This is definetly not up the ally when it comes to the current no risk asessments that NASA is presently stuck in. We know that even green house gases can effect us hear why would it not work else where is what science is saying.

No experiments have been preform with low gravity and I feel that it is why Mars atmosphere is the way that it is today.

If the mass of Mars was some how increased then maybe we would then have a chance of success at teraforming it into a more hospitable environment more suited for humans and earth species.

So excuse the typo but where are your comments of insight not just ridicule or are you not able too.

Anonymous comments or personal attacks are not permitted on this site. The offending comment has been removed and the user has been prevented from posting new comments.

Im afraid when we do find life on Mars the terraforming issue will be moot. All discussions about terraforming should be under the assumption that there is no life on Mars, an assumption that seems more unlikely every day. Any near term terraforming we do shouldn't have an immediate impact on local martian microbes but it would be inexcussable to destroy the first 'aliens' we come across even if they are microbes. Has anyone done research to see what simalar microbes can tolerate as far as climate changes?

There is current research about microbes--extremophilic bacteria--from the hot-springs in Yellowstone, the (red river) in Spain, and some cold tolerant microbes in the dry valleys of Antartica. D. radiflorians is an interesting microbe. With the exponential growth rate of microbes--evolutionary adaption to new environments--resources from Microbiology, Environmental Magazines(available at the local University or College) You might access USGS or the EPA websites and query for extremophilic bacteria. Another resource, on line, Eurekalert. Also, methogens or methogenic bacteria--"What causes a canary to die in the coal mines? Large amounts of Methane gas--from bacteria that resides in the mines, consuming the fossilized remains--or coal."
Zach, you might want to chech UMWA website, to see if there are articles or resources that could shed light on your query about microbiotic adaption to climate changes.
Some of the microbes, anaerobic ones, perfer high concentrations of iron, sulfur, or other types of metals--

http://science.nasa.gov/newhome/headlines/ast14dec99_1.htm

Terraforming with microbes.

The recent discovery of Methane in the Martian atmosphere--a strong and tantalizing hint of possible indigenous Martian life--puts this debate in an arena (morality and ethics) where scientists are poor arbiters and poor decision makers.

If Mars proves to have indigenous life, do we have the moral RIGHT to eliminate it to terraform the planet for our use?

I am by no means against colonization that is respectful of indigenous life forms. But a possible unique and separate ecological system is not something to be haphazardly destroyed for our convenience. In our ignorance and rapacious greed we have done a poor enough job of sharing our OWN planet with other species that in my opinion we have no moral right to doom another world to mnass extinctions of indigenous life forms.

A study on the orbit of Phobus indicated that in 40-50 million years Phobus would break apart and possible impacts would occur. If there are microbes, indigenous life forms--then evolution possibly should continue--mass extinction will eventually occur.
Human colonization or terraforming, probably will occur in the near future-50 years-out of the need for humans to circumvent a Malthusian population explosion of 8-9 billion followed by a populaiton crash to 1-2 billion by 2125.
This being, one of the negative aspects of moral and ethical reasoning--do humans have the right to have a second "Earth-like" home over biologically and evolutionary unique indigenous Martian microbes and bacteria?
The 'terraformers' vision of glass domes and underground tunnels of chemical factories pumping gases into the Martian atmosphere for 800-900 years--is very romantic writing--as the Martian Oceans form and plains of genetically engineered plants take root.
It might be that the scientist and political leadership, out of the need to extend human life and biological organism in the solar system, might decide to jump-start Mars. Having Phobus lowered to impact the planet, starting the geological and hydrological processes. Thus, adding gases to the atmosphere through volcanic eruptions, heating the surface and releasing the water-ice and carbon dioxide in the polar regions. If that were to occur, then other scientist could develop PhD Thesis on how to proceed with colonization and terraforming after a Major Impact Event formed an ocean/atmospheric system conducive to life.
65 Million years ago the Dinosausr Age ended because of an Asteroid. Human Society is looking for the next NEO event. So, having such an event take place on Mars over the next 15 years--might provide insight on how humans will surive a Malthusian population growth or Asteroid Impact Extinction on the Earth.

I still vote for D. radiodurans!

If there is life on Mars, we need to study it to understand a new biology. It may be that Martian life and Earth life have a common origin and/or similar biological processes, or it may be totally different. We will answer fundamental questions about Earth life.

If there is no life on Mars, then there will be no ethical issue with regards to exterminating a different biological realm. We could then colonize and terraform to our hearts content.

Some may say colonizing or terraforming Mars will ruin the natural beauty of Mars. That is easy to say when you sit in the comfort of your living room watching pictures from Mars on your TV. It is different if you are living in a mud hut in India, China, South America, Africa....

just wanna know if there was any plant life grown in MARS?