Half-Borg t1_j20dwyn wrote
It makes no sense to colonize the moon, there is nothing there we need. And even if, costs are much higher than getting it on earth. Colonizing Mars is just a fever dream of a mad man. Unfortunately the richest mad man on earth.
Psycho_bob0_o t1_j20evbk wrote
The moon has helium-3 and a weak gravity well.. Do you actually believe all space colonization is senseless?
s1ngular1ty2 t1_j20hgvd wrote
Yes it's senseless. It's a waste of money. The only planet worth any consideration is the moon for limited moon bases for scientific research because it's close enough.
Psycho_bob0_o t1_j20hzlu wrote
You'll be glad to know society has sided with you ;)
Half-Borg t1_j20k0vn wrote
At what do we do with the weak gravity well? Can we build space ships on the moon?
Psycho_bob0_o t1_j20kn8z wrote
That would be one option (though very far off) but if you want O'Neill cylinders outside of the earth's orbit materials from the moon would be much cheaper. You could also use the moon as a waypoint for deep space missions.
Half-Borg t1_j20lg8o wrote
I say that's off at least fify years, maybe a hundred
Psycho_bob0_o t1_j20lsxl wrote
You're probably right to be honest! It still is true though...
Half-Borg t1_j20mf0g wrote
I not against space colonization in general, but I don't see it happen in my lifetime. For now space is for the robots. Human will follow in the far future.
fitzroy95 t1_j20fvot wrote
Colonizing anywhere off Earth is a step to ensuring the long-term survivability of humanity. There are several things that can destroy human civilization that we can't stop. Probably won't kill humanity as a whole, but could send the survivors back to the stone age and they'd never recover
e.g. a "dinosaur-killer" asteroid. the eruption of any of the world's dozen or so Super-volcanos (several of which are over-due), etc
Taking humanity into space gives us a second chance, where right now, all our eggs are in 1 basket. and that basket is extremely fragile
s1ngular1ty2 t1_j20h4fn wrote
If something destroys the Earth we are dead because any Colony requires the Earth to send supplies to function.
Stop believing sci-fi. It's not real.
fitzroy95 t1_j20jy1c wrote
Any colony that is built off world is going to need to slowly become self-sufficient, growing their own food, mining and manufacturing. and Yes, that takes time.
and Yes, there will be a period where they are totally dependent on Earth, which is likely to last decades, but is certainly unlikely to last centuries.
Technology changes at a massive rate, and the minerals and resources available in space far outstrip anything available on Earth. Getting access to them is going to be hard, but far from impossible.
s1ngular1ty2 t1_j20kr6g wrote
No it won't because other planets lack the necessary resources and required supplies form Earth.
You are believing sci-fi and need to stop.
fitzroy95 t1_j20m3h2 wrote
No, I believe in science, technology, and humanity's rate of development.
Apparently you believe that we've reached our peak technology and will never improve.
I believe that the term for that is "Luddite"
s1ngular1ty2 t1_j20mexz wrote
No you believe in sci-fi because you don't have a strong foundation in technical areas. Colonizing other planets is sci-fi and not real and won't be probably ever.
It is that hard...
Half-Borg t1_j20jsrh wrote
First, a self sustaining colony is not automatically the same as a colony. Second, disregarding unlikely extinction events, and focusing on likely extinction events, it would make much more sense to finally do something about climate change.
fitzroy95 t1_j20kmrr wrote
> disregarding unlikely extinction events
"unlikely" ?
Most of the world's super-volcanos are overdue for an eruption, those are guaranteed to happen, the only question is whether the next one is next year, or in 1000 years.
The same applies to dinosaur killers. We've been hit by multiples of those over the millennia, we're almost guaranteed to be hit by another. That one is more on the range of millions of years statistically, but could still be tomorrow (but probably won't be).
Half-Borg t1_j20lnsp wrote
What makes the moon more habitable, than earth after an super volcano eruption?
fitzroy95 t1_j20n0o5 wrote
Humanity will still (probably) survive after a super-volcano eruption, but current technology and civilization is much less likely to. And once those are gone, they can never be rebuilt, because all of the necessary resources (minerals etc) needed to rebuild have already been used up, and those remaining are impossible to access without already possessing those technologies.
Having self-sustaining colonies off-planet means that technology and civilization can still survive, and be reintroduced afterwards. Getting them to the point of being self-sustaining, and having their own space-based manufacturing isn't a trivial task, but is very achievable within a century or so.
Half-Borg t1_j20ndy6 wrote
So far life has survived asteroid impacts and super volcano eruptions on earth. It hasn't on Mars. So why not build the self sustaining colony in Australia?
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments