Can humans be the new martians?

[bizzle]

As pretty much everyone knows, one day whether due to our error, or the sun's rising in temperature, the earth is no longer going to be habitable. Right now, a lot of money and time is being spent developing the idea of Terraforming, or the process of creating new Earths. And for the moment, they have their sights set on Mars.

Mars is at the moment to cold to support life and completely devoid of oxygen in the atmosphere (which is made up of CO2 and Nitrogen). However, there have been traces of ice found on the planet's surface and water is definitely one of the most essential building blocks to support life.

What the suggested plan is to make life sustainable for future humans is to first do to the planet what we're already doing here. Releasing massive amounts of greenhouse gasses into the atmosphere to cause a rapid change in global temperature.

Then they propose sending millions of species of lichens and algae (the kind that have been known to survive in the roughest conditions with little water and heat) to convert the massive amounts of Carbon dioxide in the Martian atmosphere into oxygen. After they establish that, small insects and animals and grass-plants next, then larger vegetation, then larger animals until finally Humans! This is supposed to take course over a couple hundred years if it ever does even happen.

I think its a pretty interesting idea and it sounds great in theory, but I don't think it can work in reality. Ecosystems are so delicate and rely so much on specific conditions being met that it seems almost impossible - but then again humans have long been known to defy nature.

What do you think? Do you think it will be necessary or even possible to move one planet's ecosystem to another? Even if it does succeed, what next? Mars can't last forever either so where would we go after that?

I have a link to a BBC documentary that covered this topic and I would post it, but it's on a website that links to copyrighted material. So I figured I would ask permission first. (Mods can I link to it?)

Oh hey, I found a wiki article. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terraforming_of_Mars)

[Niki]

If humans are still around when the sun dies, we wouldn't be able to be anywhere in this solar system. I guess they just recently found a planet that could be habitable, but it's insanely far away. But I do think it's possible and that it probably will happen, but there's no way we'll be around to see it.

[Ox]

We'll be dead, everyone will still be an asshole and we'll just wreck that planet as well. It probably could happen, but even if it does, it's not going to be some utopian society, it'll still be as crooked, violent and twisted as Earth is.

[bizzle]

Its not a plan for when they sun blows up, its for when the sun gets too hot to sustain life on earth. The sun is constantly getting hotter and hotter and when the earth's temperature rises even 10 degrees, were fucked. That is a very long time in the future but still inevitable.

[Matterialize]

I've read about the lichen method, and it will actually take much longer than a couple hundred years to accomplish - But that doesn't necessarily mean we have to wait that long. Although Biosphere 2 (http://forums.explosm.net/showthread.php?p=606399#post606399) was basically a failure, we could build off of that and create enclosed colonies on Mars, until the planet can sustain life on its own.

As far as heating up the planet, one way to do it is with a soletta (giant space mirror). We'd use it to sublime one of those carbon dioxide ice caps and release a fuck-ton of the stuff into the atmosphere, which then traps some of the sun's energy, which heats up the planet more, releasing more CO2 and trapping even more energy, and so on. It's a positive feedback thingy.

EDIT: Bizzle, where did you hear that the sun is heating up? :ahe: I know it's supposed to inflate and explode eventually, but that's not supposed to be for another billion years or some shit. Earth's resources and atmosphere are going to be ruined long before that happens.

[Niki]

Matterialize, it gets like 1% hotter every ten years or something. I can't exactly remember why, but I heard the same thing somewhere.

[Ox]

Matterialize, it gets like 1% hotter every ten years or something. I can't exactly remember why, but I heard the same thing somewhere.

That sounds like :science: :facts: to me, it's conclusive!

[bizzle]

EDIT: Bizzle, where did you hear that the sun is heating up? :ahe: I know it's supposed to inflate and explode eventually, but that's not supposed to be for another billion years or some shit. Earth's resources and atmosphere are going to be ruined long before that happens.

Actually, I didn't really hear about it until I watched that documentary a while back but I looked into it and its apparently just how the life of a star works. It gets bigger and bigger until the star just collapses onto itself or something. I don't know. I'm not really an astrophysicist.

But here's a couple links:

http://www.hno.harvard.edu/gazette/1997/11.06/BrighteningSuni.html
http://astrosun2.astro.cornell.edu/academics/courses//astro201/evol_sun.htm

[Desert]

Bizzle, you're on a good thread spree or something.

Yeah, the sun's getting hotter every ten years or so, but in at LEAST a million years (where we will all be dead or so advanced that we have done something else) the sun will explode.
I think it's a smart idea to start looking for ways to move to Mars, but we need to also do stuff to protect ourselves from the upcoming heat waves.

[Niki]

Bizzle, you're on a good thread spree or something.

Yeah, the sun's getting hotter every ten years or so, but in at LEAST a million years (where we will all be dead or so advanced that we have done something else) the sun will explode.
I think it's a smart idea to start looking for ways to move to Mars, but we need to also do stuff to protect ourselves from the upcoming heat waves.

The sun won't explode for another five billion years.

[Desert]

The sun won't explode for another five billion years.

I wasn't sure if billion was the right word but ok.

[Relaps]

Billion is the right word.


We won't be around by then.

[bizzle]

We would need to vacate the Earth long, long before the sun blows up.

EDIT: Lots of reasons. Over heating of the planet due to global warming or increased solar activity, over-population, nuclear devastation, et cetera.

[Alcoholic]

Where did the evidence of the sun increasing temperature come from? That contradicts thermodynamic laws, and goes against the known nature of stars.

Can you find the link, or something comparable?

[bizzle]

Actually, I didn't really hear about it until I watched that documentary a while back but I looked into it and its apparently just how the life of a star works. It gets bigger and bigger until the star just collapses onto itself or something. I don't know. I'm not really an astrophysicist.

But here's a couple links:

http://www.hno.harvard.edu/gazette/1997/11.06/BrighteningSuni.html
http://astrosun2.astro.cornell.edu/academics/courses//astro201/evol_sun.htm

[Alcoholic]

Oops. Thanks!

[BKS]

Actually, I didn't really hear about it until I watched that documentary a while back but I looked into it and its apparently just how the life of a star works. It gets bigger and bigger until the star just collapses onto itself or something. I don't know. I'm not really an astrophysicist.

But here's a couple links:

http://www.hno.harvard.edu/gazette/1997/11.06/BrighteningSuni.html
http://astrosun2.astro.cornell.edu/academics/courses//astro201/evol_sun.htm


Right. The sun expands, like a balloon, up until it gets to the breakin point. Then, if I recall correctly, it will either Supernova, and extinguish, or go right to the dwarf stages, where it gives off far less heat than it does now.



Either way we are fucked.

