Which are you for? terraforming Mars or leaving it in its Red form
- Thread starter Iceblade
- Start date
Iceblade
Admiral
Frosty, I meant that we should start getting things ready for missions to colonize outerspace. I probably sounded more hostile to the govenment than I really meant. It is just that I think we need a better shuttle than the faulty one were using. Rockets seem a much better idea what with
2 crashes-shuttle
near disaster-rocket
You see my point, at least the Japanense know what they need to do. A more energy efficent shuttle that is safer. Man I really hate the fact that this whole terrorism thing rose from out of the courner of the eye to a punch in the nose.
Humans need to go to the moon because we havn't been in over 25 years. And plans for at least a moon base need to be started. If we could set up a base on the moon humans could get to other planets-like Mars-a lot faster with less fuel needed and there could be some resources on the moon like H and metals and other stuff that humans could use to build and fuel space craft-better that a space station.
I probably should of phrased that bette. I meant that the top 1% could go into space-remember that millionaire who went into space.
Oh, and I just think it would be cool to fly in a space fighter.
2 crashes-shuttle
near disaster-rocket
You see my point, at least the Japanense know what they need to do. A more energy efficent shuttle that is safer. Man I really hate the fact that this whole terrorism thing rose from out of the courner of the eye to a punch in the nose.
Humans need to go to the moon because we havn't been in over 25 years. And plans for at least a moon base need to be started. If we could set up a base on the moon humans could get to other planets-like Mars-a lot faster with less fuel needed and there could be some resources on the moon like H and metals and other stuff that humans could use to build and fuel space craft-better that a space station.
I probably should of phrased that bette. I meant that the top 1% could go into space-remember that millionaire who went into space.
Oh, and I just think it would be cool to fly in a space fighter.
FYI, NASA is working on a new shuttle. Also the various shuttle mishaps have been due to slack engineers. The first was due to the use of an o-ring that was not actually tested in the conditions it would work under. Turned out to be faulty when cold. The second I don't know.
If rockets were the better choice don't you think they'd have stuck with them? They are not used because it costs more. Rockets are not entirely reuseable. The shuttle is.
BTW, lots of rockets have blown up. Just there's never been anyone inside. The last one that made the news was a European rocket. That was ages ago.
The moon isn't a holiday destination. You don't go there because you're nostalgic.
If rockets were the better choice don't you think they'd have stuck with them? They are not used because it costs more. Rockets are not entirely reuseable. The shuttle is.
BTW, lots of rockets have blown up. Just there's never been anyone inside. The last one that made the news was a European rocket. That was ages ago.
The moon isn't a holiday destination. You don't go there because you're nostalgic.
t.c.cgi
Vice Admiral
About the pollution "problem." Why not fire our garbage off at the moon? I mean it's not really doing anything but staring at us, giving us mood swings, and tidal shifts. Or heck, fire it at the sun, our solar system's largest incinerator! 
Yeah we could set up a large mass driver on each continent, and...
Yeah we could set up a large mass driver on each continent, and...
Quarto
Unknown Enemy
NASA's manned Apollo program included one disaster (the crew died) and one near-disaster (Apollo 13). Unmanned rockets, as Steampunk says, crash quite frequently.Iceblade said:
Shuttles, on the other hand... IIRC, when it crashed, Columbia had over 100 missions to its name. It's been flying for almost two decades. All in all, this would point to a much higher safety record than rockets. Space shuttles are probably getting a bit more dangerous to fly now, because of their old age, but rockets haven't gotten any less dangerous.
(in the context of this thread, though, this is a non-issue - after all, there is no shuttle capable of flying to the Moon and back, let alone to Mars and back)
Bugrof PizzAnt
Spaceman
Ummm, this may be a kinda dumb question, but do we have the capability to terraform it?
I mean if we do there are plenty of places on earth that could do with a bit of alteration, so why aren't we starting here?
I mean if we do there are plenty of places on earth that could do with a bit of alteration, so why aren't we starting here?
Iceblade
Admiral
Well. On idea is to use Alge to convert the Martian atmosphere to include more Oxygen which would cause numberous changes on the planet. I don't see how just Alge could though change the planet into an "M-class" planet with flowing rivers and green plants. Anybody else have any ideas as to how scientists plan to terraform Mars.
Delance
Victory, you say?
Didn't Arnold Schwarzenegger terraform Mars in about 15 minutes?
Death
gh0d (Administrator)
Iceblade said:That is a good idea to have our trash hurled into the sun. Almost all trash could be tossed into it as long as it wouldn't blow up the sun or anything like that.
Hmm. Let's run a little bit of math, shall we?
The sun has a mass 1.989 x 10^30 kg, and has trillions of thermonuclear reactions occuring each second in each cubic km of sun. The total mass of Earth (and most of that relatively inert stuff under most conditions) is 5.976 x 10^24 kg.
Yeah, I can see stuff on earth dumped into the sun being a real threat...
("Throw it into the sun" isn't quite that easy as far as orbital mechanics goes, anyway, but that's another issue.)
Bugrof PizzAnt
Spaceman
Delance said:
Yeah, but we'd have to do it without the aid of special effects and script writers ...
... makes it a little harder.