars needs WATER, liquid WATER. Water is the single most important physical material Mars needs. With it you can fuel fusion reactors to power the CFC (not PFC) plants (if CFC plants are even needed) and convert the soil into CO2.

Water and magnetics are the keys to Mars. Of course, how you intend to restart a magnetic field on a planetary scale is beyond me. And before you say that there is water in the Martian icecaps know that they are mostly CO2, not H2O.

More fun stuff:
Some plants and many bacteria LOVE rust. It is iron after all, a major component of life. The key is reducing it.

The Space Shuttle uses liquid oxygen and liquid hydrogen in its engines. This is not new science. Ramjets and plasma jets are.
The reason Isreal has its own agriculture that came seemingly out of the desert is because of massive, truly massive, investments in hydrology and irrigation. That and the area around the Dead Sea at least is below sea level, so the atmosphere is noticeably and importantly thicker, making things grow better.

It would take generations to first terraform then colonize Mars, unless some brand new tech revolutionizes energy, transportation and atmospheric science. And we begin cloning.

I will agree though about trickle down technology. I just disagree about the method. All the technologies mentioned here, along with Tang and Teflon, came from NASA research. ie government sponsored primary research. I think that an agency (like DARPA) can do the same primary research with the purpose of creating new technology in a much more efficient and planned method than that of NASA.

Sorry to be so mean, but really, before you go posting solutions to such complex problems I suggest more research!

Or if you were trying to be funny, nice job!
 
Wow, this thread died really fast.
Forget what has been said. Do you think Bush has any personall agendas for puting a man on Mars besides whats already been spoken of?
 
Snake said:
It wouldnt take that long to colonize mars either, if the atmosphere gets filled with the green house gas CO2 then planting engineered plants wil be no problem, making the planit habitable will take no more than 100 years and thats with the current technology. Also no gas will float away from Mars since it has its own atmosphere around it preventing that.
Last time I checked, it was gravity that held stuff in, not the atmosphere. Gravity also holds the atmosphere down.

Snake said:
Wow, this thread died really fast.
Forget what has been said. Do you think Bush has any personall agendas for puting a man on Mars besides whats already been spoken of?
I must be missing something here. Why would he?
 
Well USA has been getting alot of bad publicity for attacking Irak. Putting a man on Mars would restore their...whats the word im searching for here? popularity?
 
Snake said:
Well USA has been getting alot of bad publicity for attacking Irak. Putting a man on Mars would restore their...whats the word im searching for here? popularity?


Of course it would. At least Bush thinks so. But in order for it to have any effect on the US's current popularity an astronaut would have to step on the Mars within the next election cycle. That isn't going to happen.

And whether putting an astronaut on Mars would really improve America's popularity is open to debate.

I'm all for grand plans of this nature. The problem with Bush's plan, and by extension all his plans, is that they are all grand, paradigm shifting ones, but he and his cabal doesn't have a clue how to fund them! Where's the money, Mr. Bush?

This argument could go for Iraq. It could go for No Child Left Behind. It could go for Afghanistan. It could go for the FAA. It could go for Homeland Security. It could go for Social Security.

Where's the money?
 
Murdoch said:
I'm all for grand plans of this nature. The problem with Bush's plan, and by extension all his plans, is that they are all grand, paradigm shifting ones, but he and his cabal doesn't have a clue how to fund them! Where's the money, Mr. Bush?

This argument could go for Iraq. It could go for No Child Left Behind. It could go for Afghanistan. It could go for the FAA. It could go for Homeland Security. It could go for Social Security.

Where's the money?

It isn't about money as much as it's about election strategy right now. He's got all these wonderful plans but he needs more time to execute them. Therefore, he deserves more time in office, because those evil liberal Demoncrats will cut it all out from under him.

Neither Mars of the Moon are truly feasable for permanent occupation until further technologies are developed.
 
MrMarcus said:
It isn't about money as much as it's about election strategy right now. He's got all these wonderful plans but he needs more time to execute them. Therefore, he deserves more time in office, because those evil liberal Demoncrats will cut it all out from under him.

He deserves more time in office to finish his plans? Preposterous. Bush deserves more time in office if the electoral college believes he is doing a good job.

I especially enjoy the irony of how you believe a conservative Republican small-government president is in danger of having his projects curtailed by the big-government socialist Democrats. Ha!

Of course you also realize that there is no money to pay for his programs, so the ones who will be paying for them are your children and children's children in the form of a massive and irreconcilable national deficit.

But this thread is about Mars, so Mr. Marcus, how is any of your previous post related to this topic? Besides of course the quip about going to the moon being unfeasible. Care to provide some proof, or just derail the debate some more?
 
It's all political.

His father did something similar with the space station. But Bush's current proposal (largely done without funds) would also mean that projects like the space station and the hubbel will get gutted or will die out before they were scheduled to.

This is another case of using the power of the state for political ambitions rather than for good policy.

There has been a bit on this at NPR.

http://www.npr.org/features/feature.php?wfId=1625684
http://www.npr.org/features/feature.php?wfId=1603727
http://www.npr.org/features/feature.php?wfId=1601320
http://www.npr.org/features/feature.php?wfId=1602589
http://www.npr.org/features/feature.php?wfId=1599039
http://www.npr.org/features/feature.php?wfId=1597011
 
I think that the ultimate goal is to have a staging platform off the moon, and then mars to reach the asteroid belt in hope of mining any materials. This planet is just about taped out and they are wanting to know if we can manage any of these programs to get done. Ofcourse it is also an election year so it might sound good to some of the pleabians and drum up some funds for the reelection campaign.
 
Casca said:
Ofcourse it is also an election year so it might sound good to some of the pleabians and drum up some funds for the reelection campaign.

BINGO!

Sorry Murdoch, I left off the [sarcasm][/sarcasm] tags. I didn't vote for him, nor do I plan to. Casca and Welsh stated the point much clearer than I did - right now Mars and the Moon are being used as political leverage. Bush is making promises he can't keep about putting men on Mars not because he thinks he can, but because it sounds good to Joe-Sixpack the unthinking voter.

Right now the project is where it needs to be - gathering data and figuring out ahead of time what obstacles will need to be overcome to colonize Mars. Armed with that knowledge research can be directed where it needs and give the first colonists a higher chance of survival whenever they land there.
 
Murdoch said:
:wall:
They need to pump CFCs not PFCs! The last thing Mars needs is a bunch of Private First Classes running around! You kill me Jebus!


No, I mean PCFs. CFC's destroy ozon, and that really is the last thing you'd want on Mars....
 
Back
Top