From: tomk@netcom.com (Thomas H. Kunich)
Subject: Re: Is NASA really planning to Terraform Mars?
Date: Mon, 07 Sep 92 23:55:32 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest) 
Distribution: sci

(I am reposting this at request)

There have been suggestions of terraforming Mars, perhaps
even Venus. There may even be other planets or satellites
in the solar system that lend themselves to being improved
upon by man.

Well, I have a suggestion.

We can talk of sending manned flights to Mars, but we do
not have the technology yet, nor the budget for such a
prolonged and possibly ineffective space flight. Maybe we
haven't learned from recent attempts to mass produce
science, but miracle breakthoughs simply don't happen on
schedule if ever. So talk about terraforming with unknown
technologies is premature to say the least.

Yet we do have the capability of terraforming Mars or the
very least modifying Mars to support life of some sort. The
same could probably be said of Venus and other places.

If the Gaia principle really exists, and I find the
principle attractive, then we can let life do it's own work
on these planets.

It is a simple, possibly even elementary, matter to find
various bacteria, algae, fungi, lichen etc. that can exist
in the harsh environment of Mars. Or, for that matter, the
upper reaches of the Venusian atmosphere. These life-forms
are small, light and quite capable of being transported in
rather massive quantities to these planets by presently
possessed technology. Should there not be appropriate life
forms, our present knowledge of biotechnology should lead
us to be able to develop some in fairly short order.

I suggest that we send a space vessel bearing our life
substitutes to Mars and Venus. The cost is relatively
miniscule. Thereon we can sprinkle the makings of man
himself.

Oh, maybe the results won't look like our ideas of life. If
Gaia lives on Venus I am sure that she is a Venusian Gaia.
We would find her, perhaps, a little hot blooded for our
tastes. The Martian Gaia might be more to our liking but
then again who is to say? So too for the Titan Gaia.

Would the Gaia principle work? I, for one, think that it
would. In any case the results would be a satisfying and
informative experiment that would cost pennies along the
lines of space travel these days.

Of course it would be unethical to interfere with any life
there may be already there. So considerable exploration
would be necessary to give a moral basis for such a
project. But consider this:  Should man never be able to
budge from this planet in earnest we will have had our
moment of godhood and brought life to pass. And perhaps,
after all, that is the true meaning of life.

(This is a new posting on the subject)

A couple of comments have come my way in regards to the
Gaia principle. Maybe I ought to make myself lucid.

My direct quote regarding Gaia was, "If the Gaia principle
really exists, and I find the principle attractive, ~ ".

I did not say, nor do I maintain, that there is anything of
a supernatural nature about Gaia. Nor does it's original
author to my knowledge, which is admittedly slight.

Scientists can find no problem understanding nuclear
physics, with it's myriad complex intertwining of actions
and interactions. Physicists can talk for days, weeks or
even months on end about how each step leads to the next
which leads to the next in a steady flow of cause and
effect that weaves a pattern of infinite complexity and
beauty from simple original concepts.

Geologists can trace the development of the earth's mantle
over the millennia. The sedimentation and metamorphosis of
one type of stone to the next. All with a precise line that
natural laws predict with clarity at least in retrospect.

Others can trace the beginnings of life on this planet,
step by step, through eons of time. Showing how each
evolution follows the previous and theorizing about the
ecological changes that presented themselves to produce
these changes. Cause and effect, cause and effect.

Gaia, as I understand it, isn't a direct line that supposes
that what we have now is what was meant to occur from the
beginning. Gaia is the chain of events whereby life
actually does change the world around it. After all, isn't
it a little obscure to say that man is destroying his
environment and then to imply that he is the only life form
capable of doing so? I find it astonishing that intelligent
people could _not_ find the Gaia principle interesting!

No, as I say, I find the principle of Gaia attractive. I
find that it is a theory that can be tested. I have
suggested a test of that theory that can be run for a
miniscule fraction of what terraforming projects of other
types would cost. Something that requires very little in
the way of new technology. And something that could result
in the bringing of life to other lifeless worlds in this
universe.

And in the final analysis this may be the only way man can
spread life off of this small planet.

Newsgroups: sci.space