Zubrin Terraformation Interview - ...courtesy universetoday.com

Palomar · 2004-07-12 12:00:04

http://www.universetoday.com/am/publish … 72004]Read me

*Dr. Z is getting around...

--Cindy

Cobra Commander · 2004-07-12 12:33:26

So, to answer your question, I say that the colonization of Mars should not be managed at all, but be done through the joyful chaos of human freedom.

I like that wording. Maybe a little dangerous, a little bloody at times, but the only way we'll really make progress.

I think that says it all. The pioneers of the Martian frontier will be the Americans of the future.

In more ways than one, if we get our act together. :;):

PurduesUSAFguy · 2004-07-12 12:45:26

So, to answer your question, I say that the colonization of Mars should not be managed at all, but be done through the joyful chaos of human freedom.
I like that wording. Maybe a little dangerous, a little bloody at times, but the only way we'll really make progress.
I think that says it all. The pioneers of the Martian frontier will be the Americans of the future.
In more ways than one, if we get our act together. :;):

lol,
Cobra you beat me to it on the American comment, we really think alot alike.

Palomar · 2004-07-12 18:20:38

So, to answer your question, I say that the colonization of Mars should not be managed at all, but be done through the joyful chaos of human freedom.
I like that wording. Maybe a little dangerous, a little bloody at times, but the only way we'll really make progress.

*Erm...(I almost -don't- want to comment...)

What, *don't* look before you leap?

Is freedom ever born of chaos? And is chaos ever "joyful"? ::edit:: I suppose sometimes freedom can be born of chaos (?), but where does *orderliness* come to play? Doesn't orderliness ensure a greater measure of success? ??? ::end edit::

The U.S. "founding fathers" weren't a bunch of chaotic nits; they were a group of very intelligent and successful businessmen and etc. Yes, most of them leaned in favor of an aristocracy in control of the U.S. and approved the continuance of slavery, etc., etc...(I have other bones of contention with them as well, but I don't want to go off topic). Anyway, think of them what you will, but there was nothing "chaotic" about our independence from England -- except perhaps certain points (circumstances) within battle incidents of warfare itself.

Benjamin Franklin was a staunch loyalist to the Crown for years. George Washington wrote just a few years prior to 1776 (in 1774?) that he'd consider anyone the worst sort of ilk who would wish to break ties between the infant colonies and their mother nation. Etc., etc. When these men decided to declare independence and make plans to fight for independence, it wasn't born of "chaos."

I also don't think NOW is a good time to be claiming future Marsians as "Americans." And there's a few other sides to the American story most people don't want to look squarely in the eye.

Off my soapbox...(just some comments; not really looking for a debate or hashing out, though I may not be averse to it either. And tomorrow starts my work week so...)

--Cindy

Shaun Barrett · 2004-07-12 19:26:32

I thought it was a great interview and I agree with just about everything Dr. Zubrin said.
I especially liked his comments about overzealous greenies who are likely to strike "a fashionable pose" in the pursuit of bacterial rights, while gargling with mouthwash and pouring chlorine into their swimming pools!
And as for Schweitzer and Pasteur being "denounced for crimes against bacteria" ... ! :laugh:
That's a classic.

I understand the aspirations of many people here at New Mars, who have gone to enormous trouble to outline how the politics of Mars should be organised, but I think they're wishful thinkers if they imagine human beings will go along with any plan designed to orchestrate their behaviour on Mars (- apart from the obvious survival requirements).
One of the main attractions of the place will be its frontier atmosphere, at least in terms of social mores. Earth is already becoming too homogenised and bland in that regard and we need a new melting pot of ideas. Trying to anticipate what's best for Mars in the future from our vantage point on Earth in the present is, in my view, an exercise in futility.

Zubrin for president!!

Palomar · 2004-07-12 21:04:47

I understand the aspirations of many people here at New Mars, who have gone to enormous trouble to outline how the politics of Mars should be organised, but I think they're wishful thinkers if they imagine human beings will go along with any plan designed to orchestrate their behaviour on Mars (- apart from the obvious survival requirements).

...
Trying to anticipate what's best for Mars in the future from our vantage point on Earth in the present is, in my view, an exercise in futility.

*Shaun: Your first comments which I quoted can't, IMO, apply to myself, as I don't feel I've gone to any extraordinary lengths to outline what "should be" on Mars (that's Mr. Beach).

My comments -weren't- intended to be in reference to "orchestrating human behavior." (Which ushers in the matter of ethics and futility besides...)

