2 ms·
I like Kim Stanley Robinson’s take: that humanity’s off-planet presence will be like our presence in Antarctica. We will put a bunch of scientists there and con
by rotexo 6y ago
I like Kim Stanley Robinson’s take: that humanity’s off-planet presence will be like our presence in Antarctica. We will put a bunch of scientists there and continue to actively support them there, because self-sufficiency is unlikely in such a hostile environment. It is hard to imagine anything else in my children’s or grandchildren’s lifetimes.
All the arguments about colonization of other planets strike me as tautological. We should have people on other planets because it would be good to have people on other planets, or we shouldn’t because we don’t have people on other planets and we do have them on Earth. So people will argue, and each side will direct the resources they have to their side of the argument. Not sure what else there is to be said.
- josefresco 6y agoHaving just finished a few of Robinson's books, your comment reminded me of (I believe) "Red Mars" in which there was a part where the first settlers returned to their camp from exploring Mars and remarked (rather sadly) how dirty and terrible looking their encampment was, in contrast with the beauty of unspoiled mars. They compared it to scientific outposts on Antarctica.
- rotexo 6y agoIndeed! KSR has clearly had a change of thinking about terraforming since the Mars trilogy. I asked him about it at a reading he did from Red Moon, and he responded with the Antarctica analogy I described above.