3 ms·
Seriously, you'd pick a planet undergoing a mass dying rather than one with all the support you need to live independently? Make a cot in a firestorm? And sure
by gnarmis 11y ago
Seriously, you'd pick a planet undergoing a mass dying rather than one with all the support you need to live independently? Make a cot in a firestorm?
And sure if you wanna assume the same tech as that used by us in Antarctica right now and somehow make an equivalence between that and a hypothetical self sufficient colony and all of the attendant tech.
I see lots of obvious upsides, as stated before. It's quite clear that there's massive upsides to sending people to Mars and working towards a self sufficient colony there. Namely, redundancy of civilization and the obvious economic and tech impact. Of course you should pursue this colony.
- AndrewKemendo 11y agoYes, I would rather be on a planet that has something left after a mass dying and a known history of it's growth cycles than a planet that has NOTHING LIVING ON IT to start with. Not really sure how else to say this, so I won't say it anymore.
- gnarmis 11y agoOf course it does in that example. 10,000 people living self sufficiently. Enjoy the fiery death while the others go on living, then.