• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Trump Plans Mars Colony With Musk

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
Well, it's obviously not going to happen. Bush Jr said we were going to Mars, too. I don't think humans are going anywhere. We are not suitable for space travel, let alone permanent colonies. It's just a sci-fi pipe dream. We'll just continue to explore space with probes, robots and drones.
The Moon is easy enuf to get to, so
it could entice traveling there again.
 

Heyo

Veteran Member
I don't see the point.
The Moon has vast resources, mostly easily exploitable metals. It's much more efficient to bring the refined metal into orbit than Earth metals. So, anything we want to build in space would be cheaper to make with Moon material.
But the moon lacks other essential material, especially water. It might be necessary to import that from the icy moons of Jupiter, which will again be cheaper than getting it from the bottom of the gravity well of Earth.
 

Saint Frankenstein

Here for the ride
Premium Member
The Moon has vast resources, mostly easily exploitable metals. It's much more efficient to bring the refined metal into orbit than Earth metals. So, anything we want to build in space would be cheaper to make with Moon material.
But the moon lacks other essential material, especially water. It might be necessary to import that from the icy moons of Jupiter, which will again be cheaper than getting it from the bottom of the gravity well of Earth.
I was referring to human expeditions to the Moon. It certainly makes sense to use technology to exploit resources. Well, as long as we don't end up, you know, destroying the Moon in our resource extraction.
 

Heyo

Veteran Member
I was referring to human expeditions to the Moon. It certainly makes sense to use technology to exploit resources. Well, as long as we don't end up, you know, destroying the Moon in our resource extraction.
I agree that Luna isn't a place for a colony, just for resource extraction. And there will be people there to build and maintain the (mostly automatic) factories.
Space stations are the way to colonize space.
 

Alien826

No religious beliefs
Not exactly a new idea, just not feasible yet.

As an alien we should put you in charge.

Yes, despite the fact I was joking I have heard of this. I think the materials in the wall would not be strong enough, though we could perhaps use them for the "building" at the top?

You don't want me in charge, I'd deliberately sabotage it. I'm here to keep an eye on you lot, and so far I'm recommending that efforts to keep you confined to this planet should continue. (You think the progress at NASA being so slow was an accident? And the failure of the Boeing spaceship?). First prove you can look after one planet, and also get along with one another, before you are let out of the "nursery".

By the way, you probably think that asteroid that is going to orbit the Earth for a month is just that? I'm overdue to be replaced and return home, so I have hopes ...
 

Alien826

No religious beliefs
Only landlords that are corporations?
National rent control?
Stupid on steroids.

I'll comment on this only.

Back in the, I think, 1960s and maybe 1970s in England there was a thriving rental market going on in the London area (maybe elsewhere, that's the one I experienced). It consisted of old buildings divided into small sections (sometimes one room) served by a single bathroom, and often poorly maintained. A particular landlord named Rachman overdid the extortion, including using force to evict tenants, to the point where the government stepped in and introduced lots of new regulations, including occupation security for tenants and "fair rents". All very well meant and it did put a lot of "slumlords" out of business, but ... All a tenant had to do after moving in was to trot down to the local council and have his rent reviewed. A mostly much lower rent would be forced on the landlord and he would be powerless to evict the tenant so long as the rent was paid. The result was that it became uneconomic to own rental properties and many landlords just dropped out of the business, particularly as the buildings themselves were worth a lot. Overall, it became close to impossible to rent at that level in the London area.

It was actually more complicated, but my thumbnail sketch will illustrate my point. When you try to fix things, beware unintended consequences.
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
I'll comment on this only.

Back in the, I think, 1960s and maybe 1970s in England there was a thriving rental market going on in the London area (maybe elsewhere, that's the one I experienced). It consisted of old buildings divided into small sections (sometimes one room) served by a single bathroom, and often poorly maintained. A particular landlord named Rachman overdid the extortion, including using force to evict tenants, to the point where the government stepped in and introduced lots of new regulations, including occupation security for tenants and "fair rents". All very well meant and it did put a lot of "slumlords" out of business, but ... All a tenant had to do after moving in was to trot down to the local council and have his rent reviewed. A mostly much lower rent would be forced on the landlord and he would be powerless to evict the tenant so long as the rent was paid. The result was that it became uneconomic to own rental properties and many landlords just dropped out of the business, particularly as the buildings themselves were worth a lot. Overall, it became close to impossible to rent at that level in the London area.

It was actually more complicated, but my thumbnail sketch will illustrate my point. When you try to fix things, beware unintended consequences.
When something sounds good to the masses,
being a terrible idea won't stand in the way.

My own city tried to enact rent control, but
it was fortunately voted down. One problem....
Some buildings would've had rent reduced to
below the costs of operating the building.
Not a sustainable model.
 

Stevicus

Veteran Member
Staff member
Premium Member
There is this...

New rocket thruster could mean humans boldly go on never-ending space trips


I remember reading one possible way humanity could expand itself to other worlds, but it would be a one-way trip that could last hundreds of years. A ship full of frozen human embryos, controlled by a robot pilot, along with other robots programmed to care for the embryos and ensure their survival into adulthood on a new planet (which would presumably be checked beforehand to ensure that it has an oxygen atmosphere and can support human life, aka "Class M"). It would also contain a library computer with every book, film, recording, artwork, etc. - so that human history and culture can at least be preserved in some way.

Unless FTL travel is possible, this may be the only viable option for humanity's survival if staying on Earth becomes less and less of an option.
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
I remember reading one possible way humanity could expand itself to other worlds, but it would be a one-way trip that could last hundreds of years. A ship full of frozen human embryos, controlled by a robot pilot, along with other robots programmed to care for the embryos and ensure their survival into adulthood on a new planet (which would presumably be checked beforehand to ensure that it has an oxygen atmosphere and can support human life, aka "Class M"). It would also contain a library computer with every book, film, recording, artwork, etc. - so that human history and culture can at least be preserved in some way.

Unless FTL travel is possible, this may be the only viable option for humanity's survival if staying on Earth becomes less and less of an option.
Do you worry that human
life on Earth will end soon?
 

Stevicus

Veteran Member
Staff member
Premium Member
Plans should be reasonable....sane....& actual plans.
In the year 2024, there's no way to move Earthlings
elsewhere. There aren't even any technologies on
the horizon to do it.

True, but it's just an abstract, theoretical idea which I recalled reading when I saw the idea about never-ending space trips. I realize it would be in the realm of sci-fi at this point, so it's not like I'm saying they could start on something like this today - or even at any time in the foreseeable future.
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
True, but it's just an abstract, theoretical idea which I recalled reading when I saw the idea about never-ending space trips. I realize it would be in the realm of sci-fi at this point, so it's not like I'm saying they could start on something like this today - or even at any time in the foreseeable future.
To many people unfamiliar with the hurdles & risks,
colonizing Mars is real. And they vote. Politicians
pander to voters, so there is the real possibility of
trillions of dollars being spent on this boondoggle.

If fear of human extinction is worth pursuing, there's
no better place to plan for it than right here on Earth.
Consider all the scenarios for mass extinction events.
Design systems to allow some or many humans to
survive & recover. Dinosaurs, fish, mammals & others
have done it before. Humans can too.
 
Top