New Mars Forums

Bill:

Mining is not going to pay for the exploration and settlement of Mars.  If Martians were able to extract platinum on Mars and then transport the platinum to Earth and sell it for $600 per ounce (approximately the current price), they would not  make a profit.

Scott

Byron:

In the fourth chapter of Space Biospheres, (Orbit Book Company; Malabar, Florida, 1987) authors John Allen and Mark Nelson presented an outline of their plans for a "Mars Settlement I."  The site plan of the settlement, viewed from above, looks like a snowflake that has four arms (see page 81).  A "Replication Line" through the tip of one of the four arms indicates the point where a Mars Settlement II could be built.  People would live in MSI while they worked to construct MSII.  After the completion of MSII, more settlers could immigrate from Earth and undertake the construction of MSIII.  Then more settlers could immigrate from Earth and begin the construction of MSIV.  Eventually, there would be thousands of people living is hundreds of interconnected settlements.

The development pattern recommended by Allen and Nelson seems practical and achievable.  In contrast, the proposition that a clear dome could be constructed to house 100,000 people is not achievable.

Scott

Mr. Armitage:

NASA published a photograph of a shuttle pilot and the manuals that people have to study in order to become shuttle pilots.  The manuals were stacked up as tall as the pilot. 

The first Martian explorers and settlers will have to be as extensively trained as shuttle pilots.  A necessary step in writing those manuals will be the construction of full-scale models of spacecraft, bases, and settlements.  The way that the first Martians will live on Mars will be thoroughly rehearsed and documented and it is just plain silly for you to equate that sort of planning with totalitarianism.

Your assertion that I am a totalitarian is inane and cowardly.

Scott G. Beach

Mr. Armitage:

I do not believe that you actually reviewed the organization sites that I referred you to.  If you had, you would have found that the governance systems of those organizations are based on consent.  There is nothing "totalitarian" about them.  By referring to the people of those communities as "flakes," you are simply trying to denigrate people whose values you disagree with.

Scott G. Beach

Mr. Armitage:

In previous messages, I have referred readers to the Ecovillage at Ithaca, the Ecovillage of Loudoun County, and the Champlain Valley Cohousing "farm village."  The Ecovillage of Ithaca is in full operation.  The Ecovillage of Loudoun County is under development.  And Champlain Valley Cohousing is in the planning stages.

Please review the websites that these three groups of people have posted.  You will see for yourself that they are not "dirty hippies" and "flakes." 

Ecovillage at Ithaca
Ecovillage of Loudoun County
Champlain Valley Cohousing

Scott G. Beach

Phobos:

If most crop land on Mars is underground and artificially illuminated then day-time harvesting will probably be the norm.  However, if most crops are in sun-lighted greenhouses then, for radiation safety reasons, harvesting will probably be done at night.

Scott

Martian settlements will have to produce enough food to sustain their members.  The "Farm Village Concept" that is being developed by Champlain Valley Cohousing may be a good model for organizing the agricultural production systems of Martian settlements.

Scott

*********************
The Farm Village Concept

What makes Champlain Valley Cohousing a "Farm Village" rather than a regular cohousing village? Well, it works like this. Usually, when a parcel of land comes up for development in Vermont, the issue that burns in many people's minds is, "Do we allow housing on this land, or do we preserve it as farmland?" The answer in our case is--both!

How will we do this?

This idea is the brain-child of numerous residents of our area: farmers, gardeners, residents of the rural farmland around Burlington, and other interested people. Here are the basic components:

We will develop the minimum number of homes that we can afford to, in order to reduce the  impact of housing on our beautiful farmland.

We are building on a small portion of the land--less than 10% so the rest can remain open farmland.

We are founding a Community Supported Agriculture (CSA) business. This is a farm that we subscribe to, paying a yearly fee. In return, the farmer grows our organic vegetables and fruits (except, of course, for those we wish to grow ourselves).

Home ownership in our community comes with an obligatory CSA share at a reasonable subscription fee (administered much as a condo fee would be). This is to provide the farmer with a secure base income. Part of this fee may be bartered in exchange for produce you may wish to contribute to the CSA.

We will supply some of the infrastructure the farmer needs to run his or her business: irrigation pond, small barn, fenced paddock for livestock, small greenhouse.

