posted
Why is Mars still red in the 24th century? As I understand it, NASA scientists plan to begin their teraforming procedure not long from now: beginning with a bunch of C02 producers; then micropes, bacteria, than plants. NASA predicts in 150 years, the red planet will be no longer red but blue. With all the techologies the Fed has, would it hurt them to make the darn planet a bit Earthlike?
------------------ Not only is silence a beautiful noise, it is also the most unavoidable and loudest noise in the universe...
posted
That could be a possibility. But...I don't see the reason or logic behind that. Why would anyone want to mask a rather insignficant planet? There is no treasure, just a huge gigantic shipyard.
------------------ Not only is silence a beautiful noise, it is also the most unavoidable and loudest noise in the universe...
posted
More importantly, in a galaxy full of M-class worlds, why waste the resources terraforming Mars when there's a great little duplex three systems over?
At any rate, terraforming, even with 24th century technology, takes time. (Unless you've got Genesis, I suppose.)
------------------ "Oh, it's an anti-anti-WTO song. It's essentially a pro-Starbucks song. I saw this picture of a guy sticking his foot through a plate-glass window in a Starbucks in Seattle, and he was wearing a Nike. Man, couldn't you just change your shoes?" -- M. Doughty
posted
Also, if Mars has life, even primitive life, I would imagine that would render it as an unacceptable choice for terraforming, at least on a global scale.
------------------ "Oh, it's an anti-anti-WTO song. It's essentially a pro-Starbucks song. I saw this picture of a guy sticking his foot through a plate-glass window in a Starbucks in Seattle, and he was wearing a Nike. Man, couldn't you just change your shoes?" -- M. Doughty
posted
Then again, if Mars had primitive life, mostly likely the first ever ET life discovered by humans, you might not want to turn the whole planet into a giant shipyard. Even if Mars were terraformed, it might not be completely terraformed (perhaps only the lowest elevations are habitable) and enough deserts would remain to make the planet look red from orbit.
------------------ When you're in the Sol system, come visit the Starfleet Museum
posted
As far as I know (and I could be wrong), no amount of Terraforming is going to bring Mars any closer to the sun. And Mars is simply not habitable as far away from the sun as it is. Earth is habitable because it has none of the ptifalls that would make it uninhabitable: rotation, distance problems etc.
------------------ "A gathering of Angels appeared above my head. They sang to me this song of hope, and this is what they said..." -Styx
posted
I thought Mars was close enough to the sun to support a Class M environment, *that's* why they want to terraform it.
I guess the micro-lifeforms ruin the terraform idea for the UFP
------------------ If you want to get your soul to heaven, trust in me. Don't judge or question. You are broken now, but faith can heal you. Just do everything I tell you to do. Deaf and blind and dumb and born to follow. Let me lay my holy hand upon you. -Tool, "Opiate" -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Prakesh's Star Trek Site
posted
Yes. Mars could be Terraformed. Will it be? Dunno. Yes, we'd NEED to start soon, to have a decent atmosphere by the 24th century, at best.
Things it would take to Terraform Mars include Heat -- generatable through several proceses, inclusing the introduction of greenhouse gases, the 'salting' of the icecaps, and mega-large light/heat reflectors. Water -- found in abundance in comets. Could steer a few into Hellas basin, assuming that there isn't quite enough left underground on Mars. A denser Atmosphere -- the hardest to create and maintain, given Mars's smaller mass. however, use of specialized terraforming equipment, coupled with the feedback loops generated by the first two elements and the addition of Mars-survivable forms of simple life (algae, plants, microbes) to create oxygen and ozone, would probably speed this up a bit.
Oh.. and theoretically, it IS possible to move Mars closer to the Sun... say into a trojan orbit with Earth... but I wouldn't advise it with anything less than a Class II Civilization.
Why isn't the Trek Mars terraformed? I agree that it's probably either because the Trek Universe has a superfluity of colonizable. M-Class worlds, or because they discovered primitive life on Mars and decided to leave most of the surface untouched, as a preserve. (The "Sagan" Directive.)
------------------ "Nobody knows this, but I'm scared all the time... of what I might do, if I ever let go." -- Michael Garibaldi
posted
Distance is not the main determinant of whether terraforming might be successful. Remember that our moon is as close to the sun as the Earth, but it's never likely to be terraformed, despite what may or may not be implied by "First Contact."
------------------ When you're in the Sol system, come visit the Starfleet Museum
posted
Distance is only relevant where solar thermal output is concerned. If the greenhouse effect could be controlled, Venus would be habitable, albeit quite a bit warmer, and it's closer to the Sun than Earth. Likewise, if Mars could be warmed and given a thicker atmosphere (two events which would likely feedback upon themselves) it would be perfect grounds for Terraforming, although we'd most likely end up with coniferous forests at the warmest spots.
Tropical Venus, Temperate Earth, Coniferous Mars.
Indeed, if the Moon were the size of Mars or Ganymede, we might be in a double-planet system, looking at blue waters overhead. Wouldn't THAT be a sight?
------------------ "Nobody knows this, but I'm scared all the time... of what I might do, if I ever let go." -- Michael Garibaldi
[This message has been edited by First of Two (edited May 12, 2000).]
posted
In theory, the moon could be terraformed too. It would lose the atmosphere in a geological blink of an eye, but that still leaves us with millions of years of nice Lunar weather. (Actually, considering the two week long lunar day, the weather might not be all that nice, but my point is that you can terraform quite a few different kinds of worlds if you aren't expecting them to have an Earth-like stability.)
I thought I had brought up a point earlier, but apparently I only imagined it. So I'll do it now. It is possible to terraform portions of a world's surface instead of the whole thing. In fact, it's a great deal easier. Just build a largish dome over your chosen area. A nicely sized impact crater might be a nice spot. I'm betting this is what's happened in Trek. (Doesn't that cadet from DS9's "Valiant" mention watching the sunrise from outside a dome?)
Finally, terraforming suggests a certain sort of view of the universe. Namely, a very sedentary one. Spending large amounts of resources converting dead worlds into living ones suggests an unwillingness to go out and seek new ones. The Federation, on the other hand, seems to be geared in the opposite direction.
------------------ "Oh, it's an anti-anti-WTO song. It's essentially a pro-Starbucks song. I saw this picture of a guy sticking his foot through a plate-glass window in a Starbucks in Seattle, and he was wearing a Nike. Man, couldn't you just change your shoes?" -- M. Doughty
posted
Okay, back to the original question... Why hasn't Mars been terraformed in Trek, when NASA is thinking about it now? Because the Trek timeline diverges from ours as early as the '60s. By the year 2000 in the Trek timeline, they already had functional cryogenic ships and satellites. Plus, being four years out of the Eugenics Wars, science may have been focussed on other things. Then, sixty years later, warp drive comes along... Probably they just didn't get around to it early on, and, by the time they could have done it, it just wasn't that interesting anymore, so they didn't.
------------------ "The search and the arrest provided several hours of entertainment in the neighborhood." -"Worm Suspect Arrested", Wired News
posted
It would be more suitable to terraform venus
IP: Logged
Shik
Starship database: completed; History of Starfleet: done; website: probably never
Member # 343
posted
Ever stop to think that maybe Mars SHOULDN'T be terraformed? Not only is it the site of humanity's first colony on another planet (no, Luna is NOT a planet), but it's also renowned for its redness. Those events alone should place the planet on the Federation Register of Historical Places.
------------------ "Do you know how much YOU'RE worth??.....2.5 million Woolongs. THAT'S your bounty. I SAID you were small fry..." --Spike Spiegel
So I'll do it now. It is possible to terraform portions of a world's surface instead of the whole thing. In fact, it's a great deal easier. Just build a largish dome over your chosen area. A nicely sized impact crater might be a nice spot. I'm betting this is what's happened in Trek. (Doesn't that cadet from DS9's "Valiant" mention watching the sunrise from outside a dome?)
Printer-friendly view of this topic