[John Travolta]

Matterialize, it gets like 1% hotter every ten years or something. I can't exactly remember why, but I heard the same thing somewhere.

No, you're wrong. What a totally made up statistic.

[Putzmeister]

im going with the im not an astrophysicist idea, but of my understanding the Sun i not going to "explode".. it is going to grow exponentially larger turning into a Red Giant, and then due to those forces will implode on itself. Much like a black hole is created, but our sun is not even close to being large enough to create a black whole.. it just will become a White Dwarf.. prove me if im wrong, but thats my understanding of it.
Heres a link that i found interesting.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=Q5M3t0SOZSM

[ElPresidenteMike]

When the Sun goes super nova, it'll have already engulfed earth in its process of turning into a red giant so the super nova is not what we've gotta worry about.

[bizzle]

When the Sun goes super nova, it'll have already engulfed earth in its process of turning into a red giant so the super nova is not what we've gotta worry about.

Holy shit, maybe you should read the entire thread. This has been covered how many fucking times? This isn't about the sun going into super nova.

[Crabstick]

Hey cool, science sort of.

As it stands we're not technologically capable of setting up camp on Mars. Or finding an alternative planet to live on. As it stands.

But that's the joy about science, it just keeps on expanding. We've progressed further in the last 5 years than in the 20 years previous, and that trend is going to continue. When it gets to the point where we have to pack up and leave Earth (it's gonna happen no matter how hard you try, Bob Geldoff) we'll have the technology to do so. It's not something to worry about today.

[ShockWave]

I think Mars might be too small. It's currrent atmosphere is really thin (I think it's about 1% of our atmosphere), because it's gravitational force is too weak to hold in gases. I'm not sure a release of greenhouse gases into Mars' atmosphere would do much of anything, because most of it might just escape into space because of the lack of gravitational hold.

I'm not a scientist though, so my word isn't worth anything. :/

[Graft]

I'm thinking that SW is right. But, I'm not a scientist either. :indiff:

I think that we wouldn't be able to terraform it or ever make it like earth(different size and makeup), but we could establish enclosed colonies, kind of like space stations on planet where humans could live. We'd need a better way of recycling materials and oxygen before we could do this however.

[Dauntasa]

When the sun gets hot/big enough that Earth can't support humans, we can move to Europa. It will have warmed up quite a bit, the ice will have melted and turned it into a wet planet, and it already has oxygen.

[Niki]

When the sun gets hot/big enough that Earth can't support humans, we can move to Europa. It will have warmed up quite a bit, the ice will have melted and turned it into a wet planet, and it already has oxygen.

But what happens when the sun shrinks back down? There'll be almost no heat so we need to have something out of this solar system for when that happens.

[Dauntasa]

But what happens when the sun shrinks back down? There'll be almost no heat so we need to have something out of this solar system for when that happens.

The sun won't shrink back down. That's not how it works. It will explode, destroying the entire system, and then all that's left will be the core.

[Clerlic]

Sun isn't warming up that fast, if it were, we'd be fried long ago. 1% in 10 years??? That means it was more than 7 times colder 2000 years ago. It's only global warming we have to worry about, and I'm pretty sure getting rid of that is easier than terraforming a whole new planet. Although I do think that it should be done anyways, we need to start colonising space the sooner the better (sorry I'm still under the influence of Mass Effect).

[Gudizere]

I think Mars might be too small. It's currrent atmosphere is really thin (I think it's about 1% of our atmosphere), because it's gravitational force is too weak to hold in gases. I'm not sure a release of greenhouse gases into Mars' atmosphere would do much of anything, because most of it might just escape into space because of the lack of gravitational hold.


Yes, but I would have thought adding water to the planet would create more mass and thus, bigger gravitational field.

[CasualFriday]

There's all kinds of things in the planning stage by various initiative groups. A few of them want to try terraforming, but they all have different ideas. Some envision a tree-filled landscape within a few hundred years, while others hope for parts of the planet to be covered in algae and fungus within a few thousand.

However, on the subject of celestial life cycles, Betelgeuse (one of the closest stars to us besides the sun) is expected to explode into a supernova within the next 10,000 years. It will be visible during the daytime and will fully light the sky during the night. The explosion will result in a gamma ray burst (common to supernovae) that has a one-in-so-many-thousand chance of hitting Earth. If this were to happen, there is no way to stop it. We would be fried. In fact, Betelgeuse could have exploded ten minutes ago, we wouldn't know for quite some time.

[I_Smell]

But what happens when the sun shrinks back down?

THEN WE SHALL FIGHT IN THE SHADE.

I think terraforming is so cool. It's like starting a new planet, it's crazy.
To me, terraforming would just be creating some kind of hemisphere that can keep a consistant temperature, then adding something that uses up Carbon Dioxide and produces Oxygen, and something that uses up Oxygen and produces Carbon Dioxide. Then go do something else for a while. I know that wouldn't work, because I came up with it and I'm an idiot.

The sun won't shrink back down. That's not how it works. It will explode, destroying the entire system, and then all that's left will be the core.

Then we will live on the core (obviously).

[Chaplin]

There's all kinds of things in the planning stage by various initiative groups. A few of them want to try terraforming, but they all have different ideas. Some envision a tree-filled landscape within a few hundred years, while others hope for parts of the planet to be covered in algae and fungus within a few thousand.

However, on the subject of celestial life cycles, Betelgeuse (one of the closest stars to us besides the sun) is expected to explode into a supernova within the next 10,000 years. It will be visible during the daytime and will fully light the sky during the night. The explosion will result in a gamma ray burst (common to supernovae) that has a one-in-so-many-thousand chance of hitting Earth. If this were to happen, there is no way to stop it. We would be fried. In fact, Betelgeuse could have exploded ten minutes ago, we wouldn't know for quite some time.
I'm glad and unhappy I won't be able to see that. Glad because I don't want to die, but unhappy because that sounds kind of cool, it lighting up the sky and all. I think we are a far way off from any human life on any other planets. The co founder of google is going on a space craft though in 2011, so space travel is starting to pick up.

[Dauntasa]

Then we will live on the core (obviously).

By "the core", I meant "the super-dense, fifteen thousand degree core of the sun".

[Niki]

The sun won't shrink back down. That's not how it works. It will explode, destroying the entire system, and then all that's left will be the core.

Well I knew that, but not all stars explode into a huge supernova. :indiff:

[jewishjosh]

While I like the idea of playing god with another world, we're better off putting our eggs in Earth's basket. If we clean this mess up we won't have a need to move to Mars, and if we don't we'll be dead by the time we have the ability to colonize another planet. Just think, if Earth can't sustain 6.7 billion people, how could Mars sustain even a fraction of that with an artificial atmosphere, limited resources, imported ecosystems, and a smaller physical size? We're better off developing Mars for astro-tourism.

