Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

If possible, would terraforming Mars be ethical?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • If possible, would terraforming Mars be ethical?

    Lots of water found on Mars, but not much carbon dioxide. However, assuming that it were possible to create the necessary carbon dioxide, would terraforming Mars be ethical, or would leaving it be as nature created it be better?



    Edit: The hypothetical includes the assumption that there are simple organisms on Mars that are unique to Mars.
    52
    Yes. It should be used for the betterment of mankind.
    88.46%
    46
    No. We've already ruined one planet and we should live within our current means.
    7.69%
    4
    Only if there is a banana shortage on Earth.
    3.85%
    2
    Last edited by DanS; February 16, 2003, 17:58.
    I came upon a barroom full of bad Salon pictures in which men with hats on the backs of their heads were wolfing food from a counter. It was the institution of the "free lunch" I had struck. You paid for a drink and got as much as you wanted to eat. For something less than a rupee a day a man can feed himself sumptuously in San Francisco, even though he be a bankrupt. Remember this if ever you are stranded in these parts. ~ Rudyard Kipling, 1891

  • #2
    There's nothing living on Mars. Ethics don't really concern non-living objects...
    Tutto nel mondo è burla

    Comment


    • #3
      Boris, you assume the present state.
      Dan is asking a question of prospects.
      You also assume nothing living. All we know is, nothing we know by our experience.

      I vote "no". Better things to do.
      Life is not measured by the number of breaths you take, but by the moments that take your breath away.
      "Hating America is something best left to Mobius. He is an expert Yank hater.
      He also hates Texans and Australians, he does diversify." ~ Braindead

      Comment


      • #4
        Slow: So you have a sliding scale of ethics, where priorities have to be set, and other good objectives would be sacrificed?

        Let's assume for the sake of argument that Mars terraforming would be beneficial for the economic well-being of Earthlings.

        Boris: Are you making a distinction between transforming living things and transforming non-living things?

        Let's assume for the sake of argument that there are some simple living things on Mars, like one-celled organisms.
        I came upon a barroom full of bad Salon pictures in which men with hats on the backs of their heads were wolfing food from a counter. It was the institution of the "free lunch" I had struck. You paid for a drink and got as much as you wanted to eat. For something less than a rupee a day a man can feed himself sumptuously in San Francisco, even though he be a bankrupt. Remember this if ever you are stranded in these parts. ~ Rudyard Kipling, 1891

        Comment


        • #5
          I say terraform. And if the Martians don't like it, let them all go back where they came from.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by SlowwHand
            Boris, you assume the present state.
            What other state should I presume? He's asking if it would be ethical to terraform Mars as it is, I imagine.

            Dan is asking a question of prospects.
            And how didn't my answer address that question?

            You also assume nothing living. All we know is, nothing we know by our experience.
            Our scientific knowledge is enough for us to assume there is no life on Mars. If there by chance is, it would have to be on the level of microbes. Ethics still wouldn't apply, as we accept the disposal of microbes as a natural part of our existence.

            I vote "no". Better things to do.
            Even in the context that Earth is full/environmentally ravaged, it may be the only option for survival of the human race?
            Tutto nel mondo è burla

            Comment


            • #7
              I don't see anything unethical about it, not that that necessarily makes it wise or easy. I just read an article a few days ago that says that terraforming is now considered more difficult because Martian polar regions have been found to contain ice, not frozen carbon dioxide. Turns out there's a lot less CO2 on Mars than was originally thought.
              "When all else fails, a pigheaded refusal to look facts in the face will see us through." -- General Sir Anthony Cecil Hogmanay Melchett

              Comment


              • #8
                I guess I'll just go with Zkribbler.
                Move the Martians onto reservations.
                Odd that we could consider messing with another planet as ok, but not another country.
                Life is not measured by the number of breaths you take, but by the moments that take your breath away.
                "Hating America is something best left to Mobius. He is an expert Yank hater.
                He also hates Texans and Australians, he does diversify." ~ Braindead

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by SlowwHand
                  Odd that we could consider messing with another planet as ok, but not another country.


                  Are you serious? Need we explain the difference to you between a living and non-living object?
                  Tutto nel mondo è burla

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Read my addition to the hypothetical. Simple living organisms exist on Mars that are unique to Mars. This follows an "abundant life" model.
                    I came upon a barroom full of bad Salon pictures in which men with hats on the backs of their heads were wolfing food from a counter. It was the institution of the "free lunch" I had struck. You paid for a drink and got as much as you wanted to eat. For something less than a rupee a day a man can feed himself sumptuously in San Francisco, even though he be a bankrupt. Remember this if ever you are stranded in these parts. ~ Rudyard Kipling, 1891

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      It's very ethical, since it will allow more people to live decent lives worldwide.

                      We can use CFCs, and PFCs to create the greenhouse effect to heat the planet, however if CO2 will be missing it will be tough to grow anything..

                      What's the composition of the soil, as we know, so far?
                      urgh.NSFW

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by DanS
                        Read my addition to the hypothetical. Simple living organisms exist on Mars.
                        Already answered.

                        And why wouldn't anyone make the distinction between a living and non-living thing?

                        I have in my hand a glass. If I so chose, I could drop to the floor and smash it to a thousand pieces. Would that be unethical (assuming it's not anyone else's property)?
                        Tutto nel mondo è burla

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          And why wouldn't anyone make the distinction between a living and non-living thing?

                          Why would anyone?
                          I came upon a barroom full of bad Salon pictures in which men with hats on the backs of their heads were wolfing food from a counter. It was the institution of the "free lunch" I had struck. You paid for a drink and got as much as you wanted to eat. For something less than a rupee a day a man can feed himself sumptuously in San Francisco, even though he be a bankrupt. Remember this if ever you are stranded in these parts. ~ Rudyard Kipling, 1891

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by DanS
                            And why wouldn't anyone make the distinction between a living and non-living thing?

                            Why would anyone?
                            See my example. Why would ethics apply to an inanimate object?
                            Tutto nel mondo è burla

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Truth be known, Boris, and I say this with love in my heart Boris, is looking at this from an arrogant Earthling point-of-view.
                              What is life, per his detetermination.
                              Is the plan then to just abandon Earth, for Mars?
                              How about spending the bucks correcting our mistakes here.
                              Man. What a concept.
                              Life is not measured by the number of breaths you take, but by the moments that take your breath away.
                              "Hating America is something best left to Mobius. He is an expert Yank hater.
                              He also hates Texans and Australians, he does diversify." ~ Braindead

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X