It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Humans to colonize Mars by 2023

page: 2
7
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 1 2012 @ 01:35 PM
link   
This is the sort of action mankind has to take if we want to propel ourselves into the next step of "evolution" for humanity. I commend them for taking that step!

By the way OP, why do you believe humans are meant to die on Earth? What if we are not from Earth to begin with and were dropped off here long ago by our ancestors?

In my opinion, death is death. If we are meant to move on to the next "level" then what chunk of real estate we die on is meaningless.
edit on 1-6-2012 by sheepslayer247 because: (no reason given)




posted on Jun, 1 2012 @ 01:35 PM
link   
Weren't the Dutch the people that based their whole economy on the Poppy a while back? Now they are going to try to sell real estate on Mars and interplanetary travel vouchers?


By the replies on this subject I can see that NASA and other space agencies have a lot of people conditioned to supply them with money for their unnecessary ventures.

edit on 1-6-2012 by rickymouse because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 1 2012 @ 01:39 PM
link   
reply to post by rickymouse
 



Now they are going to try to sell real estate on Mars.....


Heck I'll but a few acres.....oceanfront, preferably....oh, wait....oops......

....well, I want one of the Rovers....at least, I can auction it off to help pay for the land......



posted on Jun, 1 2012 @ 01:43 PM
link   
reply to post by PluPerfect
 


I should build myself a little rover like that to take pictures remotely. I ought to be able to throw something like that together with scraps from the local metal recycling places for about a hundred bucks. I can send it out on a rocky beach and sell real estate on Mars with the pictures, especially if there is a blonde sitting out tanning.



posted on Jun, 1 2012 @ 01:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by PluPerfect
reply to post by rickymouse
 



Now they are going to try to sell real estate on Mars.....


Heck I'll but a few acres.....oceanfront, preferably....oh, wait....oops......

....well, I want one of the Rovers....at least, I can auction it off to help pay for the land......


Eh beachfront is over-rated, give me the mountain side any day. It's safer those dust storms can get pretty bad.


-SAP-



posted on Jun, 1 2012 @ 01:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by ExPostFacto


Interesting. Who will pay if something goes wrong though?



all of mankind.


That first image on the video is pretty funny. Imagine Marvin, sitting on Mars, enjoying the tranquility and then, suddenly, up pops a bunch of mobile homes.

we're going to turn Mars into a trailer park



posted on Jun, 1 2012 @ 02:05 PM
link   
Intersting idea, but with conventional rockets and 7 year journey,
far fetched to say the least, unless pf course non conventional rockets
and near instant travel to destination can be cracked and tried.



posted on Jun, 1 2012 @ 02:08 PM
link   
reply to post by Angelic Resurrection
 


I missed this part:


......but with conventional rockets and 7 year journey.....


"7 years?"

That is way outside of reality, for a trip to Mars......even using "conventional" propulsion methods, it is at most a four-month journey.....NOT "7 years"......and, this is using, again, acceleration levels within normal Human tolerances.



posted on Jun, 1 2012 @ 11:52 PM
link   
reply to post by PluPerfect
 


You are correct.
The op says 7 years and the video says 7 months.



posted on Jun, 2 2012 @ 12:38 AM
link   
Seven months is a much better number... but still enormous when you figure the difficulty in maintaining a body that can function in a gravitational environment.

Really - the 'solution' to colonizing anything in space (be it a constructed colony in the void or another planet) is to send robots and materials first to construct infrastructure we would need. THEN send people.

Trying to sustain a human population on the surface of mars while they construct habitats and other necessary infrastructure (to include sources of water and oxygen recovery systems) is a little unrealistic. Send robots there to build it and aid in maintenance once the people do get there. Then you can have the people do the things robots can't (or just aren't as good at).

The insanity with which people approach the issue of space colonization is worrying.



posted on Jun, 2 2012 @ 01:09 AM
link   
If they faked the moon landings, they can re fake the mars landings.
Its that simple.

