XPost: sci.space.policy, sci.physics   
   From: invalid@invalid.com   
      
   On 10/12/2016 7:41 PM, Fred J. McCall wrote:   
   > Serigo  wrote:   
   >   
   >> On 10/12/2016 2:46 PM, Fred J. McCall wrote:   
   >>> JF Mezei  wrote:   
   >>>   
   >>>>   
   >>> >From a plant life point of view,  it si doubtful you could get plants to   
   >>>> grow "outdoors". And if your plants are indoors, the CO2 they will get   
   >>>> will come from humans, not outside air (since the indoor habitat will do   
   >>>> everyuthing to keep that nasty CO2 out).   
   >>>>   
   >>>   
   >>> Wrong.  CO2 from humans will go into scrubbers.   
   >>   
   >> wrong, no way to clean scrubbers on Mars.   
   >>   
   >   
   > Wrong.  Of course there is.  Just take them outside, heat them, and   
   > take them back inside before they cool.   
   >   
   >>>   
   >>>>   
   >>>> It would be extremnely challenging to develop sustainable human presence   
   >>>> on Mars of the type seen in Total Recall or even Babylon 5.   
   >>>>   
   >>>   
   >>> For some moderate value of 'extremely'.   
   >>   
   >> it is still too costly, and there is no payoff, just rocks and sand in a   
   >> vaccum   
   >>   
   >   
   > We already established that your "rocks and sand in a vacuum" is   
   > false.   
      
   wrong, it is not a true or false game.   
   Compaired to Earths atmosphere, Mars is more like outter space, a vacuum.   
      
      
      
   >   
   >>   
   >>>   
   >>>>   
   >>>> The problem with Mars is that initial settlers will be dependent on   
   >>>> Earth for ALL their supplies for a long time, and it will be even longer   
   >>>> time before they start to have ability to manufacture goods locally from   
   >>>> locally mined iron/aluminium/coal etc.   
   >>>>   
   >>>   
   >>> No.  There will be some things that will be locally produced in fairly   
   >>> short order.   
   >>>   
   >>   
   >> name any of them.   
   >>   
   >   
   > Water, oxygen,   
      
   they brought that with them, and the tech to produce it.   
      
   > various other gases,   
      
   like Nitrogen... which they also brought with them.   
      
   > including methane for rocket fuel.   
      
   they do not need rocket fuel, because they do not need to go back to Earth.   
      
   > As a colony gets bigger it will start to pay to locally produce   
   > metals.   
      
   from melting down old supply rocketships,   
   it is more cost effective to leave them there as scrap.   
      
      
   >   
   > Try and keep up.   
   >   
   >>   
   >>> There will be some things that will probably have to be   
   >>> imported for a very long time.  There will have to be some new   
   >>> industrial processes, since there will be no coal.   
   >>   
   >> no need, no reason to go to mars.   
   >>   
   >   
   > If humanity listened to trolls like you we'd still be huddled in caves   
   > eating bushes.   
      
   you missed out on the moon exploration, and you have failed to keep up   
   with NASA R&D on what is required for Mars.   
      
   You keep stating the silly stuff.  Like a stoner going to drift up and   
   live the big life on Mars like in the movies.   
      
   Get  Real.   
   or go post in     sci.fiction.for.dummies   
      
   >   
   >>   
   >>>   
   >>>>   
   >>>> In fact, is there any information on whether mining for minerals can be   
   >>>> done on mars ? Would there be veins of iron, bauxite, gold or some coal   
   >>>> wrth digging for ?   
   >>>>   
   >>>   
   >>> Sufficient amounts of various metals for initial development are   
   >>> available without having to do much in the way of mining.  Ores can   
   >>> just be scraped up off the surface.   
   >>>   
   >>   
   >> so you have been there ? or are you just makeing stuff up ?   
   >>   
   >   
      
      
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)