Hi guys, if you liked this video, share it on your social networks (Reddit, Facebook, Instagram, Tik Tok etc.) and you will help the Insane Curiosity community to increase scientific content. Thanks
Is there a way to provide artificial gravity on the surface (or subsurface) of Mars with some kind of spinning habitat? It seems fraught with problems.
But do you really need to kill interest in space exploration this early? It's not a bad thing to imagine and think about it. I would argue after we fix our society and planet, we should try space exploration and colonization.
Yes, having a base on the moon would likely give us a better understanding of low gravity effects on astronauts. It seems nuts to me that anyone would want to go to mars without knowing what the low gravity would do to them. We should definitely establish a moon base before going anywhere else. Astronauts on mars would be stuck there for a minimum of 2 years without any help.
There's a big difference between no atmosphere, and some atmosphere, even tenuous. A lot of industry will be easier on Mars than on the Moon. It is even conceivable to adapt some plant or lichen to live on Mars surface, and thus help transform it. But otherwise, indeed, this is an exercise in establishing a entirely artificial living environment. Again, doing that on Mars will be easier than doing that in space station. For one thing, material resources are available on the surface that are not in the empty space where everything would have to be brought in. Mars is the ideal place to do that!
@@informatimago so explain if we do colonize Mars, communication between the two planets are going to be problematic and if you disagree let’s debate, and I know I will win.
I read the National Geographic for the Moon Landing. They were talking Mars missions in the 1980’s. They got to the Moon so fast, they didn’t realize how difficult not to mention expensive space travel is.
Chicken Little won't be going Mars. I'm sure you,with free energy and AI ,as smart we already have. I can sure you I do know free energy that good enough to power every on earth ,Mars or Star ship . Robots that can pick up 40 lb on Earth on the moon 240 lb. 1000 robots and 20 humans cresselia 1000 robux that smart as humans 20 humans in one day the robots can work 24 hours a day.. and yes my free energy devices small enough that could a thousands a years of life for the robot . And the robots would be pretty strong Mars 120 lb . I could see about a 200-acre people living on the rim of the dome in there individually pressurize hones caves like structure with their individual gardens connected to their own house . Maybe the dome would have a 50 acres of lake maybe these lizards crawfish frogs. but maybe have a hundred acres of forests maybe about least fifty acres of grassland . Rabbits and squirrels and chickens and goat sheep birds and bees. I'm pretty sure we could get to 300 ft long or 500 ft long manufacturing ships. I know you going to think I'm foolish or for sure it's lie. I think I have come up with a way to to get to Mars in 3 days at 1G gravity. 😂
I don't want to spend three months 6 months in a Coca-Cola can called a spaceship NASA or Russian might as well not leave the Chinese space can off this list.😂 .
I think Ganymede it's going to work for me epic Jupiter and the other moons. Mountains I think with the mountains to crater land of ice and rocks .Ganymede would be a pretty crazy place and beautiful. Maybe a thousand acre dome and an artificial sun. Might as well make three artificial suns . I think it would even have a light Blue sky. But with different colored LEDs purple pink yellow skies but I think blue would everyone's favorite . I think 1,000 lb gold vest long way adjusted to Earth's gravity and help stop radiation.
YOU DONT TALK MUCH DIFFERENT FROM A BLACK PERSON IN THE GHETTO.. TALK TO THEM ABOUT LIVING LIFE THROUGH CHALLENGES.. MAYBE THEY CAN HELP YOU SOLVE YOURS.. @@jackgoodell5574
@@jackgoodell5574 Accelerating at a mere .01g to the halfway point (and then decelerating by the same modest amount) would be enough to go from the Earth to Mars in a few days, not a few months. This is why Elon's stubborn insistence on using chemical rockets is silly - by using a propellant hungry drive, he forces the need to coast almost all of the way and that's where those long travel times come from.
@@davidmacphee3549 Really focused on lying thru his teeth about colonizing Mars. Those humans made all of that on Earth, BTW. And it's real. Unlike the fake CGI visions of Mars being presented to know nothings.
As Neil deGrasse Tyson said: "If we were able to terraform Mars into Earth than why not terraform Earth into Earth?" (for all here who don't get it: this is meant concerning climate change 😉)
Earth’s societies don’t have equal goals or rights to do this in a short timeframe. We have more responsibilities here on Earth. Ideally, Mars won’t have the same societal hinderances.
Earth is the planet we need. It does not require us to alter it. Mars is too far from the sun and does not have enough atmosphere. We can and should change that. Venus is too close to the sun and has a sulfuric acid ice cloud 15 miles thick. We can move it and get rid of the sulfuric acid in the clouds. That would make both planets habitable.
I've always said we have the perfect planet right here why not spend all this money and fix it rather than going to some cold dead rock. Elon Musk has always had this weird fetish with Mars. He's going to find out it's going to be a lot harder than the hardest things he could imagine it to be. Just building a space vehicle that that will be safe and efficient enough to get there and back is going to be hard enough. And as hard it is it is for us to even find a planet that's remotely even anything like Earth in anything that we've discovered so far in the universe tells you how rare our planet is and how special it is, every aspect of biological conditions to support life are mind blowing, just watch some DNA or microscopic animations will completely blow you away.
The biggest evidence against martian colonisation is the fact that we still don't have permanent human settlements in Antarctica. When we'll start having cities in Antarctica and not just research stations then can we start talking about other places. And even then there is no practical need to go to Mars. We need significant advances in med tech to start with in order to handle the problems of Mars. Long story short sorry The Expanse ain't gonna happen soon.
It's easier to build an O'Neill habitat in space than a city on Antarctica. Free energy and free superior resources are readily available among the NEAs. No worries about pollution, as with inhabiting Earthly deserts or oceans or Antarctica. We need a university city/resort in an O'Neill habitat in Mars orbit, and a branch of that base down on the planet. Another one among the moons of Jupiter and Saturn. There are no new inventions needed to build for virtually Earth-like conditions anywhere off-Earth where there are or to which we bring materials. No, the cost isn't outrageous (not compared to soft-landing on Mars everything for Musk's million person city). The '70s NASA Ames space settlement studies said that cost over ~30 years until the first habitat is done is like any other large infrastructure or industrial development down here. We'd have had the first small habitat by ~'08, along with all launch and in-space infrastructure to reproduce it.
The artificial biosphere problem still is unsolved. At this stage I could envisage a small research base on Mars. This base would be dependent upon supply ships from Earth. Supplying basic oxygen, food and water and power for even a small research base would be difficult.
Agree with Neil. Here are some simple steps to do in increasing difficulty to achieve before Mars colonisation. Note that Mars is exponentially more difficult. 1. Colonise Central Australia. 2. Colonise Mojave Desert 3. Colonise Gobi Desert 4. Colonise Sahara Desert 5. Colonise Atacama Desert 6 Colonise Antarctica 7. Colonise Moon 8. Colonise Mars (good luck you will need it)
Colonize underground earth... Practical experience... Underground cities on earth. Also not a bad backup plan for asteroid strikes. Maybe a solution to climate change. A reasonable start is Helsinki Finland. They have massive underground facilities to fend off a possible Russian attack. Its interesting how they use these facilities during peace times.
In Arthur C Clarke's books any humans born on an off earth colony could never visit earth. I think the first challenge to overcome should be creating a propulsion system that could get us there in days or week rather than months. Wouldn't like to get into trouble and the nearest help being a year away.
I don’t like the anti-progress argument that we have to solve ALL our other problems (will never happen!) before we achieve something new. It’s a huge mistake to make assumptions based on our current technology when technology is accelerating the way it is. Mars will happen very soon and many people will be ready for the adventure...
This video completely misses the point about why we should strive to colonise Mars asap. Of course it will be hard, many tough challenges, people will die too, but it's why we are not living in caves that defines the human spirit and nature. Someday we want to reach the stars, be amongst them, someday Earth will be no more. Imagine if life on Earth was unique, imagine how precious that would make it and how important it would be to spread it to other worlds.
Sorry Eagle. The earth and govt. have much more pressing problems. It is not going to happen, at least in your or my lifetimes. Star Trek is a hopeless fantasy. No wars, disease, poverty problems on Earth. Horse feathers.
@@nightlightabcd Clueless, making sweeping statements about "never" is totally anti-human and all that we are. Once people thought we would never fly, let alone land on the moon. You have zero clue about what technology we will have in 100 years from now. Never, what a joke! Our technology of today is like magic to anyone living 2000 years ago. Of course we will colonize Mars and Venus at some stage, terraform both.
And it's not a hot desert, but a radically, freezing-ass cold desert! With no atmosphere to speak of, no atmospheric pressure (may as well be on the Moon), the "soil", regolith, is a toxic cocktail, and roughly 1/3 earth gravity to boot! Oh yeah, let's all go live on Mars.
@@samr.england613 Nobody said we would live in the open. We would live in pressurized habitats. There is research underway to see if Martian soil that has been filtered of toxins can be useful for farming. And the lower gravity might not have as much of an effect on humans as microgravity does. Exercise and medical supplements might be all humans need.
@@ebonaparte3853 Hi Ebon, I never said we'd be living in the open on the surface of Mars, but in pressurized habitats. Problem is, is that the colonists will be imprisoned in those habitats 99% of the time, and when they do go outside, yep, the pressure suit. As far as the Martian "soil" goes (regolith), to detoxify it of the lethal and deadly perchlorates as well as the equally if not more lethal lead, arsenic and mercury, it will take A LOT of water, something that Mars doesn't have readily available! And finally the roughly 1/3, partial earth-gravity problem. This is an unkown, because no one, nobody, has ever lived long-term or EVEN short-term in 1/3 earth gravity. People want to believe that it, "won't be a problem", or will say, "I'm sure humans will be fine in 1/3 gravity", but that is wishful thinking. Remember how the Apollo astronauts had to locomote with that hoppity-hop, side-to-side motion? It's because they couldn't efficiently move forward or back, or to side to side like they could on Earth. They adapted to the 1/6 grav on the Moon. It will be similar for people on Mars.
@@ebonaparte3853 What I don't understand is how little the possibility of a production of gravity through rotating, bowl-shaped habitats is mentioned. Would a construction of such habitats have to be too expensive? Don't platforms rotating trains, don't huge merry-go-rounds already exist on Earth, since decades? Has not an MIT professor Dennis Whyte recently achieved a breakthrough on fusion, with a most probably effective plant now being built?
@@HansDunkelberg1 Maybe we need to research that field more. We may not even need them, if Martian gravity is enough for humans with regular exercise and medical supplements.
I will stay on this gorgeous planet called Earth and will never leave it nor will it ever enter my mind to do so. Be my guess, you can have Mars, I’ll take Earth. Thank you.
life emerged from the seas and colonized the lands and the air , next step is space , this is in our genes , we will adapt . Remember , fishes grew lungs to breath on earth , they grew legs , they grew wings to fly , in our case , we are building rockets , we carry our oxygen to go to space , we are still doing what life did billions years ago
About 1/2 difficult as to are stating in your video: First you're wrong about the gravity: it's between 38 and 39%, not 33. Second ...completely fallacious comparing Earth and Mars temperatures....even below 100 F the problem on Mars would be overheating in a pressure suit not getting cold.... Ask your self what's the difference between placing your hand in ice water vs 32° air, divide that cold air effect by 100 and you'll see how little the cold would affect you. Water is in the soil in mid-upper latitudes, not far north. Perchlorates can be removed from Martian soil by perchlorate eating bacteria...and in the process give off Oxygen gas. Radiation exposure on the ISS can be as high as 1000 millisieverts for every six month period and as high as 400 millisieverts on the Martin surface. This is not to say that exposure on Mars isn't a problem, but it's one that can be mitigated with certain technologies. Living and growing plants underground LOUD BUZZER NOISE! got that one wrong too. There are a number of (albeit self enclosed) home and building structures with natural lighting that have already been proven out here on Earth. These structures can be automatically 3-D printed using matian regolith. Too frustrating to stay subscribed you folks....if memory serves you're the ones who reported a velocity that was one or two orders of magnitude off from the actual. Am outta here.
Holy cow, your "facts" are even wronger. Where to start? 1) the soil does contain toxic perchlorates. Your solution: perchlorate-eating bacteria... yeah, sure. We have boxes of perchlorate-eating bacteria capable of surviving on Mars ready to ship. 2) "Radiation can be mitigated with certain strategies". Yes, that's exactly what the narrator said. 3) Oh yeah, all those homes and structures already proven ....on Earth!!😂. Listen, nobody's perfect, but this channel gets the facts right far more than most so stick around, you might learn something.
Lol you're so wrong at the very most fundamental level. Theoretical science is just that but then comes application. Lol where do we get all these resources in an already scarce resource world just to get all the s we need to get there. Look at how long it took to just make the ISS and that's in near earth orbit. Mars has no magnetic field and way less mass. Any atmosphere would be stripped away faster than could be created. Bacteria need water to survive that is to say to be active as does any life lifeform. lol it would need a lot more water than what's there and for it to be a warm liquid form. So tell us htf do we do that? Heat the planet plus bring extra water which again is a resource here that's already scarce? But to retain that heat we would need an atmosphere with similar pressure as earth s surface or higher to already exist there. You're mad because you have a high school education and your mindset driven by shows like star trek. Impossible to colonize Terra form Mars as its a circular conundrum plus we will never have enough actual resources to achieve it and then make it self perpetuate. Lol the most major problem we will never be able to solve there is making the core like earth's so that there is a strong magnetic field. Lol ever think of that? The narrator could've just stuck to that instead of all the other explanations.
@@dirremoire lol bacteria need warm liquid water to perform. Lol is nowhere close to enough water there. Lol would have to coat entire planet about three thousand feet deep at least for such activity to even begin to have a positive effect. Meanwhile have a solid cold core. No magnetic field. Bwahaha as soon as any atmosphere made solar winds are going to strip it away. This is all assuming there's enough percolate there to even get that much oxygen out. Oxygen CO2 isn't only problem. What about all the other gas types we need. We just as well as plants need nitrogen. Its isn't oxygen or co2 that gives us a stable atmospheric pressure or do they make up the majority of our atmosphere. Its nitrogen. Its pretty obvious we can never applicatively solve such problems. Mars an absolute no for all time unless lol we become magicians. Venus however there's a slim chance. But still gas wise it would have same problem. Its actually nitrogen be the main gas problem. Bet none y'all thought of that or the core-magnetic field problem
THE ONLY PERSON NO ONE CARES ABOUT.. AMAZING.. HEY EVERYNE.. LETS MAKE THE PLANET WE ALL LIVE ON ABLE TO BE LIVED ON.. I SWEAR THESE PEOPLE ARE ALL SO STUPID..
Humans are perfectly adapted to Earth. Almost everything planned for colonization is an inconvenient or dangerous version of what we have here. Let the robot landers do the exploration.
Yes, we evolved to survive in our current ecosystem and have dabbled in artificially created living spaces for short periods. Just like our 5 senses were evolved for life on earth, we won't ever see the bigger picture (extra dimensions, etc.) because other than 'math', there is no other way to experience things outside the realm of our reality.
@@thegeop5906 Nah. At the distance between Mars and Earth, you'll need humans on the Planet. Signals will be delayed anywhere between 5 to 20 minutes depending on the time of year. Try doing any emergency repair when you are minutes delayed. Thankfully, humans can stay in a Bunker while Robots control the surface remotely.
@@silverhawkscape2677 Mining of Mars for resources anywhere else is a silly idea. More silly than a city/colony on the planet. The NEAs offer enough to end the relevance of the scarcity model regarding energy or raw resources or room for growthy. We know of 1400 NEAs more easily reached than Mars, 400 more easily reached than the Moon, 40 or so easier than Lunar orbit. And from meteorites we know that the resources at an asteroid can be far _far_ better than the Moon.
I’m all for exploration but when we start to change what a human is and cross the line to something is , I can’t support that … shit you see how society is today and giving ppl the power to play nature/god is just wrong to me .
To some people the most "realistic" view is that the earth is flat. I see it as we can get probes to Mars. We can get people to the moon. Granted the technology has changed so much since the days of Apollo. The least of the problem will be finding volunteers to go. But it makes the most sense to colonize the moon first to prove we can colonize another celestial object. Then, the main problem only becomes a matter of distance. We should be focused on seeing if we can even get humans to Mars but as far as colonizing anything other then earth would it not make sense to try it on the moon first? Screw Elon Musk, he is just a creepy scammer and just takes credit for others pie in the sky ideas even though most of them are implausible epic failures. But he might be able to raise funds and/or expedite the process of colonization or even just going back to the moon for tourism intents. Might as well exploit that if possible.
I didn't hear anything realistic, he has points BUT they are ALL stuff we can easily overcome and I think we will have the first baby born on Mars in my life time
@@getyourgameon1990 there is no practical reason to colonize mars. No matter how bad earth gets, it’s will still far easier and less expensive to live here.
Notions about terraforming Mars run into a huge problem: lacking a magnetic field, nothing will prevent the solar wind from scouring off any upper atmosphere created by somehow injecting bazillions of tons of Oxygen (generated how, and using what raw materials as reagents?). Humans would have to keep those generators going forever. We're lucking to have the protection our magnetic field gives us, but but Mars doesn't.
@@daviniarobbins9298 I heard an idea about using the Lagrange points around Mars to space man made magnets to create an artificial magnetic field, but sounds bonkers to me.
I mean an artificial MS wouldn’t have to cover the entire planet it would only need to cover the diameter of the sun at whatever orbit it’s at, also generating power is pretty simple considering the device is literally used to intercept solar radiation.
This is the biggest reason why humans could never live on Mars. With no magnetic field to protect it, we would be suffer from deadly solar charged particles as well. Any CMEs would bombard the planet and kill anyone on the surface. Mars is a bad investment for human colonization. It simply can't support life without a proper magnetic field. Period.
So this RUclipsr is smarter than Elon Musk in your opinion huh? bold statement lol Yea this guy and his computer can definitely see how impossible it is. Elons legion of scientists and astronauts, engineers definitely are wasting their time...they should watch this video and educate themselves lolol!
@@hyperionzii5889 forget about this RUclipsr, I myself am 100 times smarter than Elon musk. The only thing musk is better than me is at conning people, being a psychopath, stealing other peoples work, selling vaporware and snake oil and being a d ick. Apparently, these are the qualities required to become a billionaire today.
@@hyperionzii5889 ; Elon Musk is a con artist who is brilliant at raising money. This is good because Musk’s reputation as a tech guru brings in funds which has kept Tesla and Space X alive. And Tesla and Space X have made a lot of progress. Still, Musk has come up with nonsense such as using nukes to melt the Mars ice caps which he knows is a bad idea. But Musk does this to build his brand which again brings money for his companies. Hyperloop and the Boring Company are also scams but they also build his tech guru brand. Back to Mars. The video is wrong because someday, humans will have a colony on Mars. But we are talking hundreds of years from now when that will happen. Why so long? Because the technical problems to build a Mars city are massive. Humanity doesn’t even have a human crewed outpost on earth’s Moon yet. And the Moon is only a 3 day trip from earth and launches to the Moon can be done everyday. By contrast it takes months to get to Mars and launches can only be done every 26 months. - Once humanity figures out how to live on earth’s Moon in a permanent outpost, then getting to Mars will be a next step. But again, that’s a long way from now.
It was difficult to follow lockdown rules and wear masks in coronavirus but we still dream of settling on Mars. There is a very little chance that we'll ever colonize Mars.
@@razormilkyway8444 yeah I don't see any of those qanon idiots managing to have the self control and self discipline required to survive in a hostile, almost-airless environment if putting a mask over their face was too fking complicated.
@@razormilkyway8444 So you enjoy wearing a diaper to carry out your physiological needs for hours at a time? That sounds significantly more unpleasant than wearing a mask.
For everyone saying these cringe "they always said we'd never" quotes how in the hell are you planning on reviving a dead planet core thats responsible for keeping the atmosphere around it?Making the atmosphere is one thing but keeping it on the planet another.
Why do you need to revive a dead core, when the atmosphere thinning is such a slow process that it will take millions of years? Just doing what we do here on Earth right now would prevent the atmosphere from thinning due to it being replenished more than what is lost.
@@bloxyman22 - Because you have to contend with the absence of a global geomagnetic field. First off, *where* are you getting that atmosphere from to begin with? Not from Mars itself. For example, the most common gas in Earth's atmosphere is nitrogen, not oxygen. Humans cannot breathe pure oxygen. But there are no large amounts of nitrogen on Mars to extract. So where are you getting it? Nuclear fusion? Comets? The new atmosphere will be getting stripped away by the solar wind even as you are trying to build it up.
No one here talked about the composition of the atmosphere. What is the main purpose of terraforming in short term, is to increase pressure enough for water to be able to flow and for humans to be able to be on surface with very little protective gear. We are talking about even colonies on Moon, which we could never ever terraform at all and Mars certainly is a much more habitable to us than the moon and yet we will probably have a colony on the Moon eventually as well. Also magnetic field vanished billions of years ago and took billions of years to reach current stage, which is by the way right now in pretty much in equalibrium so that even a little extra added will add to the amtosphere over time. There is plenty of water and greenhouse gases locked away on and below the surface. Either way what is your solution? Stay on earth and make sure we get wiped out and not even attempt to colonize another body? I surely do not know of a better world than Mars when it comes to us being able to survive.
@@bloxyman22 - False. The magnetic field vanished billions of years ago, and as far as we can tell so did most of Mars's atmosphere and water. It has *not* been a slow decline to it's present state. Mars's surface features are mostly billions of years old! It is a *dead* planet. The scant carbon dioxide atmosphere that remains is solely because CO2 is very heavy compared to most other gases found in Earth's atmosphere. You also haven't answered where exactly you plan to pump in all of this new atmosphere from! Because the required supply of volatiles are *not* present on Mars! Where will you get all that nitrogen? All that oxygen? All that hydrogen? Talk of lunar colonies is completely different. Even with chemical rocket propulsion the Moon is three days travel from Earth. Not 6-24 months depending on where Mars is in it's solar orbit relative to where Earth is. The Moon's distance from Earth changes very little. Mars changes dramatically as our respective planets orbit the Sun, and for part of the time Mars is opposite the Sun from Earth, which even makes communication a challenge! To top it off, not much talk about lunar colonies presumes permanent occupation, or producing children up there. The general assumption is that it will be a temporary posting like trips to Antarctic outposts. We cannot save ourselves from extinction events by trying to colonize an uninhabitable planet where the colony would still be utterly dependent on the continued civilization on Earth! That should be simple logic.
I agree with the Vid. As one of my professors once pointed out, If we can't live in the oceans because it's too hard, then no way we'd be able to live off on Mars.
THANK YOU! Finally a sane voice regarding Mars colonization/terraformation. The sad truth is that Mars, despite being the only planet in the Solar System that will not immediately kill you, is thoroughly uninhabitable. And no, it is also not terraformable because it is simply too small of a planet for humans to function in the long term...
If it was terraformed, it wouldn't function as an earthlike paradise for billions of people, but rather a hub for travel, science, and would be like a giant space station. The population could live in artificial gravity habitats.
You think negative Elon thinks positive Human(Nasa) already landed unmanned rover in Mars successfully it's a milestone I hope SpaceX will send manned starship to mars successfully
Humans used to sail numerous months on rat infested ships surrounded by endless water. There’s always a special breed of people that are psychologically designed for this kind of harsh living.
@@888jackflashOur technology is also exponentially more advanced as well. Regardless to say, the analogy to the human grit needed to overcome these obstacles till remains.
@@yeshuasage3724 The scale of the dangers involved are just as injuriously proportionate because of their level of technological development and the challenges they faced at the times.
@Michael Orlow Living on Mars is a bloody awful idea. At most we will have an ISS-like presence on Mars with Astronauts staying for around a year before coming back and being replaced with a different crew
I always shake my head in near disbelief when I see martian colonists in spacious habitats with small tables of plants. I envision cramped quarters needing maintenance. And as for hydroponics to feed a sizable population just consider the scale of agriculture the San Joaquin valley ... If we can develop agriculture that needs a few table tops or even a warehouse size "farm" that could feed a few 100 persons, then we could apply the same advancements to feed 7+ billion here on Earth where water, air, temperate climates and sunlight are more readily available.
I agree, feeding a bunch of tin-can dwellers is one problem now imagine the amount of costly maintenance it'll take to run a sewer-water recycable system !
Yeah man! The artists concepts of Martian bases and cities are always ridiculously idealistic! The domed cities in the background, the 'smiling' people in pneumatic travel tubes, the comforting ship taking off or landing, the cutaway showing the proverbial, lab-coat clad couple with clip boards and lap-tops scrutinizing the plants in the "greenhouse", etc, the manned rover approaching, and the guy in a pressure suit, outside, apparently tantalized by a Martian rock he's looking at!
@@ebonaparte3853 Or the early decades. Or the early centuries for all you and I know. At any rate, the living quarters will always seem cramped because, no matter how many or few the "Martian colonists", they will all, 99% of the time, be confined and imprisoned in their pressurized habitats.
I agree. I think a lot of people are too optimistic about colonizing Mars. The chances of Mars being habitable are pretty tiny. Mars contains an extremely low temperature, high concentrations of toxic chemicals, lethal amounts of radiation, an insufficient amount of water, a barely existent magnetic field, and an atmosphere that is 1% of Earth's. Not to sound like an asshole, but people who listen to science and logic would fully understand why colonization on Mars is a very small chance. If we live on Mars in large domes, then it is possible to live on Mars, but nowhere near like living on Earth.
You didn't mention low gravity, which is a complete unknown. All of this is beside the point that we can build for virtually Earth-like conditions in space habitats, anywhere.
It has no magnetic field because it has no liquid iron and nickel center like Earth to generate one. Thus it has no Van Allen Belt to protect it from the Sun's extreme radiation. It has virtually no atmosphere; if we stood in one of those huge sandstorms there we wouldn't feel the wind. The soil is chemically toxic to life and would be difficult to sanitize for growing food. The gravity is weak enough to give long term health problems. There may be water but how much and how difficult it would be to extract, detoxify and use we don't know. I love the idea and all but we probably should direct our energy and resources at keeping our planet habitable first. We have a good thing going right here if we fix it up a bit , clean up our messes and tend to it better.
And even if you do manage to transform the atmosphere there is still the problem of zero magnetic field to protect it from the solar wind. You would be constantly replenishing the atmosphere to replace the lost.
There's a reason we have not been out of low earth orbit since 1972 and that is no one is willing to pay for it. Take the cost of going back to the moon, multiply it by 1000 and that's a good guess of the cost of visiting Mars for a short stay. Even a small colony on Mars would cost billions annually to maintain. Add to that even the smallest problem could be fatal. Here's what I think will happen, in the next 30 years we will probably land people on Mars, might be a couple of times and that's it. It will go the way of Apollo! A far more interesting proposition is a Moon colony, it's 3 days away and you could rotate people regularly so the lack of gravity and solar radiation had less effect on people.
I don't think we will ever "colonize" Mars on a large scale, but I do think we will have several small sites populated by scientists studying the planet and the people supporting the colony. These "colonies" will need to be fairly self-sufficient and will populated by people who have chosen to spend the rest of their lives there. As far as large-scale colonization, it is just too dangerous and expensive to move people and supplies from earth (or the Moon) to Mars.
@@johnhitz1185 You are correct - Mars is uninhabitable, which is why I said there would never be anything but small research sites populated by scientists and support personnel there. Same with the Moon or any other planet / asteroid in our solar system.
Somebody said it better below. If we can't "colonize" places like Antarctica, Siberian tundra or high inside the northern arctic circle, we'll never withstand a Mars colony. In addition to the temperature and brutal atmosphere, there's a huge particle, x-ray and cosmic radiation problem on the journey in, on the surface and on the journey out. Shielding is heavy and consumes resources to move it around. No, we won't be colonizing Mars regardless what the internet billionaires think. There are much more lucrative uses for our time and treasure.
Theres no reason to colonize Antartica, like there is to colonize a "backup planet". Ie, making like multiplanetary and backing up DNA/life-forms in case of a calamity on Earth. Antartica would be just as exposed as the rest of the planet to an ELE. DOesnt have to be mars, but we will need need some type of off-planet storage of DNA/life.
@@simonhill6267 Yes but as for the rest of the places the guy has point. We need to solve those environmental places to survival to prepare for even worst places of Mars and Venus. We need to completely conquer our planet's environment so that steps towards living on Mars or Moon isn't as big of a problem.
@@Ghost-hj5jy we could easily have a small population live in Antarctica with tens of billions in funding. The reason we don't is because there is no incentive to spend that money setting a colony there
I've been saying all of this for years anytime I say anything I get accosted by Elon' fanboys. People just don't realistically realize how monumentally difficult it is just to get to Mars with the technology we currently possess much less put people on the surface "safely" and that's the key word. What I don't understand is we have the perfect planet right here if we quit screwing it up who would pick a cold dead rock over Earth to live on that was in their right mind?? Elon Musk has just got some weird fetish with Mars and he's got all of his cult members believing in his nonsense when it's just not going to realistically happen in our lifetimes. And don't get me wrong I'm all about space exploration but I would rather us spend all this money fixing Earth and creating technology and new propulsion systems (which are crucial) to travel to deep space and go to other galaxies or other solar systems at the least in a reasonably short amount of time like Proxima Centauri, I mean if we're going to go big let's go big and go for it.
If you repurposed all of the people who are doing meaningless jobs on Earth right now, you'd probably have a colony next year. Humans do not use their resources very well. They need to rethink their economic structures because they are largely based on false assumptions and are highly manipulated to the benefit of individual interests and not the planet as a whole.
I suspected you were an idiot when you started implying that colonizing Mars is for the purpose of replacing Earth. Your idiocy was confirmed when you said we’ll get to Proxima Centuri in no time and it was a more feasible venture.
@@chatteyj Space does expand things away from us but there are at least 80 ish galaxies in our local group that we should have access to for a good long while even if we are limited to less than light speed. Today at sub-light speed we still have access to 6 percent of the estimated 2 trillion galaxies that are observable. Actually getting to any of them with humans as they exist today is another matter altogether. Von Neumann probes would be easier. However, there is a multitude of things we still don't understand and many of these assumptions could change in an instant.
I try to send them to common sense skeptic.. the Elon musk debunked videos is a good place to start. Then they have a whole series on Mars specifically. It will.. never happen
What a great start to having a rational conversation about both Mars and this conversation can also be applied to a moon experience. Both the Moon and Mars have NO magnetosphere. For those who don’t know, this is the very thing the shields a planet from solar winds and radiation. It also helps retain most or almost all of any atmosphere. So even if you made a perfect system for terraforming a planet and got it there, the lack of a magnetosphere would just rip away all of your efforts, period.
@@thomasforbes784 that's doesn't make ane sense. How can kilograms be the messurment of mass whne different atoms weight different amount. If there are 2 cubes with the same volume and the same atom density but one is made from iron and one helium. Than they both have the same mass but will wight different in kilograms.
@@lmao2351 We currently mostly measure mass using weight that may be where some of your confusion is. But a kilogram is a measure of mass which doesn't change based on which celestial body you are standing on. Weight does change.
in some point..if we do not get to terraform entirely but still manageable to live there without equipment i do believe "evolution" will have a part and could be having two Human Species going on..Earthlings and Martians...
No magnetosphere- the terraforming would need plate tectonics and a molten core in order not to be lost into space. This is what occurred on mars in the first place. Sorry but their analysis is correct.
@@robcoyle5011 As buddy said above we are in the Nano Age we are taking very great leaps in Moore’s law. We can and will use CRISPR and nano bots to alter the human body to deal with the issues of MARS Elon’s Musks Boring Company will dig and actually figure out what happened to Mars not what some cat thinks happened don’t even know jack shit about the ocean let alone even places on earth still anomalies that scientists can’t explain but sure they know what’s popping on Mars 😂
@@douglasnorth4703 , So you can't figure it out yourself, and needs facts and proof to convince you that Nano technologies aren't the only things we have achieved?? I'm done with you it's mind boggling.
The biggest problem is economics. First you have to find an economic reason to go there. The reason I think it is important to have a colony is “Humanity shouldn’t have all its eggs in one basket” as Heinlein said.
Mars is a dead-end destination. The only way we can permanently move into space is build structures that are completely capable of supporting human life. Rotating these structures to produce 1G earth gravity is an extremely important requirement that can't be efficiently duplicated on any other body in our solar system. In order to accomplish this, we need to work on moving comets and asteroids closer to earth so that they can be mined for building materials.
Despite whether we colonise Mars or not, it will never be a home to millions and will take thousands of years to make habitable to a lesser degree of comfort as the Earth provides. Just another case of the importance we should place towards cleaning up our planet and to severely penalise those who pollute or degrade the earth. After all no other place will be as remarkable or as habitable as the earth is. Ever.
Yes that is true. We just might make the trip, set foot, and leave. To colonize mars would be very difficult and not to mention expensive. Every trip would be super dangerous
I tend to agree with you. Attempting to establish bases and "settlements" on Mars provides a focused goal that might lead to a vibrant solar system economy and exploration of the stars close to us and transiting objects. The O,Neil cylinders, orbital stations and bases on the Moon and other small objects like Ceres may become more important in the future. It is only vital that we try to venture beyond the Earth, to ensure the conscious witnessing of the universe and exploration of space.
@@NowanInparticular True, but those moons require much more time, deltav, and technology to get to when compared to the relatively close mars, unless you're referring to our own moon.
I would never say never, we don't really know what technology will be like a thousand years from now or even further into the future, but I do feel confident Mars will not be colonized any time soon for anyone alive on earth today to see.
The logistics make it impossible with today's tech but "never" is a really long time. I would agree that we will not colonize Mars any time in the near future, however Basically, it comes down to NEED. There is no need to spend the trillions of dollars that it would take to colonize Mars. This may change at some point in the future.
What would be the "need"? I assume you're referring to some kind of pollution? We could set off every single nuclear device we have all at once and Earth would still be much easier to live on than Mars. The only thing I can see that would make a move to Mars to even be considered is a planet ending event (meaning the actual structure of Earth was broken). AND we'd need enough warning to make moving to Mars possible. Doesn't seem likely both these requirements would happen.
@@MrWaterbugdesign I don't know what the "need" is and neither do you. There is no way we could possibly know all the possible problems that Earth might have way out in the future. Pollution and setting off nuclear devices are today's problems. These problems may not even exist in the future. Do you think 1000 years ago, nuclear war was a concern? Our minds can not even begin to comprehend what things might be like on this planet in another 1000 years.
We desperately need a university city/resort in Mars orbit in an O'Neill habitat. BTW, building such a thing in Mars orbit, or Jupiter orbit, won't cost us a thing, because long before then somebody will be mining NEAs and the value of all the gold in all the vaults and oil underground will crash down through the cellar, and the space infrastructure economy will rule and supply the Earth economies. If we'd kept on after Apollo, and done O'Neill habs in Earth orbit, it'd be finished and building follow-ons today and we'd already be mining NEAs.
“Need” will probably be for people who live and work in orbit and on the moon deciding they want independence or more space for their people. They’ll honestly probably go for the moons of the jovians and mars will be a truck stop, so it’s moons and orbit will be what they really need. People and machinery will find a way down to the surface. Mars’ destiny is to be like the Nova Scotia or Siberia of the solar system--a rural backwater people pass near or Thru. There will likely never be a “revolution” by whoever ends up on Mars surface because they will mostly be left alone
I definitely agree I think we greatly underestimate the challenge and I think we need better technology and experience before attempting such a task. Personally I believe the moon is a much better option and we don't even need people on it! I want it to be used for manufacturing and building ships and things for earth orbit not to mention producing machines to create bases and build infrastructure on mars before we even for getting our eggs out of just being in earths basket mars is quite unapealing living in earths orbit would protect us frok basically un calamity that would befall earth
Technology is not, and never will be the issue; humans cannot collaborate to future plan. Irreversible climate change, a rapid and terrifying increase in right wing views and authoritarianism, a refusal by individuals to make even small changes to their lifestyles for the greater good because of their own sense of entitlement in the here and now. That is why we are going to be a foot note in the not too distant future rather than working towards something incredible.
I know that people over the millennia have said "we will never do this". They said this about something in their own world. When you leave that world the challenges grow exponentially. The failure rates skyrocket and the amount of resources used is astronomical. No pun intended. We can't even send a manned mission to Mars with the expectation of it returning. Biological life forms are too fragile for long duration space travel. We haven't studied Mars enough with probes to warrant a manned mission. We have not found a resource that we need to send a manned mission. We need to stop trying to travel long distances through space. We need to use our resources to help this planet. It is the only one perfect for humans to thrive on.
I agree 100% that the idea of colonizing Mars in the next 50-200 years is an aspirational feel-good fantasy. We may colonize that planet one day, in the very distant future, but the humans will be bio-engineered in such a way that they will almost be like a different species.
@@hamsandwichindahouse To be fair, we could rightly lay claim to being their progenitors, I guess in the same way that Neanderthals, Lucy, and the first tool users, can lay claim to being ours..
WOW! That was very thought-provoking and entertaining, well done! 👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻 I'm glad to see that I am not alone on my assessment of the impracticalities of colonizing Mars. Having a base or two is fine but that is completely different than colonization. It would be much easier (and cheaper) to build orbital habitats or space stations with rotating sections to create artificial gravity like in Babylon 5 in orbit around Mars and use Mars to mine it for resources according to our needs without the need to genetically enhanced ourselves. 😉 Anyway, I look forward to seeing more of your videos! You just earned a new subscriber and fan! 😎
The first time I disagree with you :| I never knew this would come. I believe that we will colonise Mars and will TERRAFORM it. We cannot do it now but we aren’t in the future yet are we? I believe we will discover it.
You can’t terraform a planet that lacks a magnetic field because the field protects the loss of any atmosphere and also would insulate inhabitants or farms above ground from cosmic rays. Won’t work, unless your view is subterranean terraforming.
@@dr.michaellittle5611 there are theoretical ways around that, those ways might become practical one day. I'm not saying they will, just saying, never say never.
Well... some people's job is to make videos for YT and other's is to push back the limits of what humans can do. Luckily, RUclipsrs are not in charge of space programs.
People don't colonize antartica, we'll get a scientific outpost eventually. However nobody will want to raise a family on mars. Everything on Mars we have on earth. The moon is a far better spaceport and the asteroid belt has better acces to mining resources. I'm all for space exploration (I rlly hope nasa is succesful in establishing the lunar bas camp). However people only settle inhospitable envirements when they have major incentive to do so. No such incentive exists on Mars.
I totally agree. What's more, I believe it will be decades before we even send a human to Mars. We can push technology to it's limit, but we can't push it beyond our ability and Mar's is still way beyond us.
it will be a long time, unless we want to send CORPSES to Mars - that we can accomplish right now! protected long-range human space travel is beyond Earth tech for several decades at least
The thing always forgotten to mention is that no matter how much we mess up earth with nuclear wars, radiation and pollution, the environment stays way way less hostile then the Moon, Mars a space station or any other place in our solar system. It is not popular to tell as it sounds so romantic to leave earth to find a better life but each and every craft or base that is imagined, designed or build, would be safer for humans to live in when it REMAINS HERE ON EARTH. It is virtually impossible to mess up earth so much that it becomes safer in another place in space. Sorry for messing up your "going to space" dreams. I still love these technical challenges. They are just not the solution for humans the coming million years.
We ought to get our act together here on Earth before we even thhink of going to Mars. Anyhow, who would want to live on Mars? Sure there will be bases like there are bases in the Antarctica, but that will be it.
@@razormilkyway8444 It will be "it", unless Mars's core spontaneously starts heating up again and convections create a magnetic field to shield from the extremely dangerous levels of cosmic radiation anyone on Mars would be exposed to at all times
The temperature on parts of the equator goes from more like -70c to 10c each day, which makes those places warmer than inhabited areas of Siberia during their winter.
@@DALKINION So you build your society around wildly fluctuating temperatures. Somehow I think that'd be ridiculously inefficient and a nightmare for maintenance workers.
There is a difference between being a realist and a pessimist. People that think everything is impossible all the time and being negative as soon as people talk about stuff they don't believe in are the people that constantly hold us back from actual progression.
@@chrisdonish Not us as individuals, but as a species. The survival of the human race depends on colonization into outer space. If we stay on one planet we are doomed when something happens, such as a global war, asteroid impact, viral outbreak etc. Living on multiple planets and outside in space drastically increases humanities chances of surviving and not becoming extinct. But unfortunately most people on this planet are incredibly selfish and don't give a shit about that and only care for themselves.
@@Drakey_Fenix none of those are a justification for colonizing mars, there is no possible major catastrophe that can justify leaving earth for any other planet, humans cannot survive any where in space or on any other planet without relying on resources from earth. If earth as a planet becomes inhospitable for humans,any space or other planetary colonization effort will become unsustainable because there are no resources or atmospheric conditions in space that can sustain human existence. We should focus on taking care of earth instead of trying to colonize dead and inhospitable planets.
@@chrisdonish How would it not? Imagine one day an asteroid comes hurdling towards earth that we can't stop, the last remnants of humanity AND possibly even life itself (although that's doubtable) could be wiped out within a day. We should expand, and it is inevitable that we will.
@@anticorn6635 it is not inevitable that we will colonize anything that cant sustain life, there are over 8 billion people on the earth and over 400 million people living in South America which is less than 700 miles away from Antarctica which was discovered over 200 years ago yet not a single permanent settlement or colony has been established there and you want to know why? BECAUSE IT CANNOT SUSTAIN LIFE. And let me tell you, Antarctica is a garden paradise compared to any planet known to us, it has water, sunlight, oxygen, is less than a days travel from the closest human settlement and not to mention a breathable atmosphere so you can be as hopeful as you want but until I see any improvement on colonizing the frozen continent then nothing will change my mind that colonizing a planet over 50 million miles away from earth will remain in the realm of science fiction.
We need to consider the developments in biological sciences in the next 50 years too. These developments can help in solving the challenges you have mentioned like Cancer
@swamy Sri: The cancer risk is substantial on earth. One third of women and one quarter of men die from cancer. The usual mechanism is acquired somatic mutations in the genes that control the growth and differentiation of tissues coupled with age related reduction in DNA repair. Toxic metabolic byproducts are much more important than radiation. A few malignancies such as acute myeloid leukaemia , non Hodgkin’s lymphoma and thyroid cancer may become more common in Mars residents. There are prophylactic medications available for osteoporosis. 38 percent of earth’s gravity may be well tolerated (only time will tell). In general, lack of medical care is another big problem for Mars residents. I can envisage a substantial research and exploration base on Mars, but not a large colony with hundreds of thousands of residents.
Living in underground bunkers and symbiotically controlling robots on the surface for all the labour would lower most health risks heaps. Muscle and bone density loss would be the main problems for long term life on Mars health wise but wearing weights isn't unheard of
Spend 10 years on the moon with no help and then tell me mars is doable...and I mean no help from earth either no food sent no medical supply no nothing other than communication that's it, if you can do that then I would say maybe, but mars is still a nastier place.
For those who think we can colonize Mars anytime soon I have a suggestion: set up a colony in Antarctica and see how that works. Nobody lives there permanently now and it is infinitely more friendly for human life and many, many times more accessible than Mars!
I can't imagine living without forests or beaches or animals or swimming in a lake or floating down a river. Bad enough for an adult who has made such a choice, absolutely unethical to do this to children!
@@user-nw3xp7yt4r There may be children and teenagers who are raised on Mars who could not imagine living without ready access to explore in rovers and drones for hundreds of kilometers in any direction, map and name new features of a planet they and their parents have a vested stake in. They might imagine the responsibility of doing chores and upkeep on a farm or ranch on Earth, but not the level of critical life-sustaining responsibilities they would experience.
@@johnmcnulty4425 Ty for response. Your opinion and factual recount is quite valid. There will be plenty of trees, except they will be part of a habitat complex, under domes in greenhouses. There will be water reservoirs and canals and even beaches. Many beaches on Earth are effectively created and maintained anyway. The environment is harsh outside the dome but wild and unexplored except by satellite which is the beauty of the world. There are rocks and geological features that have been untouched for billions of years. Nevertheless, it is a hard sell to give up this precious planet of Earth to make Mars green.
Another thing to really consider is WHY? More to the point, for what reason would anyone fund such a colony. Historically, colonies served to main purposes: 1. To take advantage of resources not available or at least less abundant in the home country (e.g. tea from China) 2. To get rid of undesirables, typically criminal or religious. It would be far cheaper to build more prisons on Earth than to create a Botany Bay on Mars. A Martian colony would require experts in many fields just to keep the lights on. That's a far difference from farmers looking for free land or trappers looking for beaver in the Americas. The basic needs for survival existed here already, even with some difficulty. Even with what existed here, supply trips to Europe were a regular thing and never truly ended. What does Mars have that people on Earth need? Can it be brought back here more cheaply than getting it on Earth? If you can't answer those questions, then why would anyone spend trillions of dollars to do it?
Looking to the stars have helped us with problems on earth multiple times. We should be able to figure it out which will overall benefit earth also. I honestly don’t think people even considered reusable spaceships back then but look at them today , the progress is crazy.
@@dirremoire the space shuttle was reusable yes, but now people mean that the ship can take off and land by itself when referring to reusable ships. The shuttle needed a new external tank to be built in order to take off every time, making it not fully reusable.
@@dirremoire the shuttle was only partially reusable, with an extremely high upkeep price. Starship will be more akin to a commercial jetliner as far as reusability goes.
@@dirremoire I have heard it said that the shuttle never reached its goal of being reusable....It was at best refurbish-able... It took between 450 million and 1.5 billion to make a shuttle ready to fly again.
The reusable boosters on SpaceX require significant turnaround time before they can be reused. I'm sure at the very least they require a thorough inspection, replacement of critical parts, not to mention the time of refueling before they can be reused. Nor can they be reused forever. At some time they'll need to be retired, maybe after just a few uses.
Actually, it totally could. It would require a teeny bit upkeep and a constant influx of Nitrogen and Oxygen, but solar wind strips away Mars' atmosphere far far slower than we can replenish it. On top of that, we could conceivably create a (relatively) small artificial magnetic field and place it between the Sun and Mars so that Mars is constantly in the "shadow" of the artificial magnetic field and won't be continuously subjected to solar wind. And in the next few centuries/millennia, who knows? We might discover some method to kickstart Mars' core so that it can start generating its own magnetic field again.
@@SomeoneNamedTygget no it could not and we can't kickstart the core of a planet. you're delusional in your confidence about what we, a bunch of apes from Earth, can do.
The challenges to occupy Mars are not too great. They are impossible! All money going to fund anything remotely related to Mars should immediately stop. In addition, NASA needs to be totally eliminated!
Agreed! Steps to exploring Mars: 1. Determine if there is life on Mars NOW, or the past. 2. After finding no life, genetically engineer microbial species that can survive on Mars. 3. Wait 1 million years and see what comes out. I suppose simulations are better! But if the Gaia Hypothesis is true, perhaps life on earth will fail to thrive on Mars (maybe even plants!) even if all the chemical/temperature/energy conditions are replicated. Then we'll discover there's a hidden "life field" on earth we can't (yet) measure and we can then see if we can find it!
@@DesertRat332 It's a possibility, but "life finds a way" probably has its limits. I'm 100% sure intentional seeding of life that has been genetically modified to survive on Mars would have a chance, but otherwise unclear how evolution works under 0.01% lifetimes of single organisms.
@@ericgolightly8450 Until science can produce life from scratch, we don't know what it is, but if physics has fields, there's no reason to imagine life doesn't exploit them. Maybe we'll find out when everyone dies on their way to Mars? Maybe not?
I'm note sure I'd agree with never, but it's probably centuries away from happening. Once humans are able to harness massive amounts of energy only then will the massive amount of supplies needed to build and maintain an colony would be possible. We are still trying to canoe across the pacific ocean when what's needed is a jet airliner. As the ancestors of the oceanic islanders knew this was very dangerous, but somehow possible endeavor.
We will colonize Mars (sort of) but it will mostly be to mine it's resources and to make things that are best made in 1/3 gravity. There will be permanent settlements on Mars (so far as anything reliant upon constant upkeep and technology is permanent) but it won't be a utopia by any stretch. In the future, people will live in space colonies. Space colonies will be preferred due to the ease of maintaining a comfortable environment, upgrade, expansion, modification and can be moved if the need arises to boot. Planets won't be prime real estate and people living on them probably will be looked down upon.
What would you mine on Mars and why? Why will people live in "Space colonies"? What will they do in space? What will drive the economy of these "space colonies"?
Can you imagine the poor kid born on Mars peering through a telescope at the beautiful, blue-white disk of Earth? Can you see the tears in that poor kid's eye?
@@dirremoire especially after they find a stash of millions of Hours of banned video footage from Earth in the overseers office. The video of their parents signing up for a trip to Mars. The video of a man they recognise from a statue that they are told to worship.....
The psychological effects of such missions have been researched by scientists for years. People live in Antarctica for years under similar conditions. The brain adjusts to a low-stimulus environment. Not to mention, an extreme amount of effort would be put into entertaining the Martians. And we're not even talking about computers and the internet, but much more even very realistic VR glasses, etc. Humans must become a multiplanetary species. That is the next step in evolution.
Yea. Those mars gonna require high intelligent, beyond average mental health, and souls of the warriors. If they're mouse, than we're probably.. bacteria? Not a bad life^^
It's not about the technology, medicine or science. We will at some point in the future (whether its 100 or 500 years from now) have the ability to technically build and sustain a colony on mars. The real question would be if we have the motivation or need to do so. That will be the determining factor. I definitely think we will have manned missions to Mars and even have bases for research purposes, but anything beyond that is up in the air.
@@lionroar26 In 500 years time humans will have significantly more advanced technology and science at their disposal. These problems that you bring up is like telling someone from the year 1500 that going to Australia on horseback is impossible, and that even if you make it to Australia nobody is going to help you live there or sustain a colony. Don't underestimate our ingenuity and will to break barriers.
@@03chrisv What are you on about? So man traveled from one place to another on a planet where he and his horse can naturally survive. Okay, but that is not what I said, a human beings survial 100,000 years ago and today is reliant on the same things, What are you going to take oxygen water food and pets with you on your startrek space ship? And what about the protection we get from the Earth's barrier from the sun's lethal radiation? I'm not being arrogant but just making a solid reality point. Their is nothing wrong with gaining seeking knowledge but you have to be realistic, I think their is a more of a possibility of super advanced AI robots going to Mars and making a colony or a environment where humans can survive but you are looking at 10,000 years not 500. Also WW3 doesn't seem too far off.
This video is interesting, but it fails badly in one extremely basic point: our bodies aren't even able to make the trip there. Period. Read "First Man: The Life of Neil A. Armstrong", by James R. Hansen. He explains, with all due sources, how the challenges of human trip to Mars are absolutely out of the range of our capacities, even in a theoretical long term future.
The nearest close Earth analog planet with an oxygenated atmosphere may be many light years away. Many difficult problems would need to be solved before we could colonise such a distant planet.
Ok, I haven't gone through the whole documentary (yet) - but let's just say : Think about building a home for yourself on earth temperate zone - it's tough Think about building habitat for 1 million people on earth's temperate zone - it's a mega project ! Think about building a city in the Antarctic - with 1 million inhabitants.. That's like crazy hard - 1000x harder ! Think about building a city on the bottom of the ocean - with 1 million people.. That'd be nigh impossible, 1000 times more difficult.. Think about building a space station in earth orbit.. with 1 million people.. That's like crazy mind boggling ludicrous and 1000 time more difficult Think about building a moon base with 1 million people .. Again 1000x more difficult Doing that on mars is 1000x or maybe even 1 Million times more difficult ! Guys, we are not going to be an interplanetary species - EVER ! And if we are it'd be in 100 million years from now (by which time we will have been long extinct).
Depends. If two things happen, all bets are off. 1) Access-to-space costs drop dramatically (eg space 'elevator' technology) and 2) genomic research far enough advanced to design a 'hardened' body plan, able to withstand higher levels of molecular ionization damage at the cellular level. The bonus of the genomic research is the related mastery-preservation of Earth's macro environment. They kind of go hand in hand. If we can master ourselves and our local environment that efficiently, those are the techniques required to adapt THIS surface-dwelling species, into something more flexible, for traveling the distances to OTHER planetary surfaces and engineering reliable, closed-loop, habitable environments along the way. That's when interplanetary exploration starts looking feasible. But we're just beginning to face this last, greatest, hurdle, mastering the preservation of Earth's environment, before that journey can begin. 100 years? Maybe?
In the future, They may have biodomes that people can live in on the moon and Mars, but I don't think Terraforming will be possible. Plus, the trip there would be akin to being buried alive, and that is a fate worse than death.
Do you know of tech to shield biodomes from cosmic rays? Mars has no magnetic field. Ron howard had it right in his Mars TV series. You would have to move underground. Makes the whole Mars thing more difficult and kinda pointless - except for science exploration.
"We may be stuck on Earth." Why is that a negative statement? "We may be blessed with the chance to live our lives the most wonderful, life-sustaining, heavenly place in the entire known universe."
I do hope we'll find some kind of highly valuable substance on the mars, moon, or asteroids. This way we'll have a reason to solve all problems with building colonies outside our planet
It's a myth that there's nothing valuable or worthwhile in space. NEAs are easier to reach than the Moon, and for instance the little Apollo class NEA that hit near Chelyabinsk is denser with metals than the Earth's crust down 50 km deep. Some meteorites are density 8+, greater than pure iron. King Tut's rust-proof meteoritic steel dagger is 6% cobalt. No mine on a planet or larger moon will ever work such materials. Something larger than Mars had its guts spread across space, so metals are not difficult, whether its iron or Titanium, Paladium, Uranium.
They already have milllions of tons of valuable or useful elements (like gold, iron, etc.), problem is we are still developing technology for space mining. And yes maybe we'll find there some exotic, unknown substance of great value.
@@fernandochaves9665 It's accurate to say that there are no new inventions needed. No new fundamental theoretical or engineering discoveries need to be made. Every process for catching an NEA or building a space habitat is known, and either in-use in some form in present industries, or known as an interesting side-effect that's not terribly useful down here but could be revolutionary and simple up there. (many astronautical and mining engineers have published it in peer-reviewed engineering publications)
Never say never. The outward urge is a very deep yearing. Do not underestimate it. There will always be people who will try. If it were made a national priority, the limitations could be overcome.
The low gravity and complete lack of magnetic field make long-term human habitation of Mars pretty much impossible. Even if the atmosphere, water, and energy issues can be solved, everyone will die of blood clots (due to the low gravity) or cancer (due to cosmic radiation) within 10 years. Without even factoring in gravity, just the radiation alone would make living deep underground the only option, and at that point, we'd be better off colonizing the bottom of our own ocean than Mars (it's more hospitable and at least getting supplies and people there wouldnt take 7-9 months) A manned research facility on Mars (akin to Antarctica) might eventually exist, but not a colony
One reason we will never get this done is because skilled trades people will never help build these structures. Nobody is going to give up years of life, exposure to radiation, and physical toll working in that gravity. As a Union Electrician you would never be able to pay me enough to do this work. We make a great living on Earth. You have only the SLAVE OPTIONS or PENAL COLONIES.
No one ever talks about the space rocks hurling around at thousands of miles an hour. All it takes is a basketball size Rock to hit the craft and everything is going to explode
They used to say there was nothing across the ocean. Then said there was nothing to gain early colonies. There is always reasons to expand. Yes there are challenges and you know who solves challenges, inventors. A part of reason for lack of development is our leaders now are more concerned with social issues than expanding/growing. There are only so many resources on earth, we have to go to space.
@W we are in dark ages with space tech Dumbo!!and where is that tech then who shorteness flights?? don't talk theories and bullshits which don't exist yet!!and again it won't be colonize ,infact you didn't colonize orbit of earth yet or with few peooles in ISS which are in shitty conditions in those flying container there and when they comeback to earth they have problems with gravitation and muscles.... so with Mars will be much bigger problems,infact you will colonize with dead bodies first
It's not like there's just a few problems to overcome: there's tens of thousands, each requiring battalions of specialists. The virus threat, all by itself, makes off-world colonization prohibitive.
Hi guys, if you liked this video, share it on your social networks (Reddit, Facebook, Instagram, Tik Tok etc.) and you will help the Insane Curiosity community to increase scientific content. Thanks
Thanks for the video. It was really good👌🏾
Is there a way to provide artificial gravity on the surface (or subsurface) of Mars with some kind of spinning habitat? It seems fraught with problems.
@@samuellee8018 Not really, unless we catch a UFO
Not a video I would share. However, I typically enjoy your videos.
@@livewellherenow Yeah it's a little too real.
Mars is one of those places you might want to go to just to say you've been there, but within a few days you just want to go home.
A bit like Blackpool…or Las Vegas…..🤣🤣🤣
Don’t know who wants to visit a dead hostile rock, earth is a trillion times better
Yeah, it's like going to Las Vegas.
Except once there you got a 8 month wait for a window to open to return to Earth.
Mars at the least, is a rest and resupply stop on the way to the greater universe...kind of like San Francisco was a gateway to the Pacific.
Thank for giving earthlings a good dose of reality❤
Such a shame... 🥺 I would love to ship all the Elon Fanboys and their Daddy to live on Mars. 🙃
But do you really need to kill interest in space exploration this early? It's not a bad thing to imagine and think about it. I would argue after we fix our society and planet, we should try space exploration and colonization.
Perhaps we should try the moon first. At least it's only 3 days away
Yes, having a base on the moon would likely give us a better understanding of low gravity effects on astronauts. It seems nuts to me that anyone would want to go to mars without knowing what the low gravity would do to them. We should definitely establish a moon base before going anywhere else. Astronauts on mars would be stuck there for a minimum of 2 years without any help.
@@CyberJellos better understanding of low gravity dude we have machines that can kinda simulate that.
There's a big difference between no atmosphere, and some atmosphere, even tenuous. A lot of industry will be easier on Mars than on the Moon. It is even conceivable to adapt some plant or lichen to live on Mars surface, and thus help transform it.
But otherwise, indeed, this is an exercise in establishing a entirely artificial living environment.
Again, doing that on Mars will be easier than doing that in space station. For one thing, material resources are available on the surface that are not in the empty space where everything would have to be brought in.
Mars is the ideal place to do that!
Artemis Program *Cough*
@@informatimago so explain if we do colonize Mars, communication between the two planets are going to be problematic and if you disagree let’s debate, and I know I will win.
I read the National Geographic for the Moon Landing. They were talking Mars missions in the 1980’s. They got to the Moon so fast, they didn’t realize how difficult not to mention expensive space travel is.
Chicken Little won't be going Mars. I'm sure you,with free energy and AI ,as smart we already have. I can sure you I do know free energy that good enough to power every on earth ,Mars or Star ship . Robots that can pick up 40 lb on Earth on the moon 240 lb. 1000 robots and 20 humans cresselia 1000 robux that smart as humans 20 humans in one day the robots can work 24 hours a day.. and yes my free energy devices small enough that could a thousands a years of life for the robot . And the robots would be pretty strong Mars 120 lb . I could see about a 200-acre people living on the rim of the dome in there individually pressurize hones caves like structure with their individual gardens connected to their own house . Maybe the dome would have a 50 acres of lake maybe these lizards crawfish frogs. but maybe have a hundred acres of forests maybe about least fifty acres of grassland . Rabbits and squirrels and chickens and goat sheep birds and bees. I'm pretty sure we could get to 300 ft long or 500 ft long manufacturing ships. I know you going to think I'm foolish or for sure it's lie. I think I have come up with a way to to get to Mars in 3 days at 1G gravity. 😂
I don't want to spend three months 6 months in a Coca-Cola can called
a spaceship NASA or Russian might as well not leave the Chinese space can off this list.😂
.
I think Ganymede it's going to work for me epic Jupiter and the other moons. Mountains I think with the mountains to crater land of ice and rocks .Ganymede would be a pretty crazy place and beautiful. Maybe a thousand acre dome and an artificial sun. Might as well make three artificial suns . I think it would even have a light Blue sky. But with different colored LEDs purple pink yellow skies but I think blue would everyone's favorite . I think 1,000 lb gold vest long way adjusted to Earth's gravity and help stop radiation.
