Life Cycle of a Planet

     Those numbers are actually stagging but those costs are now normal for anything done by any governmental agency! The "plan" would never survive such expensive contracts, bid out by massive companies that have million-dollar-per-day coffee expenses, and use billion-dollar-one-time-use boring machines, along with the guaranteed cost over-runs, and the time delay that normally happens on every big job. At the end of each project, people would be let go after being paid, instead of now taking over the farm-store-business-home that they would be paid as their profit from the work that they and their families did.      The need for the water that would be prevented from entering and contaminating the seas and oceans of the planet is everywhere, farming, drinking, entertainment, cooling, the list could be much longer and the demand will many times still exceed how much freshwater will be available until the re-planting of the arid and semi-arid areas of the planet start to prod

      Both of these needs fall hand in hand with what every country in the world also needs, droughts and floods are a major concern all over the globe and massive water diverting infrastructure will stop both in their tracks if properly done. Moving water from an area that has too much, to where it is needed, while at the same time keeping mankind's pollution out of the seas and oceans of the planet. Will create whole new industry's that will by necessity also create jobs.      Creating 100 million small 20 acre farms with a 1-acre fish pond in arid and semi-arid areas of the planet, will require the corresponding number of people and families to own and work these farms. One of the main points of these farms is to provide ground cover, that will prevent sunlight from hitting bare soil and also increase plant respiration so that cloud cover is also produced.      Those individuals whose job is to direct water for glacier replenishments will also own a small farm nearby that wi

    As the planet has done for billions of years, or perhaps better seen as how plant life has adapted to changing conditions. While mankind tries to directly affect the growing conditions, too much sunlight, puts a cover over the plants, the planet increases cloud-cover to do the same. Not enough natural rainfall, bring in outside moisture, the planet uses the respiration of the plants themselves to increase rainfall. Not enough nutrients in the soils, due to mankind removal of plant life to feed animals and people, the planet removes little nutrients except by surface erosion so most nutrients remain in the soils. Plantlife that is eaten by animals is still returned back to the soils simply a bit farther away from where it was used at. Mankind needs to constantly replace nutrients that are the very reason for growing crops or livestock so that those nutrients are used for life, but instead of recycling those nutrients back onto the land they were removed from, we simply bring in more

      The reasons why replenishment may be less than death rates can be caused by many factors, but normally in most of life, a balance is struck where replenishment is very much greater than the ones doing the replenishment because so few make it to maturity! The number of seeds that most plants produce is thousands of times greater than needed because of this. Many times the species at what we consider the top of the food chain needs to limit their reproduction to fit their food source. Lions, wolves, only allow the pack's leaders to mate and produce young that all the rest protect. Meaning that there are many more"Aunts" than mother's, and "uncles" are driven off or killed!       Even with many of the top predator's food sources, while most females are bred to produce the necessary next-generation, many times only one male is allowed to mate many females and only after proving their strength and intelligence over other males, giving each offspring the

      Why is this relevant? That was so long ago and are there not many possible explanations for each atmosphere as it is now? I do not believe that there are other explanations that fit. Life has caused the massive changes that the Earth has seen over the 3.5 billion years that life has been on the planet. while on Venus no matter how much of the carbon dioxide has increased in its atmosphere due to volcano production over that same time frame it still had the same total percentage-wise of carbon on each planet in the beginning.       On Earth, plant and animal life would always cause the carbon dioxide in the atmosphere to become sequestered over time while on Venus there was no such chain of events that would pull carbon dioxide out of the planet's atmosphere in any great amounts. Perhaps some would precipitate out of the atmosphere but there would be little chance of that causing any long-term effects on a total load of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. Any gases would feel th

       Venus has an atmosphere 92 times as thick as the Earth's atmosphere, and its composition is 96.5% carbon dioxide. So how much total carbon dioxide is that. We know our planet's atmosphere quite well, and at 400 parts per million of carbon dioxide in this atmosphere equates to 800 gigatonnes. Therefore, since Venus is slightly smaller than our planets at only .81%, you take 800 X .81= 720 gigatonnes. Now times that by 2,412.5 (since 400 parts per million goes into 965,000 parts per million 2412.5 times) that equals 1,737,000 gigatonnes per atmosphere equivalent, then times that by 92 atmospheres =159,804,000 gigatonnes of total carbon dioxide in Venus atmosphere! Earth's total carbon dioxide load would then be slightly higher due to its larger size at around 190,166,760 gigatonnes. Alas and thankfully, the vast majority of Earth's carbon has been sequestrated underground and on its surface as mainly some type of rock! Limestone, marble, so many of the planet's

      But little parts of my plan seem to be slowly creeping into some of the writing I have read. Cloud cover as helping to increase sunlight reflected back into space, and using plant covering to reduce the amount of sunlight being converted into heat upon contact with bare ground, and instead changing it into energy for plant growth! Then just yesterday using water from the Pacific Ocean to replenish Lake Mead, of course, they will need to desalinate the water to make the water potable, instead of collecting all of the natural freshwaters and not allowing any of it to enter the seas and oceans in the first place. In doing water collection this way, manmade pollution is never allowed into the seas and oceans, all of the run-off silts, loam and clay soils, and farm nutrients, are recycled back onto agricultural lands.      Picking and choosing what parts of the "plan" can make themselves money, will never come close to doing what needs to be done to re-establish the planet&#

    Does that give mankind "carte blanche" to do anything we want on the planet, since we have already extended all carbon-based life by at least a few thousand years? The question is really irrelevant, in saving all carbon-based life for several thousand years we really saved ourselves, and without other carbon-based life, we would also become extinct.         Saving the planet is not a one-time action, as if we had successfully diverted  another giant asteroid as large as the one that wiped out the dinosaurs and most of life at that time! But neither is it just trying to maintain the "status quo" of having just the right amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere!       The weather, and the climate, of this planet, as it is now, have too many factors with which mankind can help to change to reduce extreme weather events around the planet. Without re-starting much of the lost temperature-regulating ability of the planet! This includes increasing soil cover by plant

      When I was in school, I read much of what Edgar Rice Burroughs wrote. One idea that he wrote about was destiny, he wondered who fulfilled their destiny better, mankind or the great apes of the forest? What is destiny, is it the total sum of a species' progress. or the single individual's purpose? Or only a concept that mankind wants or needs to believe in? Every species of life alive today is only here, because of past life that came and went, changing the very atmosphere or soil so that other adaptions were required for another type of life to continue.     The eternal question, of why we (mankind) are here, has been studied, debated, religions formed, and wars fought, all in an attempt to answer a question that may have no answer or one that we are simply not ready for yet! For us to suddenly find a reason for mankind to show up at just the right time, to save all carbon-based life is a staggering prospect, that was in truth a million years or more in the making!