It does bother me, though, that Zubrin seems careless -- no, strike that: He seems *rash* (no harm in bluntness) -- in that particular comment which CC quoted. Actually, I'm surprised CC agrees with Zubrin (given various comments Cobra's made in the past with regards to fascism). And no, Cobra, that's not an attempt to throw you on the defensive; I'm simply a bit perplexed is all (don't worry, I'll get over it). :laugh:

--Cindy

Cobra Commander · 2004-07-13 05:25:18

When these men decided to declare independence and make plans to fight for independence, it wasn't born of "chaos."

By the time of the Revolution, much of the chaos (in a social sense) had already worked itself out. The initial founding of the colonies was rather chaotic for its day, every crank religious sect setting up its own settlement, interspersed with various traders and the like. Not a centralized effort, and not without some of the proverbial breaking of eggs.

Not to say this is a model we should be locked into, but merely that when looking at historical examples we should consider larger timeframes.

It does bother me, though, that Zubrin seems careless -- no, strike that: He seems *rash* (no harm in bluntness) -- in that particular comment which CC quoted. Actually, I'm surprised CC agrees with Zubrin (given various comments Cobra's made in the past with regards to fascism). And no, Cobra, that's not an attempt to throw you on the defensive; I'm simply a bit perplexed is all (don't worry, I'll get over it).

Cobra takes the stand.

Well, my take is like this: were I going to set up a colony on Mars I'd have some very clear ideas about how I'd go about it. And it would have a few ideas borrowed and tweaked from traditional fascism. Quite orderly, but allowing for some... venting.

Then let's say Clark sets up a colony, it will likely be built on very different principles. Then Bill starts one, then Scott Beach sets up his commune. All in a fairly small area, all in contact with each other, all with no real desire to conform to the norms of the other. Chaos ensues. Everyone changes through the experience, some colonies thrive while others are absorbed or just die. Or, like Euthenia, fall under Mars-fascist occupation without any real attempt to assimilate. In the end something new will develop, hopefully something better than the sum of its parts.

So unless someone annexes the whole planet and initiates an ordered colonization program, that "joyful chaos" may be a foregone conclusion. And from it may be born a better future that could not have occured under more sterile, orderly conditions.

Of course, there's the outside possibility of a ending up with a planet of corpses too... ???

I guess what I'm saying is that freedom is dirty and dangerous. If we want orderly, safe and clean then we should get this freedom thing out of our heads right now. I like a little chaos, a little conflict, it keeps things interesting and keeps us all honest.

atitarev · 2004-07-13 05:25:29

http://www.universetoday.com/am/publish … 72004]Read me
*Dr. Z is getting around...
--Cindy

Great interview, Cindy! Thank you very much. I admire Zubrin and like his style.

AM: Who should the first human colonists to Mars be and how should they be chosen? Since Martian gravity is one-third of Earth's, wouldn't bone and muscle loss, along with radiation, make colonization a one-way journey? What are the implications of what, from an Earth-perspective, is exile?
RZ: Life is a one-way trip, and we are all permanently exiled from our past. In that sense Mars colonists, and all colonists, are no different from anyone else. It is just more apparent in their case, as in addition to leaving behind the time of their past, they also leave behind the place. But in so doing, they gain the opportunity to create a world where none existed before, and thus gain a form of immortality that is denied to those who are content to accept the world they are born in.

I couldn't express it any better.

Palomar · 2004-07-13 05:33:46

When these men decided to declare independence and make plans to fight for independence, it wasn't born of "chaos."
By the time of the Revolution, much of the chaos (in a social sense) had already worked itself out. The initial founding of the colonies was rather chaotic for its day

*Right. The initial founding of the Colonies was somewhat chaotic (naturally)...but by 1776 things were much more orderly.

Again, the actual founding of the U.S.A. wasn't a "joyful chaos"; rather, it resulted from well thought out strategy and preplanning by the best minds of the day. Various aspects of the war itself were chaotic (naturally) -- but the actual catalyst for independence was born of organization, planning, cool-headed strategy.

There's a lesson here.

--Cindy

Cobra Commander · 2004-07-13 05:41:51

Again, the actual founding of the U.S.A. wasn't a "joyful chaos"; rather, it resulted from well thought out strategy and preplanning by the best minds of the day. Various aspects of the war itself were chaotic (naturally) -- but the actual catalyst for independence was born of organization, planning, cool-headed strategy.
There's a lesson here.

