What is Digg?69 Comments
- PuterPrsn, on 11/21/2008, -3/+32For all you science fiction fans - or science fans, for that matter, this is a fascinating study and an argument against trying terraforming ("aresforming"??) without a deep study of the planet - if a planet doesn't have the magnetic protection to keep an atmosphere, all the terraforming you can do won't make it habitable except in bubbles.
- airwalkery2k, on 11/21/2008, -2/+8But Spore taught me that all I need to do is throw asteroids at a planet and use a laser beam.
- dromni, on 11/21/2008, -1/+6Actually if an Earth-like atmosphere were artificially produced on Mars it would take *millions* of years to dissipate even taking into account solar wind erosion. So, under a human viewpoint, were a million years is an eternity, terraforming continues to be an option.
- sirjimithy, on 11/21/2008, -1/+6I feel sorry for Marvin...
- chirt, on 11/21/2008, -2/+7I'm a huge fan of terraforming. This is a sad day indeed :(
Edit: I wonder what Mr. Zubrin will say about this - spyd3rweb, on 11/21/2008, -1/+5COHAGEN... GIVE DEEZE PEOPLE AIIIYUHHH!!!
- Rippleeffect, on 11/21/2008, -0/+4But that's not terraforming.
- dromni, on 11/21/2008, -0/+3I am not Mr. Zubrin, but I say that this process would take millions of years to wipe away an artificially produced atmosphere, so this discovery has no impact at all to idea of terraforming.
- AirRaven, on 11/21/2008, -0/+3You say that like it's *easier* than fixing Mars. >_>
- Rippleeffect, on 11/21/2008, -1/+4Why study? Just follow what they did in "The Core"
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0298814/ - palehorse864, on 11/21/2008, -0/+2This makes me very verrry angry!
- palehorse864, on 11/21/2008, -0/+2See you at the party Richter!!!
...woops - duckley, on 11/21/2008, -0/+2EXACTLY RIGHT !
I've been saying this for over 30 years now, much to the chagrin of some of my friends...
However, terraforming could still be done if you replenish the atmosphere faster than the solar wind strips it away... - inactive, on 11/21/2008, -1/+3This isn't an argument against terraforming, just an argument that any terraforming attempt must include the creation of a magnetic field
- thespiff, on 11/21/2008, -2/+4Just because there are alternative theories doesn't mean Al Gore's is wrong.
- Rocketbird, on 11/21/2008, -1/+3I thought they mistyped "Brian," but the guy's name is actually "Brain." How fitting. With a name like that, can you really go into any other field than super advanced physics?
- MeatyMcBeef, on 11/21/2008, -1/+3Now if only we had the gravity field generator from *insert any given science fiction film or tv show here*
- molochi, on 11/21/2008, -0/+2It is fact though. A few mentaly challenged people don't believe in global warming.
- tomhancocks, on 11/21/2008, -0/+2You hope that after a million years we would have progressed technology to the point that we could keep the atmosphere constant rather easily.
- palehorse864, on 11/21/2008, -0/+1Give dis people aeeahr!
- tao52nyc, on 11/21/2008, -0/+1I believe in "climate change". I do NOT believe it is ALL the fault of those pesky humans and their carbon effluent. Any so-called "climate model" that does NOT take into account the biggest greenhouse gas of all - water vapor - or does NOT take into account that giant ball of fusing hydrogen that's been hanging there for 4 billion years is fundamentally flawed.
- cmf2, on 11/21/2008, -0/+1Global warming is not the result of any one factor. CO2 is a greenhouse gas, so obviously it has an effect on temperatures. The question really is, how much of an effect does it have? In my honest opinon, we don't have nearly enough information to know that.
I do know that it isn't a good idea to pump increasing amounts of greenhouses gases into the atmosphere just because we can't quantify its effect yet. - carcar314, on 11/21/2008, -0/+1Everyone knows the globe is warming Copernicus! We are coming out of mid-level ice age. Find someone without KY in there eye sockets and ask them to read these to you:
http://www.john-daly.com/hockey/hockey.htm
http://www.geocraft.com/WVFossils/ice_ages.html
http://www.nationalpost.com/story.html?id=edae9952 ...
http://www.tgdaily.com/html_tmp/content-view-39973 ...