YOU DONT TALK MUCH DIFFERENT FROM A BLACK PERSON IN THE GHETTO.. TALK TO THEM ABOUT LIVING LIFE THROUGH CHALLENGES.. MAYBE THEY CAN HELP YOU SOLVE YOURS.. @@jackgoodell5574
@@jackgoodell5574 Accelerating at a mere .01g to the halfway point (and then decelerating by the same modest amount) would be enough to go from the Earth to Mars in a few days, not a few months.
This is why Elon's stubborn insistence on using chemical rockets is silly - by using a propellant hungry drive, he forces the need to coast almost all of the way and that's where those long travel times come from.
Okay, comeback in 20 years and checkout the comments section.
You mean when Elon is still lying about Mars?
@@jcwiggens Elon is not lying. He is just really focused.
I look out my window Downtown in a big city and think. "Tiny little Humans" made all that.
@@davidmacphee3549 Really focused on lying thru his teeth about colonizing Mars. Those humans made all of that on Earth, BTW. And it's real. Unlike the fake CGI visions of Mars being presented to know nothings.
@@jcwiggens bruh what scientific basis u basing your bullshit on ?
@@jcwiggens , credentials please. With photos.
As Neil deGrasse Tyson said: "If we were able to terraform Mars into Earth than why not terraform Earth into Earth?" (for all here who don't get it: this is meant concerning climate change 😉)
Earth is the planet we'll terraform, removing heavy industry and pollution and restoring a biosphere.
Earth’s societies don’t have equal goals or rights to do this in a short timeframe. We have more responsibilities here on Earth. Ideally, Mars won’t have the same societal hinderances.
Earth is the planet we need. It does not require us to alter it. Mars is too far from the sun and does not have enough atmosphere. We can and should change that. Venus is too close to the sun and has a sulfuric acid ice cloud 15 miles thick. We can move it and get rid of the sulfuric acid in the clouds. That would make both planets habitable.
Antartica at its worst still isn’t as deadly as Mars at its absolute best! And how many humans live in Antartica at science bases? A handful!
I've always said we have the perfect planet right here why not spend all this money and fix it rather than going to some cold dead rock. Elon Musk has always had this weird fetish with Mars. He's going to find out it's going to be a lot harder than the hardest things he could imagine it to be. Just building a space vehicle that that will be safe and efficient enough to get there and back is going to be hard enough. And as hard it is it is for us to even find a planet that's remotely even anything like Earth in anything that we've discovered so far in the universe tells you how rare our planet is and how special it is, every aspect of biological conditions to support life are mind blowing, just watch some DNA or microscopic animations will completely blow you away.
The biggest evidence against martian colonisation is the fact that we still don't have permanent human settlements in Antarctica. When we'll start having cities in Antarctica and not just research stations then can we start talking about other places. And even then there is no practical need to go to Mars. We need significant advances in med tech to start with in order to handle the problems of Mars. Long story short sorry The Expanse ain't gonna happen soon.
Antarctica is the Garden of Eden compared to Mars
It's easier to build an O'Neill habitat in space than a city on Antarctica. Free energy and free superior resources are readily available among the NEAs.
No worries about pollution, as with inhabiting Earthly deserts or oceans or Antarctica.
We need a university city/resort in an O'Neill habitat in Mars orbit, and a branch of that base down on the planet. Another one among the moons of Jupiter and Saturn.
There are no new inventions needed to build for virtually Earth-like conditions anywhere off-Earth where there are or to which we bring materials.
No, the cost isn't outrageous (not compared to soft-landing on Mars everything for Musk's million person city).
The '70s NASA Ames space settlement studies said that cost over ~30 years until the first habitat is done is like any other large infrastructure or industrial development down here.
We'd have had the first small habitat by ~'08, along with all launch and in-space infrastructure to reproduce it.
There hasn’t been even a successful sealed colony on Earth! Check out the Biosphere fail
There is an international treaty against annexing Antarctica by any country, so in consequence it can't be colonized
The artificial biosphere problem still is unsolved.
At this stage I could envisage a small research base on Mars. This base would be dependent upon supply ships from Earth.
Supplying basic oxygen, food and water and power for even a small research base would be difficult.
Agree with Neil. Here are some simple steps to do in increasing difficulty to achieve before Mars colonisation. Note that Mars is exponentially more difficult.
1. Colonise Central Australia.
2. Colonise Mojave Desert
3. Colonise Gobi Desert
4. Colonise Sahara Desert
5. Colonise Atacama Desert
6 Colonise Antarctica
7. Colonise Moon
8. Colonise Mars (good luck you will need it)
Colonize underground earth... Practical experience... Underground cities on earth. Also not a bad backup plan for asteroid strikes. Maybe a solution to climate change. A reasonable start is Helsinki Finland. They have massive underground facilities to fend off a possible Russian attack. Its interesting how they use these facilities during peace times.
We cannot overcome the low gravity and the lack of a magnetosphere.
Exactly. We ain't designed to survive in a place like that.
Finally someone said it that my exact thought.
scientists will find a protein to make astronauts not vulnerable to lethal cosmic rays . The microscopic tardigrades might be the clue
In Arthur C Clarke's books any humans born on an off earth colony could never visit earth. I think the first challenge to overcome should be creating a propulsion system that could get us there in days or week rather than months. Wouldn't like to get into trouble and the nearest help being a year away.
I don’t like the anti-progress argument that we have to solve ALL our other problems (will never happen!) before we achieve something new.
It’s a huge mistake to make assumptions based on our current technology when technology is accelerating the way it is.
Mars will happen very soon and many people will be ready for the adventure...
This video completely misses the point about why we should strive to colonise Mars asap. Of course it will be hard, many tough challenges, people will die too, but it's why we are not living in caves that defines the human spirit and nature. Someday we want to reach the stars, be amongst them, someday Earth will be no more. Imagine if life on Earth was unique, imagine how precious that would make it and how important it would be to spread it to other worlds.
Sorry Eagle. The earth and govt. have much more pressing problems. It is not going to happen, at least in your or my lifetimes.
Star Trek is a hopeless fantasy. No wars, disease, poverty problems on Earth. Horse feathers.
You watch way too much science fiction and way too naive! Mars will never be habitable by humans for the same reason it is not habitable now!
@Don Berry I'm glad it's not up to you to decide.
@@nightlightabcd Clueless, making sweeping statements about "never" is totally anti-human and all that we are. Once people thought we would never fly, let alone land on the moon. You have zero clue about what technology we will have in 100 years from now. Never, what a joke! Our technology of today is like magic to anyone living 2000 years ago. Of course we will colonize Mars and Venus at some stage, terraform both.
I've always said this.. People imagine the worst desert on earth and its infinitely worse than that
And it's not a hot desert, but a radically, freezing-ass cold desert! With no atmosphere to speak of, no atmospheric pressure (may as well be on the Moon), the "soil", regolith, is a toxic cocktail, and roughly 1/3 earth gravity to boot! Oh yeah, let's all go live on Mars.
@@samr.england613 Nobody said we would live in the open. We would live in pressurized habitats. There is research underway to see if Martian soil that has been filtered of toxins can be useful for farming. And the lower gravity might not have as much of an effect on humans as microgravity does. Exercise and medical supplements might be all humans need.
@@ebonaparte3853 Hi Ebon, I never said we'd be living in the open on the surface of Mars, but in pressurized habitats. Problem is, is that the colonists will be imprisoned in those habitats 99% of the time, and when they do go outside, yep, the pressure suit.
As far as the Martian "soil" goes (regolith), to detoxify it of the lethal and deadly perchlorates as well as the equally if not more lethal lead, arsenic and mercury, it will take A LOT of water, something that Mars doesn't have readily available!
And finally the roughly 1/3, partial earth-gravity problem. This is an unkown, because no one, nobody, has ever lived long-term or EVEN short-term in 1/3 earth gravity.
People want to believe that it, "won't be a problem", or will say, "I'm sure humans will be fine in 1/3 gravity", but that is wishful thinking. Remember how the Apollo astronauts had to locomote with that hoppity-hop, side-to-side motion?
It's because they couldn't efficiently move forward or back, or to side to side like they could on Earth. They adapted to the 1/6 grav on the Moon. It will be similar for people on Mars.
@@ebonaparte3853 What I don't understand is how little the possibility of a production of gravity through rotating, bowl-shaped habitats is mentioned. Would a construction of such habitats have to be too expensive? Don't platforms rotating trains, don't huge merry-go-rounds already exist on Earth, since decades? Has not an MIT professor Dennis Whyte recently achieved a breakthrough on fusion, with a most probably effective plant now being built?
@@HansDunkelberg1 Maybe we need to research that field more. We may not even need them, if Martian gravity is enough for humans with regular exercise and medical supplements.
I will stay on this gorgeous planet called Earth and will never leave it nor will it ever enter my mind to do so. Be my guess, you can have Mars, I’ll take Earth. Thank you.
Agreed, same here
Amen.
the earth is rome while the galaxy is the empire
life emerged from the seas and colonized the lands and the air , next step is space , this is in our genes , we will adapt . Remember , fishes grew lungs to breath on earth , they grew legs , they grew wings to fly , in our case , we are building rockets , we carry our oxygen to go to space , we are still doing what life did billions years ago
About 1/2 difficult as to are stating in your video:
First you're wrong about the gravity: it's between 38 and 39%, not 33. Second ...completely fallacious comparing Earth and Mars temperatures....even below 100 F the problem on Mars would be overheating in a pressure suit not getting cold.... Ask your self what's the difference between placing your hand in ice water vs 32° air, divide that cold air effect by 100 and you'll see how little the cold would affect you. Water is in the soil in mid-upper latitudes, not far north. Perchlorates can be removed from Martian soil by perchlorate eating bacteria...and in the process give off Oxygen gas. Radiation exposure on the ISS can be as high as 1000 millisieverts for every six month period and as high as 400 millisieverts on the Martin surface. This is not to say that exposure on Mars isn't a problem, but it's one that can be mitigated with certain technologies.
Living and growing plants underground
LOUD BUZZER NOISE! got that one wrong too. There are a number of (albeit self enclosed) home and building structures with natural lighting that have already been proven out here on Earth. These structures can be automatically 3-D printed using matian regolith. Too frustrating to stay subscribed you folks....if memory serves you're the ones who reported a velocity that was one or two orders of magnitude off from the actual.
Am outta here.
This dude constantly gets facts wrong
Holy cow, your "facts" are even wronger. Where to start? 1) the soil does contain toxic perchlorates. Your solution: perchlorate-eating bacteria... yeah, sure. We have boxes of perchlorate-eating bacteria capable of surviving on Mars ready to ship. 2) "Radiation can be mitigated with certain strategies". Yes, that's exactly what the narrator said. 3) Oh yeah, all those homes and structures already proven ....on Earth!!😂. Listen, nobody's perfect, but this channel gets the facts right far more than most so stick around, you might learn something.
Adios!
Lol you're so wrong at the very most fundamental level. Theoretical science is just that but then comes application. Lol where do we get all these resources in an already scarce resource world just to get all the s we need to get there. Look at how long it took to just make the ISS and that's in near earth orbit. Mars has no magnetic field and way less mass. Any atmosphere would be stripped away faster than could be created. Bacteria need water to survive that is to say to be active as does any life lifeform. lol it would need a lot more water than what's there and for it to be a warm liquid form. So tell us htf do we do that? Heat the planet plus bring extra water which again is a resource here that's already scarce? But to retain that heat we would need an atmosphere with similar pressure as earth s surface or higher to already exist there. You're mad because you have a high school education and your mindset driven by shows like star trek. Impossible to colonize Terra form Mars as its a circular conundrum plus we will never have enough actual resources to achieve it and then make it self perpetuate. Lol the most major problem we will never be able to solve there is making the core like earth's so that there is a strong magnetic field. Lol ever think of that? The narrator could've just stuck to that instead of all the other explanations.
@@dirremoire lol bacteria need warm liquid water to perform. Lol is nowhere close to enough water there. Lol would have to coat entire planet about three thousand feet deep at least for such activity to even begin to have a positive effect. Meanwhile have a solid cold core. No magnetic field. Bwahaha as soon as any atmosphere made solar winds are going to strip it away. This is all assuming there's enough percolate there to even get that much oxygen out. Oxygen CO2 isn't only problem. What about all the other gas types we need. We just as well as plants need nitrogen. Its isn't oxygen or co2 that gives us a stable atmospheric pressure or do they make up the majority of our atmosphere. Its nitrogen. Its pretty obvious we can never applicatively solve such problems. Mars an absolute no for all time unless lol we become magicians. Venus however there's a slim chance. But still gas wise it would have same problem. Its actually nitrogen be the main gas problem. Bet none y'all thought of that or the core-magnetic field problem
Thanks for making a realistic Prorail of science in space; perhaps our energies should be concentrated in making life more bearable on Earth
THE ONLY PERSON NO ONE CARES ABOUT.. AMAZING.. HEY EVERYNE.. LETS MAKE THE PLANET WE ALL LIVE ON ABLE TO BE LIVED ON.. I SWEAR THESE PEOPLE ARE ALL SO STUPID..
It’s depressing enough here on Earth. I wouldn’t trade that to be in a depressing hole on Mars.
Humans are perfectly adapted to Earth. Almost everything planned for colonization is an inconvenient or dangerous version of what we have here. Let the robot landers do the exploration.
Can't agree more.
Yes, we evolved to survive in our current ecosystem and have dabbled in artificially created living spaces for short periods. Just like our 5 senses were evolved for life on earth, we won't ever see the bigger picture (extra dimensions, etc.) because other than 'math', there is no other way to experience things outside the realm of our reality.
We live in a blessed and beautiful planet which turns out to be flat
@@visitante-pc5zc lol
we are adapted to this current 'earth' environment. Nothing to say it wont change drastically
Attempting to live on Mars is suicidal. I don't think the reward justifies the risk.
Wrong. Once Earth Begins to run out of Ore. We'll start mining the moon, then Asteroids, than Mars.
It's not a Question of If but When.
@@silverhawkscape2677 Industrial reasons to spoil seem ok. This could be handled by robots. But not colonizing.
@@thegeop5906 Nah. At the distance between Mars and Earth, you'll need humans on the Planet. Signals will be delayed anywhere between 5 to 20 minutes depending on the time of year. Try doing any emergency repair when you are minutes delayed.
Thankfully, humans can stay in a Bunker while Robots control the surface remotely.
@@silverhawkscape2677
Mining of Mars for resources anywhere else is a silly idea. More silly than a city/colony on the planet.
The NEAs offer enough to end the relevance of the scarcity model regarding energy or raw resources or room for growthy.
We know of 1400 NEAs more easily reached than Mars, 400 more easily reached than the Moon, 40 or so easier than Lunar orbit.
And from meteorites we know that the resources at an asteroid can be far _far_ better than the Moon.
@@silverhawkscape2677 Once humans leave the magnetoshpere of Earth they begin to die.
Glad to finally hear someone with a realistic view of Mars colonization.
I’m all for exploration but when we start to change what a human is and cross the line to something is , I can’t support that … shit you see how society is today and giving ppl the power to play nature/god is just wrong to me .
To some people the most "realistic" view is that the earth is flat. I see it as we can get probes to Mars. We can get people to the moon. Granted the technology has changed so much since the days of Apollo. The least of the problem will be finding volunteers to go. But it makes the most sense to colonize the moon first to prove we can colonize another celestial object. Then, the main problem only becomes a matter of distance.
We should be focused on seeing if we can even get humans to Mars but as far as colonizing anything other then earth would it not make sense to try it on the moon first?
Screw Elon Musk, he is just a creepy scammer and just takes credit for others pie in the sky ideas even though most of them are implausible epic failures. But he might be able to raise funds and/or expedite the process of colonization or even just going back to the moon for tourism intents. Might as well exploit that if possible.
I didn't hear anything realistic, he has points BUT they are ALL stuff we can easily overcome and I think we will have the first baby born on Mars in my life time
@@getyourgameon1990 there is no practical reason to colonize mars. No matter how bad earth gets, it’s will still far easier and less expensive to live here.
@@ScottBFree okay practical doesn't mean we won't we would do it just because we can
I think the challenge of going to Mars is much much larger tech problem than going to the Moon in the 60's
Yes it looks to be many orders of magnitude more challenging
People are finally clueing in. We’ve been producing vids like this for the past year. Mars colonization is not in the cards.
Notions about terraforming Mars run into a huge problem: lacking a magnetic field, nothing will prevent the solar wind from scouring off any upper atmosphere created by somehow injecting bazillions of tons of Oxygen (generated how, and using what raw materials as reagents?). Humans would have to keep those generators going forever. We're lucking to have the protection our magnetic field gives us, but but Mars doesn't.
Not to mention tha Mars has insufficient gravity to maintain an atmosphere of required pressure.
Unless a technology is invented that we can create an artificial magnetic field on ships for travel between planets and on a planetary scale.
@@daviniarobbins9298 I heard an idea about using the Lagrange points around Mars to space man made magnets to create an artificial magnetic field, but sounds bonkers to me.
I mean an artificial MS wouldn’t have to cover the entire planet it would only need to cover the diameter of the sun at whatever orbit it’s at, also generating power is pretty simple considering the device is literally used to intercept solar radiation.
This is the biggest reason why humans could never live on Mars.
With no magnetic field to protect it, we would be suffer from deadly solar charged particles as well.
Any CMEs would bombard the planet and kill anyone on the surface.
Mars is a bad investment for human colonization.
It simply can't support life without a proper magnetic field.
Period.
Guy tells it like it is. Finally someone with a brain
So this RUclipsr is smarter than Elon Musk in your opinion huh? bold statement lol Yea this guy and his computer can definitely see how impossible it is. Elons legion of scientists and astronauts, engineers definitely are wasting their time...they should watch this video and educate themselves lolol!
@@hyperionzii5889 forget about this RUclipsr, I myself am 100 times smarter than Elon musk. The only thing musk is better than me is at conning people, being a psychopath, stealing other peoples work, selling vaporware and snake oil and being a d ick. Apparently, these are the qualities required to become a billionaire today.
Someone with a brain(someone who regurgitates my political/ideological view )
@@e8media48 haha as if that comment didn’t give away your political leanings lmao. I’m not an American btw so I don’t care about politics in America.
@@hyperionzii5889 ; Elon Musk is a con artist who is brilliant at raising money.
This is good because Musk’s reputation as a tech guru brings in funds which has kept Tesla and Space X alive. And Tesla and Space X have made a lot of progress.
Still, Musk has come up with nonsense such as using nukes to melt the Mars ice caps which he knows is a bad idea. But Musk does this to build his brand which again brings money for his companies. Hyperloop and the Boring Company are also scams but they also build his tech guru brand.
Back to Mars. The video is wrong because someday, humans will have a colony on Mars. But we are talking hundreds of years from now when that will happen.
Why so long? Because the technical problems to build a Mars city are massive.
Humanity doesn’t even have a human crewed outpost on earth’s Moon yet. And the Moon is only a 3 day trip from earth and launches to the Moon can be done everyday.
By contrast it takes months to get to Mars and launches can only be done every 26 months.
- Once humanity figures out how to live on earth’s Moon in a permanent outpost, then getting to Mars will be a next step. But again, that’s a long way from now.
The thing about going to Mars, is that I believe it would be a one way trip. You would never be able to come back to Earth.
It was difficult to follow lockdown rules and wear masks in coronavirus but we still dream of settling on Mars. There is a very little chance that we'll ever colonize Mars.
Its easier to wear spacesuit than mask, trust me:)
@@razormilkyway8444 yeah I don't see any of those qanon idiots managing to have the self control and self discipline required to survive in a hostile, almost-airless environment if putting a mask over their face was too fking complicated.
lol found the low IQ tard
@@razormilkyway8444 So you enjoy wearing a diaper to carry out your physiological needs for hours at a time?
That sounds significantly more unpleasant than wearing a mask.
It will take a lot of preparation and planning, so it won't be 2040 when we get them there, more like 2100.
For everyone saying these cringe "they always said we'd never" quotes how in the hell are you planning on reviving a dead planet core thats responsible for keeping the atmosphere around it?Making the atmosphere is one thing but keeping it on the planet another.
Finally someone with a brain
To me Mars will be always a huge iron mine not a human colony
Why do you need to revive a dead core, when the atmosphere thinning is such a slow process that it will take millions of years? Just doing what we do here on Earth right now would prevent the atmosphere from thinning due to it being replenished more than what is lost.
@@bloxyman22 - Because you have to contend with the absence of a global geomagnetic field. First off, *where* are you getting that atmosphere from to begin with? Not from Mars itself. For example, the most common gas in Earth's atmosphere is nitrogen, not oxygen. Humans cannot breathe pure oxygen. But there are no large amounts of nitrogen on Mars to extract. So where are you getting it? Nuclear fusion? Comets? The new atmosphere will be getting stripped away by the solar wind even as you are trying to build it up.
No one here talked about the composition of the atmosphere. What is the main purpose of terraforming in short term, is to increase pressure enough for water to be able to flow and for humans to be able to be on surface with very little protective gear.
We are talking about even colonies on Moon, which we could never ever terraform at all and Mars certainly is a much more habitable to us than the moon and yet we will probably have a colony on the Moon eventually as well.
Also magnetic field vanished billions of years ago and took billions of years to reach current stage, which is by the way right now in pretty much in equalibrium so that even a little extra added will add to the amtosphere over time. There is plenty of water and greenhouse gases locked away on and below the surface.
Either way what is your solution? Stay on earth and make sure we get wiped out and not even attempt to colonize another body? I surely do not know of a better world than Mars when it comes to us being able to survive.
@@bloxyman22 - False. The magnetic field vanished billions of years ago, and as far as we can tell so did most of Mars's atmosphere and water. It has *not* been a slow decline to it's present state. Mars's surface features are mostly billions of years old! It is a *dead* planet. The scant carbon dioxide atmosphere that remains is solely because CO2 is very heavy compared to most other gases found in Earth's atmosphere.
You also haven't answered where exactly you plan to pump in all of this new atmosphere from! Because the required supply of volatiles are *not* present on Mars! Where will you get all that nitrogen? All that oxygen? All that hydrogen?
Talk of lunar colonies is completely different. Even with chemical rocket propulsion the Moon is three days travel from Earth. Not 6-24 months depending on where Mars is in it's solar orbit relative to where Earth is. The Moon's distance from Earth changes very little. Mars changes dramatically as our respective planets orbit the Sun, and for part of the time Mars is opposite the Sun from Earth, which even makes communication a challenge! To top it off, not much talk about lunar colonies presumes permanent occupation, or producing children up there. The general assumption is that it will be a temporary posting like trips to Antarctic outposts.
We cannot save ourselves from extinction events by trying to colonize an uninhabitable planet where the colony would still be utterly dependent on the continued civilization on Earth! That should be simple logic.
I agree with the Vid. As one of my professors once pointed out, If we can't live in the oceans because it's too hard, then no way we'd be able to live off on Mars.
Those are very different things
Mars dosent have crushing pressures or bioluminescencent fish dipshit
Except we actually bring gizmos to mars with us. Ocean people live with.. raft and fish?
Its easier to live on Mars. I mean you dont have to swim all the time
THANK YOU! Finally a sane voice regarding Mars colonization/terraformation. The sad truth is that Mars, despite being the only planet in the Solar System that will not immediately kill you, is thoroughly uninhabitable. And no, it is also not terraformable because it is simply too small of a planet for humans to function in the long term...
Send whomever wants to go there. Natural selection. lol
If it was terraformed, it wouldn't function as an earthlike paradise for billions of people, but rather a hub for travel, science, and would be like a giant space station. The population could live in artificial gravity habitats.
@@ericgolightly8450 We may not need artificial gravity. We don’t know.
It is terraformable, actually. And we may be able to function there in the long term. Scientists aren’t sure.
Even a pleasant voice.
"Elon Musk thinks mars is like earth" Really? Does he?
The guy is a fruit loop.
Elon meant it can be made into like Earth, not that it is currently is like Earth.
You think negative
Elon thinks positive
Human(Nasa) already landed unmanned rover in Mars successfully it's a milestone
I hope SpaceX will send manned starship to mars successfully
No he doesn't
Cave man " I've invented the wheel !!!".
Neanderthal " Those young show off punks!!!".
Humans used to sail numerous months on rat infested ships surrounded by endless water. There’s always a special breed of people that are psychologically designed for this kind of harsh living.
They are very rare indeed
This is all EXPONENTIALLY more difficult than sailing a leaky ship across the Atlantic.
@@888jackflashOur technology is also exponentially more advanced as well. Regardless to say, the analogy to the human grit needed to overcome these obstacles till remains.
😂 dumb comparison
Sailing the oceans is a wee bit different to sailing space and landing on an inhospitable planet
@@yeshuasage3724 The scale of the dangers involved are just as injuriously proportionate because of their level of technological development and the challenges they faced at the times.
I seriously doubt Musk thinks Mars is like Earth...
Yeah I don't know where did they get that from
@Michael Orlow Living on Mars is a bloody awful idea. At most we will have an ISS-like presence on Mars with Astronauts staying for around a year before coming back and being replaced with a different crew
Let Musk go and stay on Mars, I'll stay on the this beautiful blue globe.
@@markg.7865 I would love to ship all the Elon Fanboys and their Daddy to live on Mars. 🙃
@@morganangel340 I agree with that!
Hope the downvotes don't bother you. What you're saying is totally legitimate and people should hear it. Liked/subbed.
I always shake my head in near disbelief when I see martian colonists in spacious habitats with small tables of plants. I envision cramped quarters needing maintenance. And as for hydroponics to feed a sizable population just consider the scale of agriculture the San Joaquin valley ...
If we can develop agriculture that needs a few table tops or even a warehouse size "farm" that could feed a few 100 persons, then we could apply the same advancements to feed 7+ billion here on Earth where water, air, temperate climates and sunlight are more readily available.
I agree, feeding a bunch of tin-can dwellers is one problem now imagine the amount of costly maintenance it'll take to run a sewer-water recycable system !
Well, since Elon Musk has so much excess cash from not paying taxes, let’s give it a go shall we?!🙄
Yeah man! The artists concepts of Martian bases and cities are always ridiculously idealistic! The domed cities in the background, the 'smiling' people in pneumatic travel tubes, the comforting ship taking off or landing, the cutaway showing the proverbial, lab-coat clad couple with clip boards and lap-tops scrutinizing the plants in the "greenhouse", etc, the manned rover approaching, and the guy in a pressure suit, outside, apparently tantalized by a Martian rock he's looking at!
The cramped quarters would only be in the early days.
@@ebonaparte3853 Or the early decades. Or the early centuries for all you and I know. At any rate, the living quarters will always seem cramped because, no matter how many or few the "Martian colonists", they will all, 99% of the time, be confined and imprisoned in their pressurized habitats.
I agree. I think a lot of people are too optimistic about colonizing Mars. The chances of Mars being habitable are pretty tiny. Mars contains an extremely low temperature, high concentrations of toxic chemicals, lethal amounts of radiation, an insufficient amount of water, a barely existent magnetic field, and an atmosphere that is 1% of Earth's. Not to sound like an asshole, but people who listen to science and logic would fully understand why colonization on Mars is a very small chance. If we live on Mars in large domes, then it is possible to live on Mars, but nowhere near like living on Earth.
You didn't mention low gravity, which is a complete unknown.
All of this is beside the point that we can build for virtually Earth-like conditions in space habitats, anywhere.
It has no magnetic field because it has no liquid iron and nickel center like Earth to generate one. Thus it has no Van Allen Belt to protect it from the Sun's extreme radiation. It has virtually no atmosphere; if we stood in one of those huge sandstorms there we wouldn't feel the wind. The soil is chemically toxic to life and would be difficult to sanitize for growing food. The gravity is weak enough to give long term health problems. There may be water but how much and how difficult it would be to extract, detoxify and use we don't know.
I love the idea and all but we probably should direct our energy and resources at keeping our planet habitable first. We have a good thing going right here if we fix it up a bit , clean up our messes and tend to it better.
And even if you do manage to transform the atmosphere there is still the problem of zero magnetic field to protect it from the solar wind. You would be constantly replenishing the atmosphere to replace the lost.
@@daviniarobbins9298 build an artificial one. Live in arficial gravity habitats. Everything else can be outside that.
All the people taking about going to Mars, including Elon, do not want to go, but are happy to send others to suffer or die.
ask the defunct "Mars One" candidates, they were happy for a one way trip
I think you underestimate peoples willingness to die.
deep down under, they are somehow desperate, and like to have epic way to die, at least.
The guys behind the project were happy to take the sucker's money. Just like the current space hotel scam.
@@cohenrickard5282 did the European settlers say that about America when they colonised there
@@stephenpowell653 they had oxygen, wood, animals, plants, everything on the new continent.
There's a reason we have not been out of low earth orbit since 1972 and that is no one is willing to pay for it.
Take the cost of going back to the moon, multiply it by 1000 and that's a good guess of the cost of visiting Mars for a short stay.
Even a small colony on Mars would cost billions annually to maintain. Add to that even the smallest problem could be fatal. Here's what I think will happen, in the next 30 years we will probably land people on Mars, might be a couple of times and that's it. It will go the way of Apollo!
A far more interesting proposition is a Moon colony, it's 3 days away and you could rotate people regularly so the lack of gravity and solar radiation had less effect on people.
I don't think we will ever "colonize" Mars on a large scale, but I do think we will have several small sites populated by scientists studying the planet and the people supporting the colony. These "colonies" will need to be fairly self-sufficient and will populated by people who have chosen to spend the rest of their lives there. As far as large-scale colonization, it is just too dangerous and expensive to move people and supplies from earth (or the Moon) to Mars.
With all of the problems caused by radiation, such as cancer the rest of their lives may not be very long.
That's utter nonsense. Mars is uninhabitable. You are just fantasizing without any idea of what you're talking about.
@@johnhitz1185 You are correct - Mars is uninhabitable, which is why I said there would never be anything but small research sites populated by scientists and support personnel there. Same with the Moon or any other planet / asteroid in our solar system.
Somebody said it better below. If we can't "colonize" places like Antarctica, Siberian tundra or high inside the northern arctic circle, we'll never withstand a Mars colony. In addition to the temperature and brutal atmosphere, there's a huge particle, x-ray and cosmic radiation problem on the journey in, on the surface and on the journey out. Shielding is heavy and consumes resources to move it around. No, we won't be colonizing Mars regardless what the internet billionaires think. There are much more lucrative uses for our time and treasure.
Theres no reason to colonize Antartica, like there is to colonize a "backup planet". Ie, making like multiplanetary and backing up DNA/life-forms in case of a calamity on Earth. Antartica would be just as exposed as the rest of the planet to an ELE. DOesnt have to be mars, but we will need need some type of off-planet storage of DNA/life.
@@simonhill6267 Yes but as for the rest of the places the guy has point. We need to solve those environmental places to survival to prepare for even worst places of Mars and Venus. We need to completely conquer our planet's environment so that steps towards living on Mars or Moon isn't as big of a problem.
@@Ghost-hj5jy we could easily have a small population live in Antarctica with tens of billions in funding. The reason we don't is because there is no incentive to spend that money setting a colony there
@@simonhill6267 Wild life + what's underneath there could be incentive.
Musk will rather die than not colonize mars
I've been saying all of this for years anytime I say anything I get accosted by Elon' fanboys. People just don't realistically realize how monumentally difficult it is just to get to Mars with the technology we currently possess much less put people on the surface "safely" and that's the key word. What I don't understand is we have the perfect planet right here if we quit screwing it up who would pick a cold dead rock over Earth to live on that was in their right mind?? Elon Musk has just got some weird fetish with Mars and he's got all of his cult members believing in his nonsense when it's just not going to realistically happen in our lifetimes. And don't get me wrong I'm all about space exploration but I would rather us spend all this money fixing Earth and creating technology and new propulsion systems (which are crucial) to travel to deep space and go to other galaxies or other solar systems at the least in a reasonably short amount of time like Proxima Centauri, I mean if we're going to go big let's go big and go for it.
If you repurposed all of the people who are doing meaningless jobs on Earth right now, you'd probably have a colony next year. Humans do not use their resources very well. They need to rethink their economic structures because they are largely based on false assumptions and are highly manipulated to the benefit of individual interests and not the planet as a whole.
I suspected you were an idiot when you started implying that colonizing Mars is for the purpose of replacing Earth.
Your idiocy was confirmed when you said we’ll get to Proxima Centuri in no time and it was a more feasible venture.
Pretty sure we're limited to just the one galaxy dude, the Milky way, which by the way is vast.
@@chatteyj Space does expand things away from us but there are at least 80 ish galaxies in our local group that we should have access to for a good long while even if we are limited to less than light speed. Today at sub-light speed we still have access to 6 percent of the estimated 2 trillion galaxies that are observable. Actually getting to any of them with humans as they exist today is another matter altogether. Von Neumann probes would be easier. However, there is a multitude of things we still don't understand and many of these assumptions could change in an instant.
I try to send them to common sense skeptic.. the Elon musk debunked videos is a good place to start. Then they have a whole series on Mars specifically. It will.. never happen
What a great start to having a rational conversation about both Mars and this conversation can also be applied to a moon experience. Both the Moon and Mars have NO magnetosphere. For those who don’t know, this is the very thing the shields a planet from solar winds and radiation. It also helps retain most or almost all of any atmosphere. So even if you made a perfect system for terraforming a planet and got it there, the lack of a magnetosphere would just rip away all of your efforts, period.
2:39 they would weigh 25 kilogram-force. Can people please understand mass.
You’re expecting too much Mr Forbes
Kilogram isn't mass...
@@lmao2351 en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kilogram
@@thomasforbes784 that's doesn't make ane sense. How can kilograms be the messurment of mass whne different atoms weight different amount. If there are 2 cubes with the same volume and the same atom density but one is made from iron and one helium. Than they both have the same mass but will wight different in kilograms.
@@lmao2351 We currently mostly measure mass using weight that may be where some of your confusion is. But a kilogram is a measure of mass which doesn't change based on which celestial body you are standing on. Weight does change.
Never say never.
Yeah, the Martians will colonize Earth! 😎
Lol I'm from Mars I can confirm that our colonization fleet will be sent to Earth in the next 7 years
Tak! Tak!
Recent papers says possiblity of life started on mars and then came to earth. Also humans do consists of some particals of Mars. So we are martiians.
in some point..if we do not get to terraform entirely but still manageable to live there without equipment i do believe "evolution" will have a part and could be having two Human Species going on..Earthlings and Martians...
@@superkartoffel7479 where they hiding? 😂
You are talking in a caveman's perspective in regard to Mars' harsh conditions, we are in the nano age.
No magnetosphere- the terraforming would need plate tectonics and a molten core in order not to be lost into space. This is what occurred on mars in the first place. Sorry but their analysis is correct.
@@robcoyle5011 As buddy said above we are in the Nano Age we are taking very great leaps in Moore’s law. We can and will use CRISPR and nano bots to alter the human body to deal with the issues of MARS Elon’s Musks Boring Company will dig and actually figure out what happened to Mars not what some cat thinks happened don’t even know jack shit about the ocean let alone even places on earth still anomalies that scientists can’t explain but sure they know what’s popping on Mars 😂
@@robcoyle5011 one point out of all of them
@@douglasnorth4703 , incase you haven’t noticed, nano technologies is not the only thing we have we have other tech advancements as well.
@@douglasnorth4703 , So you can't figure it out yourself, and needs facts and proof to convince you that Nano technologies aren't the only things we have achieved?? I'm done with you it's mind boggling.
I think exploring, expanding, and embracing challenges is the most human thing we can do.
but truth is you can't
@@finalfrontier001 wow, thx optimist
It's ok negative people can fuel the fire of fact ,videos like this just feed the fuel for the rockets for the fire to burn
You forgot one thing, being idiotic and somehow surviving despite horrible situations
I agree completely.
The biggest problem is economics. First you have to find an economic reason to go there. The reason I think it is important to have a colony is “Humanity shouldn’t have all its eggs in one basket” as Heinlein said.
Mars is a dead-end destination. The only way we can permanently move into space is build structures that are completely capable of supporting human life. Rotating these structures to produce 1G earth gravity is an extremely important requirement that can't be efficiently duplicated on any other body in our solar system. In order to accomplish this, we need to work on moving comets and asteroids closer to earth so that they can be mined for building materials.
Despite whether we colonise Mars or not, it will never be a home to millions and will take thousands of years to make habitable to a lesser degree of comfort as the Earth provides. Just another case of the importance we should place towards cleaning up our planet and to severely penalise those who pollute or degrade the earth. After all no other place will be as remarkable or as habitable as the earth is. Ever.
Say that to your war conflict and climate change^^
Yes that is true. We just might make the trip, set foot, and leave. To colonize mars would be very difficult and not to mention expensive. Every trip would be super dangerous
@Bao Thuy while driving you have fesh air everywhere and food every few driving minutes or driving hours.
Say that to one of the richest man on the planet, Elon :)
It’s the best hand we have been dealt for a stepping stone for our journey into the universe
There are moons that would give us fuel, oxygen & a gas giant to slingshot around on our way out.... That sounds like a far better stepping stone.
Love this comment
I tend to agree with you. Attempting to establish bases and "settlements" on Mars provides a focused goal that might lead to a vibrant solar system economy and exploration of the stars close to us and transiting objects. The O,Neil cylinders, orbital stations and bases on the Moon and other small objects like Ceres may become more important in the future. It is only vital that we try to venture beyond the Earth, to ensure the conscious witnessing of the universe and exploration of space.
@@michaelskywalker3089 distant missions its existentially better using completely autonomous robotic systems setting up habitats
@@NowanInparticular True, but those moons require much more time, deltav, and technology to get to when compared to the relatively close mars, unless you're referring to our own moon.
I would never say never, we don't really know what technology will be like a thousand years from now or even further into the future, but I do feel confident Mars will not be colonized any time soon for anyone alive on earth today to see.
The logistics make it impossible with today's tech but "never" is a really long time. I would agree that we will not colonize Mars any time in the near future, however
Basically, it comes down to NEED. There is no need to spend the trillions of dollars that it would take to colonize Mars. This may change at some point in the future.
What would be the "need"? I assume you're referring to some kind of pollution? We could set off every single nuclear device we have all at once and Earth would still be much easier to live on than Mars. The only thing I can see that would make a move to Mars to even be considered is a planet ending event (meaning the actual structure of Earth was broken). AND we'd need enough warning to make moving to Mars possible. Doesn't seem likely both these requirements would happen.
@@MrWaterbugdesign I don't know what the "need" is and neither do you. There is no way we could possibly know all the possible problems that Earth might have way out in the future. Pollution and setting off nuclear devices are today's problems. These problems may not even exist in the future. Do you think 1000 years ago, nuclear war was a concern? Our minds can not even begin to comprehend what things might be like on this planet in another 1000 years.
How much money will it take to colonized Mars
We desperately need a university city/resort in Mars orbit in an O'Neill habitat.
BTW, building such a thing in Mars orbit, or Jupiter orbit, won't cost us a thing, because long before then somebody will be mining NEAs and the value of all the gold in all the vaults and oil underground will crash down through the cellar, and the space infrastructure economy will rule and supply the Earth economies.
If we'd kept on after Apollo, and done O'Neill habs in Earth orbit, it'd be finished and building follow-ons today and we'd already be mining NEAs.
“Need” will probably be for people who live and work in orbit and on the moon deciding they want independence or more space for their people. They’ll honestly probably go for the moons of the jovians and mars will be a truck stop, so it’s moons and orbit will be what they really need. People and machinery will find a way down to the surface. Mars’ destiny is to be like the Nova Scotia or Siberia of the solar system--a rural backwater people pass near or Thru. There will likely never be a “revolution” by whoever ends up on Mars surface because they will mostly be left alone
Between this and the interstellar video you are just a bundle of optimism.
The cost per person to live on Mars ( not counting the dangers ) is way too high to be possible.
For now
Get lost
Have you thought about joining Space-X or NASA? The thousands of doctoral scientists and engineers could benefit from your superior knowledge.
I definitely agree I think we greatly underestimate the challenge and I think we need better technology and experience before attempting such a task. Personally I believe the moon is a much better option and we don't even need people on it! I want it to be used for manufacturing and building ships and things for earth orbit not to mention producing machines to create bases and build infrastructure on mars before we even for getting our eggs out of just being in earths basket mars is quite unapealing living in earths orbit would protect us frok basically un calamity that would befall earth
Technology is not, and never will be the issue; humans cannot collaborate to future plan. Irreversible climate change, a rapid and terrifying increase in right wing views and authoritarianism, a refusal by individuals to make even small changes to their lifestyles for the greater good because of their own sense of entitlement in the here and now. That is why we are going to be a foot note in the not too distant future rather than working towards something incredible.
The moon would be a good mining colony,it has a shit ton of helium which is kinda scarce on earth
Why don't people realize that what you described is literally the plan
@@orangequill1645isnt helium one of the most common gases in the universe?
@@TiltedHandle Yeah but not on earth (not exactly rare either) theres like another century of it left on earth
I know that people over the millennia have said "we will never do this". They said this about something in their own world. When you leave that world the challenges grow exponentially. The failure rates skyrocket and the amount of resources used is astronomical. No pun intended. We can't even send a manned mission to Mars with the expectation of it returning. Biological life forms are too fragile for long duration space travel. We haven't studied Mars enough with probes to warrant a manned mission. We have not found a resource that we need to send a manned mission. We need to stop trying to travel long distances through space. We need to use our resources to help this planet. It is the only one perfect for humans to thrive on.
I agree 100% that the idea of colonizing Mars in the next 50-200 years is an aspirational feel-good fantasy. We may colonize that planet one day, in the very distant future, but the humans will be bio-engineered in such a way that they will almost be like a different species.
@@hamsandwichindahouse To be fair, we could rightly lay claim to being their progenitors, I guess in the same way that Neanderthals, Lucy, and the first tool users, can lay claim to being ours..
Robots someday that will be our window to experience Mars.
WOW! That was very thought-provoking and entertaining, well done! 👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻 I'm glad to see that I am not alone on my assessment of the impracticalities of colonizing Mars. Having a base or two is fine but that is completely different than colonization.
It would be much easier (and cheaper) to build orbital habitats or space stations with rotating sections to create artificial gravity like in Babylon 5 in orbit around Mars and use Mars to mine it for resources according to our needs without the need to genetically enhanced ourselves. 😉
Anyway, I look forward to seeing more of your videos! You just earned a new subscriber and fan! 😎
The first time I disagree with you :| I never knew this would come.
I believe that we will colonise Mars and will TERRAFORM it. We cannot do it now but we aren’t in the future yet are we?
I believe we will discover it.
You can’t terraform a planet that lacks a magnetic field because the field protects the loss of any atmosphere and also would insulate inhabitants or farms above ground from cosmic rays. Won’t work, unless your view is subterranean terraforming.
@@dr.michaellittle5611 there are theoretical ways around that, those ways might become practical one day. I'm not saying they will, just saying, never say never.
@@dr.michaellittle5611 really true and I think we should first colonize Arctic and small asteroids to gain experience.
It's a planet. It will take a century to terraform it
It will happen in distant future in late 22nd century
Well... some people's job is to make videos for YT and other's is to push back the limits of what humans can do.
Luckily, RUclipsrs are not in charge of space programs.
But nothing happens. Rockets launch, they blow up. Nobody goes to Mars.
People don't colonize antartica, we'll get a scientific outpost eventually. However nobody will want to raise a family on mars. Everything on Mars we have on earth. The moon is a far better spaceport and the asteroid belt has better acces to mining resources.
I'm all for space exploration (I rlly hope nasa is succesful in establishing the lunar bas camp). However people only settle inhospitable envirements when they have major incentive to do so. No such incentive exists on Mars.
I totally agree. What's more, I believe it will be decades before we even send a human to Mars. We can push technology to it's limit, but we can't push it beyond our ability and Mar's is still way beyond us.
"Beyond our ability"
Beyond whose ability? Yours? Just say you're terrified of dying and risk isn't your thing.
Well said!
Probably 2100 is when we'll have a proper colony there.
it will be a long time, unless we want to send CORPSES to Mars - that we can accomplish right now! protected long-range human space travel is beyond Earth tech for several decades at least
Some hiv viruses said that about moving to the human body I bet
The thing always forgotten to mention is that no matter how much we mess up earth with nuclear wars, radiation and pollution, the environment stays way way less hostile then the Moon, Mars a space station or any other place in our solar system. It is not popular to tell as it sounds so romantic to leave earth to find a better life but each and every craft or base that is imagined, designed or build, would be safer for humans to live in when it REMAINS HERE ON EARTH. It is virtually impossible to mess up earth so much that it becomes safer in another place in space. Sorry for messing up your "going to space" dreams. I still love these technical challenges. They are just not the solution for humans the coming million years.
We ought to get our act together here on Earth before we even thhink of going to Mars. Anyhow, who would want to live on Mars? Sure there will be bases like there are bases in the Antarctica, but that will be it.
It will not be 'it' :)
@@razormilkyway8444 yes it will be just a few bases. But even that i don't think is ever gonna happen.
