SPACEX | NASA | Space Exploration | Other Space Ventures

SebastianBlue said:
Haha, that is like saying your house is secondary to your bicycle.

This is the only planet suitable for mass human habitation that we will have access to for centuries.

And even if we do eventually find another planet we can colonise, it won’t be us peasants going, unless it is to work in indentured servitude.
Click to expand...
Very bad analogy that makes no sense
 
SebastianBlue said:
It is currently (and in the near future) much more feasible to build deep sea stations than a habitable station on the moon. There are many, many challenges that would need to be overcome with both, but the former is far easier than the latter, as the list of issues with living on the moon is substantially longer (including some pretty severe physiological problems that we’re not entirely sure we can ever overcome completely, without some truly transformative genetic engineering, that is).

And as far as colonising Mars, that is very, very far off in the future, if we ever end up doing it at all (there are very smart people that have made the case there are better places to colonise in our own solar system, much less outside of it).

I am a huge nerd who has been fascinated and obsessed with space travel and the idea of humanity colonising the solar system (and then far off galaxies) since I was very young. I’ve probably read a quarter of the science fiction and nonfiction ever written on the subject, that’s how interested I am in the concept.

But the more I have studied that aspiration—and the more I have talked to people far smarter than me trying to make it a reality—the more I understand that it is a monumental task that requires absolutely massive changes (and leaps) in not just our technology, but also our global culture. That’s even beyond the almost certainty that the vast majority of people on earth will never actually benefit from any eventual off-world colonisation.

We would need to completely restructure how humanity collaborates and is governed to support such an endeavour. Individual countries, companies, even entire unions of states or super powers will not be sufficient to be successful. This would be a global coordinated effort at a scale never seen in human history.

The problem I have with people like Musk—apart from his fascist, racist, misogynistic, grifting, and juvenile leanings—is that they are smart enough to know all of this but they choose to sell an unrealistic (perhaps unattainable) vision to the masses in order to personally profit, and in turn use the wealth generated to insulate themselves from the consequences of the actual real, immediate harm and cataclysms happening on the only known planet conducive to mass human habitation.

He’s not trying to save the planet via off-world colonisation or electric vehicles. He is trying to use those “projects” to get as much money as possible to subsidise his efforts to create apparatus that allows him to extend his life and possibly survive any cataclysm (either slower like climate change or quicker like an asteroid strike, even more severe pandemic, or even a Carrington Event level CME).

And, worse yet, he’s managed to dupe millions in to genuinely believing his farcical visions and helping to realise his salvation, with almost none of them (or their children or their children’s children or their children’s children’s children) ever standing to benefit from it. Almost no one will.

It is just infuriatingly sad to see.

Edit: I meant to link this great overview of why colonising Mars is an incredibly challenging endeavour that we are absolutely nowhere near being able to achieve. A lot of the things discussed in the video also apply to the Moon, which is still far easier to colonise than Mars.

Click to expand...

Thanks for that. I just don't get why the focus isn't on the nearest hiding places from disaster. For example underground, under the sea, in the atmosphere, in orbit or on the moon. Surely if you could get those accomplished first then you'd learn loads to scale out to protect more people, increase the quality of life, etc, etc.

Maybe those things are being worked on in the quiet. I just wish that they read my quality posts on this forum. Surely then they'd see that I'm worth getting on the list.
 
TonyM said:
Thanks for that. I just don't get why the focus isn't on the nearest hiding places from disaster. For example underground, under the sea, in the atmosphere, in orbit or on the moon. Surely if you could get those accomplished first then you'd learn loads to scale out to protect more people, increase the quality of life, etc, etc.

Maybe those things are being worked on in the quiet. I just wish that they read my quality posts on this forum. Surely then they'd see that I'm worth getting on the list.
Click to expand...
The wealthy are actually building luxury bunkers at a record pace…

The super-rich ‘preppers’ planning to save themselves from the apocalypse | The super-rich | The Guardian

Tech billionaires are buying up luxurious bunkers to survive a societal collapse they helped create, but like everything they do, it has unintended consequences
amp.theguardian.com amp.theguardian.com
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top
✖
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.