Skip to comments.
Should Earthlings colonise Mars?
Times of India ^
| 1.18.04
| Unnamed Martian
Posted on 01/23/2004 6:24:42 PM PST by ambrose
Star Wars: Should Earthlings colonise Mars?
[ SUNDAY, JANUARY 18, 2004 12:00:46 AM ]
Martian: Earthlings have destroyed their own planet; they may have little choice.
The surface of our planet appears to be a sterile, frigid desert, most inhospitable for life as Earthlings know it. We hardly have an atmosphere worth mentioning as it's mostly carbon dioxide with very little oxygen or water vapour.
Because of this, daily temperatures vary by as much as 100 degrees Celsius - from a balmy 17 degree high to a bone chilling -87 degree low - while surface temperatures and pressure are too cold and low for water to exist in a liquid state here.
The kindest thing one could say about it is that the planet resembles a cold and hostile high-altitude waste of desolation.
Yet they can't stop wanting to come here. Way back in their 1960s they started lifting off on rickety rockets, which more often than not fell back, exploded or wandered off elsewhere in space before a few finally made it to our orbit and hardly a handful touched down on the surface.
In fact, even as we speak, one of their landers is lost (though to be fair to them, another is getting ready to start poking around the planet).
And you know why? It's because Mars wasn't always a bleak and barren wilderness. Circa three billion - give or take 500 million - years ago after it was formed, our planet had huge bodies of still and flowing water on its surface which have left tell-tale signatures on the terrain.
Actually, it was quite like the young Earth was at the time. Temperatures were hot to middling, the atmospheric pressure was high and all systems were go for life to begin and start evolving.
Indeed, some Earth scientists believe such an event did take place. They think so because some years back in 1996 they found an ancient Martian meteorite which had lain buried in the Antarctic ice for three to four billion years and which on examination turned out to contain what looked like microscopic shapes that resemble living and fossil bacteria on Earth.
This raises the fascinating possibility that even though there may be no life on Mars now, it could have been teeming with it in the remote past. All the more reason Earthlings should come over to check it out for themselves. At least it'll give them some reassurance - they aren't (or at least weren't) alone in the universe.
But the Martian meteorites also raise an even more profound question. If for some reason life on Earth had not yet begun when these spore carrying rocks landed, then could not the friendly environment have nurtured it further?
If so then all life on Earth today has actually come from Mars. And Earth people are the real Martians.
In which case it's about time they should come home.
As told to Mukul Sharma
TOPICS: Foreign Affairs
KEYWORDS: mars; martians
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-32 next last
1
posted on
01/23/2004 6:24:42 PM PST
by
ambrose
To: Phil V.
ping
2
posted on
01/23/2004 6:25:01 PM PST
by
ambrose
To: ambrose
"Should Earthlings colonise Mars?" Yes. One large meteorite impact on Earth and we're done.
3
posted on
01/23/2004 6:27:35 PM PST
by
blam
To: ambrose
Let's terraform that muther, 'cuz I wanna build my retirement bungalo there. LOL
To: ambrose
If so then all life on Earth today has actually come from Mars. And Earth people are the real Martians.Someone has watched The Red Planet one time too many....
5
posted on
01/23/2004 6:30:48 PM PST
by
freebilly
To: blam
Yup. It is our duty as a species to colonize other worlds. Mars is just the start.
Our manifest destiny to explore and conquer the New World should now be taken to the cosmos.
6
posted on
01/23/2004 6:33:19 PM PST
by
ambrose
To: Viking2002
Let's terraform that muther, 'cuz I wanna build my retirement bungalo there. LOLGreat! But what will the taxes be...?
7
posted on
01/23/2004 6:33:24 PM PST
by
freebilly
To: ambrose
"What is man, that thou art mindful of him? and the son of man, that thou visitest him? For thou hast made him a little lower than the angels, and hast crowned him with glory and honour. Thou
madest him to have dominion over the works of thy hands; thou hast put all things under his feet:
A casual reading of the Psalms indicates God's intent for mankind is to make man to have dominion over every thing HE has created... and put the aquisition of that lofty goal... securely at our feet.
I would take that as a "yes".