@@razormilkyway8444 It will be "it", unless Mars's core spontaneously starts heating up again and convections create a magnetic field to shield from the extremely dangerous levels of cosmic radiation anyone on Mars would be exposed to at all times
The temperature on parts of the equator goes from more like -70c to 10c each day, which makes those places warmer than inhabited areas of Siberia during their winter.
Or Antarctica, people live there in research stations. Maybe that will be a great place to experiment with living in extreme temperatures.
@@fightingforthefuture2941 No one moves to Antartica for a holiday destination, though. It's got a research center, that's it.
@@infini_ryu9461 And that my friend, would be the basis for a Martian outpost.
In canyon and valley areas along the martian equator temps can get upwards of 20°C
@@DALKINION So you build your society around wildly fluctuating temperatures. Somehow I think that'd be ridiculously inefficient and a nightmare for maintenance workers.
There is a difference between being a realist and a pessimist. People that think everything is impossible all the time and being negative as soon as people talk about stuff they don't believe in are the people that constantly hold us back from actual progression.
How would colonizing mars benefit us?
@@chrisdonish Not us as individuals, but as a species. The survival of the human race depends on colonization into outer space. If we stay on one planet we are doomed when something happens, such as a global war, asteroid impact, viral outbreak etc. Living on multiple planets and outside in space drastically increases humanities chances of surviving and not becoming extinct. But unfortunately most people on this planet are incredibly selfish and don't give a shit about that and only care for themselves.
@@Drakey_Fenix none of those are a justification for colonizing mars, there is no possible major catastrophe that can justify leaving earth for any other planet, humans cannot survive any where in space or on any other planet without relying on resources from earth. If earth as a planet becomes inhospitable for humans,any space or other planetary colonization effort will become unsustainable because there are no resources or atmospheric conditions in space that can sustain human existence. We should focus on taking care of earth instead of trying to colonize dead and inhospitable planets.
@@chrisdonish How would it not? Imagine one day an asteroid comes hurdling towards earth that we can't stop, the last remnants of humanity AND possibly even life itself (although that's doubtable) could be wiped out within a day. We should expand, and it is inevitable that we will.
@@anticorn6635 it is not inevitable that we will colonize anything that cant sustain life, there are over 8 billion people on the earth and over 400 million people living in South America which is less than 700 miles away from Antarctica which was discovered over 200 years ago yet not a single permanent settlement or colony has been established there and you want to know why? BECAUSE IT CANNOT SUSTAIN LIFE. And let me tell you, Antarctica is a garden paradise compared to any planet known to us, it has water, sunlight, oxygen, is less than a days travel from the closest human settlement and not to mention a breathable atmosphere so you can be as hopeful as you want but until I see any improvement on colonizing the frozen continent then nothing will change my mind that colonizing a planet over 50 million miles away from earth will remain in the realm of science fiction.
I totally agree that Mars will never be colonized just as the moon. Both environments are an absolute nightmare for humans.
We need to consider the developments in biological sciences in the next 50 years too. These developments can help in solving the challenges you have mentioned like Cancer
Yup CRISPR
@swamy Sri: The cancer risk is substantial on earth. One third of women and one quarter of men die from cancer. The usual mechanism is acquired somatic mutations in the genes that control the growth and differentiation of tissues coupled with age related reduction in DNA repair. Toxic metabolic byproducts are much more important than radiation. A few malignancies such as acute myeloid leukaemia , non Hodgkin’s lymphoma and thyroid cancer may become more common in Mars residents.
There are prophylactic medications available for osteoporosis. 38 percent of earth’s gravity may be well tolerated (only time will tell).
In general, lack of medical care is another big problem for Mars residents.
I can envisage a substantial research and exploration base on Mars, but not a large colony with hundreds of thousands of residents.
@@douglasnorth4703 i can see cyborg people being the only people living on mars.
Living in underground bunkers and symbiotically controlling robots on the surface for all the labour would lower most health risks heaps. Muscle and bone density loss would be the main problems for long term life on Mars health wise but wearing weights isn't unheard of
No they can't.
Spend 10 years on the moon with no help and then tell me mars is doable...and I mean no help from earth either no food sent no medical supply no nothing other than communication that's it, if you can do that then I would say maybe, but mars is still a nastier place.
Just the thought of being stranded on mars, living in a small cell for the rest of your life would drive me mad in no time.
Why not terraform Earth first huh?
its called "the right stuff" for a reason. You havent got it
For those who think we can colonize Mars anytime soon I have a suggestion: set up a colony in Antarctica and see how that works. Nobody lives there permanently now and it is infinitely more friendly for human life and many, many times more accessible than Mars!
Thanks or sharing your thoughts!
I can't imagine living without forests or beaches or animals or swimming in a lake or floating down a river. Bad enough for an adult who has made such a choice, absolutely unethical to do this to children!
What no? Its about the exploration and we would be the first kind who became interplanetary as we still know
@@user-nw3xp7yt4r There may be children and teenagers who are raised on Mars who could not imagine living without ready access to explore in rovers and drones for hundreds of kilometers in any direction, map and name new features of a planet they and their parents have a vested stake in. They might imagine the responsibility of doing chores and upkeep on a farm or ranch on Earth, but not the level of critical life-sustaining responsibilities they would experience.
Kids love mars tho
@@michaelskywalker3089 No trees, no rivers, no beaches, no animals? No thanks!
@@johnmcnulty4425 Ty for response. Your opinion and factual recount is quite valid. There will be plenty of trees, except they will be part of a habitat complex, under domes in greenhouses. There will be water reservoirs and canals and even beaches. Many beaches on Earth are effectively created and maintained anyway. The environment is harsh outside the dome but wild and unexplored except by satellite which is the beauty of the world. There are rocks and geological features that have been untouched for billions of years. Nevertheless, it is a hard sell to give up this precious planet of Earth to make Mars green.
a hundred years from now, today's sci-fi will be rock hard real.
I doubt it.
Agreed but somewhat tho
They said the same thing 50 years ago..
3000 years from now would be more realistic.
@@ecognitio9605 And they were right with a lot of stuff. The internet, flying taxis, computers, robots which work for us and so on.
Keywords "Believe me" "Never" - Who are you to make such bold claims?
They made a very strong case. I believe them. We will never colonize Mars (albeit we'll have temporary habitations for scientists).
Another thing to really consider is WHY? More to the point, for what reason would anyone fund such a colony. Historically, colonies served to main purposes: 1. To take advantage of resources not available or at least less abundant in the home country (e.g. tea from China) 2. To get rid of undesirables, typically criminal or religious.
It would be far cheaper to build more prisons on Earth than to create a Botany Bay on Mars. A Martian colony would require experts in many fields just to keep the lights on. That's a far difference from farmers looking for free land or trappers looking for beaver in the Americas. The basic needs for survival existed here already, even with some difficulty. Even with what existed here, supply trips to Europe were a regular thing and never truly ended.
What does Mars have that people on Earth need? Can it be brought back here more cheaply than getting it on Earth? If you can't answer those questions, then why would anyone spend trillions of dollars to do it?
I don’t like your new pessimist attitude towards Mars.
Isn't the guy just the narrator? So it's either one or a few other people actually making the content for the channel.
Truth hurts ha, dont be delusional
Hahah right so pessimistic lol
F mars
Looking to the stars have helped us with problems on earth multiple times. We should be able to figure it out which will overall benefit earth also. I honestly don’t think people even considered reusable spaceships back then but look at them today , the progress is crazy.
Uh.... the Space Shuttle?
@@dirremoire the space shuttle was reusable yes, but now people mean that the ship can take off and land by itself when referring to reusable ships. The shuttle needed a new external tank to be built in order to take off every time, making it not fully reusable.
@@dirremoire the shuttle was only partially reusable, with an extremely high upkeep price. Starship will be more akin to a commercial jetliner as far as reusability goes.
@@dirremoire I have heard it said that the shuttle never reached its goal of being reusable....It was at best refurbish-able...
It took between 450 million and 1.5 billion to make a shuttle ready to fly again.
The reusable boosters on SpaceX require significant turnaround time before they can be reused. I'm sure at the very least they require a thorough inspection, replacement of critical parts, not to mention the time of refueling before they can be reused. Nor can they be reused forever. At some time they'll need to be retired, maybe after just a few uses.
Mars will not hold a breathable atmosphere without a core to generate a sufficient field
You sure thats the right way to do it?
Actually, it totally could. It would require a teeny bit upkeep and a constant influx of Nitrogen and Oxygen, but solar wind strips away Mars' atmosphere far far slower than we can replenish it. On top of that, we could conceivably create a (relatively) small artificial magnetic field and place it between the Sun and Mars so that Mars is constantly in the "shadow" of the artificial magnetic field and won't be continuously subjected to solar wind. And in the next few centuries/millennia, who knows? We might discover some method to kickstart Mars' core so that it can start generating its own magnetic field again.
@@SomeoneNamedTygget Bruh, if we can turn any planet into Earth, than why can't we turn Earth back into Earth?
@@SomeoneNamedTygget no it could not and we can't kickstart the core of a planet. you're delusional in your confidence about what we, a bunch of apes from Earth, can do.
@@vinayak90417 Because of countries with shitty governments who don't like sustainable enviroments.
The challenges to occupy Mars are not too great. They are impossible! All money going to fund anything remotely related to Mars should immediately stop. In addition, NASA needs to be totally eliminated!
Agreed! Steps to exploring Mars:
1. Determine if there is life on Mars NOW, or the past.
2. After finding no life, genetically engineer microbial species that can survive on Mars.
3. Wait 1 million years and see what comes out. I suppose simulations are better!
But if the Gaia Hypothesis is true, perhaps life on earth will fail to thrive on Mars (maybe even plants!) even if all the chemical/temperature/energy conditions are replicated.
Then we'll discover there's a hidden "life field" on earth we can't (yet) measure and we can then see if we can find it!
Dude said wait 1 million years lol
I bet we have already contaminated Mars with microbial life. Life will find a way!
@@DesertRat332 It's a possibility, but "life finds a way" probably has its limits. I'm 100% sure intentional seeding of life that has been genetically modified to survive on Mars would have a chance, but otherwise unclear how evolution works under 0.01% lifetimes of single organisms.
"Life Field" bruh what 💀
@@ericgolightly8450 Until science can produce life from scratch, we don't know what it is, but if physics has fields, there's no reason to imagine life doesn't exploit them. Maybe we'll find out when everyone dies on their way to Mars? Maybe not?
I got one line from this video “Why do we expect people to want to live in a place that is considerably more unpleasant?” Elon Musk has to see this.
You can solve all of these problems with engineering and science.
Well me might have to change human DNA to survive the gravity and radiation so it's kinda true.
@@adamjohnston529 gravity isn't an issue when using rotationally boosted habitats, and you can't solve radiation by genetic engineering.
Dont forget the ludicrous amount of optimism. I support it^^
I'm note sure I'd agree with never, but it's probably centuries away from happening. Once humans are able to harness massive amounts of energy only then will the massive amount of supplies needed to build and maintain an colony would be possible. We are still trying to canoe across the pacific ocean when what's needed is a jet airliner. As the ancestors of the oceanic islanders knew this was very dangerous, but somehow possible endeavor.
Finally, a realist, not a pessimist. I'm on the same boat as you. If we built giant metal birds to cross the pacific ocean, we can have mars colonies.
We will colonize Mars (sort of) but it will mostly be to mine it's resources and to make things that are best made in 1/3 gravity. There will be permanent settlements on Mars (so far as anything reliant upon constant upkeep and technology is permanent) but it won't be a utopia by any stretch.
In the future, people will live in space colonies. Space colonies will be preferred due to the ease of maintaining a comfortable environment, upgrade, expansion, modification and can be moved if the need arises to boot. Planets won't be prime real estate and people living on them probably will be looked down upon.
What would you mine on Mars and why?
Why will people live in "Space colonies"? What will they do in space? What will drive the economy of these "space colonies"?
No we will not and there is nothing to mine there. We will never land on Mars.
It would have to be way more valuable than gold as it would cost thousands, if not millions the price of said gold per ounce to mine on Mars.
Going to Mars, is akin to being transformed into a mouse, made to exercise on a rolling cage and stuck in a tin can buried by regolith.
Nice life.
Can you imagine the poor kid born on Mars peering through a telescope at the beautiful, blue-white disk of Earth? Can you see the tears in that poor kid's eye?
@@dirremoire especially after they find a stash of millions of Hours of banned video footage from Earth in the overseers office.
The video of their parents signing up for a trip to Mars. The video of a man they recognise from a statue that they are told to worship.....
The psychological effects of such missions have been researched by scientists for years. People live in Antarctica for years under similar conditions. The brain adjusts to a low-stimulus environment. Not to mention, an extreme amount of effort would be put into entertaining the Martians. And we're not even talking about computers and the internet, but much more even very realistic VR glasses, etc. Humans must become a multiplanetary species. That is the next step in evolution.
Yea. Those mars gonna require high intelligent, beyond average mental health, and souls of the warriors. If they're mouse, than we're probably.. bacteria?
Not a bad life^^
It's not about the technology, medicine or science. We will at some point in the future (whether its 100 or 500 years from now) have the ability to technically build and sustain a colony on mars. The real question would be if we have the motivation or need to do so. That will be the determining factor. I definitely think we will have manned missions to Mars and even have bases for research purposes, but anything beyond that is up in the air.
Because in 500 years time humans will not need water oxygen protective barrier from suns radiation, okay.
Interesting how you fail to consider how badly we're blowing it on Earth. In 100 years the greatest challenge will be how to survive here.
@@carlodave9 I've considered it, I just choose to be a bit more optimistic in our long term survival. You're free to stay in the doom and gloom camp.
@@lionroar26 In 500 years time humans will have significantly more advanced technology and science at their disposal. These problems that you bring up is like telling someone from the year 1500 that going to Australia on horseback is impossible, and that even if you make it to Australia nobody is going to help you live there or sustain a colony. Don't underestimate our ingenuity and will to break barriers.
@@03chrisv What are you on about?
So man traveled from one place to another on a planet where he and his horse can naturally survive.
Okay, but that is not what I said, a human beings survial 100,000 years ago and today is reliant on the same things,
What are you going to take oxygen water food and pets with you on your startrek space ship? And what about the protection we get from the Earth's barrier from the sun's lethal radiation?
I'm not being arrogant but just making a solid reality point.
Their is nothing wrong with gaining seeking knowledge but you have to be realistic, I think their is a more of a possibility of super advanced AI robots going to Mars and making a colony or a environment where humans can survive but you are looking at 10,000 years not 500.
Also WW3 doesn't seem too far off.
This video is interesting, but it fails badly in one extremely basic point: our bodies aren't even able to make the trip there. Period.
Read "First Man: The Life of Neil A. Armstrong", by James R. Hansen. He explains, with all due sources, how the challenges of human trip to Mars are absolutely out of the range of our capacities, even in a theoretical long term future.
Many just want hope, but sadly we'll likely go extinct before we can evolve enough to leave here?
The nearest close Earth analog planet with an oxygenated atmosphere may be many light years away.
Many difficult problems would need to be solved before we could colonise such a distant planet.
Ok, I haven't gone through the whole documentary (yet) - but let's just say :
Think about building a home for yourself on earth temperate zone - it's tough
Think about building habitat for 1 million people on earth's temperate zone - it's a mega project !
