Keep off the red planetby Oliver Morton / August 20, 2000 / Leave a comment
Published in August 2000 issue of Prospect Magazine
The moon, when we got there, turned out to be a dead place from which the living earth looked wonderful. Mars, when our robots got there, seemed disconcertingly like the moon, without the compensating view: none of the primitive plants suspected by scientists; no imperial canals like those of Edgar Rice Burroughs’ Barsoom stories. Just dust.
The original architects of the space age saw Mars as the obvious next destination beyond the moon, a challenge which would require fleets of spacecraft and, later, research stations, settlements, even colonies far from the earth. There were many practical and (above all) political reasons why this dream was not to be-but the disconcerting deadness of Mars itself certainly played its part, and so did the glorious sight of the earth rising over the limb of the moon. When the most wonderful thing in the solar system is the thing you already live on, why emigrate?
Barren as it looked at first sight, though, Mars continued to fascinate scientists, and they built up an increasingly complex picture. The impression of a moon-like surface provided by the first probes in the 1960s gave way, in the 1970s, to a planet with a more intriguing history. A picture of Mars emerged in which the planet had once been active and exciting: its atmosphere thicker and warmer, its surface cut by rivers and scoured by floods, and life a distinct possibility. But this period was brief and long, long ago. Mars was now the mummified husk of this vibrant child.