no real reason to terraform - title say's it all

Josh Cryer · 2002-09-21 20:12:58

I thought you talked to Zubrin before?

Shaun Barrett · 2002-09-22 04:52:40

Going back a few posts, to one made by NovaMarsollia on Sept. 20th, I think he's missing an important point about the impact transfer of life.
One of the most compelling arguments for leaving Mars alone originated at a time when we were quite sure Mars was biologically isolated from Earth, and always had been. We then had the tantalising prospect of possibly finding life forms based on a totally different blue-print than DNA. Or, at least being based on different amino acids.

[For those of you unfamiliar with this stuff, let me digress briefly with some interesting facts: Proteins are just organic polymers. They're made of long chains of amino acids. The number of possible amino acids is tremendous .... BUT ONLY 20 COMMONLY OCCUR IN LIFE AS WE KNOW IT!!
In addition, 19 of these 20 amino acids can exist in what is known as 'left-handed' or 'right-handed' form. (i.e. one form is the mirror image of the other.) The remaining amino acid, glycine, is too simple a molecule to have two forms. But the important point is that the 19 ARE ALL LEFT-HANDED!!
This makes recognising Earth-type life very very easy! There will be no chance of error because Earth life is SO specific and identifiable.
Sorry if I've bored anyone to sleep but I find this stuff fascinating!]

Getting back to the point (Cries of: "At last!!" ). If Mars had developed in perfect quarantine, and it had life, that life would doubtless be very different to Terrestrial life and, as such, would have a very strong case to be left alone.
However, it is gradually dawning on people's consciousness that there is a vanishingly small probability that Earth and Mars evolved in perfect isolation. Whether life developed first on Mars or here, it's as close as you'll get to a certainty that if Mars still has life at all, it will be indistinguishable from Earth life at the molecular level.
Armed with that information, there is a far less compelling case for the slogan: "Save Mars for the Martian Bugs!"

THAT, NovaMarsollia, is the real point of the "We are from Mars" argument .... a point I think you may have overlooked.

NovaMarsollia · 2002-09-22 05:01:01

This makes recognising Earth-type life very very easy! There will be no chance of error because Earth life is SO specific and identifiable.

What a bunch of crap. Little space probes carrying bio-detection euipment are going to have all sorts of problems distinguishing the origin of life. (Especially since we have no non-Earth life to compare it with!). Sure we could sent human scientists there with Marslabs but that would just screw everything up by contaminating the place with potentially native-killing terrestrial bugs and manmade pollution.

As for your other points, I suggest you re-read the posting you were trying to criticise because it preempts the points (if you could call them that) you made!

NovaMarsollia · 2002-09-22 05:03:35

I thought you talked to Zubrin before?

Yeah--have a look at:

http://www.uow.edu.au/arts/sts/TPP/marshall.html

Auqakah · 2002-10-30 14:10:24

Whether life first existed here or on Mars is pretty much a moot point, as far as the terraformation of Mars is concerned, though, isn't it?

After all, I seem to recall reading somewhere (forgive me for not recalling where, but I'm sure someone out there saw it as well ) that HUBBLE had observed some form of sugar - glucose, or something similar, I seem to recall, though I may be incorrect - in deep space. Such a find would seem to strengthen the argument that life in the universe is abundant, surely, and therefore whether life on Mars exists or not, is, to all intents and purposes, irrelevant.

Human beings matter more than microbes, after all. And if there are Earth-like (i.e. insofar as bearing life, and being possessed of a similar geological and meteorological history) planets out there, then most certainly there are Mars-like planets out there. And if there are, then the microbes there just aren't as important as they would be if life in the universe was rare.

I really can't see any way that possible Martian microbes can be attached any value whatsoever, simply on accounts that Martian microbes do not make our survival as a species either easier, or more difficult. Hence, they do not matter.

On Earth, however - getting off the subject slightly - all life is precious, as it helps to support our existance. And that is how Mars is different to Earth.

If we wish to live there, we should. Although, I still say it would be nice if we left it as close to its current state as possible...

Shaun Barrett · 2002-10-30 22:57:24

Auqakah writes:-

Whether life existed first here or on Mars is pretty much a moot point, as far as the terraformation of Mars is concerned, though, isn't it?

Yes and no!
The important point is whether any life on Mars is based on the same 20 amino acids, 19 of which are laevorotatory, as the life on Earth. If so, then we are dealing with ONE origin of life. Then the answer to your question is yes.
It would be very INTERESTING to know which planet this ONE basic system of life developed on first, but as far as terraforming is concerned, it would be relatively unimportant.

If it transpires that Martian life is based on different amino acids, or a different system of compounds entirely, then the answer to your question becomes DON'T TERRAFORM!! At least as far as my ethics are concerned.

You may feel differently about it on the basis that life might well be common in the universe. But we don't know that yet. And even if we have a million fundamentally different life-systems in our galaxy, I'm inclined to think each one has intrinsic value and we should consider carefully whether we have the right to muscle in on its ecology.

From my point of view (as most of you know, to your cost, from my incessant lecturing! ), the good news is there's virtually no chance at all that Martian life and terrestrial life will be different.
If Mars is sterile, I'll eat my hat. If the life there is fundamentally different, I'll eat my head!!

Shaun Barrett · 2002-10-30 23:03:52

Beware!!
I made a post here and attempted to submit it ... three times. It didn't appear.
I've discovered it can be accessed in the "Add Reply" section (three times! ... Sorry! )
???

Shaun Barrett · 2002-10-30 23:07:02

Oops!!
When I made that last warning post, my missing THREE identical posts appeared!

I don't know what's going on here, but I'll now delete the extraneous copies.
Apologies if it was my fault all this happened! :0

Palomar · 2002-10-31 09:47:51

BUMP...Shaun's posts aren't appearing, but can be read if one presses "+ Add Reply" and then scrolls DOWN.

Of course, this might post might not show up in the normal fashion, either...

--Cindy

HAPPY HALLOWEEN!!! BOO!!

Byron · 2002-10-31 10:05:25

A post I put on here a couple days ago disappeared into the ether as well...perhaps we should stop posting in this thread and begin a new one of this topic...

B

Lone--Wolfe · 2003-06-30 12:28:54

It's a concpiracy... to take our posts and use them to control the world! NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOooooooooooooooooooooo!!

sethmckiness · 2003-06-30 13:43:29

Just a thought. We will alter the Martian Atmosphere no matter what we do. There will be more heat put into the system, and no way about getting aroun emissions. While not as direct as Terraforming per say. If we goto Mars we will alter the Climate even if it is a very minor scale. By the time we get to Mars, on a larger scale other then a few astronauts, with a few flags, look at some rocks for a few months then go home. When we make a permanent Colony on Mars, we will be much more capable of Adjusting the Climate to something more hospitible. (Note: The first time a European was on North America in known History was ~1000 CE, the second was ~ 1492 CE) Hopefully it won't take so long for the moon, but look at the difference in Technology. I think we have already experienced the same amount of Technological shift in spacecraft since Apollo, at least with Capability, but I am going off topic. I think that this issue will be moot. By the time it will become and Issue, it will be easier to do then we think!

New Mars Forums

Announcement

#26 2002-09-21 20:12:58

Re: no real reason to terraform - title say's it all

#27 2002-09-22 04:52:40

Re: no real reason to terraform - title say's it all

#28 2002-09-22 05:01:01

Re: no real reason to terraform - title say's it all

#29 2002-09-22 05:03:35

Re: no real reason to terraform - title say's it all

#30 2002-10-30 14:10:24

Re: no real reason to terraform - title say's it all

#31 2002-10-30 22:57:24

Re: no real reason to terraform - title say's it all

#32 2002-10-30 23:03:52

Re: no real reason to terraform - title say's it all

#33 2002-10-30 23:07:02

Re: no real reason to terraform - title say's it all

#34 2002-10-31 09:47:51

Re: no real reason to terraform - title say's it all

#35 2002-10-31 10:05:25

Re: no real reason to terraform - title say's it all

#36 2003-06-30 12:28:54

Re: no real reason to terraform - title say's it all

#37 2003-06-30 13:43:29

Re: no real reason to terraform - title say's it all

Board footer