But it took a couple centuries of non-centralized colonization, development, trade, wars, and exploiting of the land before the founding of a nation like the United States was even conceivable.

The King of England had a plan for the colonies. Problem is, so did the French, not to mention the colonists themselves who had all kinds of different plans.

Even the best laid plans require compliance from others if they are to succeed. In such bold endeavors, Hell is other people.

We aren't at the "American Revolution" stage with Mars. We're slowly lumbering toward "Plymouth Rock." We've got some things to work through before the clear and cool-headed planning for a great nation starts.

Palomar · 2004-07-13 05:52:08

Again, the actual founding of the U.S.A. wasn't a "joyful chaos"; rather, it resulted from well thought out strategy and preplanning by the best minds of the day. Various aspects of the war itself were chaotic (naturally) -- but the actual catalyst for independence was born of organization, planning, cool-headed strategy.
There's a lesson here.
But it took a couple centuries of non-centralized colonization, development, trade, wars, and exploiting of the land before the founding of a nation like the United States was even conceivable.
The King of England had a plan for the colonies. Problem is, so did the French, not to mention the colonists themselves who had all kinds of different plans.
Even the best laid plans require compliance from others if they are to succeed. In such bold endeavors, Hell is other people.
We aren't at the "American Revolution" stage with Mars. We're slowly lumbering toward "Plymouth Rock." We've got some things to work through before the clear and cool-headed planning for a great nation starts.

*Going to Mars isn't the same as the expansion of the West in the 15th - 18th centuries. France, England and Spain could and did branch out...on *this* globe.

How many nations will be able to lay a literal (ala footprint) claim to Mars? The U.S. isn't even sure it wants to foot (pardon the pun) the bill to accomplish literal landing and claiming. Japan, Russia and the EU might get together to try it -- that would, then, place a multi-nation presence on a different planet which, yes, could and likely will result in a chaos of claims, plans, etc.

But Zubrin was referring to -America-; Marsians being "Americans." If America does go to Mars, I don't see why -- idealistically or otherwise -- it has to be "chaotic" within ourselves. American missions to Mars, American colonies on Mars, will answer to America and its taxpayers.

But hey -- maybe we should just toss the history books (seems we're reluctant to LEARN from them anyway). ::shakes head::

--Cindy

Cobra Commander · 2004-07-13 06:08:18

Well, I think Zubrin's "Americans" comment was metaphorical, Martians as Americans in the sense that they'll be the frontier people developing new ideas unencumbered by the constraints of life in more 'developed' regions.

But I'm all for the other interpretation as well.

But Zubrin was referring to -America-; Marsians being "Americans." If America does go to Mars, I don't see why -- idealistically or otherwise -- it has to be "chaotic" within ourselves. American missions to Mars, American colonies on Mars, will answer to America and its taxpayers.

Which is certainly a viable position, and one I can agree with and support. But there's another side to consider. Such an approach would require American control of the planet, not only early on but for the duration until American state-sponsored colonies are so dominant that no newcomer could significantly impact the social and political dynamics. This requires two things, American annexation (though not necessarily openly) of the planet, and... militarization. Government sponsored colonization will have military aspects, military personell, military installations.

In a very real sense we have the choice between chaos or empire. I'm open to either approach, with a lean toward the latter. But should the resolve of the would-be lords of Mars fail, chaotic colonization isn't without its merits.

At any rate, planning too far ahead in such endeavors is an exercise in futility unless one has the patience and resolve to see it through to fruition. I'm unsure that Americans, or even Westerners in general do anymore.

Shaun Barrett · 2004-07-13 06:18:46

No no, Cindy, my post followed on from yours but I didn't intend to single you out as a social engineer or political orchestrator!
Mine was a generalisation about the popular "Martian Politics" topic, which has attracted a lot of attention over the years.
I was just making the observation that detailed plans for the social order on Mars seem premature to my way of thinking, that's all. And that's why I have tended to avoid the subject - there's just too much time and too many variables involved between now and when martian politics will actually be formulated.

Incidentally, as far as I can tell, Bob Zubrin isn't suggesting that martian colonists will be like Americans today but, rather, that they will be comparable to Americans in the late 18th century and the 19th century in terms of their hardiness and practicality.
Just because a lot of anti-American leftist loons, backed by rabid reds in the media (at least here in Australia), have succeeded to some degree in tarring the U.S. a very deep shade of black, doesn't mean we should shy away from praising the hard work and fortitude of pioneers who built a nation on the continent of North America. That's a profoundly unfashionable thing to say but I couldn't care less - it's how I feel about it. (I know, I know ... there was the indian problem; a bad business all round. But there are no indians on Mars! And please, let's not start on the inalienable rights of bacteria again.)
And, if it came right down to it, you'd have a much better chance of recruiting me for a trip to Mars if the joint were being run by Americans than if it were under the control of Afghan warlords, Islamofascists, The People's Republic of China, Fidel Castro, or Kim Jong-Il.