The farmer uses land from us and/or land leased from other landowners in our area to produce additional organic food for sale to CSA subscribers or markets in  the surrounding community.

The community has set aside one "farmer unit" for the use of the farmer. Although the farmer must pay for the unit, we are doing our best to find outside subsidies to make this housing more affordable and thus to reduce the burden on the farmer. 

The benefits to a farmer are obvious: stable base income, land without high acquisition fees, reasonable housing, a ready market, a ready labor pool (such as our teenage sons and daughters as hands on the farm, or anyone as participants in canning parties), and community support in hundreds of small ways.

The benefits to our community are obvious, as well: organic use of our land, a job market for us and our children, opportunities and outlets for other home businesses (homespun wool, canned goods, and goat's milk, for example), the many benefits of a working farm atmosphere, and the opportunity to do something really good for our community are just a few. In addition, by using this approach we think we have found a way to link our houses and our whole way of life with the land we live on. Such a link is harder and harder to find in today's world.

Turbo:

Mars will only have "company towns" if we allow that sort of development pattern.  We have the option of promoting the development of resident-controlled towns where people make their own laws and can own their own homes and businesses.

Scott

Clark:

You wrote, "While the jury is out to lunch on wether or not we have an eternal portion of something residing in us..."

In a previously message I referred to you as a naturalist.  Your reference to the jury being "out to lunch" makes me wonder whether you would feel comfortable in the category "methodological naturalist."
 
In an article titled "Monkey Business" (The Sciences, February 1996) Eugenie C. Scott wrote, "Methodological naturalism simply requires that, in trying to explain any particular observation or experimental result, an investigator may not resort to miracles.  It is the frame of mind that all scientific workers adopt on the job, and centuries of progress has shown its value.  Philosophical naturalism asserts that the material world is all that exists -- that there is nothing supernatural, no God or gods, no creator, no creation.  Many people with science backgrounds describe themselves as philosophical naturalists, but many do not."  Ms. Scott is the Executive Director of the National Center for Science Education, which is located in Berkeley, California.

A methodological naturalist's jury on supernatural entities (gods, souls, etc.) is "out to lunch."  In contrast, a philosophical naturalist's jury has brought in a verdict: "Bull...oney!"

I feel most comfortable in the category methodological naturalist.  Do you?

Scott

Clark:

If you think that watching Nova, Scientific American Frontiers, and Nature programs is something to "laugh out loud" at then here is an alternate suggestion.  Read "Molecules of Emotion: The Science Behind Mind-Body Medicine," by Candace B. Pert. Ph.D.  And read Carl Sagan's "The Dragons of Eden: Speculations on the Evolution of Human Intelligence."  I have read both of these books and I believe that you would enjoy reading them.

Scott

Clark:

You assert that the human mind functions independently of the brain or any other physical structure and I therefore regard you as a supernaturalist.  In contrast, I hypothesize that the human mind is a function of the human nervous system, especially the brain.  This is a naturalistic proposition.  I am a naturalist and you are a supernaturalist and I am not going to try to convince you to give up your supernaturalistic belief.

You wrote, "Science dosen't have the answers, does it."  Science does not have answers to all questions and it probably never will.  Scientists do not hypothesize that the human mind functions independently of physical structures.  Scientists do not use supernaturalistic explanations to fill in the gaps in their knowledge.  Scientists accept the gaps and are, in general, comfortable with uncertainty.  In contrast, many non-scientists are not comfortable with the uncertainty gap and prefer to fill it in with supernaturalistic assumptions.

Scott

Clark:

You have posed many good questions about how the human brain functions.  However, I see no reason to get into an discussion of neurochemistry.  You are a supernaturalist and I am a naturalist.  No amount of data about the functioning of the human brain is going to convince you to become a naturalist. 

During the last few centuries, we have learned that Earth orbits Sol, Luna orbits Earth, and that all three of those bodies are approximately spherical.  These simple facts were once violently contested but today there are few people who seriously believe that Earth is flat and at the center of the Cosmos.

During this century, we will learn much more about human consciousness and behavior.  This knowledge will slowly seep into our culture and transform our understanding of ourselves.  Supernatural propositions will not be rejected, they will simply become obsolete and begin to gather dust.  And God will retire and move to Florida.  Have you ever considered moving to Florida?   

Scott