2 ms·
You need a huge group of people to even vaguely approach self sufficiency, or multiple generational advances in manufacturing. For example, if you are importin
by maxerickson 2y ago
You need a huge group of people to even vaguely approach self sufficiency, or multiple generational advances in manufacturing.
For example, if you are importing microchips, you are not self sufficient.
- mort96 2y agoOh I 100% agree. The very optimistic scenario is that a colony on mars is formed with a few people who depend on regular shipments from earth. The realistic scenario is that a colony on mars is not made this century. The extremely, wildly, super-optimistic, not gonna happen style scenario is that a few thousand people live there self-sufficiently; and my point is that, however unlikely such a scenario is, even that is nowhere close to enough, because the vast, vast majority of people would still have to deal with climate change. Moving to mars is not, and has never been, "a solution" on foreseeable time horizons.
- FollowingTheDao 2y agoIf I gave the impression that I thought we could go to Mars, I’m sorry, because I don’t think that realistic at all.
- mort96 2y agoThat is the impression I got, but upon re-reading your comment + context I see that I misjudged. ..However, what it looks like you said is that you think NASA wants the public to believe that going to mars is a solution to climate change? Am I reading that right? If so, what makes you say that? If this was SpaceX I might've agreed, but a lot of NASA's resources are spent monitoring the climate on earth to help us tackle climate change, and I can't recall any communication from NASA about how going to mars is a near-term solution to climate change. If I'm misreading you again, I apologize.