4 ms·

>overshoot, which leads to collapse Imagine, in 50 or so years, a fairly substantial human colony is established on another planet, and it figures out how to b

>overshoot, which leads to collapse Imagine, in 50 or so years, a fairly substantial human colony is established on another planet, and it figures out how to become self-sustaining. This self-sustenance act is what we need to refine - not the going to Mars bit, of course - but what I am trying to say is that the pressure is on to find self-sustaining ways to feed humans (hint: grow local or gtfo) at the very high end of the privileged technologically elite spectrum of the human misery scale, i.e. SpaceX versus the slums. If we can get to Mars and sustain, we can change the way humans on Earth live, in extraordinary ways. I'd even be willing to wager a bet that in 100 years, ones sovereign citizenship is going to be irrelevant - what will count, is whether you can make water towers into rocketships. (I don't see SpaceX as a rich mans game - I truly believe its a human response to the human disaster you talk about. If we can move manufacturing and food production into space, we may very well have a chance to turn things off in 100 years, and let Mother Earth just grow again ..)

AnIdiotOnTheNet 6y ago
First of all, 50 years is at least an order of magnitude off for realistic colonization of another planet. Secondly, there's plenty of land here on earth that is uninhabited and hostile that we could try self-sustaining colonies in first.
andrekandre 6y ago
the difference between a space colony and earth is that on earth we have a global economic system that demands infinite growth, and high disparity between producer countries vs consumer countires, which is the opposite sustainability just look at how many articles about how we generate more food than we know what to do with, yet people still starve or go hungry all around the world, or the vast differences between what is called the "global south" vs "north" i highly doubt we need a colony on another planet to teach earth how to be sustainable; the problem is the existing system refuses to change fast enough to make a difference

AnIdiotOnTheNet 6y ago

First of all, 50 years is at least an order of magnitude off for realistic colonization of another planet. Secondly, there's plenty of land here on earth that is uninhabited and hostile that we could try self-sustaining colonies in first.

andrekandre 6y ago

the difference between a space colony and earth is that on earth we have a global economic system that demands infinite growth, and high disparity between producer countries vs consumer countires, which is the opposite sustainability just look at how many articles about how we generate more food than we know what to do with, yet people still starve or go hungry all around the world, or the vast differences between what is called the "global south" vs "north" i highly doubt we need a colony on another planet to teach earth how to be sustainable; the problem is the existing system refuses to change fast enough to make a difference