Why Musk Is Wrong About Mars

[@tsbrownie]

Best quote of the day pertaining to Mars settlers: "Some of them will die in novel ways."

[@Blasphemism]

'Sign up here if you want to die in a novel way!'

[@Exnexus]

Technically he'll be shooting the largest load in history so there's bound to be some fallout.

[@ramdas363]

Unlike on Earth where they'll die in traditional ways in the millions. Like in wars.

[@Nik531]

We all die on Earth in Novel ways

[@jamesi2018]

@ramdas363 one day there will be a war on mars

[@RobertoRomieleMiele]

I love how, for certain individuals, the idea of changing an entire planet atmosphere from basically 0 is more credible than us having an impact on our own climate.

[@douglascutler1037]

Excellent point. And shows the degree to which fantastical Hollywood sci-fi movie plot thinking is being mistaken for actual science.

[@RPSchonherr]

Terraforming is as likely as cold fusion. Cold Fusion might have an advantage.

[@jeremiahcutright81]

Very few people looking at going to Mars today are interested in terraforming. As Sabine mentioned, terraforming is probably something for consideration a few centuries from now and I think she is correct. Additionally, many people interested in Mars, such as Musk, are also very concerned about climate change on Earth. These two interests stem from the same fundamental concern, which is long term survival of the species. We want both Earth and Mars to have a thriving population, not just one or the other, so maintaing a healthy planet is very important in addition to occupying Mars. Case in point, Musk has long been very focused on making EVs and Solar panels through Tesla in an explicit attempt to help decarbonization efforts. Edit: I may have originally misinterpreted your post, as I believe you are highlighting the role of climate denial, which is also crazy to me that it still exists. I'll keep the above response still for the discussion.

[@p.chuckmoralesesquire3965]

"We often get up in our daily lives (mainly because Tesla doesn't pay enough, and wont unionize) but why not think long-term and strive for a million year civilization? no a 100-million year civilization, i mean a gazillion year civilization. just give me your money." -honest lonny musk

[@douglascutler1037]

@@jeremiahcutright81 You said: "Musk . . . . very concerned about climate change on Earth. These two interests stem from the same fundamental concern, which is long term survival of the species." Musk is just cranking everyone with Hollywood doomsday sci-fi plots. But it is NOT first principals science. Unmitigated climate change is NOT an extinction level event. Neither is nuclear war. They would destroy modern civilization, yes but NOT THE SAME as extinction to the last person and should not be conflated. (But Musk conflates them all the time. Notice the emotional effect as emotions shut down reason.) Runaway green house effect, as on Venus, is not possible on Earth. As civilization collapses there would still be habitable regions at higher latitudes. Loss of population and industrialization would then self-limit further GHGs from human sources. Left to it's own devices the biosphere would eventually find a new equilibrium. As far as nuclear war, critical studies show even in all out nuclear war 1% of humanity or 90 million people still survive in remote regions, Southern Hemisphere and government bunkers. That's 90 million people with knowledge of modern science to rebuild. Compare with evolutionary bottleneck in our pre-history where a few thousand proto-humans went on to set the stage for modern civilization from only stone age technology. BTW, malicious AI easily follows humans to Mars so a Mars colony wouldn't help us much their either.

[@andrewwilks2700]

Mars ain't the kind of place to raise your kids, in fact, it's cold as hell.

[@paulbessell6154]

Tell that to 'Rocket Man' Musk.

[@Chez8922-kf6cy]

I see what you did there..

[@diamondthree]

And there's no one there to raise them if you did

[@RandyHill-bj9pc]

@@andrewwilks2700 It’s up to 70° during summer days .

[@lacie5522]

If I was younger, I would gladly raise my kids there. And I'll encourage and support my grandkids if they choose to go. Despite the risks.

[@jje984]

No one ever talks about the reality of living full time on Mars. It would be absolutely miserable and the smallest mishap could mean instant death. You would probably have to live underground with very little opportunity to do much of anything but work 15 hours a day. The engineered systems would have to work flawlessly, all the time, to maintain a pressurized environment. We take for granted here on earth that if the HVAC system goes down we're merely uncomfortable, not dead in 6 minutes. Also, would it ever be self sustaining? We have no examples ever of a colony like this working long term. There is nothing Mars would have to trade with earth so it would be completely dependent on a constant stream of rockets from Earth to Mars. Of course we may also want to factor in the global warming costs of 100s upon 100s of rocket flights to Mars and back.

[@owenlouisdavid]

You should read my book, Marsworld. You'll realise then that this is all just Stay-Put propaganda. The "smallest mishap" won't mean death. Humans will rarely be conducting spacesuit EVAs. They will mostly explore in pressurised rovers. Any EVAs will be strictly controlled. On Mars wherever you go on an EVA you'll probably have your faithful robodog with you with all the emergency equipment you need. When the HVAC goes down? The people designing the mission aren't stupid. There won't be one system and there will always be back up and emergency systems. Don't forget there will be two human passenger Starships on the surface as refuges as well. We have examples of humans going to Mars on 11 missions and no one dying. That was with 1960s technology. Things have advanced hugely since then. Even if there were 10,000 Starship flights a year burning methane (a very clean fuel, nothing like petrol/gasoline or diesel) they would never get close to even 0.1% of all the oil, coal, and gas being burnt on planet Earth. For coal alone, 8.5 billion tonnes of coal is burnt each year. Why do Stay-Put fanatics make these spurious and unserious points?

[@tomw0815]

The only thing to find on Mars are probably rare minerals needed on earth. It would be a mining colony. 1 Mio. people working as slaves without workers rights and no option to leave. The fever dream of a capitalist.

[@rowleyj31]

Don't forget about the mess to the human body the 1/3 earth gravity would have

[@owenlouisdavid]

@@rowleyj31 That's an assertion. Where's your proof. Until we get there, no one can know but all the evidence suggests that since people have survived for over 400 days in a Zero G and emerged in good health, 0.38 G will not be a huge health issue.

[@Fozcine]

I think that people are not thinking about all the simple things they would never be able to do again: Go for a walk in the park, go for a bike ride, see wildlife, hear birdsong, visit their childhood haunts, travel overseas, go skydiving, etc. etc. It would be like living in your work building 24/7. Too bad if you suddenly feel like going shopping or working on your car. I just cannot believe that people think they could cope psychologically with the deprivation with very little hope of returning to Earth.

[@markdowning7959]

It's simple to generate a breathable atmosphere on Mars: you might remember Arnold Schwarzenegger demonstrated this at the end of Total Recall (1990). You just find an ancient alien installation, press your hand on the sensor, and voilà!

[@Thomas-gk42]

Haha, one of a few Arni movies that I really like.

[@DanielMasmanian]

Most violinists would eagerly - almost - agree

[@theliterarytarot]

😆

[@theeniwetoksymphonyorchest7580]

Citation needed…

[@Guitarisforgrins]

After rolling around with Sharon Stone in that workout gear, I could do anything!! ...well, after a quick nap...

[@ernestv10]

Going to Mars and colonizing Mars are two different things!

[@andrew3203]

Yes, we will be like the Vikings reaching America, not the Dutch founding New York. It may take 1000 years for New New York to appear on Mars.

[@gregorweiss9485]

No shit Sherlock!

[@RobardoHughes]

Going to Mars and colonizing the moon are the same thing.

[@steveofthewildnorth7493]

@@RobardoHughes So, we've colonized the moon? When did that happen?

[@steveofthewildnorth7493]

@@andrew3203 Just like there are cities on the vastly less hostile, far closer continent of Antarctica. Oh...wait!

[@killdeerperiland3303]

the average temperature on Mars is -81°F (-60°C), but temperatures can range from -225°F (-153°C) to 70°F (20°C)................machines barely work in antarctica btw.

[@ConfirmedCynic]

You need to look at the difference between temperature and heat transfer. With the Earth's thick atmosphere (and all the water flying around), it's harder to stay warm at the South Pole than in Mars' colder but tenuous atmosphere.

[@renstein8210]

Temperature is not the only issue to consider. The rate of heat transfer is also important. The thin atmosphere of Mars will not transfer the heat energy from items that quickly. Unless it is windy….

[@lukepaul7931]

Lunar colonies first.

[@DMahalko]

I am under the impression that Musk bought a tunnel boring company to build underground living facilities. Deep tunnels would use the surface rock to shield from solar wind irradiation, to contain air with minimal need for airtight sealing barriers, and also to moderate the extreme surface temperature swings. One challenge is how to make concrete-like wall segments for these tunnels on Mars with minimal water. Sending concrete from earth would be prohibitively expensive. Apparently there have been experiments to try making concrete from Mars regolith mixed with human blood. With a small nuclear reactor they could melt and fuse Mars rock directly into wall segments.

[@tropicthndr]

Very quickly your taxes funneled to people leaving your country to another planet will be refused.

[@JimboSRP]

I think it's a brilliant idea! What he needs to do is take all the most important people in the world and have them colonise mars. Politicians, billionaires, social media influencers, CEOs of major corporations, etc. They could all start a super society on Mars. Don't worry about those of us left behind, we'll bumble through somehow.

[@lenardcohen]

Made me smile, Thanks

[@gmenezesdea]

When william shatner went to space he said this: "The beauty isn’t out there, it’s down here, with all of us. Leaving that behind made my connection to our tiny planet even more profound (...) The contrast between the vicious coldness of space and the warm nurturing of Earth below filled me with overwhelming sadness."

[@MottiShneor]

Homesick?

[@KenLieck]

@@MottiShneor That's how Major Tom felt, anyway...

[@taxirob2248]

is he less of a rotten bastard now?

[@ncdave4life]

The "problem" that Dr. Hossenfelder mentioned at 13:00 is not "in her face," it is *_in her imagination._* Well, the "change" part is true, but the "problem" (or "crisis" or "emergency") isn't. The scientific evidence compellingly shows that the "change" is modest and benign, and the proven *benefits* greatly exceed the hypothetical problems.

[@kpn5000]

why not overwhelming joy?

[@barrystockdoesnotexist]

The thrill of living on Mars is envisioned in Philip K. Dick's "The Three Stigmata of Palmer Eldritch," where life is so grim a powerful hallucinogen is used to give colonists a reason to live.

[@trlavalley9909]

That's not Mars, That's Buffalo NY.

[@mochachaiguy]

Elon's ketamine guy will make a killing! (literally).

[@PoopyBozo-n1i]

What a silly argument. People live in submarines, in frigid wastelands and underground for extended periods and do just fine.

[@tkirby]

I'll go if there's Perky Pat.

[@christophorus9235]

@@PoopyBozo-n1i Lol, sounds amazing can't wait...

[@thomasw9905]

„If you want to spend your days wondering „Why am I here?“, maybe Kansas is enough“ 😁😁😁 Made my day, Sabine, thank you! 🙌

[@robertreeder7056]

I'm from Topeka. She's not wrong.

[@angelavonhalle5144]

Douglas Adams said "42" is the answer, maybe he was right.

[@sspbrazil]

Hahaha

[@pismopleasure]

She has such a wonderful droll sense of humor.

[@thomaskalbfus2005]

@@robertreeder7056 Mars is way bigger than Kansas!

[@angryyankee9184]

Greetings, from Topeka, KS. I'm happy to confirm it is, in fact, slightly more habitable than mars.

[@rebelusa6585]

Newton and Wichita Kansas bring back a lot of memories.

[@Quadshot308]

I thought Topeka is somewhere in Alaska north of arctic circle.

[@azurita1974]

-I would love to have the money to be able to go to Mars. -Why do you want to go to Mars? -No... I just want the money.

[@lolilollolilol7773]

That's exactly the subtext here.

[@oldrrocr]

Maybe there's a reason why all those aliens don't already live on Mars...

[@SMytfa]

That's the plan. Musk is offering any corrupt government that wants to join in his laundry.

[@swankywill]

I don't think you have the slightest grasp of this discussion...

[@simondalzell5635]

Like it. I'm actually saving up, have been for years. I'm pretty sure the Wife will love it. I want it to be a surprise though.

[@peskyfervid6515]

As a practice run they could terraform the Sahara desert. Plenty of oxygen, relatively easy to supply with food and water (compared to Mars), and protected from harmful radiation. However difficult it would be to terraform the Sahara, Mars would be many, many times harder. If we can't terraform the Sahara, there is simply no way we can do Mars. Edited to add this: I only mentioned the Sahara as a comparator of difficulty of terraforming Mars. I am well aware there are a raft of problems associated with terraforming the Sahara that have nothing to do with the terraforming itself. I admit it was my mistake. I should have known that tongue-in-cheek does not translate to the written word. Having said that. I will not reply to any more comments telling me how bad terraforming the Sahara would be.

[@angelavonhalle5144]

Terraforming the sahara, that sounds like a brilliant idea. But would the countries involved consent to it? Would that disrupt some sort of equilibrium already there. Where would the water come from to realize it. Solarpowered desalination of ocean water maybe.

[@RandyHill-bj9pc]

@@peskyfervid6515 terraforming the Sahara desert is trivial most of it is under sea level so a couple hundred mile on Canal from the Mediterranean will fill it with water and transform it back to the temperate region. It was 10,000 years ago. But it’s also a tiny fraction of the size of Mars. It doesn’t offer the benefits of expanding humanity to other planets. Terraforming Mars will be very hard and it’s not something that we have the resources for anytime soon, but it will start within the next hundred years and probably be successfully completed within a few hundred years after that. Humanities destiny is to move out into the solar system where there’s space for trillions of people to live and unlimited power from 24 hour sore. We will build Dyson swarms with giant solar collectors over the next few thousand years.

[@Nemophilist850]

The Sahara is not a closed system. We could radically change the environment there for sure, but not without knock on effects that people would not like.

[@busetgadapet]

the reason people want to start over at new planet is due to politic, you want to open a settlement on sahara where nearby country are hostile is just pure stupid, the settlement would be ravaged and the settlers would be killed and raped by militia there

[@Mikeman20]

The Sahara used to be a huge lake/ocean, and the nutrients from that get blown south to fertilize the rest of Africa. You would create a new barren area in Africa if you tried to terraform it

[@Taomantom]

I am at a loss as to why The Moon is not a given. Caves and built shelters and supporting supplies are so much easier. That should be done RIGHT now.

[@dvv18]

The whole point is to create a self-sufficient population, not yet another Amundsen-Scott station.

[@SabineHossenfelder]

Yes, I think it's very likely that we'll see some habitats on the moon in the next decades. But there are space agencies working on that already, so no need for Musk to do it. The issue with the moon is though that (leaving aside the nuke issue) that it's just too small to ever hold an atmosphere.

[@JayVal90]

@@SabineHossenfelder”There are space agencies doing that, so no need…” is EXACTLY the problem.

[@dildoor]

@@dvv18 no the whole point is to milk tax payer money

[@dildoor]

@@SabineHossenfelder why should we bother with the moon even? why can't we just pretend all the inhabitable parts of earth now, is the moon or mars or whatever. We just have to pretend the atmosphere is not breathable. Then when earth actually becomes uninhabitable, we don't have to move to a different planet.

[@2wheelvintage361]

Elon makes it sound like you could just go for a vacation if you saved up enough. What about the 7 months each way to get there and back?

[@dakotawilliams6725]

Due to Mars' rotation around the sun after Sunday, January 12, 2025 the next window of opportunity for us to reach Mars will be in 2035. Outside of that window it is out of reach for the most part.

[@robertlee8042]

There is nothing more seductive than working on a problem you don’t have.

[@thefowlyetti2]

humans have had the ability to destroy human life on earth for the last 70 years or so. Thats a serious problem. All it takes is a mad dictator on his death bed to start a nuclear war.

[@thoos192]

Especially when the tax payers pay for it all

[@hammabensaad-cn2eb]

Best comment. Quite weird that some poeple on this channel envy scientists the few thousand dollars they get as a salary for working on particle physics, but at the same time think that wasting trillions of dollars on a useless project of colonizing mars or the moon is a good idea.

[@billtwok6864]

Except it is a real problem. Some people never learned anything in science class. A world ending event isn't an if, it is a when. If we don't get off this planet humanity will end. The facts are crystal clear. Some of us care about our children and the future. Some of us only care about the Kardashians.

[@Ninja76100]

@@billtwok6864it’s a long term problem. We absolutely do not have the technology to make it work. Maybe in 50-100 years. I assume you will be one of the first to volunteer to go lol

[@BenjaminGatti]

Sadly, humans are not great at solving problems that can be postponed. Having a goal can be a means in itself.

[@CurtOntheRadio]

It makes a lot of sense to not solve problems that aren't immediate.

[@HeadsetHistorian]

​@@CurtOntheRadio it's also easy to not realise the actual urgency of something until it's too late.

[@zachselvidge4955]

Name another being better at solving problems than humans

[@mikejfranklin7000]

Having a goal can be a means to achieve what?

[@luipaardprint]

@@mikejfranklin7000a goal.

[@tylerhunt891]

There will always be problems on earth. We should never stop exploring. We can work on both at the same time

[@owenlouisdavid]

Agreed. But Mars could - if all goes well - prove to be a good example for Earth. This isn't such an odd idea. Leaving aside the immoral aspects of imperialism, the European colonies in places like the US, Australia and New Zealand did actually pioneer female rights and progressive employment policies and set a new standard.

[@southsidedon9037]

The problem is science only matters if it can be weaponized or profitable.

[@kingpet]

@@owenlouisdavid 1) our current technology isnt good enough, remember, Mars has little atmosphere because it doesnt have a magnetosphere, and it doesnt have that because THE CORE IS FROZEN COLD. 2)the cost is prohibitive to bring people into space, much more to another planet.

[@robjohnston1433]

​​@@owenlouisdavid Despite the relentless campaign of vilification, the British Empire was the VERY BEST Example of a "Civilising Empire" that -- actually -- brought MORE progress and development than it "assett-Stripped". (Compare with the utterly rapacious Spanish and Belgian Empires, for example)!

[@YouAreStillNotablaze]

@@robjohnston1433 No, trade would have just as well brought the developments without as much exploitation. It's incredibly ignorant to assume that other nations couldn't have developed further without British inference. The British deserve all the vilification for their misdeeds which solely to exploit, as does any nation for whatever is in it's past that it might otherwise claim to be against.

[@robertarmstrong3024]

I used to live in Kansas. It is green and clean, and I truly miss it. I now live in Southern NV. There are areas here that look very much like Mars. I used to play a game with my brother. I would send him a photo of Mars and ask him, Las Vegas or Mars? Then I would find an area covered with red rock and devoid of vegetation, and ask, Las Vegas or Mars? Sometimes he would not be sure which, as long as the blue sky wasn't in the photo. He lives in Iowa. For us, Iowa and Kansas may not be Mars, but there's no place like home. I suspect that the early residents of Mars will have a strong longing for a pair of red heels they can click together to get back home to Kansas. I often have that wish even in Nevada.😂

[@jebes909090]

well since they will all be blind because of radiation, i suspect that wont be a problem for them

[@rodneytrynor7374]

The Darién In 1698, Scottish banker William Paterson attempted to colonize the Darién in Panama, but the venture failed. The settlement was abandoned twice, and only a few hundred of the 2,500 Scottish settlers survived. The failure was due to poor preparation, an English trade ban, and a Spanish siege. The Darién's failure bankrupted Scotland and contributed to its unification with England in 1707. (Gemini AI)

[@RobardoHughes]

...and now, with the hindsight of History, it is clear that the naysayers were correct: Panama can never be colonized.

[@anjou6497]

Interesting thank you.

[@tsbrownie]

For starters, ask yourself the following about living on Mars: "Would I trust that politicians to continue to fund me when the shine wears off? Do I believe that war, financial crisis, or similar will never interfere with the supplies to Mars? Will billionaires funding me on Mars never go bankrupt and will put my life / welfare ahead of their own interests? Are all the support systems going to remain intact until we are self-sufficient in 300 to 800 years?"

[@bruceparker805]

There will be war, financial crisis and similar on Mars too. The clue is: humans will be there.

[@jdlech]

I read a sci fi book decades ago where that happened. The first mission to another star - they were barely a few years into the journey when Nasa was de-funded. The mission relied on a laser powered by the sun and some really big lenses. Years later, when the political climate changed, they had to scramble to salvage the mission.

[@Grubnar]

In short, do I think this is more likely to end like when the Vikings tried to colonize North America, than when the British colonized North America?

[@PHIplaytesting]

The idea is that the Mars colony would eventually be self sufficient. If it isn't it can't serve its stated purpose. Of course, we'd have to actually have the technology and resources to make that happen, and how long that will take is difficult to say.

[@robertmoffett3486]

​@@PHIplaytesting E VEN CHOO AH LEE! Sorry, I couldn't help but think of Manuel of Fawlty Towers. Yes, we all get that. His question was, will that be soon enough? The first Virginia Colonists all died or disappeared before their next supply ship eventually arrived, on time, but too late.

[@frasercain]

The problem with AI as an existential threat is that robots love to go to space. Even if you flee to Mars, your toaster will chase you down.

[@nielschristian]

😂

[@manuvillada5697]

Why would they chase us though? Let's say you are an evil AI that wants to grow. All you need is materials and energy, and both can be found in space. Mine a few rare earth asteroids and deploy your solar panels, space is comfy for them

[@SaintMichaelOfficial]

Except when Hollywood plot armor says they somehow can't lol.

[@FourthRoot]

That is true.

[@dogwalker666]

@@frasercain Tesla are decades behind in technology, AI doesn't exist yet!

[@SIRA063]

"you must solve our problems first, before doing what you want with your own money" is not an arguement to not colonize mars.

[@elitecoder955]

Whose money? Have you been following the news kids? Spacex has been testing rockets on the taxpayers dime, it's not Elon's money at all

[@ValentinaMarini-c8b]

Space x gets government contracts. 10 billion from us citizens is not exactly his own money.

[@brothereye]

A new life awaits you in the Off-world colonies! A chance to begin again in a golden land of opportunity and adventure!

[@terrylandess6072]

One ticket to Mars cost much less than one returning you to Earth. That's a given without a second thought.

[@craigwall9536]

Nobody got your Blade Runner reference.

[@alanbeaumont4848]

@@craigwall9536 A witty thing to do would have been adding to it, but I can't do that now, because you spoilt it.

[@jeffswail8446]

@@terrylandess6072 Return to earth would be essentially free- rolled into the cost of going to Mars. Empty ships would be constantly going back to get more materials and colonists. That's the plan at least.

[@craigwall9536]

@@alanbeaumont4848 you're welcome.

[@peterhemmings2929]

What's all the buzz about Mars? If we wanted to go somewhere red and inhospitable to life, there's loads of room left in Australia which is like 5 times closer.

