Green Division?

Palomar · 2004-01-20 15:32:40

*I'm wondering how many "Greens" here are in favor of attempting to manipulate indigenous dormant life (if it exists) on Mars only (and going from there, no matter how long it may take) -versus- transplanting a lot of flora from Earth to Mars (excluding agricultural products for enclosed-dwelling colonists) in the hopes of terraforming more rapidly.

Just wondering.

--Cindy

Josh Cryer · 2004-01-20 16:12:25

I don't think local life, if it exists (which I don't think it does) will be helpful as far as terraforming goes.

Obviously if we could use it for those ends, it would be easier than shipping life in from elsewhere, but I'd think we'd need a vast knowledge of genetics or biology before we could even begin; and at that point, wouldn't it be easier to work with stuff we have a lot of experience with (Earth biology)? Of course, there's the possiblity that the biota on Mars is actually quite similar to that of Earth, so it could actually turn out to be useful.

So... I dunno Cindy. All I 'know' is that we'll proboably terraform "eventually."

Byron · 2004-01-20 16:29:37

*I'm wondering how many "Greens" here are in favor of attempting to manipulate indigenous dormant life (if it exists) on Mars only (and going from there, no matter how long it may take) -versus- transplanting a lot of flora from Earth to Mars (excluding agricultural products for enclosed-dwelling colonists) in the hopes of terraforming more rapidly.
Just wondering.
--Cindy

If we really did find indigenous life on Mars (highly unlikely, imo), we'd have to find the answer to a whole lot of questions before we could even think about terraforming. First and foremost, we'd have to determine if it was safe for humans to co-exist with Martian life. Would introducing even the tinest bit of Earth life cause Martian life go extinct? Etc, etc.

As a "green," I would prefer that Mars have *no* present life, otherwise terraforming would probably never happen. But I strongly believe there is no life on Mars, as it wouldn't be the way it is today if it did, so I guess that would make that a moot point..lol.

B

Cobra Commander · 2004-01-20 17:48:27

Terran transplants, hands down, at the expense of the native life if need be. Make Mars America.

Personally, I'd prefer to find no life on Mars. Life means delays and negotiations and permits and on and on. If we find some and can use it, fine, if we find something that doesn't affect us in any way, fine. But if we find a bacterium that causes the blood-willies or something, I'll be happy to see Terran transplants wipe it out.

Another point to consider is that the introduction of Terran life and terraforming may very well help the native life. If it is similar to Earth life it should thrive in a more hospitable enviroment.

Save the Martians. Terraform.

Shaun Barrett · 2004-01-21 00:13:02

Just a minute while I climb up on this soap box once more ... !
If any life is found on Mars, I'm reasonably sure it will be terrestrial in basic form; i.e. it'll be RNA/DNA based, with the same 20 laevorotatory amino acids and exclusively dextrorotatory sugars.
For those of you who have been fortunate enough to miss my past sermons on this topic ( ), I base this notion on the research done into the ability of bacteria to survive impact transfer between the planets, safe within the pieces of rock blasted off planet-A and drifting by chance to planet-B.
It has been estimated that on average, even today, kilograms of Mars are arriving on Earth each year.

Although there's enough circumstantial evidence for me to be 99% sure there's (terrestrial) life on Mars, if not on the surface then underground, comments like Byron's make me nervous!
If I interpret his thoughts correctly, he's referring to the Gaia hypothesis. According to that line of reasoning, life modifies a planet in order to keep the environmental parameters within certain limits. The modifications ensure that conditions remain conducive to the continued existence of the lifeforms doing the modifying! There have been whole books written about how life on Earth is instrumental in keeping the planet environmentally moderate, so that life can continue to flourish.
Looking at Mars, it's not all obvious that any such mechanism is working there, from which it's been deduced that there can therefore be no biosphere.
I think this is a strong argument and it does cause me to doubt my stated position that Mars harbours life. But then that hypothesis judges Mars using the criteria of the only planet on which we know life exists, Earth. Perhaps a Gaia-type self-regulating biosphere also existed on Mars until it was overwhelmed by catastrophic environmental circumstances. We know now that even Earth's abundant biosphere, with all the climate-stabilising checks and balances built into it, will succumb to rising temperatures in about 1 billion years. The thermophilic bacteria in the crust will likely be the last to die, the surface being devoid of any sign of life well before the last bacterium's cellular structure breaks up in the heat.
Mars has perhaps experienced the opposite scenario; the surface life dying in an apocalypse of dry cold, instead of the blistering steamy heat Earth's surface life has to look forward to.

So, although comments like Byron's do give me pause for thought, I still favour the idea that Mars is full of at least bacterial life; most likely halophilic (salt-loving) bacteria.

If there's no life, that's fine for terraformers. But if there is life, it'll almost certainly be good ol' Earth-type life and that's fine for terraformers too!
Being a terraformer myself, I can't lose!

