 |
reply posted on 14-6-2004 @ 07:53 PM by spacedoubt
|
If the Nuke scenario worked to any extent.
There is another problem, no magnetic field..
Well, not exactly, there are some small areas
where the original magnetic field "fossilized" into
the rocks, some say there is enough protection in these
zones.
Could there be a way to deal with that problem..?
Oh, And Nutzo,
I always liked saying "wasps nests" couldn't think of a way to
fit it into the post, other than this though..
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 14-6-2004 @ 07:56 PM by nutzobalzo
|
 Originally posted by spacedoubt
Oh, And Nutzo,
I always liked saying "wasps nests" couldn't think of a way to
fit it into the post, other than this though.. 
How about this?
Nuke Mars? That's as crazy as sticking your head in a 'Wasps Nest'!
Nutzo
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 14-6-2004 @ 08:20 PM by spacedoubt
|
Good one
Both are really bad ideas.
Imagine, in the future, you need to move a large population,
to Mars, to avoid extinction, maybe there is an asteroid on the way.
But you can't go, radiation levels are still
too high, and the water is polluted.
Because you were screwing around
with nukes, a few decades previous..
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 14-6-2004 @ 08:53 PM by AD5673
|
Originally posted by DaRAGE
Why dont they just nuke Mars to allow for a warmer more habitable planet.
They say that the Tzar bomb (the worlds largest detonated nuke) if fully fissible and exploded at 100 Megatons, would have released 25% of the total
radioactive material already on the planet.
But...since they didn't make it fully fissible, and only exploded at 50 megaton, they were able to reduce the amount of radiation by 95%.
Why dont they just explode a heap of tzar like bombs on Mars to heat it up a bit ;P Melt that ice, at the polar ice caps, get it flowing again and
into the atmosphere, heat up mars a heap, get a denser atmosphere on mars, let it trap the heat from the sun more, get it to temperatures where algae,
moss, whatever, can blossom, and spread over the planet and get oxygen into the atmosphere. Make the planet habitable.
Wouldn't it sure speed up the colonization process?
Nuking it wold be a good ide but there night already be life there. If we nuke Mars then that life will probably die becuase of radition, or maybe it
will feed of the energy released from the radiation?  I would like to see something llving like that!!
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 14-6-2004 @ 09:02 PM by minority2000uk
|
Mars and atmosphere
Right just wanted to place a comment here......What if we do melt the caps get an atmosphere going has anyone ever thought why it lost the last
one????
Because it has to low a mass to create a decent gravity to hold on to it as we melt it the more we let that valuable water float away it could power
are bases let us drink and also let us explorer farer out.
Nuke it and loose it i would say hmm what a half life of a typical nuclear pay load 500,000 years or so?
Anyway lets face facts in time we kill our planet or better still we dont get our tech better so we can leae our solar system the sun will expand get
hotter and anyway the planets doomed because we have a runaway green house effect due to the aging of our sun....face facts when its time to leave its
time to leave we need new planets already habitabal
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 14-6-2004 @ 09:22 PM by jameo131i
|
WTF? Nuke mars? It isn't even our planet to nuke? That is totally f'd up! The planet will be come radioactive and no one will be able to live on
it... nuking mars is a stupid idea... the point of colonising mars is so we can eventually live on it... it's our own fault that the earth is the way
it is... really we should spend more time and money (are hello mr bush... billions of dollars on space exploration... how bout spending that money
else where... making industry better for the environment) ... fixing our planet first.
[edit on 14/6/2004 by jameo131i]
[edit on 14/6/2004 by jameo131i]
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 15-6-2004 @ 12:53 PM by Trevor
|
I have a theory about those two probes on the 'lost' Mars Polar lander - and the planet-wide storm later on in time.
The word nukes figures in this theory! 
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 15-6-2004 @ 07:40 PM by FreeMason
|
I would be making comments, but the nuclear science and the Mars science in this thread is so pathetic, I'm not even sure where to begin or
bother.
So all I can really do is say to just abandon the thread all together, it is so chock-full of misinformed junk.
Just looking at several posts...
Half life of Uranium-235 is something like 4 billion years, but in a Nuclear bomb almost all of it is fissioned and so there is nothing left, what is
left is irradiation that lasts about 10 years.
There is not enough gasses in the polar caps to make an atmosphere worth a darn.
There is no life on Mars. The only question is was there ever life on Mars?
Those are just a few errors I was bombarded with on just this page alone.
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 15-6-2004 @ 07:46 PM by kinglizard
|
Originally posted by FreeMason
I would be making comments, but the nuclear science and the Mars science in this thread is so pathetic, I'm not even sure where to begin or
bother.
So all I can really do is say to just abandon the thread all together, it is so chock-full of misinformed junk.
Just looking at several posts...
Half life of Uranium-235 is something like 4 billion years, but in a Nuclear bomb almost all of it is fissioned and so there is nothing left, what is
left is irradiation that lasts about 10 years.
There is not enough gasses in the polar caps to make an atmosphere worth a darn.
There is no life on Mars. The only question is was there ever life on Mars?
Those are just a few errors I was bombarded with on just this page alone.
Well, we all would shutter to think we have insulted your superior intellect. Every time I read one of your posts you are putting someone down, I’m
simply fed up with your highbrow attitude looking down at everybody from your princely perch. I expect more from a freemason and so does your lodge.
Rather than put down everyone to make your point just make your point. Thanks….
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 15-6-2004 @ 10:32 PM by FreeMason
|
Kinglizard, first don't assume how I post is how I act, that's so annoying, it's like two people arguing over the internet that they can beat-up
the other one.
Down to business, all this stuff that's filling up the forums with page after page of useless arguments, has already been covered in previous posts.
Entire threads have been devoted to dispell myths about things being purported in this thread.
Hell I have a thread entirely devoted to understanding WHY terraforming Mars is next to impossible, unless we invent a "God machine".
Yet the arguments persist.
That is very draining on one's patience.
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 17-6-2004 @ 08:20 PM by spacedoubt
|
I think this thread is interesting.
And a good place for brainstorming, learning, etc..
So Don't kill it! please..
Also, has anyone calculated the number of Nukes it would take to have
ANY sort of affect on Mars climate of even the smallest amount?
What about Megatonnage per detonation, would you concentrate in certain areas, like the poles? or spread it around, with certain target areas picked
out. for various reasons.
Just wondering..
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 17-6-2004 @ 10:33 PM by KrazyIvan
|
Originally posted by TheConservative
This would be a very interesting way to start the terraformation of Mars.
not to mention make the planet unliveable because of all the radiation, yout have to wait thousand or millions of years for all that to go away
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 19-6-2004 @ 01:43 PM by Gazrok
|
What if we do melt the caps get an atmosphere going has anyone ever thought why it lost the last one????
Sounds very "Total Recall", hehe...
Start the reactor Quaid....
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 19-6-2004 @ 03:20 PM by Hellmutt
|
Nuking Mars?
You gotta be crazy. We can´t even control the climate here on Earth (and it seems to be getting out of control as well), how could we possibly control
the climate on another planet?
According to this nuke-theory we will never ever have a problem with "atomic winter" here on earth. We just nuke our own ice-caps and voila...Seems
like there are just too many triggerhappy nuke-fanatics out there. Ever thought about the fact that maybe all this nuke-testing that have been going
on here on Earth might be the reason why the climate is getting out of control?
Nukes should ONLY be used to possibly changing the orbit of earthbound objects when no other options are available.
"Nuking Mars, just to see what happens"... Jeezus, hope you will never become President... 
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 4-7-2004 @ 09:23 PM by Ixataar
|
Cobalt Bomb (Circa 1992)
Deep Space informed the world in 1992 that a Cobalt Bomb had been dropped on the Face by the USA by one of it's "Lost" probes (to degrade the
evidence). He put forward that this was the reason for "deterioration" in features from the Mariner/Viking images to the "Catbox" ones.
I have a whole heap of old e-mails from the odd prick...
I do not endorse this theory one way or the other.
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
|