[McGruff]

We've got like 4.5 billion years left until the sun grows and kills us all, so i'm not going to worry about that. Hopefully we can find oxygen in the rocks on mars and make that our new home, but other than that we just have to work on making the earth more suitable so the greenhouse gases don't make a bigger hole in the o-zone.

Whoever said the sun would explode when it grows to be a red dwarf was wrong, we have a way to go before the sun explodes.

[I_Smell]

By "the core", I meant "the super-dense, fifteen thousand degree core of the sun".

I meant after it cools down, stupid.

[bizzle]

We've got like 4.5 billion years left until the sun grows and kills us all, so i'm not going to worry about that. Hopefully we can find oxygen in the rocks on mars and make that our new home, but other than that we just have to work on making the earth more suitable so the greenhouse gases don't make a bigger hole in the o-zone.

Whoever said the sun would explode when it grows to be a red dwarf was wrong, we have a way to go before the sun explodes.

I'm sorry but this was the least informed post in this whole thread of uninformed posts.

[Gilligan]

The sun's not going to explode. Eventually it's going to be made up of mostly heavy nuclei. And since the fusion of atoms with atomic mass numbers above around 60 (heavy nuclei) don't produce a positive net release of energy, it's not going to supply enough radiation to warm our planet. It's going to become a white dwarf and just sit there like a giant planet.
But it will expand out and eventually consume Earth anyway, and it when it does settle a large portion of it won't fall back down to it's surface. So the area out to probably past Mars will be filled with leftover dust which well then spread out over the rest of the solar system by experiencing varying net gravitational attractions here and there from planets or possibly other areas of dense dust.

[Dauntasa]

Well I knew that, but not all stars explode into a huge supernova. :indiff:

They all explode into something. The sun won't supernova, but it will still nova, which will still destroy everything and turn it into a white dwarf.

[Crabstick]

Sun isn't warming up that fast, if it were, we'd be fried long ago. 1% in 10 years??? That means it was more than 7 times colder 2000 years ago.

I just wanna clear this up. The Sun itself is increasing in temperature by 1% every ten years. That's like at its core. By the team it reaches us, it's lost a whole buttload of heat, so we're increasing by less than 1% every ten years. It's not something you notice, unless you look at average temperatures over the last century or so.

[mikhial66]

I just wanna clear this up. The Sun itself is increasing in temperature by 1% every ten years. That's like at its core. By the team it reaches us, it's lost a whole buttload of heat, so we're increasing by less than 1% every ten years. It's not something you notice, unless you look at average temperatures over the last century or so.

The last century is not the entire Earth's history or the sun's history. Any change has to do with natural changes and/or global warming, not the sun heating up. It's like saying weather is the same as climate, if we look at the long term side of things.

[John Travolta]

Yes, but I would have thought adding water to the planet would create more mass and thus, bigger gravitational field.

Every other post in this thread has been as retarded as this one. The majority of you have no idea what you're talking about and you're totally ruining what may have been an okay thread.
I just wanna clear this up. The Sun itself is increasing in temperature by 1% every ten years. That's like at its core. By the team it reaches us, it's lost a whole buttload of heat, so we're increasing by less than 1% every ten years. It's not something you notice, unless you look at average temperatures over the last century or so.

No. The sun, as of now(actually about 8 minutes ago, LOLAMIRITE) is about 27 million degrees Farenheit. That's 27,000,000 degrees. It you took one percent of that it would be 270,000. Add that to 27 million and you get 27,000,270 degrees Farenheit. Now, does that seem like a hugely extravagant increase of temperature in the span of ten years? The actual number is approximately 1% every 100 million years. I don't know who actually came up with your statistic or why the fuck anybody would even believe it, but it's dead wrong. Could you have gotten it by the study(that's sketchy at best) that states the Sun's radiation output is increasing by .05% per decade? Either way you're wrong.

All of these scenarios about the sun completely exploding into nothing is complete nonsense.

The fact of the matter is that the sun will get bigger and bigger, until it grows to the size of more than the orbit of the Earth but less than the orbit of Mars. The Sun will not create a supernova, as many of you believe but instead it will erupt, so to speak, and cast off it's outer layer in an event that creates a planetary nebula. The Sun will then turn into a dwarf star and become exponentially more dense because of the huge amount of mass that's huddled up in a space the size of Earth. None of this will happen for another 5 billion of years or so, and all life on Earth will be completely extinct in about 1 billion years as the Sun becomes hotter and hotter.

I'm sorry but this was the least informed post in this whole thread of uninformed posts.

Matterialize, it gets like 1% hotter every ten years or something. I can't exactly remember why, but I heard the same thing somewhere.

[I_Smell]

The fact of the matter is that the sun will get bigger and bigger, until it grows to the size of more than the orbit of the Earth but less than the orbit of Mars. The Sun will not create a supernova, as many of you believe but instead it will erupt, so to speak, and cast off it's outer layer in an event that creates a planetary nebula. The Sun will then turn into a dwarf star and become exponentially more dense because of the huge amount of mass that's huddled up in a space the size of Earth.

I made a collage of this when I was 15. My physics teacher stuck it on the wall next to THE WATER CYCLE.

[John Travolta]

Oversimplified science on walls is badass.

[RocketSoldier]

They all explode into something. The sun won't supernova, but it will still nova, which will still destroy everything and turn it into a white dwarf.

Uh, no. The sun's mass is not big enough to explode into a nova. It will shrink back down to a dwarf star.

[ski]

... The sun, as of now(actually about 8 minutes ago, LOLAMIRITE) is about 27 million degrees Farenheit. That's 27,000,000 degrees. It you took one percent of that it would be 270,000. Add that to 27 million and you get 27,000,270 degrees Farenheit...

27,000,000+270,000=27,270,000. :facts:

When the sun becomes a red giant in 7.5 billion years, it will engulf all the inner planets. One of my past science teachers told my class about it but here's a source that states it in a somewhat pessimistic, yet factual, way:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_giant#The_Sun_as_a_red_giant

[Crabstick]

The last century is not the entire Earth's history or the sun's history. Any change has to do with natural changes and/or global warming, not the sun heating up. It's like saying weather is the same as climate, if we look at the long term side of things.

I'm not saying weather and climate are the same thing. I'm talking about taking a sample space. I'm sure the themometers they used in the stone age just wouldn't cut it for this sort of information. The point I was trying to make is that there is little noticeable difference over the last century, because however much hotter the Sun is getting, it doesn't really have that much of an effect on dear little Earth.

