3 ms·

> We would just ruin Mars too. Well, considering that Mars is currently a frozen, low-gravity, toxic, airless, irradiated, soil-less desert with barely any wat

> We would just ruin Mars too. Well, considering that Mars is currently a frozen, low-gravity, toxic, airless, irradiated, soil-less desert with barely any water, no nitrogen to speak of, very few options for energy generation, no protection from cosmic radiation and constantly wrecked by planet-wide duststorms, I honestly cannot imagine how we could possibly make it worse, even if we actively tried.

maxlin 3y ago
This is the thing. Living on mars is something for the strong. Something that forces us to focus on what's important. With earth we may quickly swing from paradise to a total catastrophe. Which would be worse than mars and only reach mars-level after some time. Things that incentivize lazing away do not incentivize progress.
- usrbinbash 3y ago
  > Something that forces us to focus on what's important. Primarily, it would be something that forces us to send rocket after rocket of supplies there, wasting countless resources in the process for very little, if any, practical benefit. Because, no, there is nothing to be gained on Mars that can't be gained much more effectively via robotic probes, and no, a Mars colony will not be self-sufficient. Investing resources for no good reason, is to me the exact opposite of "focusing on the important".
  - maxlin 3y ago
    Saying putting 1% of earth's resources to have a chance, of let's say super pessimistically, 15%, of actually surviving as a species through and beyond an otherwise species-ending catastrophe, to be "waste" is so stupid. This kind of thinking would have us never have gone to the moon or even have utilized the loom. Robotic probes are irrelevant to colonization. It's like saying why don't Russians stop at just fly drones to Ukraine lol
    - usrbinbash 3y ago
      > 1% of earth's resources to have a chance, of let's say super pessimistically, 15%, of actually surviving as a species That would be a good investment, yes. Unfortunately, a Mars colony doesn't realize that investment. There wont be a self-sustainable colony on a planet, where even the planets gravity well (which we cannot change, unless someone has SG1-Asgard-level technology lying around) prohibits long term survivability of a species that evolved in a gravity well almost three times as strong.

maxlin 3y ago

This is the thing. Living on mars is something for the strong. Something that forces us to focus on what's important. With earth we may quickly swing from paradise to a total catastrophe. Which would be worse than mars and only reach mars-level after some time. Things that incentivize lazing away do not incentivize progress.

usrbinbash 3y ago
> Something that forces us to focus on what's important. Primarily, it would be something that forces us to send rocket after rocket of supplies there, wasting countless resources in the process for very little, if any, practical benefit. Because, no, there is nothing to be gained on Mars that can't be gained much more effectively via robotic probes, and no, a Mars colony will not be self-sufficient. Investing resources for no good reason, is to me the exact opposite of "focusing on the important".
- maxlin 3y ago
  Saying putting 1% of earth's resources to have a chance, of let's say super pessimistically, 15%, of actually surviving as a species through and beyond an otherwise species-ending catastrophe, to be "waste" is so stupid. This kind of thinking would have us never have gone to the moon or even have utilized the loom. Robotic probes are irrelevant to colonization. It's like saying why don't Russians stop at just fly drones to Ukraine lol
  - usrbinbash 3y ago
    > 1% of earth's resources to have a chance, of let's say super pessimistically, 15%, of actually surviving as a species That would be a good investment, yes. Unfortunately, a Mars colony doesn't realize that investment. There wont be a self-sustainable colony on a planet, where even the planets gravity well (which we cannot change, unless someone has SG1-Asgard-level technology lying around) prohibits long term survivability of a species that evolved in a gravity well almost three times as strong.