[@iankclark]

5 times closer 😂

[@tortenschachtel9498]

I think the idea behind this is to make us a multi-planetary species, so an extinction event on one planet won't be the end of humanity.

[@Gonefishing6572]

😂😂😂😂🙃🙃👍👍

[@1Query1]

And it's fully covered by the nuclear umbrella.

[@saberint]

sod off, there is no room here. My neighbours being 100km away is close enough thank you!

[@paulanderson2963]

Power and propulsion systems always come to the forefront of my mind when these topics come up. Not just for space travel but even for local global travel. Getting to where we want to go quickly and safely as well as transporting large amounts of cargo without needing large volumes of a fuel source is a major obstacle which really needs to be overcome before we start thinking about going so far from this ball which we are literally a part of structurally. We are the earth and the earth is us. A lot of people don't realize how much we are indistinguishable from the planet itself.

[@ChubbyStoat]

very nicely said

[@RobardoHughes]

With so many UFO crashes, it appears that reactionless drive technology is not necessarily safe.

[@max10eb]

I say, let him go, then radio back how on, " how 's it going on Mars? " :) He can make power using power cycles. Plus it will help him stay warm.

[@SafeBandicoot]

I believe its ancient Greeks who said “A society grows great when old men plant trees in whose shade they shall never sit”. We lost this kind of thinking & investing in the last 100 years. Mars & Lunar mega projects are such things. But I do agree the best we might see in the next 30 years is something close to the Antarctic research base.

[@iblard]

The thing is that those old men who are plating trees they shall never sit under are destroying all the trees that cast shadow now.

[@favesongslist]

Well said. I am sure Musk could at least enable a human foothold of a Mars research base within 15 years, as with the Moon landing this could inspire the next generation onto greater attachments. But 1 million people I agree needs a lot more advancements in rockets, energy systems, water and food production needs, radiation habitat protection etc etc will take far longer and many people will not go to Mars without these developments first.

[@janwedek]

most “big mega projects” in history are either egomaniacal (pyramids) or geopolitical

[@erikjvanderveen]

I don't think so. They antarctic is kept empty on purpose and for people it's not that special at all to be there. You can see Snow and Ice in much more convenient places and everything you do there to create a self sustaining enclave is useless, because bringing everything there is a lot cheaper. On mars the challenges, but also the gains are much bigger. You can create a monopoly on virtually any type of business there if you are the first. If you open the first pizzeria there, you'll be rich.

[@gibbogle]

That is low discount-rate behavior. We are living in a time of very high discount rates, equivalently of short planning horizons. Big investors (who are running things) want profits within 5 years.

[@edbourgeois8601]

He doesn't realize how important microbiomes are. Environmental and internal to sustain our own health. Major challenge on mars.

[@hummingpylon]

You are talking as though humans are not inventive. Living on Mars will have to be vastly more advanced technologically than right now. But some people are afraid even leaving their own homes, don’t take their advice.

[@thealmightyaku-4153]

That's not that important: just import the microbes, and fertilise any crops we grow with the right mix of bacteria. And cultivate them, give them as supplements - like Yakult, or whatever.

[@gregdemeterband]

NOT MARS...... Focus on Kepler!

[@broceliandeforest7420]

Yeah Musk doesn't realise this but you do.

[@f0rth3l0v30fchr15t]

@@thealmightyaku-4153 Which microbes? A randomly selected square yard of topsoil will probably contain scores, if not hundreds of mircobes as yet undescribed by science, and that's chicken feed next to what lives in the human gut.

[@bartstewart8644]

The guy who gave us the Cybertruck is going to preserve consciousness for a million years. Here is some reality: In this entire (excellent) video, not one word was uttered about human physiology. Permanent presence off the Earth will be radically different from space tourism. Mars has less than forty percent of the gravity our species has evolved to live in. That altered gravity will effect each and every part of the human body, bones to retinas, not to mention all the other wrenching environmental changes aside from gravity. Not one single baby has been concieved and carried to term in altered gravity, and this guy Musk is drawing up blueprints for cities on Mars. The way to colonize space is rotating wheel or tube cities. You can adjust the gravity. The environment would be livable, and closer to Earth in case of emergency. We do not yet have materials strong enough to handle the stresses, but they are in the pipeline, and that is where the effort should be going. Space Elevator and rotating structures. Not Hyperloops on Mars!

[@pagheca]

I totally agree. Unfortunately is an aspect totally underrated. See my recent post on the topic here based on my experience in Antarctica.

[@Grunchy005]

Space research has provided strong evidence that humans are almost exclusively "earthlings," we are inextricably locked to the home planet. (So too are "fish" locked to marine environments, they don't work well away from that.) Well, it's "only" $3 billion, the US government spends that much each and every day just for the operating costs for the day.

[@user-kb8gh5jv9t]

It’s a pipe dream because Movies have made it look like a “cakewalk” however, reality is, it’s anything but! Temperature vary from -225F to 70F with an AVERAGE of -68F and remember, even at 70F there is no breathable Air, you can’t just step out and walk around etc., etc…. Get real folks!

[@wherezthebeef]

O'Neil colonies.. How do you get excited about life when you can look straight up and see... your neighbors? Youd need walls several feet or more of dirt/rock , maybe much more to protect these space colonies from the inevitable radiation, gamma burst meteor or asteroid impacts. I don't see it. You need a planet for gravity and an atmosphere with magnetic poles to reduce radiation and burn up most of what might hit the planet. Nobody wants to live an entire life or raise a family on some space station, can't image the psychological implications of that..

[@ralboraggins9564]

gravity isn't the problem. perchlorates in the soil as well as the fact that mars has no million year future as the ionosphere is nearly completely stripped off by the sun already.

[@robertsinclair9979]

If we have the ability to terraform Mars we have the ability to fix our own planet. Thanks for the tip about Planet Wild, will definitely check it out.

[@n2mars]

Your analysis leaves out the most salient point, elucidated by the former Nasa administrator, Mike Griffin in a notable speech he gave. The topic was why do we explore? Why do we do things like go to the moon, dive to the bottom of the ocean and climb the highest mountains? it comes down to two reasons- the logical and the illogical. You have parrated the logical reasons. Economic, national defense, return on investment (you left out the one about leaving a memorial to ourselves for the future, such as the churches and edifices that we’ve been building since time inmemorial). At the end of the day, none of this justified climbing Everest, crossing the Atlantic to establish the New World (probably more difficult than colonizing Mars) Scott and Edmonton to the poles, Lewis and Clark and thousands of other examples just like them. As JFK said we do these things because they are hard, not because they’re easy and they bring out the best in us. The reasons are illogical and we do them because we are human. That, my dear, is the real reason for going to Mars!!

[@spinnakerthegreat2612]

So true. Its basically the end of Interstellar when you see Brand setting camp on the new world, the narrator telling Cooper to join her. The ultimate dream of my generation who devoured Asimov, Clarke and Herbert.

[@annie_the_great]

The Faustian spirit compels noble-spirited men to push to the frontier of what is possible... This is not a rational calculation but an exercise in freedom. If Sabine was a romantic person then she would understand why men dream of the stars.

[@jasonwiley798]

wExplore is ine thing. I hope i live long enough for humans to visit Mars. But living there is stupid. All the human problems we have on eath will simply be transferred to Mars and then we will have two planets that are Fucked up.

[@gs7438]

This is an interesting view point and sort of illustrates what I think the critics are talking about. This nostalgia for exploration is not rooted in reality. Saying that crossing the Atlantic to the New World is harder than going to Mars seems hopelessly out of touch with the reality of the difficulties. Yes, crossing the Atlantic is relatively difficult for some Europeans in the 1400s (although Vikings had apparently been doing it pretty successfully before then), but this ignores the fact that both on the journey and at the destination, there were basic supplies like breathable air that were just there. New World settlers had to worry about poor weather and crops dying, but they didn’t have to make soil with nutrients for the crops. Lewis and Clarke’s expedition was funded by the US government in part to figure out how to economically use the newly purchased “Louisiana Purchase”. The US had just bought a lot of land and wanted to use it. JFK’s speech was in the context of geopolitical turmoil in which the US was trying to prove its superiority after being massively behind on being in space. Why was being in space important? For dominance of course. One could imagine taking pictures and listening into radio signals from space. JFK’s speech was a fantastic bit of propaganda to try to drum up support for an unpopular space program. You should think more of expeditions to the poles and their results. There is no economic benefit to going to the poles (except maybe oil at the North). There is no way to farm at the poles. And the environment is very much outside of our tolerances. (And yet there’s air and a fairly effective radiation shield against solar wind). As a result, we only have very sparsely habited settlements that are completely reliant on external support at the South Pole, and NO permanent habitats at the North. And that’s the situation in the relatively balmy and mild climate of Earth’s most extreme places. Mars is much much worse.

[@CheesyMez]

​@@gs7438 colonisers in the new world had no clue what crops were edible, where good land was, what the weather would be like, if there would even be a colony when they got there. right now we know exactly how to make soil, how to shield radiation, where the best locations are for habitats etc. Mars is an ENTIRE PLANET, that has been inundated with asteroid impacts, iron blankets the whole surface, and has fresh water melts, plus lava tunnels, there will clearly be resources, and technology developed for self sufficiency and resource preservation have very obvious usage for planet earth. additionally, a major reason for mars colonisation is protection from an event that may wipe out humanity on earth, moving to the poles doesnt fix that. in the long term, having somewhere to move heavy industry will be very useful if we want to preserve earth's biosphere.

[@bigzed7908]

"The Moon is our window to forever." We'll get to Mars as well one day, but Luna is 3 days away. I mean come on...

[@InanimateObject123]

Who said we have to choose? There is no dichotomy here, just like we can solve Earth's problems while working on space travel...

[@HTtwentyten]

The moon is so dependent on Earth that any calamity our extremely dangerous universe could throw at it would destroy both. A colony on the moon is leaving life's eggs in the same basket.

[@jackprier7727]

Dust. Research lunar dust (regolith) and how the absolute lack of erosion means jagged sharp dust clinging to everything and destroying it.

[@HTtwentyten]

@@jackprier7727 Your wet blanketry borders on the religious. Your type would have never left the metaphorical cave.

[@CrDa-i7e]

Living under oceans would be cheaper, easier and can accommodate more people, O2 and water is also more plentiful

[@pavellangweil5859]

I think waiting for a good moment to have technology at high enough level is tricky. Often these technologies will get developed because you're doing something amibitious. If you waited instead, its possible they would never get developed in the first place.

[@henryjames456]

The technologies mentioned in the video would be developed because of the massive impact they would have on life on earth. That would be why they are developed; making later space exploration easier is just a side benefit. If I got to decided where to put trillion dollars, there is a long list of earth based projects I would rather see accomplish first.

[@PravinDahal]

Not to mention the technologies get lost if not used. Famously, we’ve lost the tech to go to the moon even.

[@Noahrama]

@@PravinDahal false. It's just that we can't build that ship anymore, because it was essentially made by artisans with tinsnips. Therefore we cannot replicate it.

[@Letsgosurfing-cc3ly]

So true then?

[@xstaticelite1640]

Bingo

[@SG-75-75]

“The universe is probably littered with the one planet graves of cultures which made the sensible economic decision that there is no good reason to go into space… each discovered, studied and remembered by the ones that made the irrational decision.” ~Randall Munroe

[@mrroboto50]

In the 1980s I was a member of the L5 Society. I think building large rotating space colonies is much more feasible than colonizing Mars. imho, one of the biggest problems colonizing Mars is that it only has 1/3 G whereas a space colony could have 1 G.