Shaun Barrett · 2004-07-13 06:23:58

Sorry!
I've probably misinterpreted everything everybody's said and gotten way off topic in the process.
Must avoid politics
Must avoid politics
Must avoid politics
Must av ........................
:bars:

Palomar · 2004-07-13 12:31:19

Sorry!
I've probably misinterpreted everything everybody's said and gotten way off topic in the process.
Must avoid politics
Must avoid politics
Must avoid politics
Must av ........................
:bars:

*...which is why I was a bit reluctant to chime after the initial post.

I'm sorry if I sounded a bit curt in my reply to you, Shaun. There's a misunderstanding here on my part somewhere (timing of posts, etc.). And yes, I was concerned about your viewpoint of me...but I tried not to presume anything. ;P Even if we've both been here 2 years and counting now!

::sigh:: We space advocates are going stir crazy in the forums while the Earth is going to hell in a handbasket it seems.

It's very hard -not- to engage in political discussions, since politics plays such a major role in our lives.

--Cindy

BWhite · 2004-07-14 12:42:23

So, to answer your question, I say that the colonization of Mars should not be managed at all, but be done through the joyful chaos of human freedom.
I like that wording. Maybe a little dangerous, a little bloody at times, but the only way we'll really make progress.
I think that says it all. The pioneers of the Martian frontier will be the Americans of the future.
In more ways than one, if we get our act together. :;):
lol,
Cobra you beat me to it on the American comment, we really think alot alike.

Errmmm. . .

Is that a good thing or a bad thing?

Cobra Commander · 2004-07-14 13:03:02

lol,
Cobra you beat me to it on the American comment, we really think alot alike.
Errmmm. . .
Is that a good thing or a bad thing?

Why, of course it's good!

Join us in rightness! One of us, one of us, one of us.

BWhite · 2004-07-14 13:31:08

lol,
Cobra you beat me to it on the American comment, we really think alot alike.
Errmmm. . .
Is that a good thing or a bad thing?
Why, of course it's good!
Join us in rightness! One of us, one of us, one of us.

Join the Magenta Agenda (Red plus Blue equals Magenta).

Because space policy is too important to leave to the politicians.

Cobra Commander · 2004-07-14 14:03:14

Join the Magenta Agenda (Red plus Blue equals Magenta).
Because space policy is too important to leave to the politicians.

Everything's too important to leave to the politicians.

TwinBeam · 2004-07-14 16:51:00

Just a comment on chaos and the American revolution - if I recall correctly, it was chaos and various attempts to impose greater order on the colonies that led to the revolution.

In particular, it was the expensive wars/conflicts with the indians that led England to (a) prohibit colonization beyond the Allegheny Mtns and to (b) tax the colonies. The colonies wanted England to pay for the wars AND were upset about the restrictions on westward expansion AND got even more upset when England started laying new taxes to cover some of the expense.

Not that England was without blame - it was pulling in significant income from various monopolistic restrictions on shipping to/from the American colonies - the cost of the indian wars was cutting into profits.

In short, chaos was a significant factor in setting things up for the American Revolutionary War. But perhaps this is not exactly the sort of chaos to which Zubrin is referring. He may have been thinking more along the lines of frontiermen and covered wagons westward-ho, etc.

karov · 2004-07-17 04:35:59

I think the colonisation of Mars or generally the space colonization shouldn`t be compared closely to the 16-20th century continental one by the European empires. Space colonization needs huge efforts in transforming or from-scratch building of living room and human-habitable environment.

Mars will not be US establishment and development analog put in the future. US history is not at all some general trend or mini-model of the human history. I suspect that it is kinda dream of the americans to see the future terraformation and colonisation of Mars as a legitimate replica of their own path in time. You, americans are tempted to project in the overall human future your own national mithology, which like every national mithology is just semi-true product of the governmental PR activity, but I think neither any kind of 'revolution', nore 18-19th style of 'independence' will deploy on the colonized Mars.

