• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Science Confirms that Mars had an Ocean

fonzob1

fonzob1

Captain
Captain
Previously, scientists suspected that Mars once had flowing water. But, they didn't know how much or for how long. Science now confirms that Mars had an ocean that covered 20% of its surface for billions of years. So, my question is, is it really wise to send humans to Mars when they could potentially contaminate the environment? If there is a chance we could discover life that once existed on Mars, wouldn't it be better to continue to explore the planet with only robots?

http://www.space.com/28742-ancient-...=10152675373651466&adbpl=fb&adbpr=17610706465
 
Yeah it would be interesting to know if its STILL THERE!!!!!

Cause where would all that aqua go??
 
The Martain Unions are the worst. Work stopage and other hassles closed the canals, the water leaked into the soil, the planet froze up. Just can't trust Martian Unions.
 
Ithekro said:
How long will it take to setup a large enough structure to do so?
Click to expand...

That all depends on how many robots or humans we send up there. And it also depends on how fast do we learn to manipulate locally acquired materials. But besides a few chicken-and-egg problems (like you need a proto-drill to find and collect the materials to build one), I would say fairly quick given enough botpower.

Alternatively, we can just ship the drill parts from Earth. It will happen right away, but it will stall other developments.
 
fonzob1 said:
Previously, scientists suspected that Mars once had flowing water. But, they didn't know how much or for how long. Science now confirms that Mars had an ocean that covered 20% of its surface for billions of years. So, my question is, is it really wise to send humans to Mars when they could potentially contaminate the environment? If there is a chance we could discover life that once existed on Mars, wouldn't it be better to continue to explore the planet with only robots?

http://www.space.com/28742-ancient-...=10152675373651466&adbpl=fb&adbpr=17610706465
Click to expand...

How is sending humans to Mars any different than humans being on Earth and contaminating this planet?
 
Mars is Ceti Alpha V. It was dying already. Humans warming that up would be a boon for it.
No need to be too negative. We can be a wasteful, warmongering bunch. But consider this--the robotic probes we now use were made possible by SDI, wrongly considered a Cold War Brain drain, as proved by Clementine.
http://www.wired.com/2015/02/strategic-defense-military-uses-moon-asteroid-resources-1983/
Neither the on-going Discovery Program of cheap, relatively frequent automated lunar and planetary missions nor the low-cost automated Mars missions of the 1996-2008 period would have been possible without the technology infusion from SDI.
It all isn't bad news.

O/T Propulsion methods to Mars
http://arxiv-web3.library.cornell.edu/abs/1502.06457
Superdense fuels http://nextbigfuture.com/2015/02/confirmation-of-ultra-high-energy.html

I am interested in one of the folks mentioned. Carlo Rubbia
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carlo_Rubbia

He is working on a way to reduce nuclear waste.
Space based concepts are being looked at to power our needs
http://nextbigfuture.com/2015/02/project-solaris-for-enabling-and-then.html
 
Last edited:
Dryson said:
fonzob1 said:
Previously, scientists suspected that Mars once had flowing water. But, they didn't know how much or for how long. Science now confirms that Mars had an ocean that covered 20% of its surface for billions of years. So, my question is, is it really wise to send humans to Mars when they could potentially contaminate the environment? If there is a chance we could discover life that once existed on Mars, wouldn't it be better to continue to explore the planet with only robots?

http://www.space.com/28742-ancient-...=10152675373651466&adbpl=fb&adbpr=17610706465
Click to expand...

How is sending humans to Mars any different than humans being on Earth and contaminating this planet?
Click to expand...

My statement had nothing to do with the environment on Mars. It has to do with the outside chance that we could discover there was once some kind of life on Mars. If humans bring bacteria and microbes with them there, it can cast a doubt on what we might find there one day. In that respect, it is less of a risk to continue using robots to explore Mars.

Humans are a natural part of the ecosystem on earth. :rolleyes:
 
Maybe what Mars needs is human microbial interaction. Introducing human microbials to Mars could actually produce better results in location Martian microbes.
 
Mars ain't the kind of place to sail a boat.
In fact it's dry as hell.
And there's nowhere there to dock it... if you did.
 
Maybe you could float your boat in quicksand and dock it to the Space Shuttle.

(See how much I know about sailing, spacecraft and soil liquefaction?)
 
Awesome Possum said:
Mars ain't the kind of place to sail a boat.
In fact it's dry as hell.
And there's nowhere there to dock it... if you did.
Click to expand...

No kidding. But, the fact that Mars once had an ocean that it sustained for over 1.5 billion years increases the chances that life developed there at some point. There is frozen water in the polar ice cap, so who knows what could be fossilized there. Or, even an outside chance that some type of microbe managed to survive the harsh conditions there. It would be a significant discovery.
 
fonzob1 said:
Awesome Possum said:
Mars ain't the kind of place to sail a boat.
In fact it's dry as hell.
And there's nowhere there to dock it... if you did.
Click to expand...

No kidding. But, the fact that Mars once had an ocean that it sustained for over 1.5 billion years increases the chances that life developed there at some point. There is frozen water in the polar ice cap, so who knows what could be fossilized there. Or, even an outside chance that some type of microbe managed to survive the harsh conditions there. It would be a significant discovery.
Click to expand...
Some bacteria thrive in conditions that we used to think would be lethal on Earth. It's certainly possible that something managed to survive on Mars.
 
Indeed, there might still be life on Mars. I think it depends on how quick and devastatingly the changes took place, and whether it took long enough to give them enough time to adapt.

There is also the claim from conspiracy theorist's that the face of Mars and other artifacts are the remnants of an extinct civilization. An interesting idea I'd like to see further investigated independently, so the claim of NASA cover-ups can be averted, but I find it unlikely that an advanced civilization could evolve on a planet as young as Mars 1.5 billion years ago, so they'd probably have to be extraterrestrial colonists.

Either way, I'm pretty sure that an expedition would turn up evidence of life on Mars, at least at one point.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top