4 ms·

>yet there has been no substantial development of Martian habitat technology. This is, in a word, wrong: https://www.space.com/26267-china-lunar-palace-space-

• summerlight 4y ago
  To my eyes, those don't look like qualifying the word "substantial development". If you want to seriously take Mars colonization as a survival strategy for human species, you need a way to either implant most of the modern infrastructure in a massive scale (at least for hundreds of millions, otherwise the society won't sustain by itself) or develop a novel technology to terraform the planet into a human livable form within a reasonable budget. At that moment, we can talk about Martian habitat.
  • JumpCrisscross 4y ago
    > If you want to seriously take Mars colonization as a survival strategy for human species, you need a way to either implant most of the modern infrastructure in a massive scale (at least for hundreds of millions, otherwise the society won't sustain by itself) or develop a novel technology to terraform the planet into a human livable form within a reasonable budget. At that moment, we can talk about Martian habitat. We cannot sustain a million people on Mars just yet. That's a far cry from claiming there has been no progress. For that claim to sustain, the British Bombe was a dud for not being able to run one's taxes. THAT SAID: the monarchist Thiel acolytes pushing Mars to profit off surveillance contracts while trashing anything resembling a response to our climate crisis can go stuff it. They are not only destroying what we have. They are, in the long run, undermining the Mars project as well.
• MichaelCollins 4y ago
  At the pace those developments are progressing, maybe you'll have a viable Mars colony in one or two centuries. A serious effort to develop Mars colony habitats to be used with Starship would look like the Manhattan Project. What you have there are glorified highschool science-fair projects.