Thinking of political-juridical aspects of the Mars/space colonisation better imagine the settlement of Antarctica under the autority of Antarctic Treaty Organisation, the melioration of deserts as international project, the slow manner of multilevel way to independence in the frame of Second British Empire/Commonwealth of nations, even the nowaday globalisation under the autority of WTO and other EU-like structures. The local autorities of future terraformed worlds will appear as mere byproduct of the natural share of sovereignity and powers in the many levels of power responsabilty necessary for diverse and loose system-wide comonwealth - maximin degree of local freedom and conexity in the same time.

Martians should share unified law system in the general aspects with the others ( + exceptions of course ) , but will have their own global martian mechanism for delivering decisions conserning the narrower planetary affairs -- a ecology of institutions, often operating in competition on a common level, but having intrinsic hierarchy allong the scale of the problems. The same way EU or US federal government doesn`t deal with the city problems, or UN in the strictly national...

In the future the political + social sciences knowledge will step on bigger and more powerful instrumentarium than the plain 17th century narative philosophy, so the juridical conexity vs. sovereignity will be matter of exact design, understood and put in use by more politically wise populations with more clear application and outcome of the decisions made by more clear and honest 'voting' means.

atitarev · 2004-07-17 07:42:56

Georgi, I'm quoting R. Zubrin on the governing of Mars:

RZ: The Founding Fathers of the United States called our infant republic a "Noble Experiment," a place where the grand liberal ideas of the Enlightenment could be given a run, and the idea of a government based on the rights on man could be tested to see if it could succeed in practice. Their Noble Experiment did succeed, and as a result became the model for a new and better form of human social organization worldwide.
Mars can, should, and will be a place for numerous new Noble Experiments. The well of human social thought has not yet run dry, nor do I believe that we have yet discovered the ultimate and most humanistic form of society possible. In the 22nd Century, as in the 18th, there will always be people who think they have discovered a better way, and need a place to go where the rules haven't been written yet so they can give their ideas a try. For these, the Martian frontier will beckon. Many of their ideas will prove impractical, and their colonies will fail. But some of those who really have a better idea will succeed, and in doing so, light the way forward for all humanity.
So, to answer your question, I say that the colonization of Mars should not be managed at all, but be done through the joyful chaos of human freedom.

People can compare colonizing Mars with colonizing America or Australia even if it's not an exact analogue - it's a new frontier, new land, new society.

Scott G. Beach · 2004-07-17 21:14:50

Shaun:

You wrote, “I understand the aspirations of many people here at New Mars, who have gone to enormous trouble to outline how the politics of Mars should be organised, but I think they're wishful thinkers if they imagine human beings will go along with any plan designed to orchestrate their behaviour on Mars (apart from the obvious survival requirements).” I agree that Martian settlers should not be expected to live according to a masterplan that is drafted by terrestrial bureaucrats. That is why, in my design for a prototype Martian settlement, I specified that ProtoMartians would design their own systems. This would take place in the resident-designed “experimental neighborhoods” of the prototype settlement (see http://www.geocities.com/scott956282743 … thenia.htm, paragraphs 4 and 5).

I have borrowed this “resident design” idea from a community development model named “cohousing.” The Cobb Hill Cohousing Community is an interesting example of a cohousing community that aims to operate in an ecologically sustainable manner. (“Cobb Hill is an intentional community of people who want to explore the challenge of living in ways that are materially sufficient, socially and ecologically responsible, and satisfying to the soul.” http://ww.sustainer.org)]http://ww.sustainer.org)

Cobb Hill is populated by systems dynamicists, some of whom teach at Dartmouth and are associated with the Sustainability Institute (http://sustainabilityinstitute.org).

An article titled “Terraforming Mars One Piece at a Time” (http://www.universetoday.com/index.html, Mar 10, 2004) contains the following paragraph: “A local strategy to change Mars, according to biologist Omar Pensado Diaz, director of the Mex-Areohab project, can best be compared to transforming Mars one oasis at a time. The minimum size of the oasis extends to the diameter of a dome-shaped plastic cover, much like a greenhouse with a space heater. In this way, microterraforming is the smaller alternative for a planet that otherwise is an open system leaking to space.”

I believe that this “One Piece at a Time” strategy has merit. I have drawn a Mars settlement site plan that incorporates this OPT strategy. That site plan is posted on the web at http://www.geocities.com/scott956282743 … thenia.htm The plan shows an urban core surrounded by several dozen small agricultural settlements. Some of the people in each of the agricultural settlements would probably make daily trips into the urban core to sell their produce at the “farmers market.” Their agricultural domes would produce and release oxygen and thereby contribute to the gradual development of a Martian atmosphere that can sustain human life.