[P.S. In response to the original question, and feeling I have sufficient 'green' tendencies to qualify as a voter, I side with the importers of terrestrial species into the martian environment. For my money, we'll either be introducing Earth-life into a sterile world or simply re-introducing them to some long-lost cousins from back home ... what's the diff.?!!! ]

Byron · 2004-01-21 06:40:31

Although there's enough circumstantial evidence for me to be 99% sure there's (terrestrial) life on Mars, if not on the surface then underground, comments like Byron's make me nervous!

Well, I don't mean to make you nervous...lol... But can you tell me what "circumstantial" evidence for life you're referring to?

If there really is Martian life, I would think that it would have at least adapted to the native Martian conditions (much like the so-called "extremophiles" here on Earth,) which would mean we've should have discovered it by now (either with the landers or Martian meteorites here on Earth,) imo. I guess the only way we'll know for sure is to send people there and dig 100's of meters into the ground in various locations, including the ice caps, etc. In any case, it'll be a very long time before we can be sure that Mars is truly a lifeless world.

As for the Gaia hypothosis, I don't buy into it lock, stock and barrel, although I am strongly predisposed to it. The Earth would be a very different world if life didn't exist, such as having an oxygen-rich atmosphere and a life-friendly climate. The way I feel about life that it's extremely difficult to get it started in the first place, considering it took so long for it to appear here on Earth (and longer still for it to evolve beyond single-cell organisms.) Granted, there is that theory that life may have started first on Mars and got transferred to Earth at a later date, eventually dying off when Mars became too cold and dry to support it...but if life existed back then on Mars, it would probably still exist now, and we just haven't found any concrete evidence of either. For instance, if the Martian soil really was filled with salt-loving bacteria, wouldn't the rover's sensors pick it up? Of course, it'd be awfully nice if they would reinstate that sample-return mission...

In the larger scheme of things, I'm not nearly as excited about the possibility of life on Mars (since it's practically next door to Earth) as opposed to discovering life outside the Solar System (which would prove that life really isn't unique to Earth.)

Life or no life, Mars will always be an endlessly fascinating place...

B

P.S. In regards to Shaun's support of introducing Earth life to Mars...that's something that will almost surely happen anyhow when humans land on Mars, as at least some microrganisms will escape into the environment...if it hasn't happened already with the landers we've already sent there...lol. (I can see the headlines now: Martian Life Turns Out to be Imported Earth Life. A very plausible scenario, imo...

Palomar · 2004-01-21 08:49:39

*I don't want to see Mars "Americanized." By that I mean all the franchise gimmicks, no-talent media whores (male or female) clogging up outlets, etc. We've got the highest divorce and suicide rates in the world, so many nasty incidents with guns and high-powered rifles (in junior high and high schools especially...). America was once a great society...once (past tense, and even not very long ago). It isn't today, IMO.

Let's learn from our mistakes...not repeat them, and worse not *transplant* them. :-\

Won't staying "Red" keep people more on their toes? It would require a limitation in the population, with occasional influx of Earth-born colonists (that bit of change will be beneficial), etc.

The main problem I see with terraforming has much less to do with Mars as a planet (although, as a Red, I genuinely love the rusty ochres, garnets, crimsons, oranges, and golden colors of Mars!...I really wouldn't want to see that "go"), and more to do with human nature. Over-run the planet with people and pretty soon the grass will be soaking up blood from wars, stockpiles of nasty weapons will exist, etc.

The best scenario I can foresee for Mars (oh, I know...I'm no sociologist or expert, it's just another opinion here) is to allow a firm culture to build up on Mars via those enclosed colonies, populated mostly by generational native-born Marsians and the occasional influx of Earth-born folks (to keep things "stirred" a bit...must avoid stasis), and then gradually terraform. But make sure a culture is in place with limited immigration. Josh likes to remind me that terraforming is bound to occur eventually anyway...I think he's right, so I've shared these additional thoughts on the matter.

--Cindy

Byron · 2004-01-21 09:10:50

The best scenario I can foresee for Mars (oh, I know...I'm no sociologist or expert, it's just another opinion here) is to allow a firm culture to build up on Mars via those enclosed colonies, populated mostly by generational native-born Marsians and the occasional influx of Earth-born folks (to keep things "stirred" a bit...must avoid stasis), and then gradually terraform. But make sure a culture is in place with limited immigration. Josh likes to remind me that terraforming is bound to occur eventually anyway...I think he's right, so I've shared these additional thoughts on the matter.
--Cindy

Peronally, I think this is what will happen anyway, as the cost of terraforming will be impossibly high in the early going. I'm sure the general consensus will be to keep Mars in its pristine state as long as possible, much like we're already doing with Antarctica, which is just plain common sense, when you think about it.

As I've stated before, it will most likely be up to the citizens of Mars as opposed to Earth interests that will eventually bring about terraforming, as most of us here on Earth would likely be opposed to shelling out huge sums of $$ just to make Mars a more comfortable place to live for a relatively tiny number of Martian pioneers.