No. The sun, as of now(actually about 8 minutes ago, LOLAMIRITE) is about 27 million degrees Farenheit. That's 27,000,000 degrees. It you took one percent of that it would be 270,000. Add that to 27 million and you get 27,000,270 degrees Farenheit. Now, does that seem like a hugely extravagant increase of temperature in the span of ten years? The actual number is approximately 1% every 100 million years. I don't know who actually came up with your statistic or why the fuck anybody would even believe it, but it's dead wrong. Could you have gotten it by the study(that's sketchy at best) that states the Sun's radiation output is increasing by .05% per decade? Either way you're wrong.

I'm not the one who provided the 1% over 10 years info, I was making a clarification. If, as you say, the sun is 27 million degrees Fahrenheit, a 1% increase is basically fuck all. A hot day (I'm guessing in F here), is approximately 100 degrees F? So the heat we experience here on Earth is, what, around 1/270000th of the actual heat the Sun gives off? An increase of 1% within the Sun isn't something we'd notice.

Having just re-read your argument, you've told me I'm wrong by proving my point. The last sentence of my previous post was stupid, I'll admit, but I was disproving whoever it was' comments that the Sun getting hotter is going to fuck us all up.

[mikhial66]

If the sun's heat rose by 1%, the heat we would receive from the sun would rise by 1%. It's all relative.

And by the way, there are ways to tell what the global temperature was well before the stone age. Scientists can check for particles, chemicals, and gases in ice drilled up in the arctic to see what the temperature was in the past, amount other things.

[Dauntasa]

Uh, no. The sun's mass is not big enough to explode into a nova. It will shrink back down to a dwarf star.

There is a difference between a nova and a supernova. The sun is big enough to nova, but not big enough to supernova. The sun will collapse down into dwarf star, and a bunch of excess gas is blown into space. It's not really an explosion, but the gas is on fire, so it will still kill us if we happen to be it's way.

[Sundancekid]

Apparently mars doesn't have a "global magnetic field", but it used to have one, doesn't earths magnetic field protect from cosmic radiation and such?
http://mgs-mager.gsfc.nasa.gov/ is the link to the info, it mentions "Mars does have very strong crustal magnetic fields" how does this differ to the global one if any1 knows?

[Clerlic]

Apparently mars doesn't have a "global magnetic field", but it used to have one, doesn't earths magnetic field protect from cosmic radiation and such?
http://mgs-mager.gsfc.nasa.gov/ is the link to the info, it mentions "Mars does have very strong crustal magnetic fields" how does this differ to the global one if any1 knows?

If I understand correctly (don't take it as a fact), they result from so called "telluric currents", which are electric currents inside the Earth's crust (in this case Marses crust). They may be caused by the planet's magnetic field (not in this case), thunderstorms, solar wind, and other sources of energy, including man-made.

Also, stop worrying about how the Sun will behave in 5 billion years, it's so far away, we really DON'T have to think about it, the thread is about Mars, on which this Phoenix probe is currently searching for life, by the way.

[whangadude]

The sun is not the problem, we got millions of years till it becomes one, by that time human's will be dead/utopian/robots/energy beings or evolved into many different species threw out the galaxy.

But way before then earth is going to be overcrowded, like within a hundred years, that's when we need to make more earths. I dont see it as that hard for a small fleet of self replicating robot ships to be sent to the asteriod belt between Mars and Jupiter. There they would have all the resources to multiply expodentuly, then part of the newly created would be sent to Venus. Venus has too much atmosphere, Mars has too little. The robot ships will have giant (fuckin huge infact) super strong bags that suck up atmosphere and then head to Mars, eventually Mars would have an atmosphere, at the same time Venus gets less so she too could be terraformed.

Then stage 2 is other robot ships head to Europa, the sixth moon of Jupiter, the ice moon. And they mine great chunks of ice and send it to Mars and Venus, giving them a good supply of water. Once the planets have enough water and atmosphere, plants would be able to be planted and slowly the atmosphere could become breathable.

It would only take the technology to build the robots and then maybe a hundred years at most. And I came up with this plan couple years ago, I think it could work.

[Clerlic]

Bah!! Transporting matter across great distances will never work, or at least will
be highly impractical.

You sound like early 1900's engineers saying "Nothing heavier than air can fly!". ;)

[Clerlic]

Of course, but that's with our current technologies. According to Carl Sagan, we already have technology to propel a huge spaceship at 10% the speed of light. We don't need to move like half of the earth's resources just to terraform another planet, other planets have all kinds of metals and possibly even water, which is essential to life. There are and will be more ways and ideas to terraform planets, just saying "it's impossible, or next to impossible" will not help, of course. I say it's very possible unless we kill ourselves over a some thousand years old writing.

[GirlsChoize]

We'll be dead, everyone will still be an asshole and we'll just wreck that planet as well. It probably could happen, but even if it does, it's not going to be some utopian society, it'll still be as crooked, violent and twisted as Earth is.

USER WAS PUT IN TIMEOUT FOR THIS POST. (http://forums.explosm.net/eventlog.php)
Reason: QFT, only with out the FT

[pure_hatred]

One minor criticism. You said the Earth's temperature will rise by 10 degres and that will make it uninhabitable. You do realise it was about that temperature when the dinosaurs were around? Uninhabitable my ass.

On topic though, I doubt it'll work. Like you said, ecosystems are so delicate, I doubt we'll be able to get it right to sustain life on Mars. And whoeever said about the Sun blowing up, we'll have been extinct for eons before that happens. 5 billion years, actually. That's longer than the Earth is old. We'll be extinct within the next 10 million years, or at least that's what I'm estimating.

[pure_hatred]

Venus has too much atmosphere, Mars has too little.

Mars has plenty of atmosphere, but it's entirely CO2 and Nitrogen, so we can't survive. Venus also has plenty of atmosphere, which is made up of CO2 and sulphuric acid. Not to mention the temperature on Venus reaches 400+ Celsius. Eitherway, we can't live on Venus, that's like fucking overkill.

[Crabstick]

If the sun's heat rose by 1%, the heat we would receive from the sun would rise by 1%. It's all relative.

Wrong. Let's assume we're receiving one millionth of the total amount of heat given off by the sum (note: bullshit statistic). If it increased by 1%, we would get an increase of one millionth of that 1%.

In science there's no such thing as an impossibility. There's only things that aren't possible yet.

[Clerlic]

Mars has plenty of atmosphere, but it's entirely CO2 and Nitrogen, so we can't survive. Venus also has plenty of atmosphere, which is made up of CO2 and sulphuric acid. Not to mention the temperature on Venus reaches 400+ Celsius. Eitherway, we can't live on Venus, that's like fucking overkill.

