Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Mars Sample Return

editor said:
Knowing that an extinction level event is pretty much a certainly at some point, you still don't think that humanity should ever leave this planet. So what else could I conclude?
Click to expand...

OK first of all, where to? We can't even make this one planet habitable and sustainable for everyone ... even when that's what its actually evolved for billions of years to be and "we"'ve fucked it. how are we going to manage to make a paradise out of Mars, or Callisto, or .... where? There's nowhere 'we' know of that's habitable or even close to habitable, and what if we find somewhere and it's already inhabited? Is it human colonisation pt.2 the space chapter (but still with genocide or should we call it xenocide?)

Then, for how many? A few hundred? A few dozen? Who? Can you pay to join? Will it be a sample of every ethnic and cultural group on earth? Like fuck it will.

And what about the billions who stay? They just die in an extinction event, bye bye.

What species will we take, what bacteria, viruses, insects, moulds... etc will we only take 'useful' ones and not 'harmful' ones? Only to discover that Earth is an infinitely complex lifeform in itself, with layer upon layer of redundancies and feedback loops that can't be replicated elsewhere (we're so clever, we must make it work! right?)

I have my misanthropic moments, who doesn't? Call this one. I love Earth, I love actual individual humans quite a lot. But humanity as a species upon the Earth? The species willing to shit all over its home then just move on instead of fix it and make this into paradise for everyone, is a terrible thing to inflict on the wider galaxy.

It's pipedreams IMO, and dangerously elitist ones at that. If there were arks and everyone who wanted to could leave, I'd be OK with that - but that isn't how it'd happen.

Now I'll go and feel bad for being a stupid misanthrope who hasn't really thought the magical golden interplanetary future through :thumbs:
 
mojo pixy said:
OK first of all, where to? We can't even make this one planet habitable and sustainable for everyone ... even when that's what its actually evolved for billions of years to be and "we"'ve fucked it. how are we going to manage to make a paradise out of Mars, or Callisto, or .... where? There's nowhere 'we' know of that's habitable or even close to habitable, and what if we find somewhere and it's already inhabited? Is it human colonisation pt.2 the space chapter (but still with genocide or should we call it xenocide?)

Then, for how many? A few hundred? A few dozen? Who? Can you pay to join? Will it be a sample of every ethnic and cultural group on earth? Like fuck it will.

And what about the billions who stay? They just die in an extinction event, bye bye.

What species will we take, what bacteria, viruses, insects, moulds... etc will we only take 'useful' ones and not 'harmful' ones? Only to discover that Earth is an infinitely complex lifeform in itself, with layer upon layer of redundancies and feedback loops that can't be replicated elsewhere (we're so clever, we must make it work! right?)

I have my misanthropic moments, who doesn't? Call this one. I love Earth, I love actual individual humans quite a lot. But humanity as a species upon the Earth? The species willing to shit all over its home then just move on instead of fix it and make this into paradise for everyone, is a terrible thing to inflict on the wider galaxy.

It's pipedreams IMO, and dangerously elitist ones at that. If there were arks and everyone who wanted to could leave, I'd be OK with that - but that isn't how it'd happen.

Now I'll go and feel bad for being a stupid misanthrope who hasn't really thought the magical golden interplanetary future through :thumbs:
Click to expand...

There's a bucketful of pessimistic projection. Who knows what technologies will be available to future generations, but if history is anything to go by, non 'elite' workers have always been needed for long journeys/colonisation.

But you'd still prefer for humanity to be totally obliterated rather than us become an inter-planetary species, yes?
 
editor said:
There's a bucketful of pessimistic projection. Who knows what technologies will be available to future generations, but if history is anything to go by, non 'elite' workers have always been needed for long journeys/colonisation.

But you'd still prefer for humanity to be totally obliterated rather than us become an inter-planetary species, yes?
Click to expand...

I don't think we've earned the right to colonise other planets tbh. Human colonisation has an ugly history and I can't see it being better off-planet. And we definitely don't have the technology to do it, or the lifespans to get there (anywhere beyond this solar system anyway. And, where??)

I'm obviously not keen on everyone dying, but .. but what? It might be doing a favour for the civilised galaxy?

Maybe, but actually what I think is, we do have the technology to make this planet a paradise for all 8 billion of us. I love the idea of space adventures, I think we should be already planning and maybe even building arks (it'd take thousands of years to build a fleet, and no doubt involve dismantling entire cites because we sure as hell don't have enough raw materials left in the ground for such a construction project) but a large part of me wishes we could just find it in ourselves to sort Earth out before we start reaching beyond. Then, we might have something to offer who/whatever we encounter.
 
editor said:
There's a bucketful of pessimistic projection. Who knows what technologies will be available to future generations, but if history is anything to go by, non 'elite' workers have always been needed for long journeys/colonisation.

But you'd still prefer for humanity to be totally obliterated rather than us become an inter-planetary species, yes?
Click to expand...
I think the non ‘elite’ workers would be robots tbh.
 
editor said:
Some might be but the notion of a huge colony being set up by just the elite and a load of robots is wildly improbable
Click to expand...