Jesus said His kingdom was not of this world and for us to seek his kingdom... spiritualize it all you want, but the literal implication there would be that the planet Heaven and it's kingdom is OUT there... waiting for it's "prodigal" sons and daughters, to return.
... imho.
To: ambrose
When they landed on the moon, I would have predicted that we would have been on Mars by now. It annoys me that almost 40 years later we're still talking about it. And still not doing much about it.
The rover is great, but we did something similar back in the seventies, we've already got pictures from the surface. We should have had a permanent moon base for 20 years now and an ISS on the surface of Mars for 10 years now.
Meanwhile the country drifts and cultural pessimism sets in. The US is what it is because of its frontier. Take away the frontier and we're just Belgians, and whiny ones at that.
9
posted on
01/23/2004 6:36:19 PM PST
by
marron
To: ambrose
Yes, but only for liberals. Well no, actually what ever planet we can reached that is furthest from the Earth. I would suggest the sun, but I don`t think the flying space toilet would make it without burning up first.
10
posted on
01/23/2004 6:36:52 PM PST
by
GasparSantiago
(Howard Dean is an insane gerbil)
To: marron
I share your deep annoyance over the 30 years wasted since the moon mission.
Yes, it is sci-fi, but take a look at "2001" and see where many envisioned us to now be during the 60s. Not even remotely close.
11
posted on
01/23/2004 6:39:04 PM PST
by
ambrose
To: ambrose
... without a doubt.
the real problem with it from a conservative view, is the cost and who is going to pay if we do our destiny...
my question for the naysayers is, who is going to pay if we don't. It's there. We can do it. It's part of our explorer/creators nature as human beings. It's like an open 'job offer' laying on the table right in front of us.
What a way to invest human seed as capitol into the massive expanse and opportunity that lies before us.
To: ambrose
Not even remotely close.
and why is that?
I believe that "the longest economic expansion in the history of the USA," credited to Clink but originating in Reagan and the republican revolution... COULD have given us more than adequate capitol to do what our forebears dreamed to be, and begin the task of fulfilling our destiny.
Will we go NOW, or will we fall back again?
To: ambrose
I think the gay population should be the ones to colonize Mars. Let them see how long they can survive.
To: ambrose
Let the Mexicans colonize...ah nevermind...what was I thinking.
15
posted on
01/23/2004 6:51:09 PM PST
by
BeerSwillr
(Profanity free since 2003-12-17 20:41:45)
To: ambrose
MARS?? FUGGIN' "A"!
16
posted on
01/23/2004 6:51:14 PM PST
by
jaz.357
(We should be more open-minded toward people trying to kill us.)
To: Robert_Paulson2
I agree with your spiritual view of exploration. It seems almost an abomination that this entire universe was created for us, yet we insist on living on what only amounts to a speck of dust in the grand scheme of things.
Having human outposts on other worlds is also an insurance policy against natural or man-made disasters that could wipe out the Earth.
The problem is that the most sheep care not one wit about anything beyond their own immediate existence. Issues like legacy or leaving something better for a future generation are alien to them. That's why Clintoon was so popular. He governed for today only, going only on the latest opinion polling.
Bush is taking a lot of hits off this proposal, and when we finally make it to Mars, he'll be long gone from public office, denying him the "glory"... Clintoon would never have proposed something like this (and well, he didn't).
17
posted on
01/23/2004 6:52:10 PM PST
by
ambrose
To: TommyDale
New "must see reality tv,"
"Survivor MARS?"
To: ambrose
The universe is like a brand new bicycle given to us by YOU KNOW WHO, as a birthday present...
We are like the kid who would rather eat candy and play with the checkers game, so we won't have to go outside and skin our knees on that "nasty bicycle" that Daddy bought us.
You know, Dad has to be dissappointed: "Kids, I go to work here every day, and it's GREAT! So, why not let me show you the family 'business', instead of playing with those stupid television boxes you make up? Hey let Me dish a while, let's talk quantum mechanics, son!"
"Aw dad, I just wanna play with my ballbat..."
To: freebilly
Reminds me a bit of Bradbury's Martian Chronicles.
20
posted on
01/23/2004 7:10:26 PM PST
by
luvbach1
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-32 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson