SCI/TECH: NASA In Talks About Using Global Warming To Transform Mars., page 1

posted on Apr, 5 2005 @ 02:15 PM

link

Researchers at NASA are suggesting we inject Mars with a man made global warming gas.
The researchers say that adding 300 parts per million of the artificial gas will cause runaway global warming. The Global warming will cause the ice caps to melt possible reviving dormant life on Mars.
It would be possible to send a manned mission to Mars to produce the supper green house gas. The raw materials for creating the artificial gas already exist on Mars. Otherwise the mission would not be feasible to transport the gases from Earth.

www.spaceref.com
WASHINGTON -- Injecting synthetic "super" greenhouse gases into the Martian atmosphere could raise the planet's temperature enough to melt its polar ice caps and create conditions suitable for sustaining biological life. In fact, a team of researchers suggests that introducing global warming on the Red Planet may be the best approach for warming the planet's frozen landscape and turning it into a habitable world in the future.

"Bringing life to Mars and studying its growth would contribute to our understanding of evolution, and the ability of life to adapt and proliferate on other worlds," Marinova said. "Since warming Mars effectively reverts it to its past, more habitable state, this would give any possibly dormant life on Mars the chance to be revived and develop further."

The authors note that artificially created gases -- which would be nearly 10,000 times more effective than carbon dioxide -- could be manufactured to have minimal detrimental effects on living organisms and the ozone layer while retaining an exceptionally long lifespan in the environment. They then created a computer model of the Martian atmosphere and analyzed four such gases, individually and in combination, that are considered the best candidates for the job.

Please visit the link provided for the complete story.

Just because we can do something doesn't mean we should.
Unleashing life on Mars could create a super virus that if came to Earth may very well destroy us. There are many things to consider when terraforming a planet.

On the other hand there may come a time where our survival may depend on terraforming Mars. More and more it looks like life on Earth wont be pretty in the future.

Either way there are many things to consider. Hopefully when it comes time to decide on causing global warming on Mars our civilization will be mature enough to understand the consequence.

Related News Links:
science.nasa.gov

Related AboveTopSecret.com Discussion Threads:
POLL: would you support human-made life on mars???
Terraforming of other planets: For or Against?
Space Colonisation

[edit on 5/4/2005 by Umbrax]

Nygdan

posted on Apr, 5 2005 @ 02:27 PM

link

Unleashing life on Mars could create a super virus that if came to Earth may very well destroy us

On the other hand, if man lives on multiple planets, then if earth is destroyed, man lives on.

wecomeinpeace

posted on Apr, 5 2005 @ 02:34 PM

link

The question is once the global warming was initiated, how would we stop it? We barely understand the workings of global warming on our own planet. Starting a fire is easy; putting it out is the hard bit. We're far from the stage where we can safely "play ant-farm" with entire planets.

Seekerof

posted on Apr, 5 2005 @ 02:37 PM

link

I thought Mars was currently undergoing some sort of "Global Warming"?

Scientists have suspected in recent years that Mars might be undergoing some sort of global warming. New data points to the possibility it is emerging from an ice age.

Mars Emerging from Ice Age, Data Suggest
Mars could be undergoing major global warming
Global Warming on Mars?

seekerof

Ikema

posted on Apr, 5 2005 @ 03:43 PM

link

As I understand it Mars is to small or rotates to slowly to keep much of its atmospere from disapating into space. Also without a magnetic field you have hardly any protection from cosmic rays, Solar storms, Sun spots.

If this is so then Mars would need more then an atmoshere to be inhabited by us anyhow.

Edit: for misspelling

[edit on 5-4-2005 by Ikema]

Amorymeltzer

posted on Apr, 5 2005 @ 04:16 PM

link

I love sci-fi.

Yes. We could create a virus. But, we could also overpopulate and overuse planet Earth, driving billions to starvation, disease, and death, while economically ruining those who werent impoverished. Which seems more likely?

Terraforming is necessary, and I see no reason not to. The various methods are debatable, but a greenhouse gase is desirable, especially one that, if engineered properly, we could stop when we wish.

AlanSmithee

posted on Apr, 5 2005 @ 05:20 PM

link

Originally posted by wecomeinpeace
The question is once the global warming was initiated, how would we stop it? We barely understand the workings of global warming on our own planet. Starting a fire is easy; putting it out is the hard bit. We're far from the stage where we can safely "play ant-farm" with entire planets.

Well, aslong as they werent constantly releasing the chemicals into the atmosphere there wouldnt be a need to worry about "Stopping" it. The only reason we're undergoing global warming (Atleast if humans are causing it) here on earth is because we're constantly pumping more chemicals into the air. On mars i suspect it would be a oneshot deal and maybe a little upkeep to keep replenishing the chemicals that escaped into space or decayed.

Personally, i think if they can do it, they should do it. Id love to see a terraformed mars in my lifetime. I wouldnt mind them holding off a few more years though, because even 10 years ago any thoughts of terraforming mars were supposed to take 400+ years to accomplish. In another few years who knows how much they can shorten that. Id rather they do it right once than have to keep going back and trying to "Fix" it.

I wonder what theyre going to pump into the atmosphere though, and will people and/or plants be able to breathe it?

Aelita

posted on Apr, 5 2005 @ 05:33 PM

link

Why doesn't NASA suggest inventing "global cooling" to save the Earth? Signing the Kyoto protocol would be a good start.

That would be money much better spent. I like it here on Earth.

Sugarlump

posted on Apr, 5 2005 @ 06:30 PM

link

We would need to restart the liquid core rotating to have mars be anything other than a gas leaking sieve. without a functioning magnetosphere you'd need to live underground, and that being the case there are better places to colonize that would not require a jump out of a gravity well at both ends of a round trip.

Aelita

posted on Apr, 5 2005 @ 06:33 PM

link

Originally posted by Sugarlump
and that being the case there are better places to colonize that would not require a jump out of a gravity well at both ends of a round trip.

Yeah I agree, there are better places and one of them is called the Earth. I usually drive to work, no gravity well problem here

jra

posted on Apr, 5 2005 @ 08:07 PM

link

Originally posted by Ikema
Also without a magnetic field you have hardly any protection from cosmic rays, Solar storms, Sun spots.

Ah you beat me to it. Yeah with the lack of a magnetic field, it would prevent any life (or life as we know it) from growing and surviving on the surface. A thicker, warmer atmosphere isn't going to be enough.

I think trying to terraform Mars (or some other planet) could be a good thing for the future of humanity, but I just don't see this working to well. Perhaps cities with biodomes and the like would be better.

National Security Agency

posted on Apr, 5 2005 @ 08:37 PM

link

Is it because we are soon (within 200 years) going to run out of resources on Earth and need an escape?

sardion2000

posted on Apr, 5 2005 @ 10:24 PM

link

I am all for this. Personally I just do not get the people who say we should fix earth first. Experimenting on Mars and Venus could give us valuable insight into how it all works, and we could take that knowledge and apply it on Earth. What a concept

This isn't just about Colonization it's about increasing the capabilities and knowledge of Humanity as a whole, having extra real-estate is just a bonus IMO.

As for the lack of a magnetic field on Mars, well if the new Radiation shields on the ISS work out(think Artificial Magnetic Bubble) we could set out on an Engineering project like no other, and that is to create a Magnetosphere around large portions of Mars' surface. We probably would need ALOT of power to do the whole planet, so we should just pick the most strategic locations. Like places where there is lots of resources etc.

[edit on 5-4-2005 by sardion2000]

National Security Agency

posted on Apr, 6 2005 @ 12:15 AM

link

I own land on the moon, who wants to buy one acre? ...........Ofcourse you can't build anything on it because.....ah nevermind......It has a beautiful view of Earth and in the backyard you can have a huge crater to put a custom sized trampalene.

Intelearthling

posted on Apr, 6 2005 @ 12:49 AM

link

I don't know if this will work. First, the atmospheric pressure on Mars wouldn't never enable us to run around in T'shirts and shorts, even if the temperature did get up to the 80's and 90's. There just wouldn't be enough ozone in the upper atmosphere to block out UV radiation on top of this fact.

Second, the gravity on Mars would permit any gases (billions and billions of tons) introduced to it's atmosphere to escape into space.

Living on the Martian surface would be out. It's a failed project before it get's started.

Now, underground dwellings would be a different story.

[edit on 6/4/05 by Intelearthling]

Nygdan

posted on Apr, 6 2005 @ 11:15 AM

link

Originally posted by National Security Agency
I own land on the moon, who wants to buy one acre?

A number of peoples and agencies have actually sold land on the moon. The deeds are of course meaningless.

Amorymeltzer

posted on Apr, 7 2005 @ 09:01 PM

link

Originally posted by Nygdan
A number of peoples and agencies have actually sold land on the moon. The deeds are of course meaningless.

Can't own property in space.

sardion2000

posted on Apr, 8 2005 @ 02:19 AM

link

Originally posted by Amorymeltzer

Originally posted by Nygdan
A number of peoples and agencies have actually sold land on the moon. The deeds are of course meaningless.

Can't own property in space.

Yet... how do we expect to colonize if people cannot own property?

Amorymeltzer

posted on Apr, 8 2005 @ 06:12 PM

link

Originally posted by sardion2000
Yet... how do we expect to colonize if people cannot own property?

I guess we'll just have to do something about that, now won't we?

It's slightly archaic, from the race between America and USSR. Nobody wants war to spread to space, too many options. Suffice to say it will be done away with.

Besides, you may not own it, but it's all yours if no one else can get there. Also, you can just declare, for example, Mars, a separate entity from Earth, and then say 'America is landing and living here.' No one will stop you, except by landing and living there too.

synystyr69

posted on Jun, 1 2005 @ 07:39 PM

link

Originally posted by Intelearthling
I don't know if this will work. First, the atmospheric pressure on Mars wouldn't never enable us to run around in T'shirts and shorts, even if the temperature did get up to the 80's and 90's. There just wouldn't be enough ozone in the upper atmosphere to block out UV radiation on top of this fact.

Second, the gravity on Mars would permit any gases (billions and billions of tons) introduced to it's atmosphere to escape into space.

Living on the Martian surface would be out. It's a failed project before it get's started.

Now, underground dwellings would be a different story.

[edit on 6/4/05 by Intelearthling]