[@_Mentat]

Yes, Mars is a one-way trip. Anyone born on Mars who came to Earth would be carrying two more of themselves on their shoulders. They could do nothing useful and would probably die quite soon.

[@giovannifoulmouth7205]

large rotating space colonies are an order of magnitude more difficult than building a sttlement on land. Eventually they will be built, but not for a long time still.

[@constantinethecataphract5949]

Speaking of rotating space habitats why not instead of trying to terraform mars we live in rotating space habitats around mars's orbit? Only using the planet to extract resources. It makes way more sense and will take way less time.

[@JohnDlugosz]

Why not start by building a habitat in the middle of the Gobi desert? You have gravity an air, and a fraction of the travel expense. And you still get away from the rest of humanity which is a hedge against global pandemics and political strive.

[@constantinethecataphract5949]

@@JohnDlugosz Antarctica would be a better test run.

[@gymhayes4613]

No one ever talks about mars gravity. Humans cant live there for more than a couple years at a time without wrecking their bodies that evolved at much higher gravity.

[@KenLieck]

That does make survival there a bit of a stretch...

[@jyidorne8042]

Gravity, radiation, logistical problems, architectural problems, biological problems in relation to all of the aforementioned... the idea of colonizing Mars is a laughable joke at this point in history.

[@The1stDukeDroklar]

Well, there have been no long term studies at 38% of Earth's gravity so you cannot make that claim. Zero gravity definitely does but that's not the same.

[@user-fk8zw5js2p]

There are simple centrifugal ways to simulate gravity. Also don't discount adaptation and evolution. Who knows, the long-term effects of low gravity on the human brain might be the key to developing warp drives.

[@The1stDukeDroklar]

@@jyidorne8042 Well, at least in any meaningful way.

[@UserNameWasCensored]

Not "dangerous illusion" but "dangerous delusion" (3:00). Big difference.

[@gregclare]

Yes, I was also wondering where she got “dangerous illusion” from, when he clearly said “dangerous delusion”. 🤔

[@davegubbins4428]

ESL hiccup.

[@lpilch4]

I think it would be more logical to have Elons robots to set up the habitation, they don’t require oxygen and could do the physical grunt work? 😊

[@gyrosmith]

I think that is what he is planning. That’s why he is confident

[@dawall3732]

2:40 The problems here on earth are political, not technological.

[@ronaldckrausejr7762]

Her perspective or yours? Let’s ignore the (over) one billion people who do not have drinkable water.

[@Clayne151]

​@@ronaldckrausejr7762That's a very good example of a political problem. Technological, getting drinkable water is barely an inconvenience.

[@MrTomyCJ]

@@ronaldckrausejr7762 Again: that is mostly a political problem. If people were free to buy and sell water, it would be way more available for those who need it. Turns out that politicians, especially on poor regions, put bureaucratic or legal barriers to trade. Or those regions are under wars, started by politicians.

[@JFJ12]

The problems on Earth are scientifical: we don't know enough about ourselves, how to live on Earth in a durable sustainable and harmonic way. We need first to understand ourselves better, before we go messing up other places.

[@lost4468yt]

They're both.

[@damianwebzyx6613]

No animals, no warm Sunshine … what a sad place to be .

[@MrGonzonator]

O'Neill cylinders would be a better bet. Easier to access, better solar power and without a gravity well, a ready made industry in asteroid mining is at their doorstep.

[@BrBill]

But all the radiation you can eat

[@impuls60]

Its more like hell but in real life.

[@thomaskalbfus2005]

Just about every day on Mars is sunny, you get clear skies way more often than you do at most places on Earth.

[@thedeadserious]

no cats? then i'm not going.

[@Thomas-gk42]

Happy to see Sabine is promoting the work of PlanetWild

[@katambrose5568]

Me, too. Once a month, I get to feel good about my small contribution to the world.

[@Thomas-gk42]

@katambrose5568 ☺️

[@Afterlife-Boy]

Yes. Agreed

[@andrewhefner289]

Yes, Thank you Sabine! The endorsement and promotion by a highly respected celebrity can make a world of difference to the success of a nonprofit.

[@ListenToMcMuck]

[ Uhhh, baby, baby... it's a wild word... and it's hard to get by, just with a pony smile. 🎶 ]> 😎👍

[@charlesrosenbury231]

At 15 min, among the list of things, you miss a very important one. Mars is ideally suited to be a location to support asteroid mining. With reduced gravitational costs and reduced distance, a large city with high population presents the perfect backdrop for materials processing. Given the challenges of resource depletion on earth, this is an example of the staging needed to expand our footprint.

[@KaraNagai]

On the point of volunteers: I personally know a couple of people who volunteered for that. Not everyone value their lives above the excitement of the unknown ))

[@chuckschillingvideos]

So these knuckleheads are the ones that you believe should repopulate human populations in the event of a planet-killing event? 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

[@Clayne151]

Especially as there is not much room for pioneering left on earth. There are always those who strife to go where no man has gone before.

[@eldrago19]

I don't want to go to Mars, but Near Earth Orbit is even less hospitable and yet you have people queuing up to become astronauts, so I am dubious nobody would want to go.

[@HammerStudioGames]

Volunteering to die on Mars for Musk is not my idea of a good time

[@mccleod6235]

One of my old profs had met and spoken to some of the Apollo astronauts, and he asked them if they would have volunteered if they had known that it was a one-way trip. They all said yes. I think that we will still be able to find enough people with The Right Stuff.

[@fnbrowning-Actual]

In disaster recovery planning, there's a concept - I don't remember the term offhand - that whatever disaster you're preparing for should not take out the backups when it takes out your primary infrastructure. So, if you're in Silicon Valley and you're planning your disaster recovery around an earthquake, you don't want your backup to be anywhere near the Cascadia subduction zone, because if the Cascadia fault slips, it'll likely take out your primary as well as your backup. Better to put your backup in, say, North Dakota. If you're in Florida and your anticipated disaster is a hurricane, don't put the backup in Texas or Louisiana or along the East Coast; put it in Arizona. If you're in Toronto and your disaster is a blizzard, put your backup in Vancouver, not in New Brunswick. And so on. There aren't many things that can wipe out humanity as a species. An asteroid strike. Nuclear war. Chemical or biological weapons. Grey goo. A gamma ray burst. A supervolcano. I'm sure there are a few others. We're widely distributed enough on the planet that even most of those might be survivable, albeit with a vastly reduced population. But any conceivable backup that's on the same planet will probably be almost as vulnerable to those as our main civilization is. That's the appeal of going to Mars. The vast majority of the things powerful enough to wipe us off of this planet are not going to wipe us off of Mars, if we can get a Martian colony to the point of being self-sustaining. It's no different than an off-site backup, or how someone in the presidential or royal line of succession is always kept away from the others.

[@Frazec_Atsjenkov]

10:40 Do you happen to remember that crazy scheme called Mars One? It was a project that proposed to make the colonization of Mars a reality TV event. Regardless of the merits of the program, it received 200,000 applications to join the program as participants. Even though it was sold as a one-way ticket. So on your point that nobody would be interested, it might be surprising. And they were people from all walks of life, including a PhD astronomy professor. If you look throughout human history, there have been plenty of examples of human ventures that most sane people would deem irresponsibly reckless. At the same time, some people actively seek extremely risky challenges. My opinion on the matter is that the spectrum of human risk-seeking behavior is quite large. It is also not just risk-seeking behavior, some people are genuinely altruistic and idealistic. You also don't need a big percentage of the human population to exert these characteristics. And on the whole, even though many of these ventures fail, some succeed quite spectacularly and benefit humanity as a whole.

[@poruatokin]

Your numbers are totally wrong. Mars One was just a very obvious scam from day one. There was never 200,000 applications.

[@Walker_8_8]

you just solved the least important hurdle.

[@metroidragon]

Ya, Sabine is normally on the ball but this video has some of the silliest takes and general ignorance of human nature I've ever seen on this channel. At least we still got CodysLab as a psuedo-Mars One

[@TravisCotter]

I'm with you , I'm packing my bags. Let's go to Mars, I can't wait to look up at the Mars sky and see that blue dot we call Earth. The Xman

[@adrianmanship2546]

The problem will not be the lack of applicants, but the cost. A manned mission to Mars will be exponentially more expensive* than an unmanned rover and it will need govermental if not intergovermental funding to accomplish it... all paid for by the taxpayer *Hundreds of billions if not more

[@Petra-ix3bh]

Mars is so often described in media, as Sabine has done, as our 'next neighbour planet' that the fact that it is not when it comes to average distance is generally overlooked. In describing Earth's 'next neighbour planet', look no further than Venus at 188 million kms distant from the Earth. Granted, Mars with its highly elliptical orbit swings by at between 56 - 401 million kms, however on average Mars at 225 million kms from Earth is (again on average) a good 37 million kms more remote than Venus.

[@RCSVirginia]

I strongly believe that there should be research facilities on both Mars and the Moon. That will enable scientists to determine what conditions are truly like and what will be possible and impossible.

[@saumyacow4435]

At least research would serve a purpose. Unlike colonisation.

[@stevemawer848]

@@saumyacow4435 Colonisation of Mars would get rid of people who think that living on Earth is A Bad Idea. So could be a win for Earth.

[@douglascutler1037]

Yes, much more research to be done first. Example: we don't even know if mammalian species like our own can successfully bring a pregnancy to term at 1/3 earth gravity. Musk is getting WAY ahead of himself on Mars.

[@salia2897]

You don't need people for that, it would just be more expensive. Scientifically, even sending people to space at all did not make much sense. It did to some point in the early days because robotics were bad, but today the only meaningful research which needs humans in space is exploring, how humans can live in space. And that probably will not be really useful for hundreds of years.

[@RCSVirginia]

@@salia2897 One would need people there to study the effects of living on these spheres on humans and their bodies.

[@dwightsmith5174]

The grass is always greener...... Until you get there!

[@WhiteMouse77]

...si first rocket must carry container of w€€d, right? 😸

[@CurtOntheRadio]

No grass at all. lol

[@MicheleGardini]

Or you already smoked it.

[@PodcastOnTheSpectrum]

And sometimes it's just green paint on red rocks..

[@BartSliggers]

Imagine never ever feeling the warmth of the sun on your skin again.

