|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: It ain't the kind of place to raise your kids?
|
LeRoc
Famous Dutch pirate
# 3216
|
Posted
Alright, I'm just going to throw this in here. I think that we should colonise Mars.
I admit that my reasons for this aren't fully rational. A lot has been said about the benefits this may bring to science, commerce, health. And that may well be true.
But to me this is also about a sense of purpose. There is this whole Universe out there, with so many possibilities. And we're just going to stay on Earth? That doesn't make sense.
(Please come to a conclusion quickly. The next launch window for Mars will be in 2018 ![[Smile]](smile.gif) )
--------------------
I know why God made the rhinoceros, it's because He couldn't see the rhinoceros, so He made the rhinoceros to be able to see it. (Clarice Lispector)
Posts: 9474 | From: Brazil / Africa | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
mr cheesy
Shipmate
# 3330
|
Posted
So do the benefits justify the potential costs? Should that even be part of the debate?
[sorry..]
[ 31. March 2016, 10:44: Message edited by: mr cheesy ]
--------------------
arse
Posts: 10697 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
LeRoc
Famous Dutch pirate
# 3216
|
Posted
quote:
mr cheesy: So do the benefits justify the potential costs? Should that even be part of the debate?
I'm not sure. Isn't the capitalist system supposed to be promoting innovation, moving humanity forward? Here it seems that our economical system is holding us back.
--------------------
I know why God made the rhinoceros, it's because He couldn't see the rhinoceros, so He made the rhinoceros to be able to see it. (Clarice Lispector)
Posts: 9474 | From: Brazil / Africa | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Humble Servant
Shipmate
# 18391
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by mr cheesy:
So do the benefits justify the potential costs? Should that even be part of the debate?
[sorry..]
The benefits are impossible to foresee, let alone quantify.
It could cost the Earth. If we have an escape route, could we potentially take even less care of our current home than we currently do?
Posts: 241 | Registered: Apr 2015
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
Utterly impossible. Not without $trillion materials breakthroughs which are probably utterly unattainable even with a trillion bucks of useless research like solving nuclear fusion, which would also be necessary.
Kim Stanley Robinson's superb Red, Green and Blue Mars trilogy is as fantastical as Tolkein.
Science fiction - robots, manned space travel, colonization - is all utter nonsense because of the energetics.
It's Earth or nowt.
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alan Cresswell
Mad Scientist 先生
# 31
|
Posted
Mars will never (well, in the plausible future) be an escape route from Earth. It will never be possible using chemical rockets to lift more than a miniscule fraction of our population out of our gravity well (although, once we've done that getting anywhere else in the Solar System is a piece of cake). And, if we can manage to develop an alternative launch mechanism then in the process we'll probably solve most of the problems on Earth and won't need an escape.
--------------------
Don't cling to a mistake just because you spent a lot of time making it.
Posts: 32413 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
LeRoc
Famous Dutch pirate
# 3216
|
Posted
quote:
Humble Servant: It could cost the Earth. If we have an escape route, could we potentially take even less care of our current home than we currently do?
Maybe, although it would be a rather long-term concern. We're far away from Mars being so comfortable to us that way can think "what the heck" about Earth.
If anything, I think that space exploration can help grow environmental conscience. Photographs like that of the Earth from the Moon and the Pale Blue Dot have already done that.
I'm not sure to which extent space exploration has boosted solar panel technology; I'm guessing that it has to some degree. There are probably other technologies as well that also have environmental uses.
And if people are going to live on Mars, letting nothing go to waste will probably be part of their mind set.
--------------------
I know why God made the rhinoceros, it's because He couldn't see the rhinoceros, so He made the rhinoceros to be able to see it. (Clarice Lispector)
Posts: 9474 | From: Brazil / Africa | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alan Cresswell
Mad Scientist 先生
# 31
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by LeRoc:
Isn't the capitalist system supposed to be promoting innovation, moving humanity forward?
When there is a likely short to medium term return on investment then capitalism does seem to work at developing new technologies. We're beginning to see that in launch technologies that for 60 years have been dominated by superpowers using over-grown ballistic missiles - in part because the space race gave them an excuse to research more powerful missile technology to carry their infernal MADness.
But, space is beginning to bring in commercial returns. Satellite communications, weather forecasting, positioning are all bringing in money. And, private companies are beginning to put their own equipment into orbit - and doing it very cheaply compared to the likes of NASA. Piggy-backing on that, private industry is developing launch capability that at least for small payloads should beat the missiles hands down in cost.
Mars, however, has no prospect of short or medium term economic return. At present about the only thing that would produce some return on investment is the sale of exclusive TV broadcast/streaming rights. And, that will be a fraction of the cost. You may find a few investors willing to put something into a venture with possible returns in 50 years. An investment when there isn't even an outline of what commercial returns there will be is not going to happen. For that you want donors, not investors.
--------------------
Don't cling to a mistake just because you spent a lot of time making it.
Posts: 32413 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
LeRoc
Famous Dutch pirate
# 3216
|
Posted
quote:
Martin60: Not without $trillion materials breakthroughs
I don't know how realistic it is, but the current projections of the Mars Society are around $55bn.
--------------------
I know why God made the rhinoceros, it's because He couldn't see the rhinoceros, so He made the rhinoceros to be able to see it. (Clarice Lispector)
Posts: 9474 | From: Brazil / Africa | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alan Cresswell
Mad Scientist 先生
# 31
|
Posted
Since the Mars Society FAQs say $30b there's a factor of two inflation in there somewhere already. Personally, I would expect another factor of two, or two, to creep in.
The biggest issue with the Mars Direct plan is that it requires a functioning nuclear reactor to be landed remotely on Mars and operate unsupervised for at least 18 months to generate the fuel for the return trip. To get permission to launch a reactor would require such a high level of safety that the costs will spiral rapidly, as will the weight of the launch vehicle as extra redundant systems are added.
--------------------
Don't cling to a mistake just because you spent a lot of time making it.
Posts: 32413 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Humble Servant
Shipmate
# 18391
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:
It will never be possible using chemical rockets to lift more than a miniscule fraction of our population out of our gravity well
That's all we need to preserve the species. Individuals without the resources or power will be expendable.
Posts: 241 | Registered: Apr 2015
| IP: Logged
|
|
LeRoc
Famous Dutch pirate
# 3216
|
Posted
quote:
Alan Cresswell: The biggest issue with the Mars Direct plan is that it requires a functioning nuclear reactor to be landed remotely on Mars and operate unsupervised for at least 18 months to generate the fuel for the return trip. To get permission to launch a reactor would require such a high level of safety that the costs will spiral rapidly, as will the weight of the launch vehicle as extra redundant systems are added.
Hmm, I'm not too keen on nuclear power. Of course, we've sent around 30 fission generators to space already, but I guess this one would be much bigger.
--------------------
I know why God made the rhinoceros, it's because He couldn't see the rhinoceros, so He made the rhinoceros to be able to see it. (Clarice Lispector)
Posts: 9474 | From: Brazil / Africa | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
no prophet's flag is set so...
Proceed to see sea
# 15560
|
Posted
What's the morality of Mars colonisation? Considering how well we have sorted out poverty, pollution, war. Dystopianly, perhaps we should noisily blow each other up and quietly poison and starve just one planet.
--------------------
Out of this nettle, danger, we pluck this flower, safety.
\_(ツ)_/
Posts: 11498 | From: Treaty 6 territory in the nonexistant Province of Buffalo, Canada ↄ⃝' | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Boogie
Boogie on down!
# 13538
|
Posted
I've only just got the reference in the OP
Whether it ever happens or not I think it's a great thing to strive for. Just like the moon landings, a lot of unforeseen good will come out of it too imo.
We humans need goals and aims or we tend to turn in on each other. A 'Mars race' between superpowers would deflect from all the pointless willy waving too.
--------------------
Garden. Room. Walk
Posts: 13030 | From: Boogie Wonderland | Registered: Mar 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
LeRoc
Famous Dutch pirate
# 3216
|
Posted
quote:
no prophet's flag is set so...: What's the morality of Mars colonisation? Considering how well we have sorted out poverty, pollution, war.
