ESA Venus Mission Delayed
MrShaggy writes "The BBC is reporting that the ESA has announced that they have to hold the Venus Mission. According to the article, contamination is being blamed. From the article: 'Esa said the delay had been prompted by the discovery that insulation from the rocket launcher had contaminated the Venus Express spacecraft. "The satellite is contaminated, so they will have to dismantle and re-mount it again," a spokesperson for the space agency told the BBC News website.'"
To me, this only means that the risk that we would be able to turn Earth into a Venus-like state is rather small. The problem just happens to be that (current) human cilization and activites are severly affected long before that. The current state of the climate might not be optimal, but many things rely on it. The worst thing is when that reliance on things being a certain way isn't even obvious to those most closely affected by any change, and/or those in power.
There is still no real proof that the current trend of climate warming is not part of a very long term cycle that us humans wouldn't know about, since our existence is but a blip relative to the Earth's age...
Actually, there is evidence concerning this very fact. The research is something like 10-15 years old (heck, I did a report on it in middle school ten years ago and it was old news).
Here's some links, Google for more if you want:h tm h tm
http://www.climateark.org/articles/1999/icecore2.
http://www.climateark.org/articles/1999/icecore2.
Here's some good images of analyses of the Vostok core samples fromt ok.co2.gif
http://www.androidworld.com/prod60.htm - http://www.androidworld.com/Vostok_Ice_Core.jpg
http://cdiac.esd.ornl.gov/trends/co2/vostok.htm - http://cdiac.esd.ornl.gov/trends/co2/graphics/vos
Ultimately, the data is generally interpretted two ways.
Just thought I'd mention that =]. Personally, I think it's part of a normal cycle, and that it's pure egotism that humanity can think they're powerful enough to inadvertently destroy a massive ecosystem that has been in place for millions and millions of years. I mean, Australia isn't a whole lot worse off than it was when us Westerners got there, and most people say we really bungled that one.
When you're afraid to download music illegally in your own home, then the terrorists have won!
Is this an excercise in unnecessary cleanliness, or does the spacecraft actually cease to function normally when "contaminated"? What's the point? I never quite understood this aspect of big government space initiatives.
Skiers and Riders -- http://www.snowjournal.com
It's a bit more complex than that... More pollution -> blocks sunlight slightly, lowers average temperature -> changes path of air currents slightly -> africa loses rainy season -> drought.
If it was happening uniformly it wouldn't have any effect... however industrialised countries are pumping a lot of crap into the atmosphere, so they're experiencing dimming more than non-industrialised countries.
This was also apparently a cause of the hot summers they've had in france that have killed several people (although they're french, so probably don't count).
I was a little unconvinced by the argument this was mainly caused by aircraft though - yes, their trails probably do make a small difference to the surface temperature, but they're talking about a couple of degrees drop due to it... which would take a *lot* of aircraft.