Their take on chlorofluorocarbons has nothing to do with what the previous example you gave was, which was Ozone alteration. The previous example was
corn-ball, this is more reasonable.
I want to point out their initial presuposition which is in my opinion what seperates this from do-able, and write-able.
Could people live freely on Mars one day? Today Mars is a frozen desert with a carbon dioxide atmosphere that is too thin for liquid water to
exist. Water may however exist deep underground in subsurface aquifers.
there's water under the surface of Mars (and that is an extremely big if), then we can terraform Mars (breifly as Mars is a dead world
for a reason, which means it will want to return to its state of death if we do not solve that reason, and that reason is not atmospheric but tectonic
and size. Both of which we have no power to change the later though we could change if we bombarded Mars with the Moon and Ceres, adding their
combined masses into a larger form.)
The article gives no argument as to what to do if
there is no water in giant underground aquifers. And if you don't have a contingency plan
then it's not possible with-out luck, and luck is not always on our side.
Also I'm still skeptical of the quality of thought behind the effort. Again "do-ability vs. write-ability".
I can write all day about terraforming Mars, someone wrote three books on it.
Just as many people wrote about going to the Moon, but NASA did not decide to do what Jules Vern wrote. He only happend to be lucky in concept, the
reality is hundreds of volumes of technical manuals and data figurations that would allow us to build a craft predicted to go to the Moon and
I've never seen such practical data gathering and research for terraforming any world. It always is "write-able" articles and books and such,
No one will take any of these articles and begin doing it without quickly encountering problems, such as "what if there is no water under the Martian
Or what if we melt the ice-caps (the northern especially) and find that not only did it not have its desired affect, but now the gasses we released
are escaping into space and will be fully gone in 500 million years.
Anyways, more important to me which makes me skeptical, is the bit at the top that says:
"Aerospacescholars.jsc.nasa.gov: An Educational Outreach Program Between NASA's Johnson Space Center & the State of Texas."
For two reasons:
1) JSC does not head the planetary sciences department, that is why JPL is working with the Mars Rovers, JSC handles Public Relations and Manned
Space Flight once cleared from the tower and many numerous other things.
2) Educational Outreach is public relation gimicks. It's far fetched, and has little to do with science. The thing that bugs me the most is that
they now have 3 Astronauts selected to be "Educator Astronauts" giving classes from space to high schoolers and such below. Two are Geologists, I
am thankful though because while I believe Geologists are going to be sent to the Moon and Mars in the future, not fighter pilots (this was shown by
sending Harrison Schmitt on the last and most important expedition of Apollo, Apollo 17.) But these educator astronauts have the lowest educational
history I have ever seen compared to non-pilot Astronauts, one only has their Bachelors in Geology.
My point is, NASA which is strapped for funding, is doing what I see as desperate things, now that's probably a bit biased, but sending an Astronaut
up for nothing but publicity, which is all educating from space really is, is in my opinion a sign of desperation.
And it's sad because those Astronauts can do the job just as well as the others, and they should not be sent up as "educators" but as Astronauts
and should be given assignments that show this and so forth and so on....Politics is beating NASA down.
And so their educational outreaches in my opinion are never very valid, only very imaginative and they use good science but they stretch the limits
between do-able and write-able in order to capture the imaginations of future voters, because every voter is worth some tax dollars.