Really? A viable colony would be outside our solar system, so a lot of very tricky technical and resource problems would have to be solved along the way. Massive advances in robotics wouldn’t be necessary for that, but it seems pretty likely.

Edit - noting that this is the Mars thread, so perhaps other star systems should be discussed elsewhere. Not convinced at all about Mars though.
 
mojo pixy said:
I don't think we've earned the right to colonise other planets tbh. Human colonisation has an ugly history and I can't see it being better off-planet. And we definitely don't have the technology to do it, or the lifespans to get there (anywhere beyond this solar system anyway. And, where??)

I'm obviously not keen on everyone dying, but .. but what? It might be doing a favour for the civilised galaxy?

Maybe, but actually what I think is, we do have the technology to make this planet a paradise for all 8 billion of us. I love the idea of space adventures, I think we should be already planning and maybe even building arks (it'd take thousands of years to build a fleet, and no doubt involve dismantling entire cites because we sure as hell don't have enough raw materials left in the ground for such a construction project) but a large part of me wishes we could just find it in ourselves to sort Earth out before we start reaching beyond. Then, we might have something to offer who/whatever we encounter.
Click to expand...
Your life of relative luxury is on the back of the damage we've collectively done to the Earth and exploited workers so I think it's hard to take the moral high ground here.
Besides the most likely candidates for human to colonise have - as yet - no signs of life at all. It would be like colonising the Atacama Desert.

And you might say that you're "obviously not keen on everyone dying" but that's exactly what will definitely happen at some point in the future - and possibly quite soon given the ongoing nuclear tensions.
 
editor said:
Some might be but the notion of a huge colony being set up by just the elite and a load of robots is wildly improbable
Click to expand...
The only thing on mars at the moment is a robot & Elon musk seems to be the man with a plan to get there so it’s probably more probable than some kind of workers paradise! 😬
 
freshapple said:
The only thing on mars at the moment is a robot & Elon musk seems to be the man with a plan to get there so it’s probably more probable than some kind of workers paradise! 😬
Click to expand...
Why are you introducing nonsense about a 'workers' paradise'?
 
editor said:
Your life of relative luxury is on the back of the damage we've collectively done to the Earth and exploited workers so I think it's hard to take the moral high ground here.
Besides the most likely candidates for human to colonise have - as yet - no signs of life at all. It would be like colonising the Atacama Desert.
Click to expand...

"My" life lol as if you can offload your own high-tech, well-fed, centrally-heated responsibility. I think you mean "our" life of luxury, city boy.

So anyway, why not just terraform (i hope you mean 'terraform' because i'm seriously allergic to the word 'colonise') the bits of this world which are currently turning unhabitable under our stewardship, then? For people who are alive now?

editor said:
And you might say that you're "obviously not keen on everyone dying" but that's exactly what will definitely happen at some point in the future - and possibly quite soon given the ongoing nuclear tensions.
Click to expand...

I hate to break it go you but 'at some point' everything in the universe will be cold and dead.

Closer to home, there's no way we're getting to niburu before sea levels drown our biggest cities. And as for nuclear tensions, the entire reason we're in space at all is because of the cold war and nukes are a product of the same arms race as Saturn 5 so riddle me that on the moral high ground.
 
I absolutely approve of terraforming Mars. Colonization would not seem to be an applicable term to the human settlement of Mars since their are no aboriginal people there
 
mojo pixy said:
"My" life lol as if you can offload your own high-tech, well-fed, centrally-heated responsibility. I think you mean "our" life of luxury, city boy.

So anyway, why not just terraform (i hope you mean 'terraform' because i'm seriously allergic to the word 'colonise') the bits of this world which are currently turning unhabitable under our stewardship, then? For people who are alive now?



I hate to break it go you but 'at some point' everything in the universe will be cold and dead.

Closer to home, there's no way we're getting to niburu before sea levels drown our biggest cities. And as for nuclear tensions, the entire reason we're in space at all is because of the cold war and nukes are a product of the same arms race as Saturn 5 so riddle me that on the moral high ground.
Click to expand...

Grim, right?

We still have a chance to fix our planet, and if we don't have the heart, will or discipline to do so - we certainly shouldn't be out there in the stars. Yet.

Love space exploration but just as much effort should be exploring ways to heal Earth.

And it's not ok to leave it to the next generation, because that's an abdication of responsibility.

Imho, obviously.
 
krtek a houby said:
Grim, right?

We still have a chance to fix our planet, and if we don't have the heart, will or discipline to do so - we certainly shouldn't be out there in the stars. Yet.

Love space exploration but just as much effort should be exploring ways to heal Earth.

And it's not ok to leave it to the next generation, because that's an abdication of responsibility.

Imho, obviously.
Click to expand...
Why not do both? Explore and colonise other planets and also work together to fix the Earth?

I don't recall anyone ever stating that bit was an either/or option.
 
editor said:
This is getting very silly, given that the end of the universe is predicted to be in about 100 trillion years.

www.popularmechanics.com

This Is What the End of the Universe Will Look Like, According to a Cosmologist

Roughly 1 trillion years from now, the last star will be born. In about 100 trillion years, the last light will go out.
www.popularmechanics.com www.popularmechanics.com
Click to expand...

