Re: First people on Mars are colonists?
- From: jdnicoll@xxxxxxxxx (James Nicoll)
- Date: Sat, 19 Sep 2009 02:06:09 +0000 (UTC)
In article <b48f3f80-320b-486a-9820-9f579dbb467b@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
Mark Reichert <Mark_Reichert@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/01/opinion/01krauss.html
It's a suggestion on how to eliminate all that return trip fuel as
well as pointing out there's no reason to send people except as
colonists.
Any stories written that way?
Thomas Scortia's EARTHWRECK! ended up that way due to circumstances
beyond the astronaut's control. A station full of Americans and a station
full of Russians managed not to get destroyed during a spasm thermonuclear
war that trahsed most of civilization. They were planning on returning to
Earth to rebuild things when they discovered the Soviets had deployed a
Doomsday Germ Weapon as a final Screw You to America. Happily, their Mars
turned out to be a lot easier to live on than ours (It's post-Mariner,
pre-Viking, and subject to severe climate shifts that never the less
have not erased all organic matter from the surface). We don't learn
if the colonization attempt worked, I think, only that they got there.
--
http://www.livejournal.com/users/james_nicoll
http://www.cafepress.com/jdnicoll (For all your "The problem with
defending the English language [...]" T-shirt, cup and tote-bag needs)
.
- References:
- First people on Mars are colonists?
- From: Mark Reichert
- First people on Mars are colonists?
- Prev by Date: Re: GirlGenius 09142009
- Next by Date: Re: Some Features of a Great Neighborhood
- Previous by thread: First people on Mars are colonists?
- Next by thread: Re: First people on Mars are colonists?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|