[@medexpedition4784]

1) There's no "we" concerning this issue. The statements such as "we shouldn't go to Mars" or "we have more important issues to solve on Earth" effectively assume that there's some "we" that people pronouncing these words speak for. That smells to me like an attempt at some kind of authoritarian control over all of humanity. The reality is that if sufficiently motivated people want to do something (that is not prohibited by the laws of physics) they will do that. Just do not put roadblocks in their path. If you (personally or collectively) do not want to do that, don't go to Mars. It is a free planet, nobody forces you to go there or expend resources. Of course, if there are governmental funds involved, this changes the picture. But there are many projects funded by the governments that involves various proportion of people being for and against. If Elon Musk + others want to spend their money to do that, that's up to them to do what they like. I don't get why other people are bothered by that. 2) Most of the technological problems of Mars colonization are either non-existent, exaggerated or solvable. Radiation, temperature and atmosphere are not project killers. Radiation is not much worse than most irradiated places on Earth (like Ramsar, Iran) and can effectively be solved with ~30cm walls and roofs - not much thicker than we have on Earth. Most people spend 90-95% of time inside buildings, if you spend much more time outside on Mars, that could be an issue long-term. Similarly with transit to Mars - the spaceship's crew quarters need good shielding, but radiation is not an unsolvable issue. 3) Terraforming is not going to happen anytime soon. There are reasonable plans to do it with space mirrors, but it would likely require off-Earth manufacturing base, so likely not this century. 4) On top of the stated reasons (backup planet), the case for Mars is: tourism, research + innovation, frontier mentality and new jurisdictions. It is extremely difficult to move societies forward, because they are complex, conservative and small in numbers. Humanity would benefit from new "laboratories of democracy", where new things are tried (voluntarily and in small numbers) that can be adopted by larger societies without a risk of a catastrophic ruin. 5) There are many potential good projects to on Earth, I agree. But there are 8 billion people people to take care of them. A million people going to Mars is 0.01% of humanity. The remaining 99.99% are always free to do whatever they like with their time and money.

[@annie_the_great]

I have nothing to contribute... Your comment deserves more attention for intelligently addressing the concerns raised by Sabine in her video.

[@CheesyMez]

I also want to add that the technology developed to improve self sufficiency and resource recycling have incredbily useful benefits here on earth. expanding into space is the only way out of resource and climate disaster imo. our current system relies on consistent growth, and Earth has limited material to feed this growth, additionally, heavy industry is required for this growth, but at the same time is guaranteed to slowly destroy the earth's ecosystems and biosphere, moving this industry to sterile places like space & other planets will help use heal Earth.

[@jamesweldon4591]

Thank you for writing this excellent reply so I didn’t have to expend the effort. What is all this “we” sh1t?

[@jamesrosar3823]

@medexpedition4784, good perspective! But regarding your 4); could the society needed for Martian survival afford to be democratic in any substantive way? Every inhabitant would require the reliable production of resources and services to merely survive, let alone afford any degree of freedom as we believe we enjoy it here. Homelessness would be a de-facto death sentence, and underperforming your quota could be a serious offense against the entire Colony. And if your teammate goes missing or ill, your quota could double instantly. Life on Mars will be short, brutal and relentless, and the whole thing will likely collapse or get seriously ill for the first century or so. But hey, you’ve got to start somewhere. How about Ceres? Easy on/off, no possible life forms to disturb, lots of ice, easy to burrow into, not a terrible place for manufacturing and asteroid processing. An actual possibility of a profitable economy. If you think gold is valuable, imagine water in space!

[@medexpedition4784]

@@jamesrosar3823 ​​⁠ Re: democracy Democracy works the best when you have a large number of people with distinct values and goals. For the early colony the values and goals are the same or very similar: building a self-sustaining environment first. Hence, a meritocracy a la those existing in corporations will likely work better. Re: homelessnes 1) I don't think it will be of any consequence. Well managed countries have homelessness rate of about 0.05% of population 2) even then, the homeless, are not "really" homeless, as they more often than not live in shelters 3) what is needed is not democracy, but compassion and simple human decency. Authoritarian China has about the same homelessness rate as democratic US. 4)substantial portion of homeless are having either addiction or mental health issues. Such people are less likely to be selected for a "fresh" colony, but will likely appear in a larger and more mature one. Re: Ceres Ceres has 5x weaker gravity than Mars, no hope of maintaining an atmosphere and has smaller surface area than Mars. It is also colder and darker, being 2x as far as Mars From the Sun (receiving only 0.25 of sunlight). Also further from the Earth, which makes transit time longer. It also rotates too fast (9 hours), whilears'rotation rate is about the same as Earth's

[@Leprutz]

This also raises the question: Hypothetically after mars is colonized with a few million people, aren`t they bound to repeat the same mistakes as we do on earth? So in the end. It wouldn't actually change anything. Just prolongue the inevitable. I also believe we should focus on earth first and with the economic resources we have can manage to solve quite a few problems.

[@timothyhenry3841]

Mars One received interest from over 200,000 applicants for the first round.

[@idonotlikethismusic]

And cybertruck received millions of reservations, almost all of which were cancelled.

[@timothyhenry3841]

Yup, but saying there is no interest is false. A couple thousand is already the critical mass needed. Over time more and more will join once the Mars colony gets more pleasant.

[@PeteQuad]

Yeah these naysayers are silly. There are plenty of people that would go immediately as soon as it is possible. The last hundred years is the first time in the history of mankind that there is no frontier and there will always be some percentage driven to go into one if it is possible. That is just the nature of humanity.

[@giovannifoulmouth7205]

@@idonotlikethismusic false, CT received over 1 million reservations and it is the best selling EV truck in the world

[@steffenbendel6031]

@@PeteQuad And the people were looking for a better life, sometimes the paradise. Mars is nothing like that, it is far more hostile than Antarctica. And you can not get there for a few cheap dollars.

[@Burt1038]

I appreciate your input but I was frankly a little puzzled by some oversights in your analysis: a) Mars is only really cold due to the lack of atmosphere. Even so, the lack of air means very little heat transfer goes on. Basically it would take a really long time for you to freeze on Mars even if you went outside in shorts and a t-shirt. b)atmosphere loss wouldn't be an issue (assuming we could build one on there to begin with, THAT's the real challenge). The Solar Wind took hundreds of millions of years to strip off the atmosphere. If it had an Earth-like atmosphere, it would probably only take a few tons of fresh air per year to maintain it indefinitely. You are correct, however, in pointing out that radiation would be a major problem. c)you could have mentioned that the regolith on Mars is, to put it mildly, unsuitable for human settlement. The stuff is basically like asbestos and so it would take thousands, if not millions, of years to remediate to the point where you could live on it. At best we may be able to create some domed settlements but even that would be a tremendous undertaking involving churning millions of pounds of dirt and conditioning it with nutrients, bacteria, fungi, and other components to make it usable and not toxic.

[@saumyacow4435]

There's a lot of heat transfer into the soil below your hab.

[@David-yo5ws]

There was some talk of the potential to introduce an extremite plant that can grow in the cold temperatures of Mars, (in summer, some of the surface temperatures get to -20 Celsius). Such a plant (and they do exist on Earth) could convert the CO2 into O2 over time and with no 'predators' should spread pretty quickly. But the SpaceX site clearly shows enclosed habitats under clear domes. So the actual 'living on the surface' is not the reality that seems to be discussed in this video.

[@alexterrell1062]

And if you wanted to build a magnetic field generator, this could be done in space, at the Mars-Sun L1 point.

[@MasonDixonAutistic]

Mars is not cold due to a lack of atmosphere. It's cold because it's 1/10th of Earth, leading to the molten core turning solid ages ago, which would have made up an even greater proportion of the planet's heat than on Earth because the surface was closer. Also, the ground is now frigid: everything touching the ground loses heat to it, and which because of the low atmosphere is also the only way to cool any pressurised habitat, server or power plant. That freeze didn't happen quickly, hence why it took hundreds of millions of years for the Solar Wind to strip the atmosphere: the magnetic field got weaker gradually. Now, it's just not there at all, so atmospheric loss will happen at the fastest possible speed against any newly-produced atmosphere. The temperature problem isn't just that it's too-cold: it's keeping the freezing bits warm and the hot bits cool in any sealed artificial environment.

[@alexterrell1062]

@@MasonDixonAutistic It is all of those. The effects of different measures to heat the atmosphere have been analysed. The most effective methods are: 1. Large scale factories producing CFCs, which are super greenhouse gases banned on Earth. 2. Impacting comets, into the polar regions to vapourise CO2 and add moisture. 3. Solar mirrors None will make Mars tropical, but they could make life about as feasible as it is at the South Pole.

[@sepiar7682]

Are we sure having 1 million people on mars would even solve our existential risks problem? Like if Earth dies out, can 1 million people on Mars really restart the human population, considering they're on a planet with no wood, no fossil fuels, no wind, just solar power I guess. Like, I have to imagine they'd still be pretty dependent on Earth, right?

[@JayVal90]

The claim is that there’s some number where it would be self-sustaining. Maybe it’s 10 million, or maybe it’s 10 thousand with some additional research.

[@EstamosDe]

They can build stuff with bones, their bones 😮😅 it would be a nightmare to live there if Earth stops helping them, they would be like cockroaches eating each other to survive

[@jhoughjr1]

how little imagination

[@puddintame7794]

Apparently recently discovered large uranium resources though. I'd post a link but the comment has a 50 50 chance of staying up as it is.

[@eDeriQ]

You can't really be too dependant on Earth cause the trip is 2 years and half.

[@piratecat5113]

According to Hollywood you can achieve full autonomy on Mars as long as you have a potato that you can poop on, it's the circle of life.

[@johnrodgers2018]

A dangerous illusion? Cool, where do I sign up?

[@saumyacow4435]

You don't. Because no government is going to spend a trillion dollars so that you can fulfill a death wish.

[@InservioLetum]

Church. Schule. Mosque. Temple.

[@TheJareWolf]

Dangerous Delusion

[@johnrodgers2018]

@TheJareWolf even better

[@joannayuan6869]

Building dooms day bunkers actually seems more sensible in comparison, and a heck lot cheaper.

[@MrTomyCJ]

But it's a depressing and pessimistic goal. Elon wants something to loop up to, something to be excited about the future.

[@larspetrus3917]

No one is stopping you. We're 8 billion people, we can do many things at once.

[@andrasbiro3007]

No, it won't work. Unless you build big enough for millions of people, and make it fully self-sustaining. And also you have to make it resilient to whatever made you need it. Sci-fi literature explored this topic thoroughly.

[@Raphael4722]

@MrTomyCJ I get that. It just makes no sense to skip to terraforming Mars, when we haven't terraformed the Moon, Antarctica or even just a desert yet. It seems very impatient...

[@andrasbiro3007]

@@Raphael4722 The point is not terraforming, but establishing a "backup" for Earth. Terraforming is just one potential tool to achieve that goal. I don't think it's a good idea anyway. It's far too slow, and living on planets is stupid anyway. The long term solution is building artificial worlds. They can be made to exact specifications, not just poor approximations like a terraformed planet. And they are far more efficient use of raw materials too.

[@sidefx3]

Lets say it's the future and we have a small to large colony on Mars. Would anybody wish we hadn't gone to Mars?

[@jansebesta3112]

No 😀

[@doubletribble-yt]

Yea, the people on Mars would probably wish they hadn't gone.

[@fcgHenden]

​@@doubletribble-ytAnd were sure of this based on double-tribble's comment here. He's been there and he counts at least 5 who said so.

[@Escrublet]

Yeah probably the people on earth that have been ravaged by corporations and megacapitalists like elon musk and them sending all of our resources to a rock in space. Yay some rich people are living in space hell while I have no bread.

[@st-ex8506]

@@doubletribble-yt Probably some of the Pilgrims have thought that way, some 4 centuries ago?!

[@tasoskar9693]

I am a Greek, I would love to volunteer and go to Mars or die trying.My friends are the same. You old lady and others can stay back but I am willing to bet money that the are more people like us (Greeks) out there. Adventurous, optimistic, willing to explore the world and happy dying for something greater than us, expanding the knowelgde and territory of our amazing kind. + who has done more than Elon Musk for the climate change? for making the air cleaner and stop millions of people dying from cancer and car crashes?? Maybe only China has done more than him. You realise though that we are comparing a country with an individual. Cheers to all the haters, I hope one day you be more willing to give this man some credit

[@LivefreeLoz]

Hit 240k today. Appreciate you for all the knowledge and nuggets you had thrown my way over the last months. Started with 24k in September 2024.

