You are viewing a single thread.
View all comments View context
7 points

I heard sometime interesting regarding that recently, if we have the ability to terraform Mars, we’ll have the ability to hear on earth. So why not just fix it here where it’s millions of times easier than doing it on Mars.

permalink
report
parent
reply
26 points
*

The solution for Earth isn’t going to be some pie-in-the-sky terraforming (which, I’d like to note, means “to make Earth-like”) project, but changing our psychotic economic system that depends on infinite growth and consistently elevates the worst of us into positions of power.

That’s why I think we’ll never manage to unfuck ourselves. There’s just way too much power invested in keeping things the way they are

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points

Does that mean you’re for or against teroforming Mars?

permalink
report
parent
reply
11 points

I have nothing against the idea of terraforming Mars, I just don’t think terraforming is going to save us from ourselves.

Like I said I just don’t believe we’ll ever get to that point – because we’ll fuck things up on the only currently livable planet so badly that I doubt mass-scale industrial society will survive long enough for terraforming Mars to become relevant.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-2 points

Two things:

  1. Who says capitalism depends on infinite growth? I often hear that criticism, but I don’t see where it’s coming from? I’ve not heard a capitalist say this, only anti-capitalists. What is it about capitalism that requires this growth?

  2. Can you name anything, anywhere, which exists without growing? Doesn’t even have to be alive, just asking for any phenomenon that just exists without growing.

So I guess it’s one point expressed two ways: “Requiring constant growth” is not a valid criticism of our current economic system.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

The modern take on stock investment is to not give dividends, so the only way for shareholders to make money is to have the company grow indefinitely.

Obviously a capitalist won’t tell you that. My economy professor kept insisting that efficiency is always positive because it only concerns making a bigger cake, so there is more cake to be divided among the people involved, which he called surplus. In reality greater efficiency has a cost, and the cost is paid by people, while other people pockets the surplus. Fuck capitalists.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

We won’t have the ability to terraform Mars until we try to terraform Mars.

Perhaps Mars’s greatest contribution to our civilization wont be that it hosts cities or future life, but rather simply that it gave us a place to experiment so we could test things once before implementing them here.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

So why not just fix it here where it’s millions of times easier than doing it on Mars

¿Por qué no los dos?

Also, I’m not entirely convinced that the problems are analogous. Mars needs to be warmed up, Earth needs to be cooled down. I think a more appropriate challenge would be terragorming Venus.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

I have a feeling we’ll learn plenty of applicable lessons from one with the other.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

If we can teraform Venus we can teraform the galaxy. The planet is inhospitable in every single way. We can’t even land spacecraft that last very long. If materials don’t melt from the heat and disintegrate from the atmosphere, then the volcanos ought to do the trick.

It’s also harder to get to Venus than it is Mars.

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

Kurzgesagt did a video on the topic. We just build a planet-sized sunshade to freeze the atmosphere, launch the excess CO2 into space, and import water from the ice moons of the gas giants. Simple, really.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

Why not both?

Although Mars is still a terrible candidate for terraforming. It’s at the outer edge of the goldilocks zone, and even if you can solve the temperature, radiation, and atmosphere issues to create a viable ecosystem, it’s still going to cause problems for humans thanks to the low gravity.

Venus on the other hand could realistically function as a second earth if we clean up the atmosphere.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-1 points

Venus on the other hand could realistically function as a second earth if we clean up the atmosphere

The cost would thousand of trillions at least, in fact it may cost more money to do something like that than currently exists. We can barely fund NASA.

Frankly if humanity ever could get together politically to allocate enough resources to do anything like this, Im fairly sure a few greedy billionaires would stick most of those public funds in their pockets, and we’d end up with nothing at the end.

Im sorry to say Im pretty pessimistic about us as a species getting anywhere. Hell we’re 80 year out from WW2 and still struggling to control fascism.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points
*

No one’s trying to put terraforming Venus into next year’s budget. This is all theoretical talk about what would be possible to do some day.

The cost of terraforming Venus would be large, but the benefits of having a second habitable planet are also quite large. Even ignoring the benefits of having more land and resources, there’s also the just the fact that being on two planets means we can potentially survive as a species if something happens to one of them.

It would also have to be heavily automated, and only really becomes realistic once you have machines that are essentially self-sufficient at which point the concept of “cost” becomes a lot fuzzier. It would mean dedicating resources, but you aren’t paying an army of self-replicating robots.

However, the sheer scale of the task means that the benefits would only be seen many generations later. It would require extreme efficiency and long term planning with little tolerance for error. The kind of people who would make such an investment are unlikely to just hand the money over to the shadiest billionaire they can find. And it would be difficult to keep a scam going if they need to show continual progress decade after decade.

Maybe we’ll never see enough progress to overcome the kind of greed and short term thinking that would doom a huge, world-altering endeavor like this. But if that’s the case, it’s more likely that we’d just never try. All the more reason to keep pointing out what could be instead of just accepting the shittiness that we see today.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Just out of curiosity are you writing this from the Fertile Crescent?

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

ancient alien crazy hair guy appears

Okay but what if we lived in the moon

permalink
report
parent
reply

Space

!space@lemmy.world

Create post

Share & discuss informative content on: Astrophysics, Cosmology, Space Exploration, Planetary Science and Astrobiology.


Rules

  1. Be respectful and inclusive.
  2. No harassment, hate speech, or trolling.
  3. Engage in constructive discussions.
  4. Share relevant content.
  5. Follow guidelines and moderators’ instructions.
  6. Use appropriate language and tone.
  7. Report violations.
  8. Foster a continuous learning environment.

Picture of the Day

The Busy Center of the Lagoon Nebula


Related Communities

🔭 Science
🚀 Engineering
🌌 Art and Photography

Other Cool Links

Community stats

  • 1.5K

    Monthly active users

  • 297

    Posts

  • 2.4K

    Comments