You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Submit your comments on this article
Home Front: Tech
Scientists propose conservation parks on Mars
2004-11-28
I have a dream. In the dream, the normal people of this earth simultaneously reach the breaking point with this sort of nitwit, wolf-caller, or general loon. One Thursday afternoon, around 2:30, the normal world with turn on them and beat the living crap out of them all en masse. I don't know if it'll do any good, but it'll let us vent.
Next time you go for a stroll on Mars, be sure you don't leave any litter behind. A plan to keep parts of the red planet in their pristine state could see seven areas turned into 'planetary parks', regulated just like national parks here on Earth. The scheme has been proposed by Charles Cockell, a microbiologist for the British Antarctic Survey in Cambridge, and Gerda Horneck, an astrobiologist from the German Aerospace Centre in Cologne, Germany. "It is the right of every person to stand and stare across the beautiful barrenness and desolation of the Martian surface without having to endure the eyesore of pieces of crashed spacecraft scattered across the landscape," they write in the latest edition of Space Policy.
Now, didn't that cause an almost uncontrollable urge to holler "Oh, shuddup!"?
Although scientists have found no life on Mars, Cockell and Horneck point out that many national parks on Earth are protected partly for their geological interest and natural beauty, such as the Grand Canyon and Antarctica. "And if Mars has simple microbial life, there are even greater reasons for establishing planetary parks - to protect that life from human destruction," they write.
No human being has set foot on the planet yet, and these guys are already demanding to be put in charge — because of their superior Virtue™...
"We've already crashed unmanned spacecraft there - Mars Polar Lander and possibly Beagle 2 - so there's already an environmental issue," Cockell told news@nature.com. He says the crashes are as irresponsible as dropping robots over the Antarctic...
Posted by:Anonymoose

#15  Oh, all right.

ENVIRONNMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT -- MARS

No environment, therefore no impact.

The end.
Posted by: jackal   2004-11-28 10:08:18 PM  

#14  A microbiologist should know better. To quota a movie, "Life overcomes, it escapes, it finds a way."

Trying to corral earth-critters to certain sections of a biosphere is a hopless cause.
Posted by: mojo   2004-11-28 4:33:14 PM  

#13  Lol, Dish!

Terraforming! Eeeek!

Heart attacks all over the eco-wankosphere!
Posted by: .com   2004-11-28 2:36:41 PM  

#12  Ship his ass to Mars, that he can see it with his own eyes... as they explode out of his head.

I suppose this means they're opposed to terraforming, too.
Posted by: Dishman   2004-11-28 2:32:39 PM  

#11  The Problem is that useless fools like this even get a shot at a reading of their crackpot ideas/ideals. I suggest a good shit beating shoud be had to quell such asshattery. This paper is designed with the sole purpose of sucking up grant money, government funding and, limiting human expansion into space. Let the shit pounding commence.
Posted by: Sock Puppet of Doom   2004-11-28 1:29:50 PM  

#10  Surface area of Mars is equal to what? The Eurasian landmass. We've dropped equipment onto the surface a combined size of what? A small condo perhaps? It's hard to get perspective on this sort of thing but it really does seem like the problem is contained.
Posted by: RJ Schwarz   2004-11-28 1:01:08 PM  

#9  just ask for a Supersite cleanup ;-)
Posted by: Frank G   2004-11-28 12:35:13 PM  

#8  The basic thing to remember about people like this is that they NEVER produce anything but hot air and fatuous studies. They wait until productive people do something and then try to take over. If they would quit talking and actually work, people might pay attention to their ideas other than as a source of amusement.
Posted by: RWV   2004-11-28 12:32:11 PM  

#7  We should also ban building secret bases to study inter-dimensional travel on Phobos.
Posted by: AJackson   2004-11-28 12:20:28 PM  

#6  I just love this shit: ""It is the right of every person to" [insert your favorite whatever here]... Really? Point it out... And it is my "right" to ridicule such obviously buffoonery. Note to Cockell and Horneck: there is no there there, boys.

"However, establishing the parks would present an enormous challenge for international law."
Woohoo! A brand-new bureaucracy! Even Diplomad would be impressed by the futuristic ingenuity of it, lol!

Frank - If only it wasn't located next to a toxic waste plant, sigh. ;-)
Posted by: .com   2004-11-28 12:19:12 PM  

#5  "Or is that marsbat?"

That would be phobobat or deimobat, your pick.

Mons Veneris? Is there such a thing on Mars? I thought that Alternative 3 was just a fiction.
Posted by: Cornîliës   2004-11-28 12:05:25 PM  

#4  ROFL!!! Great minds... Lol!
Posted by: .com   2004-11-28 11:59:14 AM  

#3  I've always been a proponent of a permanent playground/park on Mons Veneris
Posted by: Frank G   2004-11-28 11:57:49 AM  

#2  ...Okay - at the risk of being labeled a Moonbat(TM), I believe we should have some idea of places where we don't want to drop survey landers - permafrost, for instance, because it is kinda fragile. And once we're there, hell yes, let's establish parks at Tharsus, or Mons Olympus, because these are places humans should see as unspoiled as possible, just like Yosemite or Everest.
This asshat, however, seems to be suggesting that we will be sending wave after wave of voyeuristic, autonomous golf carts to go charging around the Martian landscape like droids invading a planet in a Star Wars movie. WHAT in our history of planetary exploration so far makes him think this will happen? As a rule, NASA has done everything in its power to make its probes safe and as non-intrusive as possible given the demands of the mission. After all, these things have to be designed and built in accordance with Terran safety and environmental regs - and my understanding is that at least one or two missions have compromised their eventual goals in order to stay within those regs. These two need to remember that the 'astro' in their job descriptions means you cannot simply transfer your political and moral beliefs upwards - you are scientists whose job is to EXPAND knowledge, not restrict it.

Mike
Posted by: Mike Kozlowski   2004-11-28 11:45:19 AM  

#1  Scientists propose conservation parks on Mars
He says the crashes are as irresponsible as dropping robots over the Antarctic

Moonbat_mode ON ## Or is that marsbat?
We must protect the innocent martians from the greedy, exploitative Americans.
Moonbat_mode OFF

And so it begins...
Posted by: N Guard   2004-11-28 9:55:21 AM  

00:00