I know your used to crayon pictures so I'll explain what i was talking about above more clearly for you high schoolers. You will be heavily taxed for natural occurrences and lose many of your god given rights over this issue in this next decade. Most planets in our solar system are warming right now due to the increased solar activity that has been coming in in the last 150 to 300 years. That's a matter of record from scientific data and is not in a position to be argued with. Do you think we are causing the temperature change on Mars too(link above). We get our heat from the Sun right? And the Sun is putting out more heat in the form of solar flares. It's not rocket science. We don't need politicians like Al Gore to make a graph for us. There is more heat and that makes it hotter. Not a very complicated situation.
Have you ever gone camping? When you added a log to the fire pit and the fire got bigger, did you notice that it got hotter around the fire. That's because theres more fire. Fire is the release of energy from the logs. There is more energy being released. Heat is energy. Therefore, you feel more heat. So, in summary, more fire = more heat. Try it next time you go camping or get your mom to show you with the stove (don't burn yourself). More fire = more heat.
Our planet get 100% of it's heat from the Sun. More flares from the Sun = more heat on Earth. Just like the camp fire example. Not a very complicated situation.
People are not convinced of fake science like man made global warming because A) there is no conclusive evidence B) the main argument that we need to reduce CO2 is that we don't know but should be precautions C) you would have to be an idiot to agree to be taxed over the weather or other natural occurrences D) the entire issue is political and has no bases in fact, data, or science. The IPP is a political force and not a scientific body. - asherp, on 11/21/2008, -2/+3This guy's name is really David Brain? Nice.
- jeffkee, on 11/21/2008, -1/+2.. Cleaning up what we have here at Earth is probably the best option. If we can't keep our own Earth clean, what makes us think we can do any better by inhabiting another planet in a couple hundred years?
- borez, on 11/21/2008, -1/+2Maybe Mars ( like Earth ) has a spinning core and it's reversed causing the magnetic umbrellas to form, maybe Earth will one day suffer the same fate.
- Pan425, on 11/22/2008, -0/+1can't help but wonder where is the solar wind hauling these "ionized globs" of Martian atmosphere off to?
- inactive, on 11/21/2008, -3/+4I can't believe there are retards who don't believe in global warming
- subliminalurge, on 11/21/2008, -1/+2It hasn't yet, and they've reversed plenty of times.
- alappat1, on 11/21/2008, -0/+1Well, i think, by the time we have the tech to terraform mars, we will probably have the tech to solve this problem too (maybe an artificial magnetic field created by a subsurface superconducting grid - or even re-start the core of mars some way- use of vacuum energy to dump terawatts of power into heating the core up again etc) .
- inactive, on 11/21/2008, -2/+3"just increase the orbital velocity of Venus and gradually move it into the same orbit as Earth but on the other side of the sun."
Unless you get it to the exact same speed as the earth,we would eventually collide with it. - inactive, on 11/21/2008, -2/+3"I'm sorry, according to Al Gore and friends, the sun is not capable of causing environmental changes"
In the Earth, cause we have a magnetic field that protects us from it.
Mars doesn't. RTFD - carcar314, on 11/24/2008, -0/+1Don't you know? It's because Al Gore and Obama put a tax in place to keep our atmosphere in place. The IPP report came out and said that despite no member on the IPP possibly being able to recreate or comprehend the complexities of the unknown universe, they feel they have proven that we need some one on God's level like Al F-ing Gore or UN Obama to realign the universe for the Better(tm).
The only catch is that we have to trash our economy, destroy the bill or rights, and surrender our country to the corrupt UN in order to keep the atmosphere around Earth. Sounds like a good deal to me. And I know about these things because I read Popular Mechanics during my lunch break at the prison where I am a janitor's assistant in training. They also say that we need to give them our first born sons so that the dirt won't blow up. YOU DON"T WANT THE DIRT TO BLOW UP DO YOU? - eRenee, on 11/22/2008, -0/+1How come the solar wind blows Mars air out and not ours?
- inactive, on 11/21/2008, -1/+2I can't believe there are retards who don't believe in global warming
- FreckleEars, on 11/21/2008, -0/+1Where do you suggest we get all this atmosphere from dromni? Also, it is highly possible that it would just dissipate easily. Most people do no understand how dangerous the universe is to us little fragile people. Even with a comparable atmosphere, it wouldn't mean ***** becasue Mars is essentially, a dead planet (the core), meaning it has no stable magnetic field.
Our magnetic field is what makes us special in this solar system. Without that we would be right and truly screwed. It is extremely likely that mars will never be inhabited becasue the planet does not have a magnetic field that is stable or strong enough to fend off the deadly styles of solar radiation that would quickly burn up just about anything we put on its surface (life... inorganic material is fine since it is already there). - mgmirkin, on 11/22/2008, -0/+1So, how exactly does on "magnetize" "chunks of air"? Doesn't that require an electric current? Air is not a ferromagnet (permanent magnet). The terminology and science seems sloppy... Besides, magnetic reconnection has long since been debunked. Don't know why space scientists persist in using it. Explaining magnetic fields in plasma requires acknowledging electric currents in the same. Yes, even in space!
- AirRaven, on 11/21/2008, -0/+1But what about when the atmosphere *does* wear away?
If humanity's still around on Mars by then, what could we do about it?
It's all very well to get a breathable atmosphere going on an otherwise dead planet, but one that's had millions of years of development invested in it? - mgmirkin, on 11/22/2008, -0/+1Probably because Earth has a fully formed Langmuir sheath (plasma sheath around a charged body shielding it from 'foreign' / 'different' plasma external to itself), known as the 'magnetosphere.' If we didn't have that, we'd be pretty screwed.
- slvrbullet87, on 11/21/2008, -0/+1Terraforming might work... we have 4 billion years until the sun ***** everything up... hell planting 10 seeds might work in that period of time
- inactive, on 11/22/2008, -1/+1I guess you would know cause you were around then. stfu
- subliminalurge, on 11/23/2008, -1/+1The Earth's magnetic field prevents energy (light and heat) from the sun from reaching us?
That's news to me. - CaptCarrot, on 11/21/2008, -2/+2Well, we do have a rover up there that drove around a bit, so it's not beyond the realm of possibility that humans can be blamed. (Not that they're responsible -- jus that they can be blamed.)
- professor357, on 11/21/2008, -4/+4I'd like to point out that the solar wind created by the sun is not a constant. Even with the magnetic shield that the earth is blessed with, there is the potential for a period of incrementally stronger solar activity to adversely influence our atmosphere.
It's not much of a leap in thought to see that this phenomena could influence the temperature of the atmosphere and the climate we experience with no input whatsoever from humans.
Gee, maybe Al Gore doesn't have a clue about what's causing global climate change after all. - cmf2, on 11/21/2008, -0/+0Tahiri, that isn't exactly true as a planets velocity affects its orbit.
- haydentech, on 11/21/2008, -2/+2I don't know, 'cause the resulting debris from such a collision would rain down on Earth and the whole inner solar system for centuries?
- hoisonsauce, on 11/21/2008, -1/+1Cohagen!!!!!!!
- subliminalurge, on 11/21/2008, -2/+1It's the CO2 emissions from our rovers and probes.
- fknrat, on 11/21/2008, -4/+3No Mars colonies then. Can we get back to fixing Earth please?
- Sornos, on 11/21/2008, -2/+1Terraforming is not feasible. There is waaaay too much to change. It'd be easier to change the change the human colonists than the planet itself. Enclosed colonies are the only way to go if you a doable approach to colonizing an otherwise inhospitable planet.
-
Show 51 - 69 of 69 discussions
The Digg Toolbar for Firefox lets you Digg, submit content, and keep track of Digg even when you're not on the Digg site. Download the official 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is