Re: Life on Venus is absolute hell, but doable

From: George (george_at_wtfiswrongwithyou.com)
Date: 01/26/05 

Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2005 21:04:27 GMT

"Brad Guth" <bradguth@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:e75886b8381f94eaba25d7627d9f963b.49644@mygate.mailgate.org...
> "|-|erc" <H@r.c> wrote in message news:35p945F4m9lbfU1@individual.net
>
>> Mars?
>
> Mars has also been doable. At least once upon a time (somewhat the
> opposite of our ice-ages) Mars wasn't so damn cold and nasty. However,
> as of lately the easily pulverised and sub-frozen to death and otherwise
> thoroughly TBI to death Mars seriously sucks.
>
> Even for extremely limited robotics Mars sucks. For the likes of
> humanity it'll take another spendy decade and perhaps a trillion hard
> earned bucks and euros to pull it off.
>
> For a human expedition that'll become far more limited than doing our
> moon, nearly every stinking watt and/or calorie (4.184 joules) of energy
> will need to be imported from Earth, and of course the environment of
> Earth will become stuck with at least another 1000:1 worth of artificial
> CO2 per whatever's shipped off towards Mars (I wonder how much pollution
> is worth these global-warming days?).
>
> Unless a significant geothermal resource of energy is identified, Mars
> is going to remain as somewhat spendy and damn risky, not to mention the
> required safe-house for those managing to return (even though they're
> suffering badly from radiation exposure) that'll have to live out their
> lives in isolation, as that's certainly another what-if that's spendy
> and absolutely chuck full of complications.
>
> How do you propose that we even get folks to/from the likes of Mars
> without their being pulverised through and through by something or TBI
> to death?
>
> Do you even realize that we still haven't a viable fly-by-rocket lander,
> and that's nearly four decades after the supposed fact?
>
> BTW; Mars is in the wrong direction, at least it's typically better than
> twice as far away as Venus, and seldom even that close, whereas Venus
> comes to within 110 fold the distance to our moon, and Venus
> accomplishes that fairly often.
>
> Regards, Brad Guth / GASA-IEIS http://guthvenus.tripod.com/gv-topics.htm
>
>
>
> --
> Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG

A person on Venus is going to withstand the crushing pressures and temperatures
hot enough to melt lead exactly how? If a probe designed to withstand these
effects can only last a few minutes before it is destroyed, how do you expect a
human to survive?

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Workgroup is not accessible
    ... folders on Venus, but the converse is not true. ... Start diagnosis for MARS ... "MARS ping Mars" ... Error browsing network: ...
    (microsoft.public.windowsxp.network_web)
  • re:Straight to Mars?
    ... Mars still sucks real bad. ... nasty, though it's not technically excessively hot, at least not ... I don't know why on Venus there shouldn't be ... Earth, all 10+ tonnes per soul per month after month, and that's only ...
    (sci.space.policy)
  • Re: Improved lunar landing architecture
    ... Doing Venus instead of Mars is nothing but a win-win-win for science, ... essentially green/renewable forms of energy that doesn't have to be ... Since R-1024/m worth of structural insulation can be locally ...
    (sci.space.policy)
  • Mars and Venus are surprisingly similar (Forwarded)
    ... of Mars and Venus being stripped away into space. ... need to investigate the evolution of the two planets' atmospheres. ... the solar wind does not directly interact with the atmosphere. ...
    (sci.space.news)
  • Re: >>> The Ares-1 cant fly >>>
    ... so it's Michael Griffin's mistake against Geronimo's mistake. ... Of what's far better than doing our moon: ... mars first and venus next. ... life or the remains thereof on Mars, ...
    (sci.space.policy)