Mars - The next Earth?

Originally posted by Dae
In my mind If we understood how planets work, Venus would be my bet on terraforming, we would have to figure out how to make it spin faster though (among other things!) because a venusian day is longer than its year!

wheres superman when we need him most???


coven

Originally posted by Uplifted

Originally posted by Navieko
First of all, right now we don't know really anything about the planet (unless of course you trust everything NASA/Mainstream tells us).

What if NASA is lying to us completely. What if there is life on Mars, maybe other planets too. Mars could be a planet rich in red plants. Every photo NASA releases of Mars could be fake.

actually,there's a good chance they are doing exactly that

www.abovetopsecret.com...

cute, eh?

... when you look at Mars pictures like this one, you start to wonder:




from external page

Originally posted by Spacedeck
Didn't earth start out as just like rocky place but then gradually life started to form?

Earth started out as a ball of dust and gas that accumulated mass until its gravity was sufficient to start pulling in larger and larger rocky and metallic bodies. When it reached the point in its life when it was sucking up millions and millions of tons of this stuff every day, the young planet Earth would've seemed like a seething cauldren of molten rock — which allowed the heaviest materials, such as Iron and Nickel, to gravitate to the core, as lighter rocky materials rose to the surface. After innumerable collisions with other large bodies in the new solar system (including icy comets and the predecessor of our Moon), the Earth solidified into the basic mass that we know today. And all of this activity took place over a geologically moderate span of time — perhaps as little as 500 million years.

But here is what's strange. With the Earth only a half-a-billion years old, still hot and more poisonous than anything we can imagine, Life suddenly popped into existence on this planet and spread rapidly. In Australia a couple of decades ago, researchers discovered fossilized bacteria colonies, for instance, that dated back some 3.5 billion years. Which just blew everyone's mind — because it seemed that as soon as Earth's crust was stable, Life just appeared. Boom, hello Life.

Prior to this revelation, it was believed that the very simplest single-celled Life required a billion or so years to gradually evolve out of the chemical muck that comprised primordial Earth (although Science still can't explain how Life can evolve from a pool of raw chemicals). Something as sophisticated as bacteria shouldn't have appeared until the Earth was 1.5 or 2 billion years old, according to the old model. But here were whole bacterial colonies flourishing on Earth after only half a billion years!

You might get a better feel for this with a kitchen analogy: Say you're cooking a big, bubbling hot kettle of soup, then you switch off the heat and walk away from it. Eventually, long after the soup cools, mold might start to form on the surface. Logic dictates this progression of events, and I've seen it happen in my own kitchen. Now imagine that just 5 minutes after you turn off the heat, mold starts to form on the surface of your soup.

Well, you'd be so shocked and disgusted that you'd probably call in the Environmental Protection Agency to conduct a study in your kitchen. And rightly so.

But modern scientists were equally shocked when they realized that Life may also have suddenly appeared on Earth before the planet had even cooled down to tasting temperature. I mean, whatever Life was, it had to be tenacious to evolve in what was basically a toxic chemical waste site, and do so almost as the planet was forming.

Which lends a lot of credence, I think, to the Panspermia and Exogenesis theories — which you can lump together by saying that Life already existed in the universe and was deposited on Earth by some mysterious means soon after the planet congealed out of the vacuum of space. Not only "appeared" on the planet, but consumed it, over and over again, through repeated mass extinctions.

Now, as all of this pertains to "The Next Earth," I think it may be the purpose of Life to perpetuate itself across the cosmos, spreading in some especially pernicious form from one star system to another over millions or billions of years. I mean, we may be the very "flowers of Life" that produce the next generation of "space seeds"... Perhaps that's our ultimate objective, to custom-engineer super seed packets of Life, designed to take root in everything from solid state ammonia to vaporous metals, and fire these seed packets off in all directions — and perhaps with no hope whatsoever of seeing the results of our labor.

However, we may take consolation in believing that this is how Earth was seeded 3.5 billion years ago, by custom-made Life hurled into space by a far off and now long-extinct civilization, a billion years before our sun was even born.



— Doc Velocity

Evn if there was existing life on mars, and the PTB didn't want us to know about it, "What could we do to objectfully prove our point of belief's and view's?"
Besides, we haven't even got the tech to set up a Lunar station (As far as we know0 on the moon. There is an Astrophysisist by the name of Niel deGrasse Tyson that has a lot of insight of what the speculation's are and what we are currently capable of achieving as a 'Human' population. He has a very retoric view of our future and our present. There are so many issues he's covered dealing with the universe that I could not pick one to post, but here is a link to all of the appliable video link's through Google. A lot of information if you take the time to watch. Also, if you can find the interview with the New York Times video, he speaks of our space race and the future of simplistic space travel as a norm of the future. Very interesting stuff.... "Enjoy!!!"

video.google.com...

from external page

Originally posted by Doc Velocity
Problem is, Mars doesn't have sufficient mass to retain a dense atmosphere, even if we somehow found a way to pipe in nitrogen and oxygen. We might adapt to the low gravity with relative ease, but we're not going to adapt to a lack of atmosphere. Beyond that, Mars has no electromagnetic field, which is necessary for deflecting potentially lethal solar activity.

Unfortunately, our best bet for colonizing Mars is going to be by tunneling underground for protection, and splitting the water molecules we find there for fuel and atmosphere. Even so, it'll take hundreds of years to make Mars a self-sustaining human colony... Unless we first genetically engineer our human colonists to breathe carbon dioxide, endure hard radiation and withstand sub-zero temperatures.

— Doc Velocity

Oxygen and Nitrogen make up about 85% of Earth's atmosphere. As I stated in another thread ... Mars' neighbor Jupiter has a frozen moon named Triton that it's not really using. And just so happens it made up mostly of .... you guessed, Nitrogen. The frozen polar caps should contain plenty of Oxygen. So we have most of what we need to create an atmosphere decently close by. Now, we just need to get Ford, Chevy, Toyota, Nissan and everyone other major truck manufacturer to work with Boeing and build a truck big enough to haul Triton over to Mars and viola!

Ill repeat what i said in another Mars related post, which is my opinion, or one of my opinions on whats going on with Mars and everything else related to NASA..
You know what? How do we even know this is what Mars really looks like? We see only what NASA and the Govt wants us to see. Mars could have large cities and a population and we wouldnt know it, unless they wanted us to know it.
These rovers could be on Mars yes but there are places that look just like this on Earth, Utah and Nevada deserts for example. If an alien culture wanted their citizens to believe that Earth is dead, they could land in one of these Deserts and show them the images of a "dead" dried up world
Dont get me wrong, im not saying that Mars is alive with activity and "people" BUT hasnt anyone else ever thought about what im saying?
For that matter, the same holds true for other things that they have complete control over. Venus for example, Its completely enveloped in clouds, how do we know that the probes that us and the Russians sent actually seen what they claimed to have seen?
Yes i know its a stretch but its worth thinking about..

I hate to be redundant, but I have to agree with everyone else that Mars's gravity is just too weak to hold a dense atmosphere. No matter how much CO2 we pumped into the planet, it just couldn't hold on to it. Besides, Mars's atmosphere is already 95% CO2, so even if it could hold it, adding more would actually make the planet less inhabitable.

[edit on 3/20/2007 by spookymusic]

G'day all,

I have come across abit of information relating to Mars and thought Id share it with my fellow ATS'ers.

It come from xfacts.com... which is abundant in information on Mars and many other topics of interest.

In regards to Mars, may I forward you to an article titled - "The Mars - Earth Connection" located here - mars-earth.com...

makes for some riveting reading in relation to the connection between Cydonia and the structures of Mars and how they correlate with the pyramids at Giza.

also there is a documentary shot in the 70's that goes on to interview some members of the NASA space program. The documentary states that it is fictional thou created based on facts, and the scary thing is the footage of a Mars landing on May 2nd 1962. The footage is just the view from the landing and the scary and wierd thing is if this can actually be authenticated then it will flip the way we think and the lies NASA tells us on its head. Towards the end of the 2:28min footage you can clearly see some sort of living animal burrowing under the surface of Mars like some sort of Mole.

Here it is, view it and decide for yourselves -
youtube.com...

The "Alternative 3" documentary can be found here -
xfacts.com...

If the documentary is based on fact, what it goes on to say is the same as some other conspiracies in that the Cold War between Russia and the USA was a cover for a joint space program to colonise the dark side of the moon and make efforst to place man on Mars.

The cover of the Cold War would have been ideal for the manufacture of thousand of rockets and propulsion systems to use for their agenda.

another good video to watch in regards to the NASA coverup and how NASA was created as a public charade to fool society can be found here -

titled "Arsenal of Hypocrisy" - www.jonhs.net...

Another must see document is the following one that goes into detailing how NASA touches up Mars picture to fool us into thinking that Mars is red.

Titled - "Is NASA hiding the true colour of Mars?"
xfacts.com...


I hope that helped

Originally posted by Rockpuck
The Earth has gone threw many...many....many climate alterations... ice ages.. warm periods.. at one point almost all of the United States, Canada and Europe was under water, along with much of the world.

Nothing to fear here, just a natural cycle. "global warming" or more appropriately global climate shift has been used for political and financial gain off peoples ignorant fears.

You might want to note that the last time Europe was under a signifigant amount of water was sometime in the Jurassic, and the North American central sea drained off in the mid-cretaceous.

You'll also want to make note of the fact that these alterations to gography took at least a few million years to accomplish through plate tectonics - both Europe and North America were lifted by plate tectonics Also interesting is that the Mediterranean Sea has only existed since the Miocene

Do also note that, despite some wacky claims to the contrary, humans were not hanging around the coastlines of the Permain or Cretaceous, and so were not affected by either change.

Warming and cooling of the earth is a natural cycle - with hte extremes seeming to come one after hte other - such as the permain ice age immediately giving way to a drastic rise in temperatures in the Triassic, only to cool off a little and warm up a littel at the Cretaceous / paleocene border, and remain relatively constant up to the Pliestocene deep freezes, and the Holocene warming up again.

All these fluctuations took place over a few tens of thousands of years at the shortest. Not five decades. What we call teh "medieval warm period" and "lottle ice age", so often cited, were really just mild burps in range of temperature that has remained quite constant from the start of the Holocene, to a few dacades ago. We're surpassing the medieval warm period, and have done so in a very short space of time.

I'm certain the earth will continue to exist, and sustain life should the whole thing get knocked out of wack into an extended hot period, natural or manmade. The worry is whether we'll be one of the species that survives the inevitable mass extinction that results.

Our current trends, the speed at which climate is changing and the degree to which it is changing, could very well lead us to an extinction on the level of the Cretaceous event. I wouldn't go so far as to say it'd be as brutal as the Permain event (one of the benefits of having more than one landmass), but it's pretty bleak for Homo sapiens.

As for the electromagnetic field, we can artificially create that. It would take a huge amount of power, but we can do it.

The atmosphere, ok, that would be a problem, we would have to use our own biodomes for that, as it would be too thin if we were to pump it onto the planet.

But the fact that the solar system is warming up may just be the ticket needed to terraform mars easier. We can engineer DNA now, so we should be able to easily create plant life that can survive in thinner atmospheres, or we can just keep them in the bio-dome with us.


A solution to this is, if we find that the solar systems warming is going to be a constant thing, we can find a way to knock our own planet further away from the sun aswell. Though that is far more far-fetched than terraforming a new planet.