Science and Technology news... :: View topic

Fred J. McCall · Guest

Neil Gerace <geracen@iinet.net.au> wrote:

:On Nov 21, 2:03 pm, Fred J. McCall <fjmcc...@gmail.com> wrote:
:
:> Why is it that whenever someone like Neil doesn>t 'get it' they always
:> think it>s the OTHER people who "don>t understand"?
:
:I understood the irony in saying evolution is "just a theory", as if
:theories weren>t to be trusted.
:

How nice for you. Yet you stupidly assumed that *I* didn>t understand
it.

Like I said, you didn>t get MY point, so you stupidly assume *I*
missed something.

Hint: You missed something. Now go figure it out.

--
"Some people get lost in thought because it>s such unfamiliar
territory."
--G. Behn

Fred J. McCall · Guest

Neil Gerace <geracen@iinet.net.au> wrote:

:On Nov 20, 10:46 pm, Fred J. McCall <fjmcc...@gmail.com> wrote:
:> Philip <n...@nospam.net> wrote:
:>
:> :
:> :And evolution is "just a theory".
:> :
:>
:> Uh, don>t look now, but evolution *is* "just a theory"...
:>
:
:I think you don>t understand why Philip used the ironic quotes.
:

Why is it that whenever someone like Neil doesn>t 'get it' they always
think it>s the OTHER people who "don>t understand"?

--
"Some people get lost in thought because it>s such unfamiliar
territory."
--G. Behn

Rand Simberg · Guest

On Fri, 21 Nov 2008 09:24:33 +0100, in a place far, far away, jacob
navia <jacob@nospam.com> made the phosphor on my monitor glow in such
a way as to indicate that:

[quote]Pat Flannery wrote:

jacob navia wrote:
Pat Flannery wrote:
The planetary society makes a mistake by trying to get us to send
humans to Mars

We can>t send humans to Mars until we know for certain that there are
no living things there.

Particularly things like this:
http://www.badmovies.org/movies/angryred/angryred6.jpg

Pat

Unable to have any rational discussion.

I raised some concrete points in my post. You ignore them and just
try to ridicule them.
[/quote]
That>s because most of the "points" that you usually "make" are
ridiculous.

jacob navia · Guest

Rand Simberg wrote:
[quote]On Fri, 21 Nov 2008 09:24:33 +0100, in a place far, far away, jacob
navia <jacob@nospam.com> made the phosphor on my monitor glow in such
a way as to indicate that:

Pat Flannery wrote:

jacob navia wrote:
Pat Flannery wrote:
The planetary society makes a mistake by trying to get us to send
humans to Mars

We can>t send humans to Mars until we know for certain that there are
no living things there.
Particularly things like this:
http://www.badmovies.org/movies/angryred/angryred6.jpg

Pat
Unable to have any rational discussion.

I raised some concrete points in my post. You ignore them and just
try to ridicule them.

That>s because most of the "points" that you usually "make" are
ridiculous.
[/quote]
The european Mars express has detected methane in the atmosphere of
Mars. The methane could indicate the presence of bacteria

(http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/3577551.stm)

This is "just ridiculous" of course.

The most important part of Mars exploration is precisely the
discovering of an alien form of life. A human expedition would
destroy any chance of doing that.

The risk of contamination of the earth with alien bacteria is just
"ridiculous". Who cares? Let>s go even if we do not know what can happen!

THAT attitude is not ridiculous.

--
jacob navia
jacob at jacob point remcomp point fr
logiciels/informatique
http://www.cs.virginia.edu/~lcc-win32

Pat Flannery · Guest

jacob navia wrote:
[quote]
Particularly things like this:
http://www.badmovies.org/movies/angryred/angryred6.jpg

