Welcome to Tesla Motors Club
Discuss Tesla's Model S, Model 3, Model X, Model Y, Cybertruck, Roadster and More.
Register

Opposition to Mars

This site may earn commission on affiliate links.
I struggle with that : Why didn't the other advanced civilisations backup themselves?

There are likely enormous aspects to our reality that are completely unknown or even inaccessible to us. Perhaps intelligent technological life occurs about once per known universe.

Also, if humans are typical, we don't seem particularly interested in saving the life of people we don't know. No one alive today is going to be saved by humans becoming a multi planet species. Those living underground on mars might prefer to be dead anyways. The most desolate place on earth is much nicer than anything that will be built on mars for hundreds of years.
 
  • Disagree
Reactions: anticitizen13.7
I struggle with that : Why didn't the other advanced civilisations backup themselves?
We don't know anything about possible other advanced civilizations (and I question whether humanity is anywhere near "advanced" status right now).

We also do not know if interstellar travel will ever be possible. I think it will be possible a few centuries from now, if we don't destroy ourselves before then. But I could be wrong.

So other species could have spread beyond their home planet to other planets or moons in their solar system but were never able to achieve successful interstellar travel before their sun went nova.

There are many possibilities. Fun to think about. But we know next to nothing about other worlds, othe solar systems, other galaxies.
 
Also, if humans are typical, we don't seem particularly interested in saving the life of people we don't know. No one alive today is going to be saved by humans becoming a multi planet species
Disagree. Many people are passionate about saving the lives of strangers. And many people are convinced that making humanity multi-planetary is a very important goal.
 
Also, if humans are typical, we don't seem particularly interested in saving the life of people we don't know. No one alive today is going to be saved by humans becoming a multi planet species.

This is probably the most ignorant thing I've read all day.

Police? Firefighters? EMTs? All dedicated to saving lives, usually of people they've never met.

Then there are medical professionals who work in hospitals. People in medical and pharmaceutical research and clinical trial administration. Many if not most are in this because they care about saving lives. And this isn't just about $ because making more $ on Wall Street is a faster and far less time costly endeavor.
 
This is probably the most ignorant thing I've read all day.

Police? Firefighters? EMTs? All dedicated to saving lives, usually of people they've never met.

Then there are medical professionals who work in hospitals. People in medical and pharmaceutical research and clinical trial administration. Many if not most are in this because they care about saving lives. And this isn't just about $ because making more $ on Wall Street is a faster and far less time costly endeavor.

How many babies lives could be saved next month by using half of your personal wealth?
 
We don't know anything about possible other advanced civilizations (and I question whether humanity is anywhere near "advanced" status right now)

Sure, I'm with you on all your points, but I don't think a civilisation has to become very advanced before "backup" becomes a problem that it chooses to solve (and, back to Fermi, Where the Heck Are They?!!)

Maybe no back-up planet available ... and yet in our Solar System although we have Mars as a handy, suitable, neighbour there is also chatter that the moons of Saturn and Jupiter, albeit "rather far away", would probably be suitable too. So even if the backup choice is a tough one, its still "do-able"

I don't know if inter-solar travel will ever be something folk will want to do, but if Elon says that a 1-million person planet is self-sustainable it seems reasonable to me that for a planet threatened with extinction, and "find another star" was the only option, then building one, or indeed hedge-your-bets "many", space vehicle(s) to house a million people wouldn't be hard.

Heck, in Seveneves the author Neal Stephenson managed to achieve (yeah, with "some imagination" :) ) earth evacuation with an emigration large enough to be self sustaining using today's technology by strapping some pods to the space station and with only a couple of years' warning of the impending annihilation of Earth

So the lack of communication from another civilisation because it failed to have a backup seems like really really long odds to me.

I struggle much more with:

At what point will we beam "here we are" into space with sufficient power to be received across the universe?

How long will we bother to transmit that (any answer is going to be a heck of a long time coming)

and thus Why the heck would we bother in the first place?

Perhaps the more obvious answer is that we will discover the other life in the Universe by astronomy - in the last few years we have become able to "see" planets orbiting stars, with just a few more TerraPixels in the camera we will be able to see each individual Alien walking on their planet! ... no doubt our first view will be of them looking back at us and, right at that moment, clapping their hands and raising a glass of champagne ... and also a placard saying "What kept you?" :rolleyes:
 
  • Disagree
Reactions: Thelosen
Cixin Liu in "the Dark Forest" series makes a good case for developing in stealth mode. She's a Chinese sci-fi author, and just her initial background is strange enough (to a western white male), before getting into the actual sci-fi stuff. The basic premise is that once we advertise to the universe, some really advanced civilization will step on us.
 
Perhaps try covering your ears and go "NANANANANANANA".
A straw man is a common form of argument and is an informal fallacy based on giving the impression of refuting an opponent's argument, while refuting an argument that was not advanced by that opponent. One who engages in this fallacy is said to be "attacking a straw man".

Nobody here is covering their ears, except you.
 
Disagree. Many people are passionate about saving the lives of strangers. And many people are convinced that making humanity multi-planetary is a very important goal.

Which strangers are you willing to save? Do babies become worthy of saving when they participate in a goal of which you approve? I think a future space babies of the sub saharan program may get you and Musk interested in human progress instead of feeding the need of constantly escalating adolescent fantasies.
 
Perhaps try covering your ears and go "NANANANANANANA".

Take your own medicine:

From today's launch,

Iridium-2, Falcon 9 1st stage successful landing: SpaceX on Twitter

Iridium-2, successful deployment of 10 Iridium NEXT satellites: SpaceX on Twitter

SpaceX is making orbital launches more and more affordable, paving the way for interplanetary travel.

Your deflections, denial, and straw man arguments don't change that.


No comments on a million people on Mars this century?

The emperor has no clothes.

Electracity has no argument at all.
 
Last edited:
Which strangers are you willing to save? Do babies become worthy of saving when they participate in a goal of which you approve? I think a future space babies of the sub saharan program may get you and Musk interested in human progress instead of feeding the need of constantly escalating adolescent fantasies.

This is an extremist argument. Do you spend ALL of your effort to prevent the deaths of babies? You are making comments here, so that is proof that you are not. If you are not, then what is your point? You are trying to compare the lives of babies on Earth to expanding humanity into space? They are two different things. One does not preclude the other. This is similar to the argument that Bill Maher made up. The two things are not mutually exclusive. The same argument is true for those that want to chastise electric car drivers for not being 100% green. In both cases, you do the best you can. It's an improvement. Not perfect or the absolute best way to achieve the eventual goal. However it is action. Some action and improvement is better than shrugging your shoulders and waiting on a better solution.

JMHO on the subject.

And further, being a skeptic is a good thing. However being a naysayer and trying to slow progress is a very bad thing.

Again, JMHO.