That's valid concern; no use going to Mars if we do the same bullshit there that we do here.
If Mars is currently lifeless though, at least we won't have to worry too much about poisoning and starving the planet.
--------------------
I know why God made the rhinoceros, it's because He couldn't see the rhinoceros, so He made the rhinoceros to be able to see it. (Clarice Lispector)
Posts: 9474 | From: Brazil / Africa | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alan Cresswell
Mad Scientist 先生
# 31
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by LeRoc:
quote:
Alan Cresswell: The biggest issue with the Mars Direct plan is that it requires a functioning nuclear reactor to be landed remotely on Mars and operate unsupervised for at least 18 months to generate the fuel for the return trip. To get permission to launch a reactor would require such a high level of safety that the costs will spiral rapidly, as will the weight of the launch vehicle as extra redundant systems are added.
Hmm, I'm not too keen on nuclear power. Of course, we've sent around 30 fission generators to space already, but I guess this one would be much bigger.
Yes, the reactors currently sent into space have been about 5kW, or less, and typically operate for a few years. And, least one of them has come back down to Earth spreading radioactive debris across a very large area. With at least two more launch failures where the core was ejected to splash down into the sea. A 5-10% crash back to Earth rate for nuclear reactors is simply not good enough.
And, the Mars Direct reactor would need to be significantly bigger, and ideally operate long enough to generate fuel for subsequent missions as well, so for 10 years or more. The Zubrin paper envisages a 100kWe reactor.
--------------------
Don't cling to a mistake just because you spent a lot of time making it.
Posts: 32413 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
A mere hundred billion dollar mission will only START a British Antarctic Survey level post.
This is just pathetic hubris, like nuclear fusion. And as Alan has said, if we can crack something like that, we can crack anything here on Earth.
But we CAN'T crack anything like that. Ever. Fusion or a space elevator. Going off-world needs both.
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Augustine the Aleut
Shipmate
# 1472
|
Posted
A scientist friend (sets of initials and a Canada Research Chair) once told me that she favoured a mission to Mars because this was the only way to get serious funding approved for basic research. She pointed out that the 1960s space exploration effort produced incredible collateral products and techniques, which have had much to do with the improvement of our quality of life, and the electronic productivity boom of the past 25 years. She was very convincing, listing lots of things which to which I did hot pay sufficient attention to retail to shipmates.
Posts: 6236 | From: Ottawa, Canada | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Pigwidgeon
Ship's Owl
# 10192
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by LeRoc:
(Please come to a conclusion quickly. The next launch window for Mars will be in 2018 )
If you could offer this trip for January 20, 2017 you might get a lot of Americans wanting to go, depending what happens on November 8, 2016.
--------------------
"...that is generally a matter for Pigwidgeon, several other consenting adults, a bottle of cheap Gin and the odd giraffe."
~Tortuf
Posts: 9835 | From: Hogwarts | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
HCH
Shipmate
# 14313
|
Posted
It is quite possible that human beings will not be able to colonize Mars due to its light gravity. By now there is quite a lot of data available about the effects of zero-G, but low-G is more of a mystery.
I would not assume that an expedition to Mars will necessarily travel unpowered on a doubly-tangent ellipse orbit. People have pointed out that one could build a continuous-thrust ship that would get there much faster.
It is quite likely that someone will build orbiting habitats, perhaps at the Lagrange points. I don't know that I would care to live there.
Posts: 1540 | From: Illinois, USA | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
SusanDoris
Incurable Optimist
# 12618
|
Posted
It seems reasonable to assume that, well within the billion or more years before this planet becomes impossible for human life, scientist will have discovered a means of moving us, or as many of the people still livingkk who can and wish to go, to some other suitable planet.
I suppose it seems daft to say so, but I am sad for those who will know, in that far distant time, extinction is not that many generations away.
[ 31. March 2016, 16:25: Message edited by: SusanDoris ]
--------------------
I know that you believe that you understood what you think I said, but I am not sure you realize that what you heard is not what I meant.
Posts: 3083 | From: UK | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
Humanity cannot possibly last that long, 1% if that.
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
LeRoc
Famous Dutch pirate
# 3216
|
Posted
quote:
Alan Cresswell: The Zubrin paper envisages a 100kWe reactor.
Yes, that's a rather big obstacle.
@Pigwidgeon:
quote:
HCH: It is quite possible that human beings will not be able to colonize Mars due to its light gravity. By now there is quite a lot of data available about the effects of zero-G, but low-G is more of a mystery.
Interesting. Are you expecting low-G to be much different from zero-G? What this tells me that it might be better to experiment with the Moon first. (At least we won't have to deal with launch windows.)
quote:
SusanDoris: It seems reasonable to assume that, well within the billion or more years before this planet becomes impossible for human life, scientist will have discovered a means of moving us, or as many of the people still livingkk who can and wish to go, to some other suitable planet.
I think you're talking about the time when the Sun will begin to expand, which will be more than a billion years from now. I agree with you that this will give us plenty of time to come up with a solution to move the whole population somewhere else.
Of course, there are many things that could threaten us before that. A large meteor. Or more likely, we ourselves.
--------------------
I know why God made the rhinoceros, it's because He couldn't see the rhinoceros, so He made the rhinoceros to be able to see it. (Clarice Lispector)
Posts: 9474 | From: Brazil / Africa | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Pigwidgeon
Ship's Owl
# 10192
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by LeRoc:
What this tells me that it might be better to experiment with the Moon first. (At least we won't have to deal with launch windows.)
A rather oddly-attired woman on public transportation a few weeks ago was trying to convince my friend and me that we* should colonize the moon since the gravity is 1/6 that of earth.
(* not the two of us specifically, but humankind in general I assume.)
--------------------
"...that is generally a matter for Pigwidgeon, several other consenting adults, a bottle of cheap Gin and the odd giraffe."
~Tortuf
Posts: 9835 | From: Hogwarts | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
LeRoc
Famous Dutch pirate
# 3216
|
Posted
quote:
Pigwidgeon: A rather oddly-attired woman on public transportation a few weeks ago was trying to convince my friend and me that we* should colonize the moon since the gravity is 1/6 that of earth.
According to her, what would the benefits of this low gravity be?
--------------------
I know why God made the rhinoceros, it's because He couldn't see the rhinoceros, so He made the rhinoceros to be able to see it. (Clarice Lispector)
Posts: 9474 | From: Brazil / Africa | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ariel
Shipmate
# 58
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by LeRoc:
Alright, I'm just going to throw this in here. I think that we should colonise Mars.
...
But to me this is also about a sense of purpose. There is this whole Universe out there, with so many possibilities. And we're just going to stay on Earth? That doesn't make sense.
It doesn't make sense to shove off to a cold dead planet where the main excitement is scrambling in and out of dusty red craters, clad in spacesuits because you can't breathe the atmosphere. I think it would be stultifyingly dull, and everything would have to be imported and therefore expensive, and you'd have to live under some kind of dome that enabled earth-type living conditions, gravity, light, heat and water.
If you're going to colonize, at least pick an interesting planet with water and plants that can support earth-type lifeforms. I can't see Mars as much other than a penal colony.
Posts: 25445 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Penny S
Shipmate
# 14768
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Humble Servant:
quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:
It will never be possible using chemical rockets to lift more than a miniscule fraction of our population out of our gravity well
That's all we need to preserve the species. Individuals without the resources or power will be expendable.
So the survival of the species depends on a small self selected bunch with money and a debatable ability to recognise the appropriate type of woman to perpetuate us. Trump? Murdoch? A gene bottleneck is not going to be a good thing.
Posts: 5833 | Registered: May 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Nicolemr
Shipmate
# 28
|
Posted
quote:
If you're going to colonize, at least pick an interesting planet with water and plants that can support earth-type lifeforms.
First we have to find such a planet. ( Mars does have water, btw, quite a bit of it actually. Just all tied up in ice.)
Mars is the first step in moving out into the stars. We aren't going to get any planet more habitable in this solar system.
--------------------
On pilgrimage in the endless realms of Cyberia, currently traveling by ship. Now with live journal!
Posts: 11803 | From: New York City "The City Carries On" | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Huia
Shipmate
# 3473
|
Posted
Oh goody! A whole new planet for people to ruin. One was not nearly enough ![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
Huia
--------------------
Charity gives food from the table, Justice gives a place at the table.
Posts: 10382 | From: Te Wai Pounamu | Registered: Oct 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
LeRoc
Famous Dutch pirate
# 3216
|
Posted
quote:
Ariel: It doesn't make sense to shove off to a cold dead planet where the main excitement is scrambling in and out of dusty red craters, clad in spacesuits because you can't breathe the atmosphere.
I see what you mean. I guess what you're saying is even more true about the Moon, which is basically a dull bunch of rocks. Mars is geologically quite interesting though. I find this video (2:20min) rather impressive. And of course, not everyone is like you. Volunteers are lining up to live on Mars.
And echoing what others have said, perhaps humanity living on Earth for the next billion years would be pretty boring too.
quote:
Huia: Oh goody! A whole new planet for people to ruin. One was not nearly enough
Like I've said a little earlier, if Mars is currently lifeless, I wouldn't be too upset about that.
--------------------
I know why God made the rhinoceros, it's because He couldn't see the rhinoceros, so He made the rhinoceros to be able to see it. (Clarice Lispector)
Posts: 9474 | From: Brazil / Africa | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ariel
Shipmate
# 58
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by LeRoc:
I see what you mean. I guess what you're saying is even more true about the Moon, which is basically a dull bunch of rocks.
The Moon gives me the creeps. It seems so dead and silent, and there's the dark side.
People are different and there won't be any shortage of volunteers to go and live on Mars. But I love the countryside on our own planet, and the wonderful variety of plants and birds and animals, and there wouldn't be any of that on Mars, no new species that you could enjoy getting to know (or I suppose be wary of/have to eradicate in order to live there safely). There's an incredible amount of variety (and beauty) packed into this planet and we're still discovering things about it. I'm not at all sure that Mars would have half as much to offer.
Posts: 25445 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Pigwidgeon
Ship's Owl
# 10192
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by LeRoc:
quote:
Pigwidgeon: A rather oddly-attired woman on public transportation a few weeks ago was trying to convince my friend and me that we* should colonize the moon since the gravity is 1/6 that of earth.
According to her, what would the benefits of this low gravity be?
She didn't really say -- perhaps she thought it would be nice to weigh less without having to go on a diet. She didn't strike me as being terribly rational.
--------------------
"...that is generally a matter for Pigwidgeon, several other consenting adults, a bottle of cheap Gin and the odd giraffe."
~Tortuf
Posts: 9835 | From: Hogwarts | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
LeRoc
Famous Dutch pirate
# 3216
|
Posted
quote:
Ariel: The Moon gives me the creeps. It seems so dead and silent, and there's the dark side.
Maybe there is a misunderstanding here, but there isn't a side of the Moon that always stays dark. All places on the Moon have days and nights, just as on Earth. (The difference is that one day-night cycle lasts a month.)
--------------------
I know why God made the rhinoceros, it's because He couldn't see the rhinoceros, so He made the rhinoceros to be able to see it. (Clarice Lispector)
Posts: 9474 | From: Brazil / Africa | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ariel
Shipmate
# 58
|
Posted
Still creepy. There wouldn't be any shortage of people willing to live on the Moon, but marketing properties that get no light for an entire month, or conversely, are floodlit for days on end, is going to be interesting.
Posts: 25445 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ricardus
Shipmate
# 8757
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by LeRoc:
quote:
Pigwidgeon: A rather oddly-attired woman on public transportation a few weeks ago was trying to convince my friend and me that we* should colonize the moon since the gravity is 1/6 that of earth.
According to her, what would the benefits of this low gravity be?
Less energy required to move stuff round, and therefore to manufacture stuff? Then use space elevators to transfer the stuff between the Moon and Earth.
--------------------
Then the dog ran before, and coming as if he had brought the news, shewed his joy by his fawning and wagging his tail. -- Tobit 11:9 (Douai-Rheims)
Posts: 7247 | From: Liverpool, UK | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
LeRoc
Famous Dutch pirate
# 3216
|
Posted
quote:
Pigwidgeon: She didn't really say -- perhaps she thought it would be nice to weigh less without having to go on a diet.
Heh, funny.
I know Zubrin is against it, but I wouldn't mind starting on the Moon. The way I understand it, it's getting more and more difficult for billionaires to find something to do with their money. That's why they keep buying Premier League teams and running for president.
Why can't we entice one of them to fund a base on the Moon? Let him call it Trump Base, or erect a tower there as a homage to his penis, whatever. He can do a reality TV show there if he wants. As long as the money keeps flowing.
At least the general public would get used to the idea of people living off Earth. We could have research there, some tourism, telescopes unhindered by an atmosphere … And we could test what it would be like to live based on machines that extract the things we need from rocks.
I think that all of this would make the next step to Mars much more natural.
--------------------
I know why God made the rhinoceros, it's because He couldn't see the rhinoceros, so He made the rhinoceros to be able to see it. (Clarice Lispector)
Posts: 9474 | From: Brazil / Africa | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
LeRoc
Famous Dutch pirate
# 3216
|
Posted
quote:
Ricardus: Less energy required to move stuff round, and therefore to manufacture stuff?
I know, I was just wondering what this woman said to Pigwidgeon.
quote:
Ricardus: Then use space elevators to transfer the stuff between the Moon and Earth.
As long as they won't use them to hurl rocks at Earth
quote:
Ariel: marketing properties that get no light for an entire month, or conversely, are floodlit for days on end, is going to be interesting.
It's two weeks of light, two weeks of dark. And I imagine that people will be living underground anyway?
BTW Earlier on this thread I referred to the 'Earthrise' photograph. I just realised that mr cheesy uses it as his Ship avatar.
[ 31. March 2016, 19:01: Message edited by: LeRoc ]
--------------------
I know why God made the rhinoceros, it's because He couldn't see the rhinoceros, so He made the rhinoceros to be able to see it. (Clarice Lispector)
Posts: 9474 | From: Brazil / Africa | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Lamb Chopped
Ship's kebab
# 5528
|
Posted
Why is it so important to preserve the species?
I'm rather fond of it, myself. But even I know that it's going to come to an end eventually. And if we're fool enough to make it a premature end by our own idiocy, perhaps we ought to do it in our current safely-contained planet, instead of spewing our screw-ups over other planets too.
Now you could talk me into extraplanetary travel on other grounds. But preserving the species, meh.
--------------------
Er, this is what I've been up to (book).
Oh, that you would rend the heavens and come down!
Posts: 20059 | From: off in left field somewhere | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
no prophet's flag is set so...
Proceed to see sea
# 15560
|
Posted
Well, if we're going to fantasize - planets outside our solar system are not going to be colonization destinations any time soon, if ever - I want to be on the USS Enterprise with Captain Picard. Exploring the galaxay and using the holodeck. And drinking prune juice with Worf or maybe some left over green stuff from Scotty's stash in the previous series (skip the synthahol please).
--------------------
Out of this nettle, danger, we pluck this flower, safety.
\_(ツ)_/
Posts: 11498 | From: Treaty 6 territory in the nonexistant Province of Buffalo, Canada ↄ⃝' | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Hedgehog
Ship's Shortstop
# 14125
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by LeRoc:
quote:
Ariel: marketing properties that get no light for an entire month, or conversely, are floodlit for days on end, is going to be interesting.
It's two weeks of light, two weeks of dark. And I imagine that people will be living underground anyway?
Considering there are cities on Earth (like Trondheim, Norway) that only get about ten hours of daylight in all of December, I suspect people could adjust.
Say what you will about humans, but they are adaptable.
Once one gets to Mars, how practical would it be to terraform it? Assuming you set up a huge greenhouse to keep things warm enough to grow, I would think it would still take Quite A Long Time to create a breathable atmosphere and manufacture a greenhouse effect so that one could live outdoors.
--------------------
"We must regain the conviction that we need one another, that we have a shared responsibility for others and the world, and that being good and decent are worth it."--Pope Francis, Laudato Si'
Posts: 2740 | From: Delaware, USA | Registered: Sep 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
LeRoc
Famous Dutch pirate
# 3216
|
Posted
quote:
Lamb Chopped: Why is it so important to preserve the species?