Pat

Unable to have any rational discussion.
Seriously, I was just joking around, not ridiculing you.[/quote]
There are three alternatives for life on Mars:
1.) It never had life, and is lifeless now.
2.) It once had life, but that life is now extinct.
3.) It had life, and still has life.
In cases 1&2, human contamination is a moot point... in fact, we might
bring life to a dead world which is a interesting concept, as it could
then undergo its own evolution, and might even develop intelligence
somewhere way down the road.
Case 3 is an interesting one... so far we have seen no sign of still
existing life, and even microscopic detritus of life (such as spores,
pollen, or microscopic shells like those of diatoms) should have shown
up in the microscopic views that Phoenix returned.
Given the conditions on the surface - with its oxidizing soil,
temperature extremes, dryness, low atmospheric pressure, and radiation
bombardment from the Sun, any life would of necessity probably be
underground, much like the bacteria that we now know exist in some
fairly deep rock strata here on Earth.
It that case it mat take either some very involved manned or unmanned
expeditions to track such life down through boring deep into the surface
and examining core samples that such borings return.
If that>s the case, then human contamination of the surface might be
pretty unimportant, as the organisms that travel with us would be
nowhere near as suited for life in a Martian environment as ones that
evolved there, and would probably quickly die if exposed to Martian
conditions, or actually become food for native Martian organisms.
Conversely, native Martian microorganisms would probably be terribly
unsuited for life on Earth, and either die or be consumed by Earth
microorganisms.
Considering the fact that our bodies can protect us from most Earth
microorganisms, despite the fact that they have had both billions of
years to evolve, and their short lifespans means they can evolve much
faster than we can through mutation (like the constantly evolving cold
and flu viruses) we would probably have little to fear from such
hypothetical contamination.
Besides, if some of those meteorites from Mars we have recovered that
were blasted off of its surface by impact events actually did have life
in them, we have probably been contaminated by microscopic Martian life
many times already.

Pat

jacob navia · Guest

Pat Flannery wrote:
[quote]

jacob navia wrote:

Particularly things like this:
http://www.badmovies.org/movies/angryred/angryred6.jpg

Pat

Unable to have any rational discussion.
Seriously, I was just joking around, not ridiculing you.
There are three alternatives for life on Mars:
1.) It never had life, and is lifeless now.
2.) It once had life, but that life is now extinct.
3.) It had life, and still has life.
In cases 1&2, human contamination is a moot point... in fact, we might
bring life to a dead world which is a interesting concept, as it could
then undergo its own evolution, and might even develop intelligence
somewhere way down the road.
[/quote]
True.

[quote]Case 3 is an interesting one... so far we have seen no sign of still
existing life, and even microscopic detritus of life (such as spores,
pollen, or microscopic shells like those of diatoms) should have shown
up in the microscopic views that Phoenix returned.
[/quote]
1) For unknown reasons you ignore the methane existence. This
is a gas that just can>t exist on Mars atmosphere. If we detect it,
then there must be a source that continuously produces it. This
is a strong indication that there could be underground life
in there.

2) The microscopes of Phoenix are not specially powerful, and in
any case they could not resolve bacteria.

[quote]Given the conditions on the surface - with its oxidizing soil,
temperature extremes, dryness, low atmospheric pressure, and radiation
bombardment from the Sun, any life would of necessity probably be
underground, much like the bacteria that we now know exist in some
fairly deep rock strata here on Earth.
[/quote]
There are protected environments near the surface, specially in caves.

[quote]It that case it mat take either some very involved manned or unmanned
expeditions to track such life down through boring deep into the surface
and examining core samples that such borings return.
[/quote]
Exactly.

[quote]If that>s the case, then human contamination of the surface might be
pretty unimportant, as the organisms that travel with us would be
nowhere near as suited for life in a Martian environment as ones that
evolved there, and would probably quickly die if exposed to Martian
conditions, or actually become food for native Martian organisms.
Conversely, native Martian microorganisms would probably be terribly
unsuited for life on Earth, and either die or be consumed by Earth
microorganisms.
[/quote]
This we just do not know. We are speculating here what would happen
with earth bacteria in Mars. As far as we already know, earth bacteria
survive vacuum and high radiation doses unharmed. In any case they could
just protect themselves by... going underground. There is water
underground. They could be transported by the wind/sand to more
sheltered places, we just do not know.

[quote]Considering the fact that our bodies can protect us from most Earth
microorganisms, despite the fact that they have had both billions of
years to evolve, and their short lifespans means they can evolve much
faster than we can through mutation (like the constantly evolving cold
and flu viruses) we would probably have little to fear from such
hypothetical contamination.
[/quote]
You do not know.

Mars life could be similar to earth>s desert life. When the conditions
are right they reproduce exponentially until the conditions change and
they enter the dormant state again.

What would happen when they would be confronted to an environment where
the bad conditions never return?

We just can>t take those risks based on some assumptions, however
reasonable they look to us. We have to know with certainty that
this will not be the case because
(1) There is no life on Mars.
(2) The life in Mars is identical to Earth life and hence not
more dangerous than any other bacteria here.
(3) Mars life needs some stuff that is absent on Earth or is in
some way incompatible with our planet.

[quote]Besides, if some of those meteorites from Mars we have recovered that
were blasted off of its surface by impact events actually did have life
in them, we have probably been contaminated by microscopic Martian life
many times already.

[/quote]
Maybe, we just do not know.

I think it is very important that we are CAREFUL from the start.
We JUST DO NOT KNOW. And until we know, it is better to PLAY SAFE
i.e. explore using machines that do not come back, and can be sterilized
before their trip so contamination and contact between two
biospheres is avoided until we know its safe.

Contact between Titan>s biosphere (if any) and earth would be much
safer because of the enormous difference in temperature, from
-220 C to +15 C would make survival by any Titan "bacteria"
completely impossible on earth.

The same with Venus and its 450-500 C. If any life exists there
that is adapted to such temperatures, it would freeze here
immediately

But the temperatures on Mars are VERY near our temperatures,
and Mars bacteria would feel very well in the Antarctica.

--
jacob navia
jacob at jacob point remcomp point fr
logiciels/informatique
http://www.cs.virginia.edu/~lcc-win32

kT · Guest

jacob navia wrote:
[quote]Pat Flannery wrote:

jacob navia wrote:
Pat Flannery wrote:
The planetary society makes a mistake by trying to get us to send
humans to Mars

We can>t send humans to Mars until we know for certain that there are
no living things there.

Particularly things like this:
http://www.badmovies.org/movies/angryred/angryred6.jpg

Pat

Unable to have any rational discussion.

I raised some concrete points in my post. You ignore them and just
try to ridicule them.

Typical of this group.
[/quote]
It>s still good for a quick link every once and a while, and also the
occasional infamous William Mook first principles post, plus the news :

http://habitablezone.com/space/messages/531315.html

And there is this :

http://www.itemsinthenews.com

http://www.frontiernet.net/~c.younger/News/Items_in_the_news.html

What are you looking for specifically, most rational people who lurk
here have very specific interests and well thought out plans in place.

People that have something to discuss go off on their own tangent.

There is a big argument going on about fuel depots, have you been
following those discussions? It>s far more widespread than the usenet.

Pat Flannery · Guest

jacob navia wrote:
[quote]
1) For unknown reasons you ignore the methane existence. This
is a gas that just can>t exist on Mars atmosphere. If we detect it,
then there must be a source that continuously produces it. This
is a strong indication that there could be underground life
in there.
[/quote]
Ah, but methane can indeed exist in the Martian atmosphere for a few
hundred years before breaking down:
http://www.universetoday.com/2008/11/03/mars-methane-mystery-still-beckons/
Although the findings of methane rich areas of Martian atmosphere at
particular spots but not over the whole surface are odd, as the methane
should be swept around the planet by its winds unless you have some sort
of methane-making Martian ecosystem running at those spots and the
methane is breaking down almost immediately rather than surviving for
years and years.
I think that what you are seeing is local methane clouds produced by
methane ice containing space objects hitting the Martian atmosphere and
breaking up causing local methane spikes at particular areas.
Certainly several of the less substantial meteors that hit Earth>s
atmosphere contain methane ices, and some have been observed at fresh
meteorite impact sites....as well as just chunks of methane ice falling
out of the sky all on their own with no associated solid meteoric debris.
On Mars, the low temperatures could keep the methane ice solid for some
time, as it slowly sublimated into the atmosphere around the impact site.
If that>s the case, then over a period of time such atmospheric methane
"hot spots" should change position and intensity on the planet as new
chunks of methane ice enter its atmosphere, and older ones eventually
are entirely volatilized into the atmosphere.
Moving methane spikes would argue against the gas being made by living
organisms, as their ecosystems should be limited to particular areas,
not appearing here and there at random.
If the methane spikes stay in the same area over a long period of time
_and are consistent in intensity year-to-year_ that would argue for a
biological cause, as ones caused by impacts should decrease in intensity
as time goes on and more of the methane ice dissolves.

[quote]
2) The microscopes of Phoenix are not specially powerful, and in
any case they could not resolve bacteria.

Given the conditions on the surface - with its oxidizing soil,
temperature extremes, dryness, low atmospheric pressure, and
radiation bombardment from the Sun, any life would of necessity
probably be underground, much like the bacteria that we now know
exist in some fairly deep rock strata here on Earth.