I'm just saying if you're worried about the human race dying out, don't be. It's inevitable.

But heat-death of the universe aside, what exactly is the (imaginary) timescale for an 'extinction-level' astronomical event on Earth? Or is it just odds at this stage? (hint: it is). Do you think we'll be hit by a meteor before or after the deadly floods, storms, heatwaves, droughts and famines which are definitely coming in the next few generations, from man-made climate change? In short, will we starve, or burn?

You're right, it is silly. Because if we carry on as we are going, when the meteor finally hits there might not actually be any humans left to witness it.
 
editor said:
Unless we've managed to set up sustainable colonies on other planets, of course.
Click to expand...

Oh yeah, all those other planets without air or water or trees that we don't even know about and can't get to.

Science fiction is great though.
 
freshapple said:
Sorry, I was being lighthearted! I can’t see any benefit to having colonies on mars tbh.

Earth would have to be really really shit before mars was the better option.

www.nasa.gov

What Is Mars? (Grades 5-8) - NASA

Mars is the fourth planet from the Sun and the next planet beyond Earth. It is, on average, more than 142 million miles from the Sun.
www.nasa.gov www.nasa.gov
Click to expand...
Thing is, it's not all about colonisation/building interplanetary paradises for the elite. It's also about satisfying humankind's inherent curiosity and the insatiable desire to learn more and the need to explore strange new worlds, to seek out new life and new civilisations, and to,err, to boldly go where no one has gone before.

And it we do manage to leave the solar system, who knows what's out there and what possible discoveries could benefit us all?
 
OK, now things are getting serious on the RED Planet:

NASA's Perseverance rover may have found signs of life in a rock on Mars; the mission team's scientists are ecstatic, but remain cautious as further analysis is needed to confirm the discovery.


www.space.com

NASA's Perseverance Mars rover finds possible signs of ancient Red Planet life

"On Earth, these types of features in rocks are often associated with the fossilized record of microbes living in the subsurface."
www.space.com www.space.com
 
editor said:
Thing is, it's not all about colonisation/building interplanetary paradises for the elite. It's also about satisfying humankind's inherent curiosity and the insatiable desire to learn more and the need to explore strange new worlds, to seek out new life and new civilisations, and to,err, to boldly go where no one has gone before.

And it we do manage to leave the solar system, who knows what's out there and what possible discoveries could benefit us all?
Click to expand...
Might be easier to get gigs, too
 
Now, a real plan to warm Mars

Scientists propose warming up Mars by using heat-trapping 'glitter'​


Scientists are now proposing a new approach to warm up Earth's planetary neighbor by pumping engineered particles -similar in size to commercially available glitter and made of iron or aluminum - into the atmosphere as aerosols to trap escaping heat and scatter sunlight toward the Martian surface. The idea would be to augment the natural greenhouse effect on Mars to raise its surface temperature by roughly 50 degrees Fahrenheit (28 degrees Celsius) over a span of a decade.

The median Martian surface temperature is about minus-85 degrees Fahrenheit (minus-65 degrees Celsius). With its tenuous atmosphere, solar heat on the Martian surface readily escapes into space. The proposal would aim to allow liquid water to exist on the surface of Mars, which has water in the form of ice at its polar regions and its subsurface.

 
Last edited:
Original paper attached, and it makes for interesting reading.

This approach seems more achievable than the prevailing warming concept, that of using perfluorocarbon greenhouse gases, because of the staggering amount of PFC required and the scarcity of fluorine on Mars.

The paper suggests that 700,000 cubic metres per year of metal are required, which is 1/1000 of current terrestrial production. So massive automation would necessarily be required, but the process of converting ore to nanorods is not particularly intricate, and so might be quite amenable to full and large scale automation.

The result would be a tolerable but chilly Mars, with a somewhat thickened CO2 atmosphere. So people could go outside their habitats wearing a parka and oxygen mask, which a huge convenience and safety improvement over a full spacesuit. To make Mars completely Earthlike requires Godlike capabilities, but perhaps an austere subarctic Mars, with cold-tolerant vegetation and microbiota, and some small animals, is re easily achievable and worthwhile in its own right. People could live in huge tents (much easier to build than pressurised domes), as a higher external atmospheric pressure would balance the internal pressure in the tent, thus putting little strain on the fabric.
 

Attachments

  • sciadv.adn4650.pdf
    2.3 MB · Views: 0
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Yossarian
First liquid water found on Mars
Replies
11
Views
667
bcuster
bcuster
Elpenor
In Praise of Marshes
Replies
24
Views
877
ska invita
ska invita
editor
China's Tianwen-1 mission to Mars, 2021
Replies
25
Views
1K
gosub
gosub
editor
UAE's Hope probe successfully enters orbit around Mars, Feb 2021
Replies
4
Views
310
weltweit
weltweit
H
Mars-500, Extreme lockdown, stuck in a Russian warehouse for 520 days
Replies
2
Views
275
HAL9000
H
Back
Top Bottom