I'm rather fond of it, myself. But even I know that it's going to come to an end eventually.
Species preservation is one of the more far-fetched arguments for Mars colonisation. But I think there is a difference between accepting that we'll come to an end eventually, and not doing anything specific threats. If only because of our survival instinct. Or for our children.
quote:
no prophet's flag is set so...: planets outside our solar system are not going to be colonization destinations any time soon
True. This might be a very first step though.
quote:
Hedgehog: I would think it would still take Quite A Long Time to create a breathable atmosphere and manufacture a greenhouse effect so that one could live outdoors.
Yes, that would definitely be a longer-term project. I've seen it estimated at a couple of centuries.
--------------------
I know why God made the rhinoceros, it's because He couldn't see the rhinoceros, so He made the rhinoceros to be able to see it. (Clarice Lispector)
Posts: 9474 | From: Brazil / Africa | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
rolyn
Shipmate
# 16840
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:
We humans need goals and aims or we tend to turn in on each other. A 'Mars race' between superpowers would deflect from all the pointless willy waving too.
....so building a giant phallic rocket in a clamour to get to our moon and simply poke a pole in it wasn't willy waving?
Back to OP I suppose it might be alright to bring up kids on Mars, so long as you get them to wipe poisonous Martian dust off their shoes before coming in from playing outdoors.
--------------------
Change is the only certainty of existence
Posts: 3206 | From: U.K. | Registered: Dec 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
LeRoc
Famous Dutch pirate
# 3216
|
Posted
quote:
rolyn: ....so building a giant phallic rocket in a clamour to get to our moon and simply poke a pole in it wasn't willy waving?
It beats throwing rockets at each other (which I think is what Boogie was trying to say).
--------------------
I know why God made the rhinoceros, it's because He couldn't see the rhinoceros, so He made the rhinoceros to be able to see it. (Clarice Lispector)
Posts: 9474 | From: Brazil / Africa | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Boogie
Boogie on down!
# 13538
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by LeRoc:
quote:
rolyn: ....so building a giant phallic rocket in a clamour to get to our moon and simply poke a pole in it wasn't willy waving?
It beats throwing rockets at each other (which I think is what Boogie was trying to say).
It was
--------------------
Garden. Room. Walk
Posts: 13030 | From: Boogie Wonderland | Registered: Mar 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
HCH
Shipmate
# 14313
|
Posted
If you insist that we absolutely must have another planet and you take a long enough view, how about this: find a way to pull Venus farther out from the Sun, find a way to cool it down and then terraform it, perhaps starting with plenty of bacteria for photosynthesis. (Yes, there are serious engineering challenges, but given enough time, it might be possible.)
Posts: 1540 | From: Illinois, USA | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
LeRoc
Famous Dutch pirate
# 3216
|
Posted
quote:
HCH: find a way to pull Venus farther out from the Sun, find a way to cool it down and then terraform it
Heh, I've seen hypothetical methods that involve building an artificial ring around the planet.
I'd love to have a holiday in the lush forests of Ishtar.
--------------------
I know why God made the rhinoceros, it's because He couldn't see the rhinoceros, so He made the rhinoceros to be able to see it. (Clarice Lispector)
Posts: 9474 | From: Brazil / Africa | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
HCH uh huh.
Will we have conquered the common cold by then too?
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
georgiaboy
Shipmate
# 11294
|
Posted
All of you who have not done so should certainly read C S Lewis's 'Out of the Silent Planet.'
There's plenty of food for thought therein.
--------------------
You can't retire from a calling.
Posts: 1675 | From: saint meinrad, IN | Registered: Apr 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
Lovely tale. No food for technological thought whatsoever, ever.
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Kaplan Corday
Shipmate
# 16119
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Lamb Chopped:
Why is it so important to preserve the species?
C.S. Lewis: "For the species, as for each man, mere longevity seems to me a contemptible ideal."
Posts: 3355 | Registered: Jan 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Printer-friendly view
