A pale cloud of water ice drapes over the Tharsis volcano on Mars
NASA/JPL/MSSS
Before humanity ventured to Mars, the planet was desolate. Yet, it underwent significant geological activity, with processes of accretion, melting, and cooling, creating its distinctive features like craters, canyons, and volcanoes—all occurring in silence, without witnesses. Aside from those observing from afar, only in the most recent chapters of its history has Mars witnessed consciousness.
The allure of Mars has captivated humanity throughout the ages. This planet, a prominent celestial body for prehistoric civilizations, displayed red hues and variations in brightness, hinting at a story. Its ancient names—Nirgal, Mangala, Aukak, and Harmakis—echo with a weight that transcends time, almost fossilized from an era long past. For millennia, Mars has symbolized profound forces, representing blood, conflict, and passion.
The advent of the telescope revealed a small, orange disk with polar ice caps and shifting dark markings, shaped by seasonal changes. Yet, these early observations led to fantastic tales of a dying world, enriched by the imagination of astronomer Percival Lowell, who spun stories of desperate Martians constructing canals to combat encroaching deserts.
This compelling narrative captivated the public. However, with the Mars Mariner and Viking missions, our understanding of the planet transformed dramatically. We now possess a wealth of knowledge about Mars, far surpassing any previous understanding, revealing an unexpected world full of new possibilities.
Despite the excitement, Mars appeared lifeless. Researchers sought any evidence of life, from microbial forms to ancient civilizations, but none was found. Just as in previous eras, stories proliferated to fill this void—tales of microfossils obscured by geological layers, ruins buried within sandstorms, and mythical figures that emerged from the Martian lore. These narratives help animate Mars, a cherished symbol echoing humanity’s innate curiosity and storytelling instincts.
Thus, we came to Mars. What began as an abstract concept now stands as a tangible destination.
This excerpt is from Kim Stanley Robinson’s thought-provoking book, Red Mars, featured in New Scientist Book Club’s latest recommendations. Join us and delve into the world of literature together here.
2026 marks a significant milestone as humanity embarks on its bold journey to colonize Mars.
Later this year, NASA’s ESCAPADE rover is set to launch towards Mars, laying the groundwork for future manned missions. For more details, read about the rover’s objectives here.
Future settlers aim to create self-sustaining cities on Mars, transforming its harsh landscape and opening new possibilities for humanity beyond Earth. This endeavor also has the potential to extend the survival of human consciousness.
Elon Musk has expressed his ambition to land on Mars within two years, as noted in 2024 on X. He has often referenced Kim Stanley Robinson’s acclaimed novel, Red Mars, published in 1992.
Set in 2026, Robinson’s narrative doesn’t rely on extraterrestrial conflicts or futuristic technologies. Instead, it delves into the ethical dilemmas faced by humans, highlighting debates surrounding the sanctity of intelligent life versus the need for solar system exploitation.
Robinson’s prophetically accurate depiction of the future includes a world dominated by powerful multinational corporations, overshadowing the United Nations. The author suggests that the UN operates as a mere tool for these corporations, predicting a future where corporate interests dictate global affairs.
His vision resonates with early predictions by Pulitzer Prize-winning science writer David Dietz, who forecasted rampant resource overexploitation and an increase in competition, leading to rising prices and a decline in luxury goods.
Robinson’s Red Mars illustrates how future generations will navigate environmental challenges. Climate change is a key factor motivating humanity to leave Earth, and the protagonist, Anne Claiborne, views Mars as a new beginning rather than a mere resource. “You can’t simply erase the surface of a planet that’s 3 billion years old,” she notes during discussions on terraforming.
The character Frank Chalmers reflects on past ecological disasters on Earth, drawing parallels to today’s ambitious “climate megaprojects,” such as glacier stabilization and large-scale re-greening efforts.
Red Mars also continues the tradition of classic speculative fiction, focusing on human conflict and societal division as the settlers grapple with how best to cultivate their new home. This central theme is further developed in Robinson’s sequels, Green Mars and Blue Mars.
Anne’s concerns about the ethical implications of creating breathable air on Mars echo a profound respect for potential undiscovered native life. “It would be unscientific and, worse, immoral,” she asserts.
The depth of Robinson’s characters and narratives makes Red Mars a treasured work, earning both the Nebula Award and the British Science Fiction Society Award, and has been subject to numerous attempts at a screen adaptation, including interest from director James Cameron before he focused on the Avatar universe.
The prequel, Green Mars, was also included in NASA’s Mars rover Phoenix lander in 2006 as part of an interplanetary library, a nod to Robinson’s influence on the genre to this day.
Outside of his Mars Trilogy, Robinson has expressed caution regarding future technological advancements and governance in his works. His novel, 2312, published in 2012, envisions a world facing extreme heat and rising sea levels while reflecting on humanity’s slow response to climate issues.
In the same year, he addressed the future of technology and society at the Humanity+ conference, emphasizing the need for inclusivity in tech advancements, stating, “[It] has to be for All People Plus,” hinting at underlying societal tensions.
The New Scientist Book Club is currently reading Red Mars by Kim Stanley Robinson. Join us for a collective reading experience here.
Feedback is New Scientist A popular figure who keeps up with the latest in science and technology. To provide feedback on topics you think may interest our readers, please reach out via email at feedback@newscientist.com.
NASA Surveillance
Some stories elude my interest in feedback. With over 8 billion people on the planet, many hold on to misguided beliefs, and countless individuals have internet access, phones, and mailboxes. I simply cannot engage with the flood of unrefined ideas that arise. Feedback— I refuse to become the person depicted in the XKCD comic who loses sleep over the phrase, “someone on the internet is wrong.”
Recently, it barely grazed the news that Kim Kardashian seems to think NASA staged the moon landing in 1969. She mentioned the same on her reality TV show The Kardashian Family, which features her mother and sisters.
Kardashian allegedly misinterpreted her chat with Buzz Aldrin, the second man on the moon. At one point, Aldrin remarked: “That never happened.” He meant there was no frightening incident during the mission, but Kardashian seemed to conclude that it implied the entire mission was faked. This is a quite audacious assertion, especially given Aldrin’s previous criticisms of moon landing conspiracy theories.
Instead of spouting mockery at the Kardashians’ misunderstanding, let’s focus on what lies ahead. According to the BBC, NASA’s Acting Administrator Sean Duffy has “invited Ms. Kardashian to the Kennedy Space Center for the Artemis moon mission launch.”
Duffy might soon wish he hadn’t set that precedent—publicizing nonsensical conspiracy theories through mainstream media appears to yield exclusive tours of NASA. Feedback has desired to visit Mission Control for ages, and we think we could propose better theories than “faking the moon landing.”
Do you know why it took 9 years for the New Horizons spacecraft to reach Pluto? Because NASA was secretly moving the planet further away from Earth to make it seem smaller, enabling the downgrade from planet status to dwarf planet.
Similarly, have you pondered the realism of Martian? Deep NASA (akin to the Deep State, but more effective) would have you believe it’s due to author Andy Weir’s research. In truth, they clandestinely left astronauts stranded on Mars during the ’90s. The premise is based on a video diary he recorded before being terminated by a robot with a heat ray.
We eagerly await the invitation from NASA.
Middle of Saturday
Previously, we delved into the concept of Scunthorpe problems. Harmless words may encompass strings that seemingly offend automated moderation systems lacking context (October 11). We thought we had concluded this matter, but Peter Lloyd has informed us about an earlier iteration of this issue.
On a Saturday afternoon in the ’70s, he recounts: Grandstand begins. ” For younger audiences and those outside the UK, Grandstand was a sports show aired every Saturday afternoon. Depending on your stance on televised sports, it was either a delight or a nuisance in an era with limited television options.
“Suddenly, one word flashed across the screen,” Peter recalls. “I was taken aback! Why would the BBC display TURD on my television? After a brief delay, the image zoomed out to reveal ‘SATURDAY ON BBC1’.”
Just Imagine!
If you haven’t heard yet, submit your work for the upcoming issue by Friday, December 5th. Check out the Imagination Research Journal.
Feedback was previously unaware of this publication, but we’ve taken some time to discover its essence. “We publish imaginary research abstracts, which are short fictive pieces that mimic the format of traditional academic work,” the editors express. An abstract serves as a synopsis of scholarly articles, offering a brief overview of prior research.
If we understand this correctly, the aim is to craft short fiction that is formatted as a mock summary of a research paper. We reviewed the ten most recent volumes. Some of the summaries/stories are quite amusing and effectively parody academic literature.
We particularly enjoyed Edward Loveman’s piece, “Being In-Between: A Sensory Autoethnography of Otherworldly Life,” which recounts “scholars capable of traversing dimensions (hyperdimensionality).” Unfortunately, Loveman notes, “Such research is often met with skepticism, cruelty, and disdain within both academia and the wider public.”
However, he argues that it symbolizes a “unique, ever-evolving, fluid connection to existence that surpasses temporality.”
Similarly, Soyoung Park’s submission queries: “Can research succeed without a research question?” in which a “group of doctoral students” engages in “an intensive coffee session,” disclosing that “their challenge was not the questions themselves, but the essence of questioning, a process that fundamentally implies and necessitates an answer.”
Feedback suspects that Imagination Research Journal could become a staple feature here. It’s a pity it’s only published once a year.
Have a story for Feedback?
You can submit your article to Feedback at feedback@newscientist.com. Please include your home address. This week’s and past feedback can be found on our website.
New Zealand’s justice minister has announced that Kim Dotcom will be extradited to the United States to face criminal charges related to the file-sharing site Megaupload. This decision could finally bring an end to a legal battle that has spanned over a decade.
Kim Dotcom, a German-born resident of New Zealand, has been contesting his extradition to the US since a 2012 FBI-ordered search of his Auckland home. Despite repeated legal challenges, New Zealand’s courts have upheld the decision for his extradition, with the country’s Supreme Court affirming the ruling in 2020.
Justice Minister Paul Goldsmith has signed the extradition order for Dotcom, stating, “Having carefully considered all the information, I have determined that Mr. Dotcom should be extradited to the United States to stand trial.”
Dotcom, who is facing charges including money laundering and copyright infringement, has argued against being held accountable for the actions of users on his site. Despite his claims, the courts have ruled in favor of his extradition, citing violations under New Zealand law.
US authorities allege that Dotcom and other Megaupload executives caused significant financial losses to film studios and record companies by profiting from copyrighted material shared on the website.
Following the shutdown of Megaupload, the site was rebranded as Mega in 2013 with a New Zealand domain. Dotcom is no longer associated with the company, which now focuses on online privacy services.
Megaupload executives who were arrested alongside Dotcom have faced legal consequences, with some striking plea deals and others receiving sentences. The unfolding legal saga has drawn attention to issues of copyright infringement and online file-sharing.
This website uses cookies so that we can provide you with the best user experience possible. Cookie information is stored in your browser and performs functions such as recognising you when you return to our website and helping our team to understand which sections of the website you find most interesting and useful.
Strictly Necessary Cookies
Strictly Necessary Cookie should be enabled at all times so that we can save your preferences for cookie settings.