There are protected environments near the surface, specially in caves.
[/quote]
Any hypothetical organisms we find are going to have a real problem on
the surface or underground in regards to water.
We don>t yet have any evidence of Mars having a molten core (neither of
the Viking seismometers showed any tremors, and the planet has no active
magnetic field left) so once you get a ways underground...or in a cave
for that matter... temperatures are going to be very stable at around
-50 to-60 C on average, and that>s way to cold for liquid water in a
undiluted state, so either the life forms don>t use liquid water or they
have some sort of super antifreeze in them that allows them to melt ice
into usable water.
As an aside, those temperatures are just right to get CO2 in a gaseous,
liquid (with the weight of rock and soil pressing down on it) or solid
state, so if you could figure out some sort of life that uses liquid CO2
instead of water then you could indeed have something biological going
on up there.

[quote]
It that case it mat take either some very involved manned or unmanned
expeditions to track such life down through boring deep into the
surface and examining core samples that such borings return.

Exactly.

If that>s the case, then human contamination of the surface might be
pretty unimportant, as the organisms that travel with us would be
nowhere near as suited for life in a Martian environment as ones that
evolved there, and would probably quickly die if exposed to Martian
conditions, or actually become food for native Martian organisms.
Conversely, native Martian microorganisms would probably be terribly
unsuited for life on Earth, and either die or be consumed by Earth
microorganisms.

This we just do not know. We are speculating here what would happen
with earth bacteria in Mars. As far as we already know, earth bacteria
survive vacuum and high radiation doses unharmed. In any case they
could just protect themselves by... going underground. There is water
underground.
[/quote]
There is water ice underground, and probably liquid CO2 and CO2 ice as well.
Those photos of the "water" coming out of the side of the crater are now
suspect: http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/mars/images/pia09027.html
For starters, what is liquid water doing flowing around several hundred
feet underground at the temperatures expected in the soil without
volcanic activity of some sort to keep it liquid?

Pat

Martha Adams · Guest

"jacob navia" <jacob@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:gg6kh0$80h$1@aioe.org...
[quote]Pat Flannery wrote:

jacob navia wrote:

Particularly things like this:
http://www.badmovies.org/movies/angryred/angryred6.jpg

Pat

Unable to have any rational discussion.
Seriously, I was just joking around, not ridiculing you.
There are three alternatives for life on Mars:
1.) It never had life, and is lifeless now.
2.) It once had life, but that life is now extinct.
3.) It had life, and still has life.
In cases 1&2, human contamination is a moot point... in fact, we
might bring life to a dead world which is a interesting concept, as
it could then undergo its own evolution, and might even develop
intelligence somewhere way down the road.

True.

Case 3 is an interesting one... so far we have seen no sign of still
existing life, and even microscopic detritus of life (such as spores,
pollen, or microscopic shells like those of diatoms) should have
shown up in the microscopic views that Phoenix returned.

1) For unknown reasons you ignore the methane existence. This
is a gas that just can>t exist on Mars atmosphere. If we detect it,
then there must be a source that continuously produces it. This
is a strong indication that there could be underground life
in there.

2) The microscopes of Phoenix are not specially powerful, and in
any case they could not resolve bacteria.

Given the conditions on the surface - with its oxidizing soil,
temperature extremes, dryness, low atmospheric pressure, and
radiation bombardment from the Sun, any life would of necessity
probably be underground, much like the bacteria that we now know
exist in some fairly deep rock strata here on Earth.

There are protected environments near the surface, specially in caves.

It that case it mat take either some very involved manned or unmanned
expeditions to track such life down through boring deep into the
surface and examining core samples that such borings return.

Exactly.

If that>s the case, then human contamination of the surface might be
pretty unimportant, as the organisms that travel with us would be
nowhere near as suited for life in a Martian environment as ones that
evolved there, and would probably quickly die if exposed to Martian
conditions, or actually become food for native Martian organisms.
Conversely, native Martian microorganisms would probably be terribly
unsuited for life on Earth, and either die or be consumed by Earth
microorganisms.

This we just do not know. We are speculating here what would happen
with earth bacteria in Mars. As far as we already know, earth bacteria
survive vacuum and high radiation doses unharmed. In any case they
could just protect themselves by... going underground. There is water
underground. They could be transported by the wind/sand to more
sheltered places, we just do not know.

Considering the fact that our bodies can protect us from most Earth
microorganisms, despite the fact that they have had both billions of
years to evolve, and their short lifespans means they can evolve much
faster than we can through mutation (like the constantly evolving
cold and flu viruses) we would probably have little to fear from such
hypothetical contamination.

You do not know.

Mars life could be similar to earth>s desert life. When the conditions
are right they reproduce exponentially until the conditions change and
they enter the dormant state again.

What would happen when they would be confronted to an environment
where
the bad conditions never return?