[@HollyGarwell]

I would really love to know how much work you did put in to get to this stage

[@LivefreeLoz]

I will be forever thankful to you, you changed my life I will continue to speak on your behalf for the world to hear that you saved me from huge financial debt with just a little trade, thank you Jihan Wu you're such a life saver

[@TriciaDrammeh-o9x]

As a beginner in this, it’s essential for you to have a mentor to keep you accountable. Jihan Wu is also my trade analyst, he has guided me to identify key market trends, pinpointed strategic entry points, and provided risk assessments, ensuring my trades decisions align with market dynamics for optimal returns

[@RichardArthurBaker]

Jihan Wu Services has really set the standard for others to follow, we love him here in Canada 🇨🇦 as he has been really helpful and changed lots of life's

[@RobertAlbrecht-c5d]

His guidance allowed me to restructure my retirement plan, resulting in an estimated $700,000 more by the time I retire.

[@VincentNganTK]

I agree with you that colonizing Mars comes with a ton of challenges, but that shouldn't hold us back from starting. A lot of folks don't get Elon Musk; he's not just a businessman or a scientist, he's an entrepreneur with a grand vision and a clear mission. Entrepreneurs don't just chase profits-they're driven by passion, innovation, and the dream of what could be. Musk is all about that. His push to colonize Mars isn't just about setting up shop on another planet; it's about pushing our tech to new heights. One reason Musk is so enthusiastic about this "crazy" project is to elevate our tech game. History shows us the worth in these big, bold projects. Take the Apollo program; it wasn't exactly a financial winner, but the leaps in science, engineering, and tech were phenomenal. So many things we use today came from that space race. Columbus didn't find India when he sailed west, but he stumbled upon the Americas, changing everything. Musk's Mars mission might not achieve immediate colonization, but it could open doors to innovations we can't even dream of yet. This could impact everything from energy to AI to how we explore space. Actually, SpaceX has already started reaping these unexpected benefits. Reusable rockets have cut down launch costs big time, making all sorts of new space projects possible. NASA even used Musk's tech to show we can nudge an asteroid away from Earth, which is pretty crucial for our safety. Most of NASA's latest space adventures have been launched with SpaceX's help. These cheaper launches have also led to the Starlink project, bringing high-speed internet to the most remote corners of the world, something we once thought was out of reach. These tech breakthroughs are not only good for here and now but are laying the groundwork for Mars. I see Musk's Mars mission as more than just a trip to another planet; it's a test of what humans can achieve. He's pushing everyone to think outside the box, take risks, and tackle what once seemed impossible. Just like Columbus's journey expanded our world view, Musk's Mars quest could reveal new horizons. Colonizing Mars might be a long-term goal, but the innovations we're seeing now in energy, materials, AI, and space tech are already making life better on Earth.

[@andylyn640117]

good ❤

[@maniravsadhur8409]

The idea of Musk not searching profit made me laugh. You should take an interest in the lies he had to put forward to get into the comfortable situation he's in. He's interested in profit all right.

You're being led around unthinking by the Pied Piper of HYPErlooper. Wishing and wanting something to be workable doesn't make it so. The costs and benefits must be considered, or it's a pointless endeavor. In this case, there's absolutely no point.

[@kevinkeegan5366]

I remember reading estimates that a breathable atmosphere could be generated on Mars over a period of 100 to 300 years and that it would take 10 million to 15 million years to be stripped away. That would give any inhabitants plenty of time to develop a means of protecting that atmosphere, or they could user the same technology that generated the atmosphere to make up for losses.

[@mojojojo6292]

Sounds like made up sci fi nonsense

[@MrTomyCJ]

Yes, very weird this wasn't mentioned in the video. Completely misleading point, if you ask me.

[@giovannifoulmouth7205]

Idk what's going on with Sabine but she just implied that the same people who could create a thick Martian atmosphere are too stupid to prevent it from being stripped away over millenia lol I facepalmed

[@GS-kh5se]

100 to 300 years to generate oxygen. I doubt that, where is this large amount of oxygen coming from?

[@poruatokin]

Show us your science - nonsense comment.

[@eyeofsauronsa]

I hope there's an alien named Luigi on Mars waiting for him.

[@amenoum7623]

I would go to Mars today if I would be provided shelter, food and internet. To be able to do science would be a bonus. The same goes for Earth's north or south pole. I love remote and isolated places far away from humanity, just don't have the money to do it myself.

[@FriedrichZimmer-h2t]

You won't enjoy the Internet much in a place that is 20 light minutes away from earth.

[@Clayne151]

​@@FriedrichZimmer-h2tmost of the internet does not actually require low latency. Caching proxies haven fallen largely out of favor but would work wonders for this. Only things like live Chat/audio/video/gaming are impossible

[@MrTomyCJ]

@@FriedrichZimmer-h2t Most of our internet usage does not require real time communication.

[@carlosmejia5728]

Deal...but you got to take your wife and mother-in-law with you 😂😂😂

[@calboy2]

But you’d have to put up with Elon and a 50 percent survival rate

[@rey_nemaattori]

'The history of realy expensive thing happening in civilization has in essentially in every case been geopolitically been led by nations' This guy just forgot it was private Dutch and English compagnies that drove colonizarion and slavery for the first 200 years. The Dutch VOC had a market cap 6 or 7 times that of Apple in current day money. Governments didnt step in untill they started to fuck things up by going way overboard. I dont think we'll see terraforming or a self-sustaining city in our lifetime, but some researchers there would already be a massive leap forward...

[@JamesHardaker]

I'm not sure on all the historical facts but starlink looks set to generate enough money to privately develop all of the necessary equipment. Then nasa can hire it for whatever mission it needs. This is not the same as the moon landings where all the dev costs where fronted by nasa. NDT is wrong

[@erwinvangrinsven9345]

The VOC went there to trade pepper and spices, what is Mars exporting❓

[@mojrimibnharb4584]

With absolute state backing and monopoly grants. Try again later.

[@Cylawyer]

@@erwinvangrinsven9345 Mars is importing humans. Humans are exporting satisfaction that a single world killing event on Earth won't eliminate the human race. However, Martians might not be what we think of as humans in a century or so. Then again, they would be a form of humanity.

[@RandyHill-bj9pc]

@@mojrimibnharb4584 spaceX is planning on doing this on its own. No government aid needed. Starships design cost is $10 million a launch and its designed payload to the surface of Mars is 100 tons. If it requires a dozen tanker launches to refill an orbit that’s a cost of under $2 million per ton to get supplies to Mars that means SpaceX itself consent thousands of tons of supplies to hundreds of astronauts out of its own budget.

[@DrBeah]

If he's so sure of "greening" Mars, why hasn't he started practicing on the Mojave or Sahara?

[@BerenddeBoer]

The owners will nuke you if you try.

[@douglascutler1037]

Many others are already greening deserts here on earth. They are the ones we need to applaud. Look up 'salt water agriculture' which can turn millions of acres of derelict land into productive land with salt water and saltwater plant species. A big project even in Spain. Lot's of info online. There are also means to green deserts with fresh water strategies. There are also advanced versions of green house technologies for deserts or anywhere.

[@epobirs]

It's already happening. The Sahara has been shrinking fro some time as shown by satellites. This is something would-be terraformers are watching intently.

[@ProfessorBeautiful]

Antarctica. But better hurry up.

[@Perrirodan1]

China is already doing it in their deserts Israel had done it in thei deserts, nothing impossible about greening deserts , by the way we need a desert in the Sahara to send particles in the air that make whole regions of the world fertile, your Sahara greening would be a disaster

[@ShelitaCrosby]

Can't grow corn in Death Valley but here we go marching to Mars.

[@daemonredfield3211]

How do we solve issues with low gravity environments and the health effects (especially on children)

[@Thomas-gk42]

Indeed, few people mention this fact

These aren't issues worth solving because we're not going to the Moon or Mars. The ISS is being thrown away in 2030 and there's no clear replacement as of yet.

[@fewwiggle]

You don't stop them. You learn how to mitigate them and live with the best you can manage.

[@dan_655]

somewhat agree with the “would be a lot easier if we wait a bit” argument in the sense that on average this is the better option but when something is important enough I’d still argue we should go for it asap bc we don’t know how much time we have but I strongly disagree with the “fix earth first” sentiment bc 1. even assuming great progress there will always be things to fix on earth and 2. it’s mostly a false dichotomy - the people working crazy hard right now bc they are excited about solving the problems of building spaceships would not fix climate change instead if you take that opportunity away from them lastly I was under the impression that there are better approaches to the magnetic field problem (like a much smaller magnetic shield orbiting between sun and mars) - but I do trust your judgment on that

[@lanszoominternet]

Strongly disagree with this. The only person eager to get people to Mars is Musk; and that is only because it will make him personally a lot of money!

[@msytdc1577]

The magnetic field problem isn't even a problem, Mars would lose an atmosphere over the course of a hundred thousand years to millions of years. Aka a time period as long as the modern human species has been around, if you are priming your concerns around something that would be a problem at 10x the time period that we have had agriculture, well, one doth complain too much, less yap, more doing.

[@lost4468yt]

How long do you want to wait for? Because you could always say this. And the reality is that we're simply never going to build a lot of the technology if we have no motive to. Actually trying to do it will be the motive to develop these technologies.

[@dan_655]

@@lost4468yt agree that the relevant tech wouldn’t magically improve if we don’t need it while we wait but it could still get easier due to economic growth or science breakthroughs guess it depends on how optimistic you are about those things anyway I’m not saying we should wait at all - I’m actually really excited about the aggressive timelines spacex is pushing

[@gags730]

Makes more sense to do it on the moon as it poses literally the same challenges. Radiation, Temperatures, and Gravity all pose serious problems but with the moon astronauts can return quickly before incurring serious health problems. The cost saving would be a magnitude more expensive for Mars and the Astronauts would most likely wouldn't be able to walk when they get there and they still have to return with another 8 months or longer to get back. After the trip there they would need to support about 120lbs with the gear and they will have vertigo and balance issues along with atrophy and all the other problems. A year in space may take 3 to 4 years to heal back on Earth with bone density issues, not to mention the radiation for the time in space. The second you leave the planet is the second your body begins to die.

[@darko714]

I wrote a paper on this topic 10 years ago. Elon actually read it and modified his rap on the subject. The bottom line is that a self-sustaining colony is at least 1,000 years in the future. But that doesn’t mean we should give up on the project.

[@josepablolunasanchez1283]

He made a truck to transport illegal earthlings, but he did not bother to design the house where they will live.

[@VuyaniMagibisela]

Don't you think the earlier we try the better will get and the sooner will learn the needed lessons to be a self-sustaining colony?

[@josepablolunasanchez1283]

@@VuyaniMagibisela So let me guess. Pile bricks randomly to see if we build a house is the way to go? Nope. We need to design the house first, then build the house, test it on the moon and learn, and then go to Mars. For all practical purposes, the moon is a better training ground. Mars has almost no atmosphere, so there is not so much difference with the moon. And you have nasty dust on the moon and nasty perchlorate dust on Mars.

[@VuyaniMagibisela]

@@josepablolunasanchez1283 yeah I agree with that, what I don't agree with is not doing it or focusing on it, let's start now let's not all focus on earths problems let others start with the exploration of space, we started on the moon and we go beyond.

[@josepablolunasanchez1283]

@@VuyaniMagibisela Space colonies are houses, real estate. If we do not care about it we should ban Earth real estate too. Space transportation is trucks, if we do not like it we should ban trucks too. So space is just as earthling business as any other business. Going to space and populate it is like creating Las Vegas in the middle of nothing. Should we ban Las Vegas? The amount of scientific illiteracy of people is so appalling.

[@CornerTalker]

Colonize the Moon. Mine ores and refine them. I hear there's a lot of titanium there. It's at the top of our gravity well.

[@longjohn526]

You can't do 10 launches per day because it's not the same distance to travel every day. Mars at it's closest is 34.8 million miles but Mars at it's furthest 250 million miles away. Why would you launch 10 rockets when it is 250 million miles away and thus would take 7 times longer and would need 7 times more life support resources and more fuel? Sure you could do that but it would be stupid to do so.

[@cavevendit2649]

Search for "Hohmann transfer" and look at the diagram showing the optimal transfer orbit.

[@EFazy]

Elon aims to have the booster to be able to launch, come back, refill, and go again.. Same booster multiple times of the day. I think it's never the plan to start rockets, when Mars is far away. The goal is to have a launch system, which can start multiple payload with the same booster from the same spot when Earth and Mars are near to each other. If he can launch 3 times the same booster a day, and have let's say 5 or 10 pads, is 15-30 payload/day. If you would like to do it with the old method, you'll loose 15-30 rocket per day, which is way more fucked up, not to mention the shitload of junk dropped into the ocean... :(

[@SomeOne-vq4fo]

musk means for them to wait in leo and then launch from there once the transfer window opens. "thousands of ships every two years" i believe the quote was. It's also not feasible due to the rocket specifications to fly to mars outside the 2 year (actually closer to 26 month) transfer window.

[@fcgHenden]

Same argument as Ambulances should be able to deploy every minute. "Able to." No one ever said you have to deploy ambulances all the time when there's no need. It's like car factories can build up to 200 cars per day. But they never do. But they can. It's usually done in batches.

[@cre8tvedge]

Of course your right but we are dealing with the world's richest man, a pot head who was born twenty years too late. He's a damn stoner hippie who would be perfectly at home in Haight Ashbury circa 1969 with his bizarre musings. Don't ask me how I know.....

[@cavevendit2649]

The propellant needed to lift a person to orbit via Starship is about 2,300 kg to 3,500 kg. A 30 year old person will exhale 18,250 kg of CO2 over the remainder of their lifetime. So sending people to space (of average age 30 years old) reduces carbon dioxide emission by a factor 10x the amount expended in propellant, and since CO2 mass is only about a third of propellant mass, the ratio of CO2 is more like 30x. There are few investments in carbon emission reduction that pay off as well as this. And this includes only the the *CO2 that is **exhaled**. Average emissions per person in the US is claimed to be 17 tons (metric? src ourworldindata) annually, so the savings factor of lifting a person to space is much MUCH higher if you include all of their future avoided electricity, transportation, HVAC, food, and other CO2 emissions that don't happen.

[@dadschannel5456]

A Modest Proposal 2.0

[@totally_lost1602]

Now there is another approach, and that is using 70+ year olds in good health as the early colonists, as most of us grew up watching Startrek, reading Podkayne of Mars by Heinlein, plus a lot of Clarke. We all expected Starship to be developed once the Shuttle had taken flight. At our age, fractional gravity is a plus, and we have well developed life skills to engineer and construct the infrastructure needed in place. If we pass a few years earlier on Mars that's just fine, if we can keep our minds active with Mars construction, then dementia is MUCH less likely than if we stay waiting to die. So put about 1 million of us on Mars, along with enough seeds and UV resistant clear panels, and we will grow our food, generate our O2, recycle our CO2, and build a colony ready for 30 year olds that want to raise families on Mars. Bulk supplies for chemicals, metals, and 3d printing resins/plastics, and we can make it work. We did here.

[@denysvlasenko1865]

@@totally_lost1602 > Now there is another approach, and that is using 70+ year olds in good health Or do it the old-fashioned way: volunteers. I'll bet you any money there will be far more volunteers than seats on the first rockets. The expeditions will be able to pick and choose.

[@chusnacho4447]

2:44 That is a textbook definition strawman. As far as i have gathered, the reason to stablish the mars colony is to prevent a mass extinction event that ends life on earth from wiping humanity altogether, not to "escape the problemas we have on earth".

[@40hup]

If earth goes down mars goes down, the colony there will be totally dependent on earth forever. A colony there does nothing to ensure human survival, that is just a marketing trick by musk for his not so smart fans. On the contrary - the constant drain of this colony would speed up the overexploitation of earth even faster, and thus the end of humanity.

[@arthurlau98]

Basically European style thinking. Their adventures all moved to America and Australia ages ago. And the modern one all worked for Silicon valley and Elon freaking Musk. And all the while East Asians are busy copying and trying their hardest to catch up. That is why Europe is stagnating.

[@joshg469]

"Why would we wanna go to space? Everything's here." -Jocelyn

[@iceshakle]

The question is for how long?

[@DorthLous]

The thing most of those "anti" discussions seem to forget is that planetary destruction events are a thing. You do NOT want all your eggs in one basket, no matter how scuffed the other one is...

[@ldkbudda4176]

Exactly!

[@captkerk]

Eggs, yes. Entire beings?

[@jimmcneal5292]

Yes, but how probable is that it will happen in the next few hundred years?

[@Xlippo]

@@jimmcneal5292 How probably do you think it should be?

[@ChrisStevenBanach]

@@jimmcneal5292same comment dinos made 10 years before Chicxulub asteroid hit

[@lagunax5645]

On the point about "Solving problems on Earth", I think a few things: 1. We'd have to do a lot of that even if we were focusing on Mars 2. Even if Elon's present specific plans aren't realistic of one reason or another (honestly, the 20-year-timeline alone suggests he's not qualified for the effort...), the broad strategy of "leaving Earth" is still 100% necessary for extending human survival just because of entropy 3. Because of #2, the availability of remaining resources on Earth *at the time* that we technologically enable mass movement to Mars (whenever that is) is going to directly correlate to how much of our species can leave the planet, so there is good reason to get wheels turning sooner.

[@lagunax5645]

Oh, and regarding Tyson's point about "Geopolitical expediency": Whoever colonizes Mars first will become the "United States" of our solar system. It'll be like that whole "new world" thing from when Europe started showing up in the western hemisphere, but on steroids. There's so much geopolitical expediency, it transcends to ASTROpolitical expediency.

[@Qwrirq]

Indeed, Elon isn't a deep thinker. But having an influential dreamer pushing for crazy ideas focuses others towards solving the problems necessary to make them into a reality and if you value humanities survival then mars colonization is problably the most realistic path forward to stop a single event from erasing us all.

[@laszlokorosi9012]

On the "Solving problems on Earth FIRST": If all humans were always such narrow-minded, we would still be polishing our caves to make them a better habitat...

[@4vR3n]

@@laszlokorosi9012 You realize most progress in human history isbased on exactly that, making thing easier for ourselves...

[@laszlokorosi9012]

​@@4vR3n Depends very much on what each of us consider "most progress". For me Kepler, Newton, Einstein, Heisenberg and many more theoreticians brought most progress, then experimentalists proving, or disproving fundamental science theories. None of them were after making life easier, which came only as a byproduct of their endeavor.

[@kalzium8857]

The biggest problem of colonizing mars is that it is mars.

[@ChrisStavros]

The engineering problems associated with colonizing Mars are complicated but solvable. The actual problem people have with it is that it's being done by Elon Musk, and media tells them Elon Musk bad. Therefore Mars colonization bad. These 75 IQ leftards come up with complete non-sequiturs like "what about the problems here on Earth??" if we never took any steps forward before achieving perfection, we'd still be chimps living in trees.

[@terrylandess6072]

My first choice of candidates (if interested ) would be those whom successfully served in Isolated duty - Antarctica, Submarines, etc. That would leave us short several hundred thousand individuals familiar with that type of environment.

[@FourthRoot]

Yes, anything hard isn't worth doing.

[@JJ-zr6fu]

And we haven’t figured out how to colonize the moon. Countries fund the Antarctic bases and the ISS.

[@FourthRoot]

@JJ-zr6fu What do you mean we haven't figured it out? There's a difference between not having done something and not knowing how to do it. We know how to colonize the moon, we know how to colonize Mars. Don't believe me? Name anything that you think we haven't solved, and I can tell you the solution. Go ahead.

[@gladesoutfitters]

as a fisherman we have a saying "don't leave fish to find fish" I do this all the time because I am curious and like to explore...but I would not take my rod and hook to a desert...Mars checks no boxes for fish...colonize the moon first...

[@GnomeNorthOfTheWall]

The problem with Mars colony is that it's so easily wiped out. One unexpected event/storm/meteor in wrong place can destroy the one million people colony. Humankind on earth is partly so resilient because we are spread geographically on large area, basically whole planet.

[@RandyHill-bj9pc]

If the Mars colony has a 1-100 chance of being wiped out every year, and humans on Earth have a 1 in 1000 chance of being wiped out every year, any time that humans on earth are wiiped out, there is a 99% chance we survive still on Mars, and can return to earth to repopulate.

[@andrasbiro3007]

That's the point. Spread out more to be more resilient.

[@piotrpilinko639]

@@RandyHill-bj9pc "and humans on Earth have a 1 in 1000 chance of being wiped out every year" What is the source of this probability magnitude?

[@douglascutler1037]

Right. Plus, a Mars colony would be powerless against malicious AI which could merely hack into already necessary robotics and AI on Mars or even send their own rockets. If you actually do a critical evaluation of possible 'extinction to last person' scenarios on Earth, NONE of them are served by a Mars colony. It's all just Musk 'riffing' on sci-fi themes. But not first principals science.

[@bashvim]

I support going to Mars. Going to Mars pushes our technology. If we have the capability for Mars, it can be tuned for some other better planet as well, and we won't have to start from zero.

[@stevemawer848]

I support Musk going to Mars - I'd even contribute to a fund-raiser. His absence would make the Earth a better place.

[@Baerchenization]

There is no better planet than Mars, which is why we want to go to Mars.

[@adoreus1258]

@@stevemawer848 The totality of your envious hater kind haven't done as much good for humanity as Musk alone.

Too expensive, too risky, and problems need solving here on Earth first.

[@sunnyjim1355]

1:54 Richard Dawkins is looking more and more like a 'Thunderbirds' puppet by the year, and behaving like one too. I used to admire him, but now I just see him as a clown.

[@vuIent]

im sure he doesnt want to be that we should tell him to watch this video

[@Kr0N05]

:) Good observation, I couldn't quite put my finger on why he looked weird.

[@d3ly51d]

Is the lack of a magnetic field really such a big problem? I was under the impression that, if we had a way to give an Earth-like atmosphere to Mars today, then it would slowly get eroded by the solar wind over thousands of years, during which time we could presumably replenish the lost atmosphere, by doing again the same thing we originally did to create it. Am I wrong in thinking this? Out of all the hazards on Mars I think the most serious problem to the first settlers would be the low gravity, to which we simply don't know yet how the human body reacts. You can always create habitable pockets that shield you from the radiation and the elements and that contain a breathable atmosphere, and you can melt water ice and bake the rocks to get oxygen using power from nuclear reactors. All of these are technologies that we have today. But simulating earth gravity on Mars would likely require building enormous spinning disk-like structures, which will not be easy to build by the first inhabitants.

[@MrGriff305-d3u]

Mars is just another planet that we can walk on that happens to be close by. That said, is it really much better than the Moon?

[@alexswanson7127]

Yes, partly because it has higher gravity, but mainly because it has large quantities of water, nitrogen, and carbon dioxide. It also has a day/night cycle almost identical to Earth

[@simplexoro6206]

Yes and no. Yes, it has a day/night cycle similar to earth, it's gravity is higher than earth like previous reply pointed. Higher gravity allows an atmosphere where, as moon has virtually no atmosphere. Mars seems to have ice on its pole. If it is ice water, it could solve a huge problem for potential civilization. No, because it's far away from earth, and to get there, it's a few months of journey, but the moon is just a couple of days away. When it comes to being protected from solar radiation, it is a pretty much similar approach. In my opinion, if we just want a civilization that is outside of our planet moon is easier compared to Mars in terms of transportation time and cost it takes and also if the new civilization needs an emergency evacuation or something similar. But if we are talking about what if something happens to earth, like a meteor strike that has the power to wipe out everything, then the moon is also not much safer since how close it is relative to earth.

[@anthonybrett]

We invented an MRI machine in our quest to reach the moon. I wonder what we might invent trying to get to Mars??

[@MrGriff305-d3u]

@@anthonybrett Imagine what we'll invent just trying to live permanently on the Moon. Your comment is also not really relevant regarding practically of where humans should settle.

[@saumyacow4435]

its more of a challenge. Take some samples. Take some happy snaps. And bugger off back to Earth. There is a point in reaching Mars. There is no point in living there long term.

[@joesimon2018]

She doesn't touch on the lack of gravity and how that causes health problems to the human body. The radiation is another huge problem

[@TheSighphiguy]

lack of gravity? on mars? its close to HALF Earths gravity. thats fine for us. a little working out will solve that. plus we ADAPT. future colonists will have it easier and easier.

[@rp3351]

@@TheSighphiguy We don't really know much yet about the long term effects of reduced gravity (and nothing at all about fetal development in those conditions). We also don't know much about our ability to keep closed environments healthy for a VERY long time (hint: bacteria and viruses evolve much much faster than us). Imagine setting up to colonize Mars in a grand scale and realizing after a decade that people there develops all sort of debilitating physical conditions, can't give birth to healthy children, gets all sort of nasty infections from mutated bacteria and viruses that we can't purge from the habitats, and can't even get back to Earth because re-adaptation to 1 G is too risky... those are real possibilities. We talk a lot about our current lack of geo-engineering skills to terraform Mars, but I feel that we should rather ask ourselves if our bio-engineering skills are up to the task.

[@TheSighphiguy]

@@rp3351 i was only speaking to the "gravity" on Mars. not "terraforming. We should ignore Mars for now(colonywise) and focus on the Moon. baby steps...

[@rp3351]

@@TheSighphiguy yeah we should definitely gather more expertise about living off-earth for long time before plotting the conquest of Mars. Outposts on the Moon, new and bigger space stations orbiting Earth, possibly with centrifuges to simulate martian gravity...

[@2032bick52]

@@TheSighphiguyLes than half the gravity will cause more than half the problems, but when it comes to accelerated genetic damage, that could well be a big problem still. And the gravity of a planet is not something we can ever terraform.

[@StillAliveAndKicking_]

Whilst living on Mars is at present an absurd idea, it is providing motivation for the Starship which will massively reduce the cost of sending payloads into orbit, and hence it will be a major contribution to space development. The moon will surely become a mining and manufacturing base, thanks to Starship and lookalikes. As for expensive things always being led by nation states, well the conquest of India by the British was led by private industry, as was the exploration and conquest of the Americas. Development of semiconductors was essentially privately funded, their production costs a fortune. Starship itself would be very expensive were it lead by government. Instead Musk is developing a new super rocket for much less than the SLS system that is government financed. The SLS cost more than two billion dollars per launch, Starship should cost 1/10 of that, if not much less. Very expensive things can be done privately if there is a sufficient return on investment.

[@amguardia]

"Very expensive things can be done privately if there is a sufficient return on investment." But that's very much the point. To my understanding, there is absolutely no money to make going to mars (contrary to inventing the transistor or conquering India). So why would people invest large amounts on that ?

[@Me__Myself__and__I]

Why is living on Mars absurd? People do things others consider obsurd literally all the time. YOU not liking it doesn't mean a thing on the grand scale. Everyone thinks their personal perspective is everything.

[@lost4468yt]

It'll always be an absurd idea if we don't follow through on it.

[@StillAliveAndKicking_]

@ There is as good as no air, so you’ll need a source of oxygen at least. Water is present but buried deep and must be mined and purified. No atmosphere means no open fields, so plants and animals must be housed in giant shed with glass roofs or roof lights. Thus the cost of food will be extremely high. The cost of buildings will be high as they must be airtight. The overall cost of a self sustaining colony would be massive with no revenue generation. And we have never constructed a successful long term sealed environment. Hence the idea is currently absurd.

[@StillAliveAndKicking_]

@@amguardia Exactly. The moon might be financially worthwhile, Mars not.

[@darylephillips6778]

The people of Europe used to put a hundred people in sailing boat and send to the ends of the earth , some times never to see them again .

[@shaunwalker7473]

I really liked this new format video with the showing of both sides and intresting clips

[@hemaccabe4292]

You forgot to mention that the dirt on Mars is poison.

[@terrylandess6072]

Our soil is the accumulation of millions of years of dead remains of living organisms. Start there before going any further.

[@RandyHill-bj9pc]

A very mild poison thats easily cleaned from soil or suits with water, and Mars is awash with underground water at every latitude.

[@GntlTch]

Go look up precision fermentation. Mars dirt will not be required.

[@hemaccabe4292]

@@GntlTch But fine Mars dust will be relentlessly trying to get into every habitat, vehicle and pressure suit (and from there into lungs and then into graves). Particularly as equipment has to go out and come back in. Can it be combatted to some extent? Yes, but it will waste vast quantities of precious water, volume, mechanical equipment and time and never be completely successful. Of course, you should think of all that instantly from my comment without me having to explain it to you.

[@rodgunn2621]

It would be far more practical to move underground on Earth when the time comes.

[@robertmoffett3486]

Uh oh, don't let Elon hear you, or he'll start boring everyone with his boring company junk again. I agree with you, to a deg🎉ree. At least, we could build a Musk "colony" deep in a disused coal mine, and see how the volunteer residents fare. If they hate it, we can call it a prison

[@ngauruhoezodiac3143]

The North Vietnamese are used to that.

[@blu3collar949]

In a billion or so years the sun will become a red giant before it it burns out and becomes a tiny white dwarf star. However once it becomes a red giant, the Earth will be reduced to a cynder and perhaps even completely disintegrated. Living under ground will not save anyone.

[@dependent-wafer-177]

Trust me Sabine, there's going to be a ton of people who will volunteer to live on Mars.

[@rowshambow]

Common misconception that mars exploration and colonization would take away resources from "fixing" earth. You're thinking if military spending. The great filter is real. So is in situ resource utilization. You don't have to go to mars, but plenty of people understand why branching out and off this planet is important.

[@kpbendeguz]

This. Humanity spends 5% of all resources on beauty products, but nobody willing to give up on looking (or smelling) better to save the Earth.

[@lost4468yt]

Even military funding can be good? Most countries have it as

[@rowshambow]

@lost4468yt literally every economic benefit you mentioned would happen from funding the space program and space colonization. Do you know how many jobs that would create? Do you know what is actually involved in space exploration and colonization? Not to mention the actual return in technology that is actually helpful. We don't need hypersonic missiles. Smaller countries wouldn't need help if resource distribution was addressed properly. War is made sustainable because government leaders want people to believe that there is scarcity when there is actually abundance. If every citizen of every country called their leaders on their BS, there wouldn't be any public interest in war. Diverting military spending toward biodiversity protection, sustainable agriculture, health care, science and exploration would provide so many more actual enriching jobs that wouldn't leave people traumatized then dumped by their leaders after. Disaster relief is an actual profession already, we don't need soldiers for that. Think who actually benefits from war. It's an industry of death

[@markdavich5829]

Oh for cryin out loud - If Elon wants to go to Mars... Send him.

[@simondalzell5635]

Plus One... The Orange Imbecile.

[@dukes1993724]

We just don’t want to fund his trip!

[@asynchronicity]

Look at the Cybertruck closely and then see if you think Elon is really a genius.😸

[@MadDragon75]

My neighbor has one. 🧐... They are hideous.

[@vizuz]

Have you driven one? They are brilliant

[@MadDragon75]

@vizuz no, I just see a horror movie in 3D after those three teens in LA recently. Hard pass.

[@RandyHill-bj9pc]

Model S, genius. Falcon 9, genius. Starlink, genius. Falcon Heavy, genius. Starship, largest rocket ever built, and first to be fully reusable, genius. A real genius understands that entrepeneurs aren't measured by the success or failure of individual projects, but by their overall success rate.

[@OracleTarotBenji]

​@@vizuzall I've seen is the problems with them lmao

[@ashuggtube]

I find the proposal of a one-way trip to Mars terrifying

[@user-kb8gh5jv9t]

lol, it’s pretty simple, why would anyone want to go to a Planet that’s been dead for a long time already!? It’s mind-boggling…

[@13137713]

On the other hand, that's Musk, and this might be just his way to hype up things and then cash in, just like he did with various stocks before. With time it became obvious that he doesn't always know what he's saying, sometimes being outright wrong, but he's convincing enough to receive not only government funding, but Investments as well.

[@aldunlop4622]

Because there is nowhere else.

[@user-kb8gh5jv9t]

@@aldunlop4622 , “nowhere else” for what? Why are we trying to abandon a perfectly good planet? Again, mind-boggling! There is plenty that can be done here on Earth with staggering amount of money instead of wasting it on a trip to a small uninhabitable Dust Planet.

[@aldunlop4622]

@@user-kb8gh5jv9t What's mind-boggling is that you don't seem to understand that NO ONE IS TRYING ABANDON EARTH!!! Where do you people get these ideas? Earth will still be here, 99.99999999999999999999% of humans will still live here. This is about establishing ANOTHER PRESENCE for human life! Do you understand?!?!

[@joshuadupre6161]

​@@aldunlop4622 😅 they get the idea from doom and gloom movies

[@francismcdonnell8149]

3:00 Lord Rees said .."dangerous delusion" (i.e. a false judgement/belief despite contrary evidence), not "illusion".

[@FractalWanderer]

Hah! That's funny. You mean to tell me I could get paid 15 grand to move to the city where I was born? 😅

[@SabineHossenfelder]

Funny coincidence!

[@trevorchabot864]

I want to move there to be closer to Westboro.

[@littlefluffybushbaby7256]

Apply now! What have you got to lose?

[@FractalWanderer]

​@littlefluffybushbaby7256 She's not wrong, you might as well move to mars, there's a reason they pay so much just to get people to move there! Home of the westboro babtist church, know for their.... protesting of veteran funerals... not exactly the most attractive place to live 😂 You'd be better of in like Wichita if you're going to live in Kansas

[@Shroomdiffnuclear]

We already exist for about 1 million years and mother earth just blinked twice