Actually, there was a proposition of building floating outposts on Venus, it's atmosphere is thicker and makes floating easier. But the outposts would be somewhere higher in the atmosphere, where the temperature and pressure is very close to Earth's, which makes it pretty habitable, minus the acid though.

But Mars' atmosphere really is thin, it's pressure is less than 1% of Earth's. Lack of a magnetic field has some part in this.

[pure_hatred]

Actually, there was a proposition of building floating outposts on Venus, it's atmosphere is thicker and makes floating easier. But the outposts would be somewhere higher in the atmosphere, where the temperature and pressure is very close to Earth's, which makes it pretty habitable, minus the acid though.

But Mars' atmosphere really is thin, it's pressure is less than 1% of Earth's. Lack of a magnetic field has some part in this.

I need to bone up on my planetary knowledge o.o

[Sundancekid]

Let's assume we're receiving one millionth of the total amount of heat given off by the sum (note: bullshit statistic). If it increased by 1%, we would get an increase of one millionth of that 1%.

Just did abit of maths/physics..... If the surface temperature of the sun is 5800K (as my exam paper tells me) then the energy hitting our atmosphere per metre squared is 2722.

If you increase the surface temperature by 1% to 5858, the energy equals 2833. This is a 4% increase of energy.

But our atmosphere reflects most of that energy anyway, and most of the planet will only receive a proportion of the energy that does get through because were not perpendicular to the incoming light.

Also, 4% increase in energy doesn't mean a 4% increase in temperature.

[Clerlic]

Just did abit of maths/physics..... If the surface temperature of the sun is 5800K (as my exam paper tells me) then the energy hitting our atmosphere per metre squared is 2722.

If you increase the surface temperature by 1% to 5858, the energy equals 2833. This is a 4% increase of energy.

But our atmosphere reflects most of that energy anyway, and most of the planet will only receive a proportion of the energy that does get through because were not perpendicular to the incoming light.

Also, 4% increase in energy doesn't mean a 4% increase in temperature.

Well it's obvious since you just calculated that it equals to 1% increase in temperature. Nonetheless, an increase of sun temperature that high (1% in 10 years) would NOT go unnoticable.

[Sundancekid]

I worked out when the suns surface temperature increases by 1% it increases the energy hitting 1x1 metre of the earths atmosphere by 4%.

[prf007]

There is a difference between a nova and a supernova. The sun is big enough to nova, but not big enough to supernova. The sun will collapse down into dwarf star, and a bunch of excess gas is blown into space. It's not really an explosion, but the gas is on fire, so it will still kill us if we happen to be it's way.

Wow, this is the first thing you've said in this thread that is remotely true, but you're still wrong about the concept of a nova, they're not smaller versions of supernovas. A nova can only occur if there are two stars in close proximity and one of them is a white dwarf that essentially sucks in the gas of the nearby star. The nearest star is Alpha Centauri which is over 4 light years away, which is too far and neither of them is a white dwarf.

[prf007]

Just did abit of maths/physics..... If the surface temperature of the sun is 5800K (as my exam paper tells me) then the energy hitting our atmosphere per metre squared is 2722.

If you increase the surface temperature by 1% to 5858, the energy equals 2833. This is a 4% increase of energy.

But our atmosphere reflects most of that energy anyway, and most of the planet will only receive a proportion of the energy that does get through because were not perpendicular to the incoming light.

Also, 4% increase in energy doesn't mean a 4% increase in temperature.

For future references, make sure to include your units of measurements, you catch hell for it from teachers but Im sure you knew that.

I wish you told me the units for energy per squared whether it be watts or joules per some other length of time. Because the solar constant has the amount of energy hitting the earth at an average of 1100 W per meter squared, which I guess makes whatever that number you gave us wrong. At the same time, the energy hitting the earth is never constant because the earth doesn't orbit the sun in a perfect circle.

But you are right, 4% increase in energy wouldn't raise the temperature hardly at all on the surface of the Earth.

[Clerlic]

But you are right, 4% increase in energy wouldn't raise the temperature hardly at all on the surface of the Earth.

That's because we have atmosphere to spread the effects over time. But if there would be a 4% increase in energy every 10 years, we would be cooked alive in primordal stage.

An example of that would be a lightbulb like 10 meters away from you, you increase it's intensity every minute by 1%, at some point it will be bright enough to blind you, providing that it would be an unbreakable lightbulb.

[Souldrinker]

As it stands we're not technologically capable of setting up camp on Mars. Or finding an alternative planet to live on. As it stands.


Ridiculous statement. We are perfectly capable of setting up a camp on Mars.

We can build contained habitats.
We can regulate a contained environment.
We can grow food.
We can make fuel.
We can live and breathe and eat and survive.

In essence, very little in the way of chemicals etc will be needed from Earth. Most of what we need is already on Mars, waiting for us.

I don't have a copy on me (I do have one somewhere, though), but grab a book called The Case for Mars, by Robert Zubrin.

If you're lazy, check out Mars Direct (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mars_Direct) on wikipedia.

I think Mars might be too small. It's currrent atmosphere is really thin (I think it's about 1% of our atmosphere), because it's gravitational force is too weak to hold in gases. I'm not sure a release of greenhouse gases into Mars' atmosphere would do much of anything, because most of it might just escape into space because of the lack of gravitational hold.


Mars' average "sea-level" atmospheric pressure is 8 millibars, which is 8/1000th of Earth's sea-level atmospheric pressure.

The lack of pressure is due to several possible factors, none of which are gravity. Mars has 1/3 Earth gravity, which is just fine. The Moon has 1/6 Earth gravity, which is just fine, too, but I think any atmosphere the Moon had was blasted away by impact (if it ever had any), which could have been a contributing factor to Mars' current state (along with a deceased magnetic field).



But way before then earth is going to be overcrowded, like within a hundred years, that's when we need to make more earths. I dont see it as that hard for a small fleet of self replicating robot ships to be sent to the asteriod belt between Mars and Jupiter. There they would have all the resources to multiply expodentuly, then part of the newly created would be sent to Venus.

Yeah, self-replicating interplanetary spaceships are easy to make

/sarcasm.

Venus has too much atmosphere, Mars has too little. The robot ships will have giant (fuckin huge infact) super strong bags that suck up atmosphere and then head to Mars, eventually Mars would have an atmosphere, at the same time Venus gets less so she too could be terraformed.

Venus has a lethal atmosphere. We don't want that on Mars.

Then stage 2 is other robot ships head to Europa, the sixth moon of Jupiter, the ice moon. And they mine great chunks of ice and send it to Mars and Venus, giving them a good supply of water. Once the planets have enough water and atmosphere, plants would be able to be planted and slowly the atmosphere could become breathable.

Mars has water, Venus is dead in the water as far as terraforming in the next millenia goes.