We just can>t take those risks based on some assumptions, however
reasonable they look to us. We have to know with certainty that
this will not be the case because
(1) There is no life on Mars.
(2) The life in Mars is identical to Earth life and hence not
more dangerous than any other bacteria here.
(3) Mars life needs some stuff that is absent on Earth or is in
some way incompatible with our planet.

Besides, if some of those meteorites from Mars we have recovered that
were blasted off of its surface by impact events actually did have
life in them, we have probably been contaminated by microscopic
Martian life many times already.

Maybe, we just do not know.

I think it is very important that we are CAREFUL from the start.
We JUST DO NOT KNOW. And until we know, it is better to PLAY SAFE
i.e. explore using machines that do not come back, and can be
sterilized
before their trip so contamination and contact between two
biospheres is avoided until we know its safe.

Contact between Titan>s biosphere (if any) and earth would be much
safer because of the enormous difference in temperature, from
-220 C to +15 C would make survival by any Titan "bacteria"
completely impossible on earth.

The same with Venus and its 450-500 C. If any life exists there
that is adapted to such temperatures, it would freeze here
immediately

But the temperatures on Mars are VERY near our temperatures,
and Mars bacteria would feel very well in the Antarctica.

--
jacob navia
jacob at jacob point remcomp point fr
logiciels/informatique
http://www.cs.virginia.edu/~lcc-win32
[/quote]
Navia>s "100% certain" recipe which he mentions a few messages
up this thread, is only a good recipe for a complete halt to
Mars settlement. If we do that, then someone else gets to Mars
-- and *gets* Mars. Further, Navia seems to have neglected
his reading, for he apparently fails to recognize how much is
to be said for going to Mars *and staying there* rather than
going and returning. This idea has been around for some years,
it is getting serious development.

The idea is this: if you go to Mars you need to fetch along
major hardware to get back. Further, the return journey is
more dangerous than the outgoing journey, because you>ve used
up most of your hardware and supplies resources. But if you
rather use that hardware weight to bring along an industrial
base for survival on Mars, and having set down there you stay
there and get busy building your settlement, this is *far,
far* more progressive and productive than returning to Terra
and leaving everything you did on Mars, back on Mars.

As for the cross-contamination Navia seems frightened of,
does he know researchers *today* have a large collection of
rocks in hand, known to have come to here from Mars? I
haven>t heard of any of these researchers turning green or
purple, or developing extra heads, nor any else of that.

Navia, it>s good you>re thinking about some of this stuff,
but did you know, other people are doing that too? To
much better effect than you have accomplished so far? ??

Titeotwawki -- mha [sci.space.policy 2008 Nov 22]

Pat Flannery · Guest

Martha Adams wrote:
[quote]Further, Navia seems to have neglected
his reading, for he apparently fails to recognize how much is
to be said for going to Mars *and staying there* rather than
going and returning. This idea has been around for some years,
it is getting serious development.
[/quote]
It was examined in the movie "Robinson Crusoe On Mars" for instance...

[quote]
The idea is this: if you go to Mars you need to fetch along
major hardware to get back.
[/quote]
Such hardware can be replaced by a cute, personality-filled monkey that
will help you find water and edible aquatic "Hot Dog Plants" once you
arrive, as in the movie above.
In fact, for the weight of the return spacecraft, _many_ CPFM>s can be
carried along.
But if we go this route, it>s vital to assure ourselves that these Mars
Monkeys won>t mutate into some sort of dangerous form that could
threaten the astronaut colonists: http://www.gwthomas.org/apes.jpg
So maybe it>s best to feed the monkeys the Hot Dog Plants until they are
fat and lethargic in the low Martian gravity, then eat the _monkeys_
before they can grow four arms and get truculent.
I know this is a bold plan, but I>m not here to be hesitant - and as you
point out, unless the US gets to Mars first, someone else will claim the
planet.
As can be seen by the minarets in that illustration above, that may be
Islamowhackofascists of some sort... that force their women to wear red
thong underwear, and won>t eat monkey meat under Martian Sharia Law.
So the monkeys grow and mutate, and soon Mars will be under their, not
human, control.
That must not be allowed to happen.
If the crew of the ISS can be forced to drink urine, then certainly the
Mars colonists can live off of monkey meat.
And wear red thong underwear for that matter. :-)

Pat

BradGuth · Guest

100 years from now and tens of trillions of our hard earned loot
spent, it>ll still be all about Mars this, Mars that and Mars so forth
until hell freezes over, of which by the way happens each and every
night on Mars.

~ BG

On Nov 22, 2:58 pm, jacob navia <ja...@nospam.com> wrote:
[quote]Martha Adams wrote:
Navia>s "100% certain" recipe which he mentions a few messages
up this thread, is only a good recipe for a complete halt to
Mars settlement.

Exactly. My position is that only automatic unmanned probes can
be sent until we know for certain that either there is no life
in Mars or that life in Mars can handle contact with us and
vice versa.

Contrary to Mrs Adams, I want to avoid xenocide, and I want to
avoid any risk to the human biosphere with a non planned
contact that could be disastrous to us or to them, if they exist.

If we do that, then someone else gets to Mars
-- and *gets* Mars.

This kind of mentality is completely ridiculous. Even if the
U.S. establishes some colony on Mars, it will not own Mars
in any way. Other people will be able to go there in much
the same way as the US did, and live there if they want to.

Further, Navia seems to have neglected
his reading, for he apparently fails to recognize how much is
to be said for going to Mars *and staying there* rather than
going and returning. This idea has been around for some years,
it is getting serious development.

Yes, I do not consider that kind of suicide mission a good
way to go to Mars.

It is possible that once the biological problems solved, humans
could go to Mars for extended periods of time, but it will be
surely NOT the first expedition to arrive there that will do
that. In any case, the plans of Mrs Adams are way beyond what
the U.S. can do in the next 30-40 years.

o There are no technologies of human survival (the life support system)
that has been tested in deep space without constant human
intervention. Look at the international space station. It needs
constant supply of oxygen, water, food, and spare parts to maintain
the outpost just running a mere few hundred kilometers from the
surface of the planet. And that is the best we can do now.

o A trip to Mars even when Mars is the closest to Earth is a whooping
56 Million kilometers, surely a trip of 8 to 10 months. Then, to make
the trip worthwhile the humans would stay for several months, let>s
say 1 year, then they return making something like a 2 year in deep
space (in the best conditions, it could be much longer if we consider
that earth and Mars approach themselves every two years only).
There is no life support system that can handle 2 years in space
without failure as yet. The problems appearing in the ISS give us a
very good view of the stand of the life support engineering today:
oo space suits that fail
oo electrical systems breakdown
oo problems with the oxygen recycling
and an incredible long list.

Mars has no oxygen, water is difficult to find and may need mining
and purifying, food is unavailable and nobody knows if plants can
grow in Mars with temperatures in summer around the Antarctica
temperatures on earth. There are not many plants in Antarctica
as you may know...

Obviously Mrs Adams has thought about this and has found all the
necessary solutions, but besides science fiction, there are TODAY
and for the next 30-40 years not any technology that can bring a
life support system needed by a few humans into the planet Mars
and making it work there.

-------------------------------------------------------------

What is interesting also when reading Mrs Adams prose, is this
central sentence:

quote
Navia>s "100% certain" recipe which he mentions a few messages
up this thread, is only a good recipe for a complete halt to
Mars settlement. If we do that, then someone else gets to Mars
-- and *gets* Mars.
end quote

In the mind of Mrs Adams, the U.S. must get there to extended the
Amrican Empire before other people (obviously hostile since they
are not US citizens) get there first.

This is completely idiotic. Any expedition to Mars is such
a big effort that no country in the earth can manage it alone.

It will be a international effort supported by all people of
this planet, not an expedition to put the flag somewhere!

The idea is this: if you go to Mars you need to fetch along
major hardware to get back. Further, the return journey is
more dangerous than the outgoing journey, because you>ve used
up most of your hardware and supplies resources. But if you
rather use that hardware weight to bring along an industrial
base for survival on Mars, and having set down there you stay
there and get busy building your settlement, this is *far,
far* more progressive and productive than returning to Terra
and leaving everything you did on Mars, back on Mars.

To this, only two words suffice:

life support ?

As for the cross-contamination Navia seems frightened of,
does he know researchers *today* have a large collection of
rocks in hand, known to have come to here from Mars? I
haven>t heard of any of these researchers turning green or
purple, or developing extra heads, nor any else of that.

Fossilized remains of Mars life have been found. Yes.
And as everyone knows, after thousands of years in space
there wasn>t any risk of contamination at all. This is
obvious to anyone but to Mrs Adams... apparently.

Another, completely different thing is to make contact
with those beings IN MARS when they are not fossils but
alive.

Navia, it>s good you>re thinking about some of this stuff,
but did you know, other people are doing that too?

Yes, I knew that. :-)

To
much better effect than you have accomplished so far? ??

Well Mrs Adams, I could say the same. Specifically I would like
to know how the people you send there will

o find oxygen to breathe
o find water to drink
o find food to eat
o find a repair store for the ALL the hardware they carry,
together with the repair technicians and tools needed
to replicate the tools that break down, fail, etc.
o Note that they will need also tools to repair the repair store
that will also fail!

What you fail to understand in your romantic dreaming about
"living off the land" is that Mars is another planet... Not
any earth. It is completely different!

--
jacob navia
jacob at jacob point remcomp point fr
logiciels/informatiquehttp://www.cs.virginia.edu/~lcc-win32[/quote]

BradGuth · Guest

On Nov 21, 8:32 am, kT <cos...@lifeform.org> wrote:
[quote]jacob navia wrote:
Pat Flannery wrote:

jacob navia wrote:
Pat Flannery wrote:
The planetary society makes a mistake by trying to get us to send
humans to Mars

We can>t send humans to Mars until we know for certain that there are
no living things there.

Particularly things like this:
http://www.badmovies.org/movies/angryred/angryred6.jpg

Pat

Unable to have any rational discussion.

I raised some concrete points in my post. You ignore them and just
try to ridicule them.

Typical of this group.

It>s still good for a quick link every once and a while, and also the
occasional infamous William Mook first principles post, plus the news :

http://habitablezone.com/space/messages/531315.html

And there is this :

http://www.itemsinthenews.com

http://www.frontiernet.net/~c.younger/News/Items_in_the_news.html

What are you looking for specifically, most rational people who lurk
here have very specific interests and well thought out plans in place.

People that have something to discuss go off on their own tangent.

There is a big argument going on about fuel depots, have you been
following those discussions? It>s far more widespread than the usenet.
[/quote]
Our resident wizard of Oz, William Mook, seems to have a rather nasty
bipolar butt load of problems with caring for anyone other than the
top 0.1% of America, and perhaps all of the 0.0001% of humanity,
leaving the lower 99.999% to rot or wish they were dead.

A space fuel depot or OASIS and otherwise nifty gateway at the Selene/
moon L1 is technically doable, especially if you believe 10% of what
our NASA/Apollo wizards with the "right stuff" supposedly did.

~ BG

jacob navia · Guest

Martha Adams wrote:
[quote]Navia>s "100% certain" recipe which he mentions a few messages
up this thread, is only a good recipe for a complete halt to
Mars settlement.
[/quote]
Exactly. My position is that only automatic unmanned probes can
be sent until we know for certain that either there is no life
in Mars or that life in Mars can handle contact with us and
vice versa.

Contrary to Mrs Adams, I want to avoid xenocide, and I want to
avoid any risk to the human biosphere with a non planned
contact that could be disastrous to us or to them, if they exist.

[quote]If we do that, then someone else gets to Mars
-- and *gets* Mars.
[/quote]
This kind of mentality is completely ridiculous. Even if the
U.S. establishes some colony on Mars, it will not own Mars
in any way. Other people will be able to go there in much
the same way as the US did, and live there if they want to.

[quote]Further, Navia seems to have neglected
his reading, for he apparently fails to recognize how much is
to be said for going to Mars *and staying there* rather than
going and returning. This idea has been around for some years,
it is getting serious development.

[/quote]
Yes, I do not consider that kind of suicide mission a good
way to go to Mars.

It is possible that once the biological problems solved, humans
could go to Mars for extended periods of time, but it will be
surely NOT the first expedition to arrive there that will do
that. In any case, the plans of Mrs Adams are way beyond what
the U.S. can do in the next 30-40 years.

o There are no technologies of human survival (the life support system)
that has been tested in deep space without constant human
intervention. Look at the international space station. It needs
constant supply of oxygen, water, food, and spare parts to maintain
the outpost just running a mere few hundred kilometers from the
surface of the planet. And that is the best we can do now.

o A trip to Mars even when Mars is the closest to Earth is a whooping
56 Million kilometers, surely a trip of 8 to 10 months. Then, to make
the trip worthwhile the humans would stay for several months, let>s
say 1 year, then they return making something like a 2 year in deep
space (in the best conditions, it could be much longer if we consider
that earth and Mars approach themselves every two years only).
There is no life support system that can handle 2 years in space
without failure as yet. The problems appearing in the ISS give us a
very good view of the stand of the life support engineering today:
oo space suits that fail
oo electrical systems breakdown
oo problems with the oxygen recycling
and an incredible long list.

Mars has no oxygen, water is difficult to find and may need mining
and purifying, food is unavailable and nobody knows if plants can
grow in Mars with temperatures in summer around the Antarctica
temperatures on earth. There are not many plants in Antarctica
as you may know...

Obviously Mrs Adams has thought about this and has found all the
necessary solutions, but besides science fiction, there are TODAY
and for the next 30-40 years not any technology that can bring a
life support system needed by a few humans into the planet Mars
and making it work there.

-------------------------------------------------------------

What is interesting also when reading Mrs Adams prose, is this
central sentence:

<quote>
Navia>s "100% certain" recipe which he mentions a few messages
up this thread, is only a good recipe for a complete halt to
Mars settlement. If we do that, then someone else gets to Mars
-- and *gets* Mars.
<end quote>

In the mind of Mrs Adams, the U.S. must get there to extended the
Amrican Empire before other people (obviously hostile since they
are not US citizens) get there first.

This is completely idiotic. Any expedition to Mars is such
a big effort that no country in the earth can manage it alone.

It will be a international effort supported by all people of
this planet, not an expedition to put the flag somewhere!

[quote]The idea is this: if you go to Mars you need to fetch along
major hardware to get back. Further, the return journey is
more dangerous than the outgoing journey, because you>ve used
up most of your hardware and supplies resources. But if you
rather use that hardware weight to bring along an industrial
base for survival on Mars, and having set down there you stay
there and get busy building your settlement, this is *far,
far* more progressive and productive than returning to Terra
and leaving everything you did on Mars, back on Mars.

[/quote]
To this, only two words suffice:

life support ?

[quote]As for the cross-contamination Navia seems frightened of,
does he know researchers *today* have a large collection of
rocks in hand, known to have come to here from Mars? I
haven>t heard of any of these researchers turning green or
purple, or developing extra heads, nor any else of that.

[/quote]
Fossilized remains of Mars life have been found. Yes.
And as everyone knows, after thousands of years in space
there wasn>t any risk of contamination at all. This is
obvious to anyone but to Mrs Adams... apparently.

Another, completely different thing is to make contact
with those beings IN MARS when they are not fossils but
alive.

[quote]Navia, it>s good you>re thinking about some of this stuff,
but did you know, other people are doing that too?
[/quote]
Yes, I knew that. :-)

[quote]To
much better effect than you have accomplished so far? ??

[/quote]
Well Mrs Adams, I could say the same. Specifically I would like
to know how the people you send there will

o find oxygen to breathe
o find water to drink
o find food to eat
o find a repair store for the ALL the hardware they carry,
together with the repair technicians and tools needed
to replicate the tools that break down, fail, etc.
o Note that they will need also tools to repair the repair store
that will also fail!

What you fail to understand in your romantic dreaming about
"living off the land" is that Mars is another planet... Not
any earth. It is completely different!

--
jacob navia
jacob at jacob point remcomp point fr
logiciels/informatique
http://www.cs.virginia.edu/~lcc-win32

Pat Flannery · Guest

jacob navia wrote:
[quote]
Exactly. My position is that only automatic unmanned probes can
be sent until we know for certain that either there is no life
in Mars or that life in Mars can handle contact with us and
vice versa.
[/quote]
You want to see that going in best possible form?
Read "Men, Martians, and Machines" by Eric Frank Russell.
They have _got_ to make that into a movie someday, just so the audiance
can see the pure and unspeakable horror of the Martian Chess Trophy.
I made a little diorama from that book and its description of _that thing_.
Mine is done in fluorescent orange with fluorescent green highlights,
and wound up like a dead intestine nailed to a rotting tree trunk.

Pat

kT · Guest

OM wrote:

[quote]On Sun, 23 Nov 2008 05:17:41 GMT, "Martha Adams" <mhada@verizon.net
wrote:

...This is ancient Mayan for "I do not know how to trim my quotes" :-P
[/quote]
It sounds like 'freak' for 'control' to me. AKA : fascist.

Since you don>t have a conscience, you wouldn not have noticed.


www.GetXFactor.com Leading Technology, Science, Agriculture News and information	Part of the Identityscape.com network... getxfactor.com jmoodmusic.com smartbusinesschoices.com mintdepot.com lowfaresalways.com evangelicalview.com shoppingpodder.com soproudlywehail.com webnews.ws currenthumor.com

Science and Technology news... Forum Index -> Space - History Forum	Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 Next
Page 4 of 5