Pages:
Author

Topic: Colonizing Mars - page 3. (Read 4683 times)

legendary
Activity: 2674
Merit: 2965
Terminated.
May 02, 2014, 07:40:36 AM
Mars is fine as it is right now, but when you'll either render it Venus like due to pollution or render you destroy due to some thermo nuclear or biohazard shit and make it impossible for any percpective of life then we are talking about what we human can do with our stupidity Sad
We won't further destroy Mars because we need it for further advancement into the Galaxy.
member
Activity: 112
Merit: 10
May 02, 2014, 07:38:59 AM
it will be simillar to earth, which means wars might start once space exploration becomes lucrative and lobying can began

At that time earth would have already been destroyed by humans and in time same thing will happen to mars .

Sounds about right, we seem to fuck up on everything.
Mars was already destroyed.

Mars is fine as it is right now, but when you'll either render it Venus like due to pollution or render you destroy due to some thermo nuclear or biohazard shit and make it impossible for any percpective of life then we are talking about what we human can do with our stupidity Sad

if he haven't destroyed Earth yet what makes you think we would destroy Mars

it's good for human race to be stationed on more planets in case an asteroid destroys Earth Cheesy
hero member
Activity: 588
Merit: 501
May 02, 2014, 05:43:02 AM
it will be simillar to earth, which means wars might start once space exploration becomes lucrative and lobying can began

At that time earth would have already been destroyed by humans and in time same thing will happen to mars .

Sounds about right, we seem to fuck up on everything.
Mars was already destroyed.

Mars is fine as it is right now, but when you'll either render it Venus like due to pollution or render you destroy due to some thermo nuclear or biohazard shit and make it impossible for any percpective of life then we are talking about what we human can do with our stupidity Sad
eid
hero member
Activity: 616
Merit: 500
May 02, 2014, 04:44:59 AM
This is a good trilogy of sci-fi on Mars colonisation if anyone's interested:


http://www.amazon.co.uk/Red-Mars-Kim-Stanley-Robinson/dp/0007310161/ref=sr_1_2/275-7100501-2115844?ie=UTF8&qid=1399020168&sr=8-2&keywords=mars

It can be a bit slow at times, but worth reading imo.
newbie
Activity: 42
Merit: 0
May 02, 2014, 04:38:54 AM
If some day we will go to another planet, I hope that we will better to that planet than to Earth.
legendary
Activity: 2674
Merit: 2965
Terminated.
May 02, 2014, 04:08:18 AM
it will be simillar to earth, which means wars might start once space exploration becomes lucrative and lobying can began

At that time earth would have already been destroyed by humans and in time same thing will happen to mars .

Sounds about right, we seem to fuck up on everything.
Mars was already destroyed.
full member
Activity: 152
Merit: 100
May 02, 2014, 02:46:21 AM
it will be simillar to earth, which means wars might start once space exploration becomes lucrative and lobying can began

At that time earth would have already been destroyed by humans and in time same thing will happen to mars .

Sounds about right, we seem to fuck up on everything.
hero member
Activity: 770
Merit: 500
May 02, 2014, 02:26:06 AM
it will be simillar to earth, which means wars might start once space exploration becomes lucrative and lobying can began

At that time earth would have already been destroyed by humans and in time same thing will happen to mars .
hero member
Activity: 588
Merit: 501
May 02, 2014, 02:23:03 AM
it will be simillar to earth, which means wars might start once space exploration becomes lucrative and lobying can began
hero member
Activity: 798
Merit: 500
Time is on our side, yes it is!
May 02, 2014, 12:04:23 AM
Just more of a reason for people to become more politely aware and active.  Big decisions will need to be made and the right people will need to be in position so things to go all wrong.
global moderator
Activity: 3934
Merit: 2676
Join the world-leading crypto sportsbook NOW!
May 01, 2014, 01:34:23 PM
It is an important distinction though. If you claim ground as sovereign territory, you can refuses to allow others to enter said territory, defend it, claim exclusive ownership of resources contained therein, etc. If you can't, then if country A sets up a "base" what's to stop anyone else from walking right into the middle of it and taking pictures, or digging a hole in the ground to mine some minerals?

If people have set up facilities there that essentially makes it theres, but that's probably how future wars will start.

If we get to the point where we're actually colonising other planets and setting up plants to mine them for minerals or whatnot then new laws will almost certainly be drawn up otherwise there would be disputes and possibly wars started.
hero member
Activity: 756
Merit: 500
May 01, 2014, 01:32:50 PM
It is an important distinction though. If you claim ground as sovereign territory, you can refuses to allow others to enter said territory, defend it, claim exclusive ownership of resources contained therein, etc. If you can't, then if country A sets up a "base" what's to stop anyone else from walking right into the middle of it and taking pictures, or digging a hole in the ground to mine some minerals?

If people have set up facilities there that essentially makes it theres, but that's probably how future wars will start.
full member
Activity: 182
Merit: 100
May 01, 2014, 01:29:57 PM
It is an important distinction though. If you claim ground as sovereign territory, you can refuses to allow others to enter said territory, defend it, claim exclusive ownership of resources contained therein, etc. If you can't, then if country A sets up a "base" what's to stop anyone else from walking right into the middle of it and taking pictures, or digging a hole in the ground to mine some minerals?
hero member
Activity: 756
Merit: 500
May 01, 2014, 01:11:01 PM
I would have to research the agreements but if memory serves, I believe basically it says that no nation can claim territory on a celestial body ie make a section of the moon or mars part of their sovereign nation.

See above. They don't need to 'claim' it officially, but it'll be whoever gets there first and settles a base or operation on it or whatever.
full member
Activity: 182
Merit: 100
May 01, 2014, 12:51:00 PM
I would have to research the agreements but if memory serves, I believe basically it says that no nation can claim territory on a celestial body ie make a section of the moon or mars part of their sovereign nation.
hero member
Activity: 756
Merit: 500
May 01, 2014, 11:13:54 AM
Thread resurrection.

What do you guys think about the current policies about governments not claiming territory on celestial bodies?

They don't need to officially claim them, but if theres anything valuable on them it'll just be who gets there first and extracts it.
sr. member
Activity: 294
Merit: 250
May 01, 2014, 04:18:32 AM
Thread resurrection.

What do you guys think about the current policies about governments not claiming territory on celestial bodies?
That only applies to earth based governments that has signed that treaty I think? Anyway, what would they do if someone actually colonized and claimed Mars? I think that they would not do anything.
full member
Activity: 182
Merit: 100
April 30, 2014, 11:15:08 PM
Thread resurrection.

What do you guys think about the current policies about governments not claiming territory on celestial bodies?
legendary
Activity: 2674
Merit: 2965
Terminated.
April 26, 2014, 03:39:44 AM
The main reason being is the budget. MarsOne has a budget of $4Billion up to 6$ billion Max. A budget that's just not enough. $4-$6 billion get you a light rail system for a small city on earth, we're talking here about transporting humans to Mars which is an extremely challenging task that requires huge amounts of funding and r&d, simulations (virtual and real life), construction, test launch that's all just before take off and then the cost of the materials and tech that will be used to build the habitat for humans in mars.

Not really.  A lot of the cost would come from the return from Mars.  You'd have to bring enough fuel for both trips - you'd have to design and carry a vehicle that could lift off from Mars, etc.

All we are really doing is landing on the moon again - except the moon is further away, and we don't need to lift off from it.  We already have the technology for leaving the earth and living in space for a while.

Just my $.02

 Wink
Yes that is it, but I do not think that the planned mission which I've linked has a return trip home. Once you go up there, you're not getting back anytime soon.
Vod
legendary
Activity: 3668
Merit: 3010
Licking my boob since 1970
April 26, 2014, 12:48:24 AM
Sure we have the tech I don't disagree, I just disagree with the costing. I believe it will cost a lot more if they r to do this mission properly (after proper research and testing) unless they plan to cram a few astronauts in a tuna can launch them and hope they don't die in Mars.

Well, we would know statistically if they would die on Mars.  Once they are there, we know their environment and the chances for a disaster, such as an asteroid shower destroying the habitats or a key component breaking down.

The big question is, can we get them there and land them safely?  And in my opinion, we currently have the technology to do that.  We've landed several rovers already.
Pages:
Jump to: