Interplanetary Environmentalism
Serious DiscussionDiscuss Interplanetary Environmentalism in the Discussions forums; Scientists propose conservation parks on Mars
Mark Peplow
International agreement could preserve important sites.
Next time you go for a stroll on Mars, be sure you don't leave any ...
Scientists propose conservation parks on Mars
Mark Peplow
International agreement could preserve important sites.
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.
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.
"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.
This is an interesting article. I learned new things.
The people proposing the parks have lost their minds, and are getting way ahead of themselves. I understand many people are concerned about environmental issues, but I think they should concentrate on earth first. To condemn exploratory spacecraft on environmental grounds is just absurd.
This is the first I ever heard of the UN Office on Outer Space Affairs, and it's ridiculous that a UN office oversees decontaminating spacecraft for Mars missions. The nations that are able to send spacecraft there are perfectly capable of handling that themselves without a UN bureaucrat signing off on it.
I heard one person saying that Bush wanted to open National parks to logging.
If that turns out true I'm going to cry...because I like the pristine color of green during the middle of Summer when I'm in rural areas, and when I head to national parks I enjoy seeing completely untouched wilderness with only a splotch here and there of some manner of civilization.
(\ /)
(O.o)
(> <)
This is Bunny. Copy Bunny into your signature to help him on his way to world domination
I heard one person saying that Bush wanted to open National parks to logging.
If that turns out true I'm going to cry...because I like the pristine color of green during the middle of Summer when I'm in rural areas, and when I head to national parks I enjoy seeing completely untouched wilderness with only a splotch here and there of some manner of civilization.
I don't know what you heard, but if it's about the parks, and not just federally owned forest land, then they probably mean letting the logging companies go in to take dead trees and underbrush. That will help prevent the forest from burning down.
You're joking, right? There are plenty of environmental problems to address here on Earth. Right in my own backyard I've got a river of which my local health department advises eating no more than one fish per month from, due to pollutants so as not to risk serious health problems.
Shadowborn To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
I don't know what you heard, but if it's about the parks, and not just federally owned forest land, then they probably mean letting the logging companies go in to take dead trees and underbrush. That will help prevent the forest from burning down.
If it's that then I have no qualms.
I just heard a "blanket statement" that Bush wanted to open national blah blah's to logging.
(\ /)
(O.o)
(> <)
This is Bunny. Copy Bunny into your signature to help him on his way to world domination
You're joking, right? There are plenty of environmental problems to address here on Earth. Right in my own backyard I've got a river of which my local health department advises eating no more than one fish per month from, due to pollutants so as not to risk serious health problems.
Yeah, I know, I was just hoping to get an answer from Synikul.
Forest fires are part of the natural cycle. The plants have evolved to deal with them. Ash is great for plant growth. Let them be, I say.
'If we take in our hand any volume; of divinity or school metaphysics, for instance; let us ask, Does it contain any abstract reasoning concerning quantity or number? No. Does it contain any experimental reasoning, concerning matterof fact and existence? No. Commit it then to the flames: for it contains nothing but sophistry and illusion.'
'The heart of man is made to reconcile the most glaring contradictions.'
More Information
Linear Mode
Latest Threads
