This is why it’s silly hearing billionaires, who do the most damage to our planet, telling us how urgently we need to “get off this rock” which has supported life for millions of years in favor of some dead planet. It’s really just an extension of capitalism that demands infinite space to exploit, instead of being content with sustainability.
Elon’s argument for why we need to spread to other planets holds true even if everything on Earth were going perfectly.
It’s not about getting everyone off Earth - it’s about creating a backup for humanity on other planets. This ensures that the only known flame of consciousness in the universe isn’t extinguished by a nuclear war, pandemic, supervolcano, or asteroid impact. It’s about not having all your eggs in one basket.
By extension it would give more of an excuse for the top 1% to give even less of a fck about earth and the climate. Next thing you’d see is all the rich bailing to another planet while those who can’t afford it are left with what’s left of earth and the hellscape they left behind (and probably still have more agency over earth than those still living on there).
And, if people like Musk hold it, it would let them tax us etc.
That’s quite cynical view. There’s about 0% chance of that happening during their lifetime. Or you think they’ll just want to go to mars and sit inside some capsule for the rest of their lives? C’moon now…
No, it would be cynical to say that all talk of space colonization is actually a lie to spur interest in government funded space technology, which gets contracted out to one major company owned by the richest man in the world who has become that rich off the back of other government subsidies.
Wait–
That’s still not an argument against the need to have a backup of humanity somewhere beyond Earth. Your desire to stick it to the man won’t mean much if we go extinct.
This is not risk free. When you give people access to space and still have terrorism and wars, things can end badly quickly.
There’s also a valid argument around where to best focus those resources now. We are nowhere near ready for space colonization on any scale, let alone sustainable ones.
A City on Mars by the Wienersmiths dives into some of these challenges if you are interested.
We will most likely always have terrorism and wars. That’s not an argument against letting wealthy individuals fund a private space race.
He meant the budget spent on space is enormous and there are more urgent priorities on Earth solve so he does get it.
We already have Mars populated by human-made robots, and one going to Europa moon, terraforming means you’re thinking of making it habitable for humans, a huge difference from sending robots to do researches to understand better the moons/asteroids/planets.
The point you try saying his argument which seems against billionaires to be invalid instead of arguing against any other point he made just points out your focus is being an apologist for the wealthy to keep doing what they do best, starve and explore everyone else.
It’s private wealth, not government funding. They’re free to use their wealth how ever they see fit as long as it’s legal.
Ad-hominem is not argument to the contrary either.
Great argument for and example of how the US government isn’t taxing wealth nearly enough, if we have homeless people and billionaires funding sci fi fantasies for their own amusement in the same country.
Asteroid impact can solve homelesness too.
I still think populating other planets is a worthy cause. We should do that while taxing the billionaires more.
Yes it is! Right now no one can hurtle an asteroid at earth to end it instantly. When space mining takes off that’s a very real threat.
I’m not sure space mining is what causes asteroids. Dinosaurs didn’t have a space program to my knowledge.
Space mining can absolutely cause asteroids strikes. It only hasn’t done it yet because we haven’t done any asteroid mining yet. A big part of asteroid mining operations will likely be asteroid herding, bringing all the asteroids you want to the same place where they can be processed. But moving asteroids around is a potentially dangerous activity.
That said, space is really really really big… It’s really hard for two things to hit each other on accident. If you’re collecting asteroids at a high earth orbit, the chance of them accidentally hitting earth instead is extremely low. You have to miss your target by over 100,000 miles. Which would be… a monumental failure.
I think it would be a good idea to start colonizing space before “we have our shit figured out on earth”, since you know, that will never actually happen. We will have wars on earth for all eternity, we should colonize and explore space anyway.
Honestly, I strongly believe that striving to make space habitats work is one of the things that will finally teach us what we need to know to live sustainably on earth. The thing is, an affordable space colony is one that recycles almost everything, one that works mostly as a closed loop, a sustainable bubble. So in other words, if you know how to survive in a space colony, you know how to live without destroying the earth. And extreme sustainability is really the natural goal with any large space colony. Unfortunately nobody is really trying to do that here on earth, the funding, the engineering, it just isn’t happening. But if we start seriously attempting habitats in space, then people will be attempting that somewhere… And once we figure out how to do it, it can be reapplied to life on earth.
