Is Mars enough to ensure the survival of the human species?

[Hicup]

<p><BR/>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>We need Wormholes.&nbsp; Getting to speeds just short of light speed is pretty much not going to happen in the foreseeable future (probably same with wormholes).&nbsp; And even if we could get going that fast would we even survive it and all other issues that go along with 15+ years in space.We need a method of transportation that will take days, weeks or months.&nbsp; If it starts taking years and years, the odds of success drop quite fast. <br />Posted by JeffreyNYA</DIV></p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>Although a different discussion, Personally I think that the direction of research should be towards figuring out&nbsp;how to mask the true weight of mass.&nbsp; Phasing it, or whatever Sci-Fi thing you can come up with, but reducing mass without reducing size is the key.&nbsp; Well that, and putting an engine on somthing that is phased.. LOL</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>Tim-</p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> Hicup mostly hang out at:  http://www.thespaceport.us  Come and check it out, if you dare!!! </div>

 

[qso1]

There are four kinds of people... <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><strong>My borrowed quote for the time being:</strong></p><p><em>There are three kinds of people in life. Those who make it happen, those who watch it happen...and those who do not know what happened.</em></p> </div>

 

[thejinxkitten]

<p><BR/>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>Assuming that living on two planets is better than one; is the two planet colonization approach enough to ensure our suvival.&nbsp; At least long enough for us to figure out how to travel close to the speed of light and get out of the solar system?&nbsp;I do think that we should colonize Mars, as this makes sense than for no other reason than to give us a fighting chance as a species..&nbsp;I was wondering what some of you think about long term?&nbsp;Tim- <br /> Posted by Hicup</DIV></p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>I think we should start terraform mars.&nbsp;</p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p> </p><div style="text-align:center"><img id="f4c1b2ef-0793-4f27-9615-e4e17a5bc441" src="http://sitelife.livescience.com/ver1.0/Content/images/store/4/6/f4c1b2ef-0793-4f27-9615-e4e17a5bc441.Large.gif" alt="blog post photo" /></div><br /> <p> </p><p> -------------------------------------------------------------------</p><p> </p><p><font color="#800080">"there are other worlds than this" Jake Chamber of Dark Tower</font></p> </div>

 

[robnissen]

<p>Based on the limited genetic diversity of the indigenous (sp?) people in Austrailia, it has been hypothesized that the entire continent could have come from a single woman and her son (perhaps in her womb) floating over from SE Asia.&nbsp; Over thousands of years there will be enough mutation to provide all the genetic diversity needed for humans to live on Mars.&nbsp; Of course, in the short run, you might have kids with legs growing out of their heads. </p>

 

[azorean5000]

Probabily there wont ever be any colonization of mars. Who wants to live in an barren frigid world? <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[derekmcd]

<p><strong><BR/>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>"Who wants to live in an barren frigid world?"</strong></p><p><strong><br /> Posted by azorean5000</DIV></strong></p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>That all depends on what our options are.&nbsp; A barren, frigid world may, someday, be the better of the two.&nbsp; </p><p>We would have an easier time sheltering ourselves from the cold than dealing with the heat and gas of a run away greenhouse or the inevitable expanding sun.&nbsp;</p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <div> </div><br /><div><span style="color:#0000ff" class="Apple-style-span">"If something's hard to do, then it's not worth doing." - Homer Simpson</span></div> </div>

 

[Swampcat]

Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>Probabily there wont ever be any colonization of mars. Who wants to live in an barren frigid world? <br />Posted by azorean5000</DIV><br /><br />Different strokes for different folks <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <font size="3" color="#ff9900"><p><font size="1" color="#993300"><strong><em>------------------------------------------------------------------- </em></strong></font></p><p><font size="1" color="#993300"><strong><em>"I hold it that a little rebellion now and then is a good thing, and as necessary in the political world as storms in the physical. Unsuccessful rebellions, indeed, generally establish the encroachments on the rights of the people which have produced them. An observation of this truth should render honest republican governors so mild in their punishment of rebellions as not to discourage them too much. It is a medicine necessary for the sound health of government."</em></strong></font></p><p><font size="1" color="#993300"><strong>Thomas Jefferson</strong></font></p></font> </div>

 

[mental_avenger]

<span style="font-size:7pt;font-family:Verdana"><BR/>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>I agree with that. The more planets we inhabit, the larger our chances&nbsp;are of having one of those planets being struck by an asteroid. If we colonize Mars, we've just doubled our chances of our species being affected by a cataclysmic event, like an asteroid impact.</DIV></span> <p style="margin:0in0in0pt" class="MsoNormal"><font face="Times New Roman" size="3"><font size="2">Not so.<span>&nbsp; </span>Colonization of Mars is going to be mostly underground, and in any case in totally enclosed habitats.<span>&nbsp; </span>The thing</font> <font size="2">that makes Earth vulnerable to a major asteroid or comet impact is our 100% dependence upon the open planet environment.<span>&nbsp; </span>A similar strike on Mars might wipe out a small region, but the rest of the planet would be essentially unaffected.</font></font></p><span style="font-size:7pt;font-family:Verdana">&nbsp;</span> <p style="margin:0in0in0pt" class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:7pt;font-family:Verdana">Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>If more people live on Mars, then Earth would be less populated, meaning it may become a safer place to live (less pollution, less disease, etc.). &nbsp; Posted by weeman</DIV></span></p><p style="margin:0in0in0pt" class="MsoNormal"><font face="Times New Roman" size="3"><font size="2">Regardless of how many people end up living on Mars, that will have no effect whatsoever on the population of Earth.</font><span>&nbsp; </span><font size="2">At 6 billion plus people, we are producing new individuals far far faster than we could ever transport them to Mars, let alone get ahead of the game.<span>&nbsp; </span>Mars will be another planet to colonize, but it will never change the population on Earth.</font></font></p><br /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p style="margin-top:0in;margin-left:0in;margin-right:0in" class="MsoNormal"><font face="Times New Roman" size="2" color="#ff0000"><strong>Our Solar System must be passing through a Non Sequitur area of space.</strong></font></p> </div>

 

[mental_avenger]

<span style="font-size:7.5pt;font-family:Verdana"><BR/>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>True, and to counter my own post above, it may be another 200 years before we can actually colonize enough of Mars to get more people off this planet and consider Mars a "Second Earth". Posted by weeman</DIV></span> <p style="margin:0in0in0pt" class="MsoNormal"><font face="Times New Roman" size="2">If anything, Mars will largely be colonized by procreation.<span>&nbsp; </span>The few thousands, or even tens of thousands that emigrate from Earth to Mars will make no noticeable difference in Earth&rsquo;s population.</font></p><br /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p style="margin-top:0in;margin-left:0in;margin-right:0in" class="MsoNormal"><font face="Times New Roman" size="2" color="#ff0000"><strong>Our Solar System must be passing through a Non Sequitur area of space.</strong></font></p> </div>