Rxke · 2004-07-18 05:35:20

So, Scott, do i understand this right you in fact propose Mars to be some kind of 'socio/political' lab environment, and have everyting set up in a way an enourmeous amount of flexibility is actually possible and actively encouraged from day one?

Interesting, never looked at your proposals that way... The distance alone could make this pretty real. No way some unexpected 'inspectors' come having a look you're doing the right thing.

Your Euthenia plans, I always had the idea they were too errr... 'planned' but if it's only the 'lab-environment' you'd set up, the outcome is quite unpredictable.

One issue with that: if the outcome, or even the evolution towards some kind of sociopolitical system doesn't fit with NASA/Earth politicians, that could cause some problems, to say the least.

"Now you guys behave, or we stop sending up replenishments!"

karov · 2004-07-18 12:44:43

I like the microterraforming approach , too. It allows direct return of the investments in short run and in small scale...

But talking about the state, the politics, etc... we should notice that indeed the government is a monopolic provider of public services. The principle difference between the public and the private sector is that the essence of the public rights is that 'no one should be excluded', the private ones - 'exclude the other' to excercise them. In that frame multiple designs for public services providing could be made without single government to be invloved, but ecology of autorized by the users entities... In many countries now the traditional services as deffence, justice, security, helthcare, education, environmental protection... are rapidly privatised. Even without Mars to have global state it could arrange quite efficient network of interacting institutions working AS a whole government... Some of the institutions would have natural monopoly, but they`ll not be an exception from the general picture.

New Mars Forums

Announcement

#1 2004-07-12 12:00:04

Re: Zubrin Terraformation Interview - ...courtesy universetoday.com

#2 2004-07-12 12:33:26

Re: Zubrin Terraformation Interview - ...courtesy universetoday.com

#3 2004-07-12 12:45:26

Re: Zubrin Terraformation Interview - ...courtesy universetoday.com

#4 2004-07-12 18:20:38

Re: Zubrin Terraformation Interview - ...courtesy universetoday.com

#5 2004-07-12 19:26:32

Re: Zubrin Terraformation Interview - ...courtesy universetoday.com

#6 2004-07-12 21:04:47

Re: Zubrin Terraformation Interview - ...courtesy universetoday.com

#7 2004-07-13 05:25:18

Re: Zubrin Terraformation Interview - ...courtesy universetoday.com

#8 2004-07-13 05:25:29

Re: Zubrin Terraformation Interview - ...courtesy universetoday.com

#9 2004-07-13 05:33:46

Re: Zubrin Terraformation Interview - ...courtesy universetoday.com

#10 2004-07-13 05:41:51

Re: Zubrin Terraformation Interview - ...courtesy universetoday.com

#11 2004-07-13 05:52:08

Re: Zubrin Terraformation Interview - ...courtesy universetoday.com

#12 2004-07-13 06:08:18

Re: Zubrin Terraformation Interview - ...courtesy universetoday.com

#13 2004-07-13 06:18:46

Re: Zubrin Terraformation Interview - ...courtesy universetoday.com

#14 2004-07-13 06:23:58

Re: Zubrin Terraformation Interview - ...courtesy universetoday.com

#15 2004-07-13 12:31:19

Re: Zubrin Terraformation Interview - ...courtesy universetoday.com

#16 2004-07-14 12:42:23

Re: Zubrin Terraformation Interview - ...courtesy universetoday.com

#17 2004-07-14 13:03:02

Re: Zubrin Terraformation Interview - ...courtesy universetoday.com

#18 2004-07-14 13:31:08

Re: Zubrin Terraformation Interview - ...courtesy universetoday.com

#19 2004-07-14 14:03:14

Re: Zubrin Terraformation Interview - ...courtesy universetoday.com

#20 2004-07-14 16:51:00

Re: Zubrin Terraformation Interview - ...courtesy universetoday.com

#21 2004-07-17 04:35:59

Re: Zubrin Terraformation Interview - ...courtesy universetoday.com

#22 2004-07-17 07:42:56

Re: Zubrin Terraformation Interview - ...courtesy universetoday.com

#23 2004-07-17 21:14:50

Re: Zubrin Terraformation Interview - ...courtesy universetoday.com

#24 2004-07-18 05:35:20

Re: Zubrin Terraformation Interview - ...courtesy universetoday.com

#25 2004-07-18 12:44:43

Re: Zubrin Terraformation Interview - ...courtesy universetoday.com

Board footer