By 2023 we could be in a massive civil global unrest, this highly fantasy.



posted on Jun, 2 2012 @ 04:57 AM
link   
I just dont see this happening before a one world goverment is in place. There is no way they will allow humans to colonise another planet before "They" have full control of Earth. What if the new human martians decided to become independant? There next supply drop would be a 50 megaton bomb thats what. Also when they show the module that the colonists/crew will transit from Earth to Mars there does not seem to be any rotational section, so no gravity for 7 months(Thats fast!) to 2 years(More realistic)! There mussels and internal organs will have atrophied to the point where they would be lucky to survive entry and landing, never mind hopping around to plant there flag.
edit on 2-6-2012 by andy06shake because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 2 2012 @ 06:18 AM
link   
You know I am a huge Cowboy Bebop fan, and I think 2071 sounds just about right....It's 2012 and we can't even balance an economy, by 2023 we would barely be recovering from this crisis....



posted on Jun, 2 2012 @ 06:23 AM
link   
How would man deal with the radiation on Mars ?



posted on Jun, 2 2012 @ 06:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by Mr Knowledge


Even if this is true, and I could participate in such a project, I wouldn't because there may be life after death and I think humans are meant to die on Earth, not anywhere else. Perhaps we as humans need to die on Earth so that our transition to the other side goes smoothly. If we die anywhere else other than planet Earth, it is possible that it might affect how we transition to the other side. I know it's kinda silly to think about stuff like that but you never know.

now.msn.com
(visit the link for the full news article)


Maybe we need to die withen a half mile of our birth place and not anywhere else in order to transition properly to the other side
? We where never meant to have cars or fly on planes so the theory is consistent with yours. Maybe it explains why there are so few ghosts as most dead people never transition because they die more than half a mile from their birth place. Only a few do so they get to be ghosts.



posted on Jun, 2 2012 @ 07:06 AM
link   
Ill be in my fifties by then...
Might acctually be possible..
Ill have to talk to my kids and make them
study like fanatics so we can make it a Joint
family endevour...

Najz



posted on Jun, 2 2012 @ 05:01 PM
link   
We will not colonize Mars, Humanity will never reach Star Trek Status either!

Too much corruption to finance such endeavors



posted on Jun, 2 2012 @ 10:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by ModernAcademia
We will not colonize Mars, Humanity will never reach Star Trek Status either!

Too much corruption to finance such endeavors


Dont tell my kids that ok..
I need them to study anyways..
So they can get big pharmajobs
and pay their parents retirement...



posted on Jun, 3 2012 @ 06:42 AM
link   
Earth Part 2?

THese guy if they land will be remembered as the fallen angels of the developed society of new mars?



posted on Jun, 3 2012 @ 12:01 PM
link   
Honestly, I don't see Martian colonies as a realistic endeavor for the foreseeable future; outside of research and some minor industrial exploits of rare materials that Mars may have in more bounty.

For fewer resources, one could just as effectively build habitats in space that almost perfectly replicate any terrain on planet Earth.

Why go to the trouble of attempting to engineer an entire planet's ecology when you can simply take what is useful from various parts of the solar system and put it together to make a habitable environment?

Planetary engineering like that is a luxury - a trophy. It's not really an efficient endeavor when you're a space faring species. We spend all this time trying to escape the gravity well of our host planet.... to sink ourselves into other gravity wells for the long term?

Planets will be a research and industrial curiosity. Some that require little to no engineering to be habitable will invariably see humans move in and live 'normally' - but the only thing a planet really offers is a massive self-sustaining biosphere that requires minimal worry or upkeep on behalf of humans.

It's a security blanket. But any planet that lacks such a feature is just not going to be worth trying to colonize. The only reason we would even attempt such a massive scale on Mars is due to the current restriction of subluminal velocities. It's all we've got - so we may as well make use of it.

On that note - Venus is a much better alternative. Comets are in wide availability and VASMIR-equipped drones could easily steer comets into a collision course with Venus (currently lacking hydrogen - plenty of oxygen-rich compounds). A few large heavy-metal asteroids might be enough to kick up a bit of a dynamo effect: Venus currently has a thin veil of protection from radiation created by its electrical storms (which allows for speculative bacteria to exist in the upper layers of atmosphere). If this cannot be accomplished and the lack of plate tectonics resolved (might need to sap a moon from Jupiter to make this happen) - then some artificial means of EMF generation and crust stabilization may have to be enacted.

The investment in long-term planetary engineering is not all that different between the two planets. The difference is that Mars will require substantial efforts to bolster its atmosphere and prevent its loss. In order to accomplish this - it will require similar investments of outside resources (though many will prefer a more controlled introduction as opposed to a comet/asteroid impact).



new topics

top topics



 
7
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join