Moon Base

[Nesterus]

[Alusair]

1. I think international projects would be great. I'm not sure if space travel will ever be truly successful until we can stop thinking as "Country A vs. Country B" and start thinking as "humankind as a whole".

2. Moon bases aren't really suitable as permanent habitable zones. Rodri is right that the moon cannot, at least with our current knowledge and theories, be terraformed, namely due to its gravity being too weak if I remember correctly. Biospheres might be possible, but broad horizon terraforming is likely out of the question, unless perhaps we made the moon one huge biosphere (which is unlikely).

However, moonbases could be useful for research and experimental means, generally in space-faring and trans-planetary habitations areas, I think.

As for Mars terraforming, in theory it's considered maybe possible, though in practicality, especially with our current limitations, it's not. I do believe Mars is speculated to have once had oceans and possibly even primitive forms of life, but I think it's also speculated that its atmosphere evolved in the wrong direction to continue to sustain such things. Either way, it's probably hard to say what Mars really has going for it until we could perform more extensive tests.

Though I do feel we really should re-evaluate the way we handle planetary ecosystems before going off to other worlds. As much as some people might want to downplay the destruction of rainforests, pollution of oceans with massive islands of plastic waste, damaging of the atmosphere, extinction of certain animal species, and so forth, these sort of behaviours are going to be counter-productive if we want to try to create or sustain new planetary settlements.

[Rota]

Moonbases cannot be self-reliant. The Moon can never be terra-formed. Neither can Mars.

Mars can be terraformed after Arnold Schwarzenegger finds the big alien machine that creates an atmosphere that is habitable for humans in just a few moments.

[eric0095]

I read somewhere that greenhouses gases could play a role in heating up Mars' climate making it hospitable (Would take awhile though obviously). Couldn't something like that theoretically happen?

[Rota]

As for Mars terraforming, in theory it's considered maybe possible, though in practicality, especially with our current limitations, it's not. I do believe Mars is speculated to have once had oceans and possibly even primitive forms of life, but I think it's also speculated that its atmosphere evolved in the wrong direction to continue to sustain such things. Either way, it's probably hard to say what Mars really has going for it until we could perform more extensive tests.

Does anyone remember a show called SeaQuest DSV? It was set in the near future, and I recall them mentioning atmosphere stations in places like the Congo and Amazon. The idea was that the rain forests had been so decimated, there was no longer enough vegetation to convert enough carbon dioxide into oxygen for human survival. So, large industrial structures were created that did the job.

I imagine this technology is going to be needed in the future, much like the pressing need for desalinization plants will be needed later this century, just to have enough potable water for human survival. As the technology is refined to create usable water, and oxygenate the air, then terraforming will become quite possible. The future needs to make this planet habitable for humans will develop the technology to make other worlds habitable for humans.

[Gamble]

some interesting points. i dont think i mentioned terraforming the moon or even mars for that matter, that just is not going to happen, in order for a planet to hold onto its atmosphere it needs a fairly strong magnetic field otherwise the solar winds just lay waste to any atmosphere that is presant. i agree with Alusair in that countrys/goverments really do need to come together to take space exploration to the next level. space exploration should not be bound by a budget, it should also not be limited to a few relatively small organizations (NASA is small relative to the amount of people in the USA). the manpower and resources that needs to be pumped into these kinds of programs is massive, but when one thinks about it venturing beyond our comfort zone in space is a massive undertaking and should be approached in a way that does not restrict progress. what i really think is going to help is if we find materials on/under the moons surface that would help fund these kind of programs. i bet if we discovered a rich vein of gold or other such valuable material on the moon it would go some way to funding our space adventures. gold is forged in the few moments of a supernova where it is hot enough, we have gold on earth, why not on the moon? we are both made up of basically the same stuff. having a living/working/exporation habitat on the moon would be a giant step forward and will enable us to learn so much more than is currently possible floating around earth in orbit on the space station. imagine what could be achieved if we (humankind) could put aside our petty differences and unite under a common goal...the way i see it is goverments are more interested in building more and more advanced weapons and bombs that we can blow each other up with than they are about advancing civilization.

[Gnerphk]

Governments exist at the will of the people. Governments act at the will of the people.

History supports these two statements; popular revolts occur when the people become fed up with their governments, and they succeed when they are particularly popular. Of course, I'm making no specific statements about Egypt or Libya; the principles hold true throughout history.

The only thing needed to get us into space (since we have the technology) is a mandate from the people of the world.

To those that say we have no business in space, I would respond thus: We cannot long survive here; I'm not prepared to say that humanity should not survive. If you are, that's another thread topic but worth discussing.

It's simple: We have no viable option. We must go.

[Gamble]

if i had trillions of billions thats exactly what i would do.

also why should it be about "a" president? this planet is a lot bigger than the united states of america, we have kings, queens, presidents, priministers, various heads of state, along with the european union...the task of advancing falls upon all the peoples of the world, the question is how long will it take for everyone to just get along and start pulling in the same direction. its fair to say is it not that the largest nations are the most sucessful ones, with a few acceptions....all people of a nation pulling together in the same direction. imagine what could be achieved if the leaders of this world got all the people pulling in the same direction???

[Puddleman]

If countries could come to together and work together this could be achieved with time. The money argument is invalid because money is really only a concept unless you can find a place where paper is extremely valuable.

[Skirata]

this planet is a lot bigger than the united states of america

Bro, where have you been. America is the world.