that is the radar imaging of Venus' surface. none of the surface features of Mars are visible in the one spin around its axis it takes.

That was very obviously Valles Marineris

@@kidmohair8151 so Venus has the same giant scar? go back and look, is clearly the scar from Mars

@@kidmohair8151 some are radar images of Venus. The one I mentioned is mars. The 3 volcanoes and vallis marineris.

@@jaredupchurch7819 and the three huge volcano’s too, Olympus Mons ..can’t remember the other two names 🤯❗️

As good a guess as any, although the aliens screwed up with not removing the greed section of brain which pretty much is costing our planet a lot and us as a race.

no

Earth today or Early Earth? Because Early Earth was nothing like it is today!

I suspect Hadean Earth and Hadean Venus were pretty much alike.

Earth and Venus are very close in mass and proximity to the sun, but Venus' days are longer than it's years and it has no moons.

@@RealUlrichLeland And it spins backwards lol. Venus is a weird one

I might have to look into that. I have never heard this before.

​@@blueabattoir the 'water' he's talking about is fused into the rock, it's not flowing water or an 'ocean', like the vanished surface water of Venus.

@@paulpenfold867this is correct.

The topic is "surface water on Venus" not other forms

We already know there are vast subsurface oceans on several icy moons throughout the solar system like Titan, Europa and Enceladus.

since you need the hydrogen, they would need to import a lot, because 3cm of water is really not much to live off for a planetary ecosystem.

For cooling, you can put "sunshades" between the sun and Venus. You could make them almost tinfoil-thick and cover a massive area with relatively little effort. Plausibly doable now, if you could find the money. There's too much carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. Sequestering some in the basalt crust, or the silicon dioxide in the mantle, might be options. Bombardment won't eject much carbon dioxide. Nudging an object from the Kuiper belt into Venus' orbit, with enough mass to potentially give Venus a new moon, is an idea. Directly removing the carbon dioxide is surprisingly difficult, courtesy of the high escape velocity and dense atmosphere (~90bar). Bombarding it with hydrogen does get you two birds with one stone; turning carbon into graphite and oxygen into water. You'd only need something in the range of 40,000,000,000,000,000 tonnes. On the more theoretical side, you could build a large "stellaser", that would draw both power and hydrogen directly from the sun, to "shoot" hydrogen at Venus. If you do manage to thin Venus' atmosphere, congratulations! Courtesy of the planet's slow rotation speed, there's now a massive temperature difference between sun-side and dark-side. Might have to expand those solar shades to regulate an artificial day/night cycle. Also, you still don't have a proper magnetosphere. Serious terraforming of planets is an arduous, and typically destructive, process.

Need hydrogen. If we were seriously interested in terraforming Venus, “easiest” way might be steering comets into it which adds water/hydrogen (but also, energy).

The Bosch reaction would be the easy one (hydrogen + CO2 in the presence of an iron catalyst produces graphite and water), and it produces energy, so it's got a great cost/benefit ratio if you're thinking terraforming thoughts, but you'd need to import the hydrogen, which would be a long and laborious process; you'd either have to truck it in from the outer system gas giants (probably Uranus, least steep gravity well) or somehow harness the solar wind. This is a centuries to millennia type of project, realistically.

First you need to have Space Tug boat ships. Then send those space tug boats to tow any huge ice rocks over the very "vast" distances required to find them by scanning the solar system... most of them may be found closer to the Asteroid Belt and beyond and the towing has to be very controlled... Next drop those large ice covered rocks or hopefully higher percentage ice balls on to Venus. Next you will need a significant amount of ice rocks to drop on Venus...

Perish the thought.

Being "twatted" is the proper scientific term.

Russia already did - 3 times - and there's no life

@@splifsend Probes cannot even find life on earth. They have tested it.

The Soviets did it already : not a single probe can sustain the harsh conditions of Venus !

Oddly, no. With an apostrophe, it is a contraction for “it is”. Without an apostrophe, it is the possessive pronoun. Just one of many exceptions in English.

​@@markj3118 Sorry for confusion, i was actually substituting the word How instead of Why. This video seems to propose a method as a solution rather than a reason. We might learn How it happened, but unlikely we will learn Why ... any help with this. (Also i am curious about the its / it's dilemma now, thanks for another sleepless night! Lol joke)

No we don't

Great! Here's your no-prize medal 🏅

@@SylentEcho Better hand out another 8 billion no-prize medals or else the rest of the world will get upset for getting left out, and then pretend-cry like they're all perfect victims.

Grow up

I think that's part of what they're trying to figure out. But these time scales appear to be much longer than the 100-year scale climate change we hear about in the news that endangers our infrastructure and civilizations. Significant evaporation appears to be a 100 thousand or million year thing. On that larger scale, we also have Milankovich cycles that might freeze things again (ice ages).

@@zzappligator great reply

@@KootFloris Yes. On the few decades/century or so scale, we seem to be more in danger of having too _much_ water, albeit in the wrong places and contaminated (sea levels rising, deserts).

@@G6JPG And like they discovered in NL, Frisia 900x the accepted norm of PFAS

Yes. Even on Earth, where the gravity is significantly stronger than Mars and Venus, Hydrogen is still light enough to escape the atmosphere into space. The reason this isn't a big deal on earth is because almost all of our hydrogen is bonded to oxygen in water molecules, and because our atmosphere is protected from solar winds by our magnetic field. There is some water on mars, but it's all either underground, chemically bound in the rocks or frozen solid at the poles. The reason Mars has hardly any atmosphere anymore is because it's magnetic field disappeared a long time ago. The convection of molten iron in the core is what creates the magnetic fields of earth, but on Mars the core cooled down much faster than earth because it's 9 times less massive. Without a magnetic field, Mars' atmosphere was gradually blasted into space by high energy charged particles from solar storms.

Yes. Even on Earth, where the gravity is significantly stronger than Mars and Venus, Hydrogen is still light enough to escape the atmosphere into space. The reason this isn't a big deal on earth is because almost all of our hydrogen is bonded to oxygen in water molecules, and because our atmosphere is protected from solar winds by our magnetic field. There is some water on mars, but it's all either underground, chemically bound to the minerals or frozen solid at the poles. The reason Mars has hardly any atmosphere anymore is because it's magnetic field disappeared a long time ago. The convection of molten iron in the core is what creates the magnetic fields of earth, but on Mars the core cooled down much faster than earth because it's 9 times less massive. Without a magnetic field, Mars' atmosphere was gradually blasted into space by high energy charged particles from solar storms.

Mars has no magnetic field and thus the atmosphere isnt protected against the sun. The atmosphere is very thin because of it. And all water in the surface with it. However, beneath the surface water is protected

Asteroids are not always rocky... some are huge iceberg covered rocks in space.

Some kind of NFC action.

its true, same happens to earth. earth loses about 100 tons every day.

You need to do less drugs