3 ms·

There are many problems with this article, and this sort of thinking explains why mankind has been trapped in a counter-productive rut for the last half century

There are many problems with this article, and this sort of thinking explains why mankind has been trapped in a counter-productive rut for the last half century when it comes to space exploration. > Contamination Concerns around Mars contamination are hogwash. We want to contaminate the f out of Mars. We want microbes to infiltrate every nook and cranny of every crevice on the planet, just like it is on Earth. If there are indigenous species, they will compete, and the best will win out. If we discover something harmful to humans, we will develop vaccines or pesticides. The author must keep in mind that this is real life, not Star Trek with high-minded Prime Directives and some deep philosophical mission. Our mission is to colonise a new planet and make it liveable for the next billion humans. There is no Prime Directive. > Research and engineering for life support Yes, a lot of research is required to develop self-contained life support systems. It won't happen unless we do it. It won't happen if we focus only of robotics and automation. Human space exploration is the end goal. Dithering about with drones and robots is fun, but the real dream is a man (or 100) on Mars. > human physiology, physiological effects of partial gravity, risk the safety of the crew You cannot embark on a planet terraforming mission and not take on risk. The whole endeavour is risky. Not doing is also risky, we might not have a pleasant Earth in 200 years. Choose people who are of strong, sound minds (as best we can evaluate) and who are willing to risk their lives for a chance of going to Mars. We definitely should not wait around until we are technologically capable of sending a foolproof 200% safe-for-humans capsule. > “Mere failure to realize a long-term, aspirational goal is not fraud” Amen.

idlewords 4y ago
We want to avoid contaminating Mars before we explore it so we can learn more about the origin of life on Earth, and the distribution of life in the universe. It's not like terraforming technology is ready to go and the researchers are holding it back with unreasonable demands. A Mars landing brings your dream of colonization no closer while potentially ruining a scientific dream that is just as valid, and far more achievable.
komali2 4y ago
> The author must keep in mind that this is real life, not Star Trek with high-minded Prime Directives and some deep philosophical mission. Speak for yourself. I want the continuation of the human species, I don't want to unnecessarily genocide another untold number of species to make that happen. I similarly don't like when we cause species here on earth to go extinct. I think space agencies should adopt a Prime Directive. Do you believe the continuation of the human race requires genocide, here and on mars? That seems very zero-sum, I believe I can argue against this being necessary.
- kiratp 4y ago
  Speaking for myself, the Prime Directive is the survival of humanity. Any other altruistic Prime Directive (ala Star Trek) is a luxury affordable only by a species that has figured out a way past the eventual explosion of their system’s star.
- perryizgr8 4y ago
  > Do you believe the continuation of the human race requires genocide, here and on mars? No I don't think so. That's why I don't want to worry about "contaminating" Mars with our microbes. It's going to be ok. We should just do whatever it takes to fulfil our objective of settling on Mars. If our spaceship happens to land on a Martian anthill then too bad.

idlewords 4y ago

We want to avoid contaminating Mars before we explore it so we can learn more about the origin of life on Earth, and the distribution of life in the universe. It's not like terraforming technology is ready to go and the researchers are holding it back with unreasonable demands. A Mars landing brings your dream of colonization no closer while potentially ruining a scientific dream that is just as valid, and far more achievable.

komali2 4y ago

> The author must keep in mind that this is real life, not Star Trek with high-minded Prime Directives and some deep philosophical mission. Speak for yourself. I want the continuation of the human species, I don't want to unnecessarily genocide another untold number of species to make that happen. I similarly don't like when we cause species here on earth to go extinct. I think space agencies should adopt a Prime Directive. Do you believe the continuation of the human race requires genocide, here and on mars? That seems very zero-sum, I believe I can argue against this being necessary.

kiratp 4y ago
Speaking for myself, the Prime Directive is the survival of humanity. Any other altruistic Prime Directive (ala Star Trek) is a luxury affordable only by a species that has figured out a way past the eventual explosion of their system’s star.
perryizgr8 4y ago
> Do you believe the continuation of the human race requires genocide, here and on mars? No I don't think so. That's why I don't want to worry about "contaminating" Mars with our microbes. It's going to be ok. We should just do whatever it takes to fulfil our objective of settling on Mars. If our spaceship happens to land on a Martian anthill then too bad.