Also, no Martian Long John Silver's, please!!...

B

Palomar · 2004-01-21 09:25:45

*Well, I liken the early stages of colonization on Mars (again...just my lil 'ol opinion) to marriage. A newly married couple needs time to adjust to each other without a lot of outside interference. New colonists on Mars should be allowed the privacy they need, and definitely no media circus pumped up by franchise or greedy companies thrown into the mix (which would likely turn the whole thing into one huge joke). This is science: A level of integrity and professionalism must be maintained; a bit of class and sophistication never hurt either (as contrasted to the common, vulgar, crass idiocy currently plaguing the US).

And Long John Silver's can keep its greasy fingers out of the picture, IMO.

--Cindy

Shaun Barrett · 2004-01-21 20:18:29

Interesting comments, Byron and Cindy.

Just to address Byron's question about circumstantial evidence, it's really just an accumulation of factors without definitive proof.
But I believe people have been hanged on a preponderance of what was, in the final analysis, just circumstantial eveidence!

Factors:-

- Mars was probably warmer and wetter 3 to 4 billion years ago when life is known to have existed on Earth.

- Impact transfer of material, both ways, between Earth and Mars has been going on since the planets formed and is still going on today.

- Research has proved that conditions inside a substantial proportion of material transferred from Mars' surface to Earth's surface, and vice versa, never reach levels intolerable to common forms of terrestrial bacteria. Hence the transfer of viable bacteria is not only possible but the chances of it not having happened are vanishingly small.

- Bacterial life is extraordinarily adaptable and resilient, being able to evolve very quickly because of the speed of its reproduction.

- If bacteria (archaea etc.) ever existed on Mars, and through impact transfer, if nothing else, it almost certainly did, then it will still be there today in one form or another.

- Bacteria can exist in a range of environments from extreme cold to extreme heat, high salinity, high acidity or high alkalinity, or even very high radiation environments. They can exist in an oxidising or reducing environment (in oxygen or without it), flourish in and even digest toxic waste, and even survive a hard vacuum on the Moon for two years!

- Bacteria are hard to eliminate, even if you make deliberate efforts to do so. (Even Operating Rooms cannot be made entirely sterile.) If you succeed almost completely in sterilising any thing or any area, just one bacterium will totally repopulate that thing or area within a matter of weeks, given enough nutrient.

- There are almost certainly areas of Mars today which fall within the huge range of possible habitats for bacteria.

- Several unsterilised or incompletely sterilised probes have landed or crashed on the martian surface since the early 1960s.

- Although the subject for much debate, experimentation, and dispute, the Labeled Release (LR) experiments on the Viking landers gave a positive result. The damning evidence of the Gas Chromatograph Mass Spectrometer (GCMS), which found no organic material in the regolith (down to parts per billion levels), and which was used to 'prove' the LR results had to be wrong, has since been shown to be baseless. The same GCMS failed to detect the organic material in thriving colonies of bacteria in Antarctic soils here on Earth!
[For an update on the LR results, see [http://www.newhousenews.com/archive/wylie011604.html]THIS SITE. ]

- Mars Global Surveyor photographs have shown streaks of dark material emanating from strata just below the surface of canyon and crater walls. The material is transient and the consensus is that it's probably briny water. Some have even suggested that its dark colour may be due to dormant spores of some kind of life suddenly germinating in the freshly released moisture.

- Some European scientists have examined 'dark spots' which appear and disappear in fields of frosted sand dunes and decided that their behaviour is consistent with colonies of living creatures, perhaps living in meltwater under protective sheets of ice.

I could probably find some more circumstantial evidence, if pressed, but I hope this is sufficient to get an idea of how my mind works (or doesn't! ) on this topic.

Cindy, I understand your trepidation at the thought of the present United States of America being cloned and placed on Mars!
I don't think you have to worry too much. Even if America does get there first, the ongoing colonisation would involve many countries and many cultures, including Europe, Russia, China etc. At least initially, the kind of people who grace the stage on the Jerry Springer Show (BLLECCHHH!!! ) would not be prime candidates for the trip, I suspect.

New Mars Forums

Announcement

#1 2004-01-20 15:32:40

Re: Green Division?

#2 2004-01-20 16:12:25

Re: Green Division?

#3 2004-01-20 16:29:37

Re: Green Division?

#4 2004-01-20 17:48:27

Re: Green Division?

#5 2004-01-21 00:13:02

Re: Green Division?

#6 2004-01-21 06:40:31

Re: Green Division?

#7 2004-01-21 08:49:39

Re: Green Division?

#8 2004-01-21 09:10:50

Re: Green Division?

#9 2004-01-21 09:25:45

Re: Green Division?

#10 2004-01-21 20:18:29

Re: Green Division?

Board footer