I used to think this way too, or hand wave away all the inconvenients as lessons to be learned, but there is a very valid argument to make that the best thing we can do as a species right now, is to focus inward here before we move out there. Wall before you run type thing. The book mentioned earlier covers a lot of these topics in detail and if you are interested I’d highly recommend as it reshaped my view of the current options. godpseed
Yeah, I’ve been meaning to read a City on Mars, it’s near the top of my list. I have read some excerpts from it though, and from what I’ve seen, it is trying to tackle these questions from a realistic perspective, but it does also seem overly pessimistic at times.
Btw, your username is awesome.
Our bodies are simply not made to leave earth for a long period. It’s a lofty goal but completely unrealistic when considering our biology has evolved specifically to live here.
Has no one learned anything from War of the Worlds?
Also, remember how humanity really messed things up when we started colonising other parts of our globe? We brought disease, we murdered and we polluted.
If you can make people survive on Mars, you’re more than able to make pockets of humanity survive those disasters on Earth
It should also be a strong strong signal to stop listening to the apes that are hoarding all the bananas, and instead, eat that banana-hoarding abhorrence.
Bananas make for a terrible time value storage in the real world
In donkey Kong country tho? He who controls bananas controls the universe
I heard if you ingest huge quantities of bananine, you will see the golden path humanity must walk, but will be condemned to life as a half banana, half human monstrosity.
100% radioactive decay
The good news is that it will never get to that point. Venus is a different planet with a different makeup and history.
The bad news, it doesn’t have to get nearly that bad to be bad for us and the rest of existing life. Not even close. Just a few degrees more, and we’re doing really well in getting there.
I’ve heard of the runaway greenhouse gas effect. Is there a limit to that?
The limit is our distance from the Sun. After a certain point the greenhouse gasses can’t make up for the fact that we just get less radiation than Venus does. The maximum potential I’ve seen is 10°C - almost all life would go extinct and we’d have to live on the tropical Antarctic archipelago, but not Venus.
Everything find equilibrium eventually. I’m sure any limits for a runaway situation depend on a lot of factors, but their ceilings are all far above anything we could tolerate. Runaway doesn’t mean there’s no point to level out, only that at the time it’s not controllable and escalating fast.
The last “runaway” situation the Earth had was called the Paleocene–Eocene Thermal Maximum (PETM) 56 million years ago and globally had a 5-8 degree Celsius rise over thousands of years. That might be a good example of a natural situation and its limits. Keep in mind the differences in rate, we’re increasing the global temperature faster than the PETM (or anything we’ve found in geological history) so we don’t know how that faster rate will act in determining a peak. There’s theories of pushing the Earth into a hothouse world that would have its own equilibrium that is far hotter than we can survive.
Bruh, just realized terraforming starts with terra and that’s why it’s what it’s called
The term translates horribly into Finnish: “maankaltaistaminen”. “To make like Earth/ground/dirt” and “make like” as in “type”, not “form”.
So it could be like “earthlikening” instead of “terraforming”.
Which makes me think of this Wikipedia that’s written in the way they imagine English could’ve evolved if it wasn’t influenced by Latin.
https://anglish.fandom.com/wiki/Main_leaf
for instance their article on maths starts with:
Telcraft (scorelore, rimecraft or reckonlore) (English: Mathematics) is the smeying of scorings, or the recking of begrips such as score, room, shift, and forebuilding. Benjamin Peirce called it “the cunning which draws needful outcomes”.
Through foredeeming and wordlock mulling, scorelore arose from notching, reckoning, deeming, and the learning of sheathes and shapes.
Knowledge and note of fern scorelore have always been a spanning and a needful lifetool, as can be witnessed from orshafts of Egypt, Bearithland, Indland, China and Frodland. Furthermore, the Ishango bone is more than 20 thousand years old.
Titillating, isn’t it?
Same lol
But think of the shareholders!!
Much more likely the whole earth turns into a desert, no?
Earth’s surface is 2/3rds water and that’s not changing.
But intense heat means more storms with stronger winds and heavier rain. Imagine a Cat 5 hitting the coast every year.
No, that would be mercuryforming Earth. Earth will still have an atmosphere and rainfall, though it may no longer be livable for humans.
I, for one, would like to give a shout-out to my dog, magnetosphere!
Holla!
The magnetosphere has been weakening in strength due to the ongoing pole shift over the past 30 years, which will peak in the 2040s when the poles will fully shift. I pray there will be no solar flares in the direction of earth during this event, otherwise most of unshielded electric equipment will get fried, including energy infrastructure.
No way. Is that really happening? The magnetic poles are flipping the 2040s? How often does that happen? Old compasses won’t be correct? Will it affect anything else (Aurora Borealis?, etc?)
I’m plumb flummoxed.
Aurora Borealis will be more visible because of the weakened magnetosphere. I don’t know what implications this will have on the world in practice.
You can watch this video for some more information: https://youtu.be/1sDZiCLUW8I
This guy Earth’s
Interesting name for a dog, not gonna lie
Maggy for short, I’m sure of it.
The acid rain is going be be so slimming.
Venusforming earth is a lot like terraforming mars, it’s just hard to reach. If 200 years ago we were able to easily reach mars, we would have fucked up that too
The feminism-oil complex
Musk is desperately trying to make “women come from Venus, men from Mars” reality
We’re just trying to make it more hospitable to women. They’re from Venus, after all.
Venus does have a lot of valuable materials, this could be a good thing.
I can’t wait to see the shareholder value.
I’d rather live somewhere habitable than somewhere with “valuable materials”.
The government never built a weather machine. But the oil companies built a carbon machine that’s doing a fantastic job changing the weather, and they knew it 50 years ago.
Earth has been around for 4.5 million years. Humans have only been around for 300,000 years approximately. With only a few hundred years of the industrial age.
Would a few hundred years really cause an extinction event?
That’s interesting to think about… Perhaps it’ll take a few hundreds/thousand years to fix. If it can be fixed… Or we get hit by an asteroid first…
Between cutting down all of the trees and other pollutants, like these so called environmentalists flying around in their own private jets, it’ll be fun for a while.
Either the humans will die off due to global warming/runaway greenhouse effect before interstellar travel is achieved, or the humans will die off due to the suns transformation into a red giant before interstellar travel is achieved.
IDK. Either way, we won’t be here for long. But the earth will be long after us.
Will technology save the human race beyond the two inevitable events? Probably not.
I assume that the red giant sun engulfing the earth will produce enough drag that earth loses momentum and falls into the sun permanently. We’ll still be gone by then, but noting is forever, even the earth itself.
Yes , you’re right. The red giant will consume the Earth.
We won’t be alive if there’s a mass Exodus from earth, but is that even possible?
Probably not
Not one single government cares so much about it tho.
Higher temperatures will free up soil for agriculture in upper and lower latitudes. With luck, population size will keep increasing then for those countries and also quality of life
Coastal cities can fight it, at least some to some degree.
If we get fusion between our lifetimes, things are going to get even better
Not one single government cares so much about it tho.
Way to generalise, bro. There are some low lying island states that are going to disappear under the rising sea levels. I think they are taking it pretty seriously.
Don’t bullshit please.
If people and government really cared that much about it, we all would be living in a totalitarian planetary government, controlling by the milligram every expense that is not calorically viable to post culling population of billions.
Either or they ALL would be pumping up so much nuclear centrals that we be drowning on the almost free energy
Either that, or they ALL would be pushing for the creation and implementation of a totally viable lunar base to construct a full orbital cache of microwave solar emitters, with the accompanying swarm of orbital mirrors to reduce the sun’s impact on the atmosphere
We see advance in neither of those
So yeah who’s bullshitting who. I know they don’t care and don’t have to pretend like they do
Your pathological need to believe a blatant lie due to your own powerlessness? That’s all on you
Meth. Not even once.
Talking from experience I gather. Don’t worry, we noticed
They say do what you know best.