In fact, it is theorised that Mars has enough water to cover half the planet. Considering Mars currently (in a waterless state) has the equal of Earth's landmass, a half submerged Mars would have half of Earth's landmass, which is plenty. Someone else in this thread said Mars is too small - this is a ridiculous statement.

It would only take the technology to build the robots and then maybe a hundred years at most. And I came up with this plan couple years ago, I think it could work.

It could not. Your plan is ill thought out, ridiculously inefficient and outright stupid.

***************

Like I said, read the book or the wiki. Zubrin is THE MAN. His Mars Direct plan could be done in 10 years on current technology, costing ~$50billion if done by govt or half that if done privately.

NASA has adopted his plan for their Moon, Mars and Beyond approach, but cannibalised it into a Mars Semi-Direct mission (instead of Mars Direct) because they are inneficient wankers who need to overcomplicate things to satisfy as many interest/development groups as possible instead of just getting the shit done.

Other Texts:
Mars Underground - a killer Mars doco.
Red, Blue, Green Mars - a fictional trilogy about colonising Mars and the subsequent problems by Kim Stanley Robinson that is excellent reading for those interested in this kind of thing

[Dauntasa]

Wow, this is the first thing you've said in this thread that is remotely true, but you're still wrong about the concept of a nova, they're not smaller versions of supernovas. A nova can only occur if there are two stars in close proximity and one of them is a white dwarf that essentially sucks in the gas of the nearby star. The nearest star is Alpha Centauri which is over 4 light years away, which is too far and neither of them is a white dwarf.

EDIT:No, wait, you're right, I'm the retard. Nevermind.

[spaj]

"Necessity is the mother of invention" as Boserup once said.

As an optimist I simply do not currently see the need to colonise Mars; rather, I see it as more of a planet for the purpose of scientific curiosity and research.

Contemporary issues such as resource management, climate change, biodiversity, and overpopulation are things that will be partially solved one way or another. Idealistic, I know, but the mere thought of colonising Mars as means to solve the above problems is a little drastic.

[pure_hatred]

To address the point of people arguing over novas and supernovas and so on. The sun will do neither. However, like all dieing stars, it will expand and consume the first 3-4 planets in our solar system. Then it will collapse under it's own gravity, but the Earth will have been incinerated for millennia by then. Again, none of this going to happen for 5 billion years, by which point, we'll be long, long, long, long, long gone.

[CnGy]

One ship.

One mission.

To find the next earth.

I'd watch that show.

[Clerlic]

The lack of pressure is due to several possible factors, none of which are gravity. Mars has 1/3 Earth gravity, which is just fine.


I must agree with everything but that statement, since pressure equals force / area, and the gravitational pull is, indeed producing force smaller than Earth's. So saying that gravity has nothing to do with it, is not correct.

[prf007]

That's because we have atmosphere to spread the effects over time. But if there would be a 4% increase in energy every 10 years, we would be cooked alive in primordal stage.

An example of that would be a lightbulb like 10 meters away from you, you increase it's intensity every minute by 1%, at some point it will be bright enough to blind you, providing that it would be an unbreakable lightbulb.

Yes but the temperature of the sun isn't changing. If anything it's getting cooler, the only thing we have to worry about is it expanding. Which won't happen before something else forces us off the earth and perhaps the solar system. Our sun is a low mass star that's currently in the main sequence phase. After it leaves being a main sequence star, it's fuel is starting to become depleted. Now I can't remember the exact process but essentially the insides of the sun start to change. The hydrogen and helium fission gets altered so the helium(I think) starts to expand and try to leave the sun. The helium expanding causes the star to bulge by epic proportions which gives you a red giant star. The reason our star won't become a super nova is because it's not massive enough. Our sun has a core of carbon, or it will when it dies at least. Stars that do end in a supernova have cores made of iron. When our sun dies, it will not explode, unless you count the outer layers of a red giant flying off into space an explosion, it will just shed the huge bulky stuff and be a tiny white dwarf.

[prf007]

To address the point of people arguing over novas and supernovas and so on. The sun will do neither. However, like all dieing stars, it will expand and consume the first 3-4 planets in our solar system. Then it will collapse under it's own gravity, but the Earth will have been incinerated for millennia by then. Again, none of this going to happen for 5 billion years, by which point, we'll be long, long, long, long, long gone.

The sun will not collapse because if it's own gravity, it isn't massive enough.

[Clerlic]

Yes but the temperature of the sun isn't changing. If anything it's getting cooler, the only thing we have to worry about is it expanding. Which won't happen before something else forces us off the earth and perhaps the solar system. Our sun is a low mass star that's currently in the main sequence phase. After it leaves being a main sequence star, it's fuel is starting to become depleted. Now I can't remember the exact process but essentially the insides of the sun start to change. The hydrogen and helium fission gets altered so the helium(I think) starts to expand and try to leave the sun. The helium expanding causes the star to bulge by epic proportions which gives you a red giant star. The reason our star won't become a super nova is because it's not massive enough. Our sun has a core of carbon, or it will when it dies at least. Stars that do end in a supernova have cores made of iron. When our sun dies, it will not explode, unless you count the outer layers of a red giant flying off into space an explosion, it will just shed the huge bulky stuff and be a tiny white dwarf.

It was the other guy who said it was warming up at that rate. It is warming up, according to wiki, but a lot slower, we have a few billion years before it gets too hot in here.

[John Travolta]

So is this thread about the Sun now?

Also, Jesus Christ. What the fuck are some of you talking about?

The sun is not the problem, we got millions of years till it becomes one, by that time human's will be dead/utopian/robots/energy beings or evolved into many different species threw out the galaxy.

But way before then earth is going to be overcrowded, like within a hundred years, that's when we need to make more earths. I dont see it as that hard for a small fleet of self replicating robot ships to be sent to the asteriod belt between Mars and Jupiter. There they would have all the resources to multiply expodentuly, then part of the newly created would be sent to Venus. Venus has too much atmosphere, Mars has too little. The robot ships will have giant (fuckin huge infact) super strong bags that suck up atmosphere and then head to Mars, eventually Mars would have an atmosphere, at the same time Venus gets less so she too could be terraformed.

Then stage 2 is other robot ships head to Europa, the sixth moon of Jupiter, the ice moon. And they mine great chunks of ice and send it to Mars and Venus, giving them a good supply of water. Once the planets have enough water and atmosphere, plants would be able to be planted and slowly the atmosphere could become breathable.

It would only take the technology to build the robots and then maybe a hundred years at most. And I came up with this plan couple years ago, I think it could work.
No.

[Clerlic]

What's wrong with the self-replicating robot ships?

Seriously, it's a project for distant future, maybe 200 years from now.

[Laced Oysters]

As cool and sci fi as it sounds, I don't like the idea of "oh well, time for a *MAYBE* Earth 2.0." It's great and all, but the thought put into that would be much better used to figure out a way to help THIS planet, the planet that we all started on.

[Metempsychosis]

I approve Laced Oysters statement.

Whats it good to settle on Mars when our beloved Earth goes nuclear and ecological devastation. Not our problem when sun dies, except those who believe in reincarnation.

[Souldrinker]

As cool and sci fi as it sounds, I don't like the idea of "oh well, time for a *MAYBE* Earth 2.0." It's great and all, but the thought put into that would be much better used to figure out a way to help THIS planet, the planet that we all started on.
Except for the fact that we're overpopulating the place and raping it of all of it's natural resources.

We'll eventually have to mine places like Mars and the Asteroids, so just bloody move there while we're at it.

Plus, those who move there will have their descendants there. Releases the burden on Earth for the future.

If we followed your argument there'd be 6 billion people crammed into a tiny portion of Africa. Exploring and colonising is what we humans do. Let's keep doing it.

I must agree with everything but that statement, since pressure equals force / area, and the gravitational pull is, indeed producing force smaller than Earth's. So saying that gravity has nothing to do with it, is not correct.

Mars' lesser gravity is not the reason it has no atmosphere. The gravity is sufficient to establish and maintain an acceptable atmosphere. It is most likely the case that a significant impact (or series of impacts) burnt or blew away the atmosphere, as well as damaging the planet and shutting down its magnetic field.

It's possible that the planet's lower mass meant it took the impact harder than Earth would have and so suffered a more significant result, but that's mass, not gravity (related, but not the same).

[ShockWave]

I think Clerlic meant gravity is directly linked to the atmosphere's pressure, not the presence and abundance of it.

Wouldn't gravity attritube to atmospheric pressure in terms of keeping the gases near the surface? I think Mars' atmosphere reaches much farther from the surface than Earth's because the low gravity allows it to, which is why surface pressures are low.

[Clerlic]

I'm just saying that planets with smaller gravity force have thinner atmospheres compared to the more powerful ones, if you look at our solar system. Of course it's not a direct correlation, like Venus is almost as powerful as Earth, but it's atmosphere is a lot thicker, but that's greenhouse gases and a lot of other stuff doing it.

[Souldrinker]

I don't think so. I think gravity affects how far out an atmosphere can reach, not how dense it is. Considering density is due to the amount of matter within the parameters of gravity's clutches, and gravity is a constant whereas total matter is a variable, the total amount of matter would have a greater effect on density.

But, I think that's neither here nor there. Mars' atmospheric levels are due to the previous existant atmosphere being removed. It did have, and could have again, an acceptable atmospheric pressure for humans.

[Clerlic]

Well gravity does reach pretty far, on Earth, at 400 km, where there's no atmosphere at all, force of gravity is still about 90%. But it's not the reach of gravity that matters. Since gas molecules aren't attached to each other, the only thing keeping them flying around is gravity, if the gravity is like 1/3rds of g, like it is on Mars, they can just fly off to space a lot easier than on Earth. If there'd be more atmosphere, it would tend to bulk down because of gravity, and it could've just been like that hundreds of millions of years ago.

I do agree that it can be terraformed and it's atmosphere can be changed, it's just really hard to do with our current tech and politics.

[Clerlic]

But then again, we could use the self-replicating robot spaceships to terraform the Earth back to the way it was before!!

[dnL_Flipped]

When the Sun goes super nova, it'll have already engulfed earth in its process of turning into a red giant so the super nova is not what we've gotta worry about.

There are two options here; 1.)The sun is made a dwarf star (but is highly un likely). 2.)The sun will most likely go supernova, with all of the energy contained in the sun, it will create a rift in the space-time fabric, in turn creating a Black hole.

Even if Earth continues on as a planet after the supernova, it will be condensed (along with every living and non living thing in the orbit of the sun) into the size of a pin.

Getting back to the subject of teraforming. I totally think that it is reasonable. The only thing standing in our way of getting off this rock is our inability to travel faster than light. The planet "Earth X" is something like 100 light years away (correct me if I'm wrong), so in theory, a light year from earth to earth x, would be how many years a beam of light from the sun would take to get to it.

Do the math, at our current technologic state it would take us 10 generations to make it to that solar system. Although with that being said, if someone had the resources to support generations, it would be totally possible.

[Clerlic]

You have got a few facts wrong: first of all, sun is not massive enough to become a black hole.

The second thing is, you're ignoring special relativity, if you send a spaceship traveling very close to the speed of light at a target located in 100 light years, the travellers will not experience it as 100 years, but a lot less, a few years, or maybe even months, depends on a speed. Of course the rest of us back on Earth would see it as 100 years.
In theory, you wouldn't need more than 30 years of life to travel across the galaxy, but when you come back, it's unlikely that your friends will be alive and millions of years old.

[Souldrinker]

But then again, we could use the self-replicating robot spaceships to terraform the Earth back to the way it was before!!

We should build a self-replicating Earth-bot!

[John Travolta]

And we can get the Iron Giant to be President!

[Sundancekid]

The second thing is, you're ignoring special relativity, if you send a spaceship traveling very close to the speed of light at a target located in 100 light years, the travellers will not experience it as 100 years, but a lot less, a few years, or maybe even months, depends on a speed. Of course the rest of us back on Earth would see it as 100 years.
Would love to understand how that works, thats why I'm applying for a degree in physics.

By the time that we want to move to another planet/need to move to another planet, hopefully fusion power has been developed. You freeze all the brainiest and put them on a ship, fly to a planet that is positioned like earth relative to its sun. Check if the planet is suitable, if not fly to the next one, if it is, wake the crew and land.

[John Travolta]

Would love to understand how that works, thats why I'm applying for a degree in physics.[quote]
You don't have to have a degree to understand one of the Universe's easiest concepts. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Universe_(TV_series) by the way.

By the time that we want to move to another planet/need to move to another planet, hopefully fusion power has been developed. You freeze all the brainiest and put them on a ship, fly to a planet that is positioned like earth relative to its sun. Check if the planet is suitable, if not fly to the next one, if it is, wake the crew and land.

Cryonics on that level is years ahead of our technological capabilities. So is traveling at or near the speed of light.

[HannahBaker]

Think about this.
Why would god make the whole universe this way if he wanted us to die. Think about it, if our planet was only one centemeter closer to the sun we would burn to a crisp. If our planet was only one cenemeter away from the earth we would all freeze to death. So, tell me why were people asking this same question a thousand years ago. People back then were saying the sun would blow up by the year 2000. Has it? No. They have been talking about global warming forever. I think it's just a scam.

[Clerlic]

Would love to understand how that works, thats why I'm applying for a degree in physics.

I don't understand that well enough either, so I'm also applying for a uni this year :D

Think about this.
Why would god make the whole universe this way if he wanted us to die. Think about it, if our planet was only one centemeter closer to the sun we would burn to a crisp. If our planet was only one cenemeter away from the earth we would all freeze to death. So, tell me why were people asking this same question a thousand years ago. People back then were saying the sun would blow up by the year 2000. Has it? No. They have been talking about global warming forever. I think it's just a scam.

Actually our orbit fluctuates 5 million kilometers twice a year, and I don't see anyone burning because of that. Also, keep your religion out of this, please.

[HannahBaker]

Actually our orbit fluctuates 5 million kilometers twice a year, and I don't see anyone burning because of that. Also, keep your religion out of this, please.[/QUOTE]


I'm sorry.

[Souldrinker]

Nevertheless, global warming is a scam (well, the human caused GW, anyways). So, that post wasn't totally shit (just 99% shit).

[HannahBaker]

Nevertheless, global warming is a scam (well, the human caused GW, anyways). So, that post wasn't totally shit (just 99% shit).

Thank you! Finally somebody else that thinks it's just a scam.

[Txlilking]

If the sun makes Earth uninhabitable, don;t you think it might do something to Mars?

[Mirrorman]

Nevertheless, global warming is a scam (well, the human caused GW, anyways). So, that post wasn't totally shit (just 99% shit).

Atleast I'm not the only one who thinks that.

[blacksurge]

We should live on Venus :facts:

[Desert]

If the sun makes Earth uninhabitable, don;t you think it might do something to Mars?

We should nuke the sun.

[bizzle]

If the sun makes Earth uninhabitable, don;t you think it might do something to Mars?

If the sun gets too warm for Earth to remain habitable chances are that Mars, a few million kilometers away might be just a tad bit cooler.

[Vin]

The sun won't get hot enough to make earth uninhabitable in our lifetime. Let's laugh it off and leave it those fatcats studying solar expansion in a lab somewhere to worry.

Meantime, let's enjoy the unpredictable weather and other effects of global warming and then move to mars and enjoy ladies with three breasts and men with freakish men-children sprouting from their abdomens.

[Evan7Evan]

......Oh man, new business venture, selling land on mars....while its still cheap....to the ignorant masses. -CopyRight (C) 2008 (pending) oh man I'm going to be rich.

[afroman9898]

Yes the earth will become inhabitable but what people need to realize is that we still have around one thousand years until the situation becomes our main priority. Look back ten years and see how much technology has change. Take that change and multiply it by one hundred. We may and may not have the technology to live on Mars but there is a high chance of it because as time moves on, we as humans learn more and more.

[Stickperson]

I'll be dead why the hell do I care?

Leave it to the men in white coats and asians.

[Mr. Crow]

It will suck because there will be no animals besides what we bring over for food, like cattle. I'll miss the squirrels. :frown:

[Txlilking]

We should nuke the sun.
Please tell me you're kidding.

Edit:
If the sun gets too warm for Earth to remain habitable chances are that Mars, a few million kilometers away might be just a tad bit cooler.

Yes but, as we all know Mars is extremely hot in during the day, and extremely cold in the night. So if it gets a tad cooler sure it will be fine in the day, but what are we supposed to do during the night?:think:

[Ox]

Wear sweaters.

[Desert]

Please tell me you're kidding.


This is very serious. I would never kid.

[Txlilking]

[QUOTE=Desert;821108]This is very serious. I would never kid.[/QUOT

:blanky: Ok. Nuke the moon. That would be a waste of missles. As if a nuke would do anything to the sun.

[Mr. Crow]

Okay, man, it is, like, scientifically proven that blowing up the sun with a nuke would be an ideal solution to solving the climate crisis, so shut up.

[Lag]

The nucular reactors can slow down the fire that's spreading on the Sun.

[Souldrinker]

Yes but, as we all know Mars is extremely hot in during the day, and extremely cold in the night. So if it gets a tad cooler sure it will be fine in the day, but what are we supposed to do during the night?:think:

As we all know, you're an idiot.

Mars does get extremely cold. It can drop to about -125oC (-195oF) during winter in some places (like, the poles).

But extremely hot during the day? The hottest Mars gets is 20oC (70oF) and that's on the equator at midday during the peak of summer.

The average temperature on Mars is -60oC (-80oF).

You say that if it gets a tad cooler it will be fine during the day. Sure, if you're an Eskimo or a Siberian. Are you an Eskimo or a Siberian, or just an idiot?

[bizzle]

As we all know, you're an idiot.

Mars does get extremely cold. It can drop to about -125oC (-195oF) during winter in some places (like, the poles).

But extremely hot during the day? The hottest Mars gets is 20oC (70oF) and that's on the equator at midday during the peak of summer.

The average temperature on Mars is -60oC (-80oF).

You say that if it gets a tad cooler it will be fine during the day. Sure, if you're an Eskimo or a Siberian. Are you an Eskimo or a Siberian, or just an idiot?

Yeah so there.

USER WAS PUT IN TIMEOUT FOR THIS POST. (http://forums.explosm.net/eventlog.php)
Reason: no contribution

[nathan_jokah]

I don't get what's going on but i think that the only way we can become the new martians is to go to another planet and look back down on earth and go " i wonder if there is other life forms on that planet " like we do now with mars and other planets. but there probably is martians on other planets writing a same forum about there selfs

so there is my opinion let's hope i don't get banned this time .

[Profane Methane]

How can there be martians on other planets when martians are specifically from mars?

[Tyler_Legrand]

How can there be martians on other planets when martians are specifically from mars?

My head it's asploding

[nathan_jokah]

How can there be martians on other planets when martians are specifically from mars?

u r right but i was reffering to aliens my mistake but i still think that ther a martians and they r doing the same thing as this

USER WAS PUT IN TIMEOUT FOR THIS POST. (http://forums.explosm.net/eventlog.php)
Reason: AOLisms. Please, re-learn English.

[Souldrinker]

How can there be martians on other planets when martians are specifically from mars?

They could be immigrants. Panspermia is a theory that life on Earth originated somewhere else in space and came here on like a comet or something.

If what actually was it started on Mars, then come here on a bit of Martian rock that was sploded towards Earth, then we're all actually Martians.

[Profane Methane]

They could be immigrants. Panspermia is a theory that life on Earth originated somewhere else in space and came here on like a comet or something.

If what actually was it started on Mars, then come here on a bit of Martian rock that was sploded towards Earth, then we're all actually Martians.
It's science, it must be true.