Thread replies: 4
Thread images: 1
Thread images: 1
File: venus-mars-july_11.jpg (42KB, 446x240px) Image search:
[Google]
42KB, 446x240px
My professor is having a quiz where we rate the terrestrial planet's from 1 being the highest chance, and 4 bring the lowest. The last question is on the possibility of life. Of course I put Earth as number 1 and I put Mars as number 2. For Venus and Mercury I have no clue which has a higher chance for life. Mercury is a dead magnet with no atmosphere while Venus is a super acidic volcanic planet which is hotter than Mercury. The only thing going for Venus is the carbon dioxide and the fact that itleast it has an atmosphere. Which planet should I choose for my number 3 spot?
>>
I'm on my phone. After seeing my post I realize how cringe the picture and title are :S
>>
>>274608
Native life, or colonisation?
For colonisation both can work (and for native both are ASS), so in this case the question is probably designed to make you explain why you choose either of them. For example, you could say Venus has at least some chances for a low orbit research station, something like that.
>>
Definitely Venus over Mercury.
On Venus: https://web.archive.org/web/20110807004311/http://gltrs.grc.nasa.gov/reports/2003/TM-2003-212310.pdf
The only thing Mercury has going for it is that it has water (ice) but the conditions are far too inhospitable for any kind of life,
Thread posts: 4
Thread images: 1
Thread images: 1