Two planet species

All steps toward human habitation of Mars, including seeding an oxygenated atmosphere, are good steps. That's one place we can't stuff up, and hey, we might need a second planet one day. We should not be too afraid of diverting resources to such lofty projects. That and asteroid proofing the earth are probably the two most noble pursuits of science. If either of these things are acheived we are going to be around for long enough to achieve plenty more.

Vote
77%
23%
Votes
44
Views
3432

29 Comments

  • Why not just build an secluded sustainable environment on earth?

  • if we can stave off the asteroids forever then we could just do that. But while there is no guarantee we can do that, we should invest in Mars. Maybe, one day, the strength of people's feeling for or against on global issues like this (or ambivalence) can be guaged by reference to websites like this one

  • I object because I don't undestand the title of two planet species

  • I object because humanity is a virus ,a greedy virus

  • i say we rape the natural rsorses or every world in our solar system and build a (world planet) or (deathstar) orbit it around the sun and walla ,keep building them as needed for our pop. this cateragory should be called sci/fi

  • I object because this isn't a logical or sensible idea, and FYI it can't be done

  • I think this is a good Idea we have real world isues hear and to make Mar's a habitat for life can be done!

  • While I support the idea of becoming an interplanetary (and one day interstellar or even intergalactic) species, and voted this idea up because it is a good idea, I feel like this should be a far off goal that at the moment is unimportant, seeing as how we have far more pressing issues on our plate at the moment. Despite that one caveat, this is a good idea.

  • I object because this is an interesting idea, but I think we should work on fixing problems on earth first. We should try to help solve out current problems, and in the future, if we have solved many of our problems on earth, we can then focus our attention to other planets.

  • Remembering the POW is a advisory position only and space flights are very expensive only certain nation can afford exploration. With the present situation concerning the worlds global economy this really is not the time to promote such an idea. However I see nothing wrong in promoting much more corporation in joint ventures that could lead up to your idea. Exploration only at this time and date should be given great inspiration.

  • Private interests are already developing the means to land on Mars. Now, until we can somehow reactivate the planet's magnetic field (a step or two above us on the Kardashev Scale, mind you), we cannot fix Mars' atmosphere. The Sun's radiation shaved it down to 150th of our atmosphere after Mars lost its magnetic field some 2 million years ago. Whatever atmosphere we construct there will be shaved off again. Nevertheless, we, as "a way the Cosmos can know itself" have reason to colonize the system. We need not do so as followers of few, through our governments, but we should and are already beginning to do so.

  • I object - we should focus more on fixing the problems at hand with our first planet before we introduce the problems from settling another planet

  • I object because this is too far fetched of an idea which is of no real use to the democracy of this planet at this time.

  • I think that occupying mars has other, far better benefits than simply occupation. Mars can be a study ground for how we can better manage ourselves here on earth. By understanding terraforming mars, we then can better understand how to better manage earth as a dominant species. Also, it would be a better testing ground for projects that could get nasty and not end up hurting the only home we currently have.

  • did you mean roercctly? man if your gona roercct someone how bout getting your grammar right? fucking dipshit moron nigger

  • here's an idea, YOU get YOUR fucking grammar right, you racist prick

  • I support this idea. As it may have been poorly presented, the idea is still sound and sane. Sending one-way missions with volunteers and keeping them in supply is much more cheaper than two-ways for the time being. It is a great risk, but so was the Mayflower and still the European settlers took it. Mars has the basic building blocks to support colonization with proper Earth-based support, and who knows what natural resources could be found there?

  • I have nothing more to add, 000001170 and MasterZoran covered my thoughts on this.

  • If a benefit of going to Mars is to inspire people to figure out how to muster the resources that would make a colony on Mars possible and sustainable, then before we execute the trip we should prove what it takes to make a sustainable world here on earth. One way to do this is to build robots that can do all of the work of humans. They don't even need to have Artificial Intelligence to start. They could simply be remotely operated by people like drones and used to farm and pick crops, do heavy construction and do other tedious and dangerous jobs where people could get hurt or too worn out. If we could implement such robots here on earth then we could send them to Mars to build the infrastructure like bio-domes that could enable humans to live on Mars. Once the bio-domes are constructed we could colonize Mars and relieve the over-population pressure here on earth.
    I believe that investing in the development of crop picking robots would be a good start. It would relieve a lot of suffering here on earth and reduce he need for low wage illegal labor. then we can take this technology to Mars.

  • Good idea, but oxygenating Mars will take a handsome amount of time, which is the one resource we don't have. That is why we should focus our efforts on Earth and its environment.
    But a very great idea 000000002

  • I object because .... It would be a waste of money, time, and resources. Let's work on fixing the problems we face on this planet first.

  • We can go to Mars today. With current technology and $20 billion (15% of NASA's budget over 10 years) we could establish a major base on Mars and the Moon using the same hardware. We must go to Mars for a new frontier. To Try out all these Ideas that people propose here to get away from the mess we made here. It could be like another 500 year Renaissance's just waiting. Check out Mars Direct

  • I object because let's face it, we have healthcare problems, education problems, extreme poverty, none of the millennium goals have been fully completed, climate change, recession, unemployment, budget deficits etc. We have too many problems on earth so why spend trillions on getting a few people to mars, we have an excellent planet here, just take care of it and find pleasure in this one rather than wasting trillions of money on exploring mars.

  • How about just making the moon habitable?

  • Unfortunately there is no way current to asteroid-proof the earth, in the same way as Carbon Capture doesn't exist in an anywhere near usable form, and there's no feasible way to get rid of nuclear waste short of dumping it in a volcano.

    But Yes on terraforming mars, although we may have to capture the water required from space or solar bodies,

  • While i would take a one-way trip myself, the use of robot drones to build habitats and support systems on mars is a great idea, costly but great. A base on mars would give us a first strike on an incoming object approaching earth is another reason to go there . There are also advances in technology which would be used on earth to make it better. There are a lot of problems on earth to focus on but these excursions into space are one aspect to be continued for all mankind.

  • That's the best answer by far! Thanks for congiibutrnt.

  • Hot damn, loonikg pretty useful buddy.

Similar Ideas: