Archived material Access restricted Article
Rantburg

Today's Front Page   View All of Fri 09/30/2016 View Thu 09/29/2016 View Wed 09/28/2016 View Tue 09/27/2016 View Mon 09/26/2016 View Sun 09/25/2016 View Sat 09/24/2016
1
2016-09-30 Science & Technology
You're not going to live on Mars and neither are your children
Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.
Posted by Besoeker 2016-09-30 02:26|| || Front Page|| [11128 views ]  Top

#1 Mars is not a “natural environment” for humans

And, whenever the author lives is? Whether Mars colony happens or not depends on a lot of factors - but "naturalness" is not one of them.
Posted by g(r)omgoru 2016-09-30 02:41||   2016-09-30 02:41|| Front Page Top

#2 I think I agree, but only because by the time we've developed the technologies required to do so, we'll realise that hunkering down on the thin skin of planets makes a lot less sense than mining the moon and disassembling asteroids in order to build O'Neill cylinders with thousands of times their surface area. With one exception - we do want to put lots of matter between at least one human colony and any possible ultralong gamma ray burst, which means at minimum 3 colonies equally spaced around Mercury.
Posted by Bugs Poodle8604 2016-09-30 05:19||   2016-09-30 05:19|| Front Page Top

#3 Actually making giant hollow living shells out of asteroid ring material and the Ort cloud's is quite doable. Maybe nuke or fusion required but it will take big rockets like Musk's to start it out. Seriously.
Think about it. Iridium went bankrupt 2 time before it became a going operation. The Chunnel once. ....
Posted by 3dc 2016-09-30 08:13||   2016-09-30 08:13|| Front Page Top

#4 No, but they might visit.
Posted by Iblis 2016-09-30 08:22||   2016-09-30 08:22|| Front Page Top

#5 I'm not a cold weather person but there those who thrive up north, plus not a hot and humid fan neither, so his arguments are fallacious because I say so. Oh, don't forget there are people who love to do things that "experts" like this guy say are impossible.
Posted by Unoger Flineng4239 2016-09-30 09:00||   2016-09-30 09:00|| Front Page Top

#6 
Posted by Blossom Unains5562 2016-09-30 10:02||   2016-09-30 10:02|| Front Page Top

#7 Most of us will never drive a battery powered car either, or if we do, it won't be a tesla. All the same, musk's cult is well on its way to being as vicious and unscientific as scientology.
Posted by M. Murcek 2016-09-30 10:41||   2016-09-30 10:41|| Front Page Top

#8 I do think we should be colonizing the Moon first, and building up the space infrastructure that would open up options. The moon is much easier because of the distance. The low gravity is a challenge but you might find a ton of elderly volunteers willing to take the risk in order to spend their final years in the increased mobility the low gravity offers them.

But it's less glamorous so I can see why Musk is shooting for Mars. Unfortunately NASA got caught up in that mindset for awhile as well.
Posted by rjschwarz 2016-09-30 11:41||   2016-09-30 11:41|| Front Page Top

#9 But we've already been there

/Sheila Jackson Lee's Weave
Posted by Frank G 2016-09-30 11:44||   2016-09-30 11:44|| Front Page Top

#10 Goofy.

Take a Nile farmer from back in the day, and show him what a wheat farmer out here in the Great American Desert can do.

We were watching a movie the other day, daughter asks, "What's that thing the guy is holding to his ear which is plugged into the wall?"

"A phone."

"???"
Posted by swksvolFF 2016-09-30 12:05||   2016-09-30 12:05|| Front Page Top

#11 We've already been to Everest and yet people still go. In fact they've built up base camps and infrastructure to make things a bit safer and easier for folks since Hilary went up.

I wish Sheila Jackson Lee and her weave could return to Mars. We'd all be happier.
Posted by rjschwarz 2016-09-30 13:15||   2016-09-30 13:15|| Front Page Top

#12 Do y'all realize how much money we could have saved by leaving Matt Damon there?
Posted by Thing From Snowy Mountain 2016-09-30 19:05||   2016-09-30 19:05|| Front Page Top

#13 And Don Cheadle. But not Hank Johnson; Mars may tip over.
Posted by swksvolFF 2016-09-30 19:46||   2016-09-30 19:46|| Front Page Top

#14 Well, the 'Red' planet should be an ideal safe place for our Millennial snowflakes. They can avoid all that pre-established infrastructure, physical and social, created by the deplorables.
Posted by Procopius2k 2016-09-30 19:52||   2016-09-30 19:52|| Front Page Top

#15 The Deplorables can shut off the infrastructure of a snowflake city and walk away. Just sayin'.
Posted by Alaska Paul 2016-09-30 20:18||   2016-09-30 20:18|| Front Page Top

23:04 Grins Snese4215
22:49 Blossom Unains5562
21:59 Frank G
21:56 Frank G
21:53 DarthVader
21:47 USN, Ret.
21:44 Lone Ranger
21:34 USN, Ret.
21:33 DarthVader
20:53 Black Bart Glutch4583
20:47 Black Bart Glutch4583
20:18 Alaska Paul
20:10 Sgt.D.T.
19:52 Procopius2k
19:46 swksvolFF
19:36 Blossom Unains5562
19:32 Blossom Unains5562
19:05 Thing From Snowy Mountain
18:58 swksvolFF
18:51 DarthVader
18:44 swksvolFF
18:22 Abu Uluque
18:19 swksvolFF
18:10 rjschwarz









Paypal:
Google
Search WWW Search rantburg.com