3 ms·

This only works if your planetary colonies can survive without Earth, and even the most hysterically optimistic dreamer doesn’t see that on the horizon. We don’

This only works if your planetary colonies can survive without Earth, and even the most hysterically optimistic dreamer doesn’t see that on the horizon. We don’t even know how to make a biosphere work in a bubble on Earth never mind on Mars. A colony is not insurance against disaster if it relies on shipments of bacteria, seeds, and probsbly much more from Earth. Our eggs are in this one basket for generations to come no matter what we do, so let’s try to unfuck this basket.

ryanmercer 8y ago
>This only works if your planetary colonies can survive without Earth You can't make a self-sustaining colony without first making a dependent colony (well you could, it's just a hell of a lot harder, there's a lot we need to learn with a permanently staffed research outpost before we attempt to colonize).
- GW150914 8y ago
  We are so far from the goal of a “backup” for humanity thst there really is little point in considering it. We’re far enough thst it may turn out Mars isn’t an ideal choice either, and a deep ocean or series of orbital platforms makes more sense. We should definitely focus on the many steps between where we are now, and species survivability, with an emphasis on those steps which allow us to examine the next series. Dealing with radiation in affordable and non-crude ways, homeostasis I’m artificial ecosystems, the impact of varying gravity of human physiology across generations, growing food in a variety of environments, our relationship to the bacteria which live in and around us, and how to replicate those effects in the absence of our biosphere. Dozens of other make-or-break issues before we can even have an outpost on a place like Mars that isn’t a glorified death sentence. Colonizing Mars is nowhere close to a problem we know how to solve, unless by “colonize” we mean “stick some people there and try to keep them alive for as long as possible, while knowing that if Earth abandons them they’re dead.” We don’t even know if Mars is a good idea compared to other options we might invent or discover over the next century or three. Meanwhile I’d you want to survive a supervolano or asteroid, Earth is still a better bet than Mars. We still need Earth, and will for a long time, with a more likely Martian scenario being centuries of robots terraforming the planet in anticipation of human arrival, not humans arriving first in any serious way.
  - SubiculumCode 8y ago
    Necessity breeds innovation. Put smart people there, with some tools, and you better believe they will figure out how to survive more or less on their own, and yes after some failed attempts and death.
    - mnl 8y ago
      I hope the plan isn't sending the A-Team to Mars. People are trivializing this idea of bootstrapping a whole civilization in a very, very, very hostile environment and I don't understand why. After two weeks, there better be a reason for that kind of mental and physical toll other than the glamour of being in a hole in Mars. We should definitely talk one day about radiation, funding, a mass estimation for the equipment, how much it will cost to develop it -no one is selling minifactories for Mars today- and the business model of the whole thing, because if no one is paying for it, it won't even start to happen. I'd love to see people taking this seriously for once and stop visualizing only a successful outcome there's no reason to expect with the facts we have (or don't) as of today.
    - GW150914 8y ago
      Unless you’re volunteering to die on Mars in the name of progress that you may in no way enable with your death, your willingness to sacrifice others rings hollow. A bunch of corpses in holes on Mars won’t in any way accelerate progress, and the specter of it might retard progress. “They’ll figure it out” has to be one of the emptiest cop-outs I’ve heard in a space full of empty cop-outs and hand waving. Trying is necessary for success, but doesn’t in any way guarantee it. It’s also not as if Mars is some kind of lynchpin in a future of humanity in space, and if you focus too much on one target you’re blinded to other options. Keep more of an open mind and be a little less cavalier about killing people and things might turn out better than you’d expect. At least, better than the “build a mountain of smart-people corpses until the problems dissolve” approach can hope to achieve. Or think of it this way; what you’re saying is equivalent to saying that the problem of humans not being able to fly can be solved by taking a bunch of smart people up in airplanes and pushing them out without parachutes.
- rohit2412 8y ago
  Couldn't you make a self sustaining colony on Earth first? Why settle on Mars?

ryanmercer 8y ago

>This only works if your planetary colonies can survive without Earth You can't make a self-sustaining colony without first making a dependent colony (well you could, it's just a hell of a lot harder, there's a lot we need to learn with a permanently staffed research outpost before we attempt to colonize).

GW150914 8y ago
We are so far from the goal of a “backup” for humanity thst there really is little point in considering it. We’re far enough thst it may turn out Mars isn’t an ideal choice either, and a deep ocean or series of orbital platforms makes more sense. We should definitely focus on the many steps between where we are now, and species survivability, with an emphasis on those steps which allow us to examine the next series. Dealing with radiation in affordable and non-crude ways, homeostasis I’m artificial ecosystems, the impact of varying gravity of human physiology across generations, growing food in a variety of environments, our relationship to the bacteria which live in and around us, and how to replicate those effects in the absence of our biosphere. Dozens of other make-or-break issues before we can even have an outpost on a place like Mars that isn’t a glorified death sentence. Colonizing Mars is nowhere close to a problem we know how to solve, unless by “colonize” we mean “stick some people there and try to keep them alive for as long as possible, while knowing that if Earth abandons them they’re dead.” We don’t even know if Mars is a good idea compared to other options we might invent or discover over the next century or three. Meanwhile I’d you want to survive a supervolano or asteroid, Earth is still a better bet than Mars. We still need Earth, and will for a long time, with a more likely Martian scenario being centuries of robots terraforming the planet in anticipation of human arrival, not humans arriving first in any serious way.
- SubiculumCode 8y ago
  Necessity breeds innovation. Put smart people there, with some tools, and you better believe they will figure out how to survive more or less on their own, and yes after some failed attempts and death.
  - mnl 8y ago
    I hope the plan isn't sending the A-Team to Mars. People are trivializing this idea of bootstrapping a whole civilization in a very, very, very hostile environment and I don't understand why. After two weeks, there better be a reason for that kind of mental and physical toll other than the glamour of being in a hole in Mars. We should definitely talk one day about radiation, funding, a mass estimation for the equipment, how much it will cost to develop it -no one is selling minifactories for Mars today- and the business model of the whole thing, because if no one is paying for it, it won't even start to happen. I'd love to see people taking this seriously for once and stop visualizing only a successful outcome there's no reason to expect with the facts we have (or don't) as of today.
  - GW150914 8y ago
    Unless you’re volunteering to die on Mars in the name of progress that you may in no way enable with your death, your willingness to sacrifice others rings hollow. A bunch of corpses in holes on Mars won’t in any way accelerate progress, and the specter of it might retard progress. “They’ll figure it out” has to be one of the emptiest cop-outs I’ve heard in a space full of empty cop-outs and hand waving. Trying is necessary for success, but doesn’t in any way guarantee it. It’s also not as if Mars is some kind of lynchpin in a future of humanity in space, and if you focus too much on one target you’re blinded to other options. Keep more of an open mind and be a little less cavalier about killing people and things might turn out better than you’d expect. At least, better than the “build a mountain of smart-people corpses until the problems dissolve” approach can hope to achieve. Or think of it this way; what you’re saying is equivalent to saying that the problem of humans not being able to fly can be solved by taking a bunch of smart people up in airplanes and pushing them out without parachutes.
rohit2412 8y ago
Couldn't you make a self sustaining colony on Earth first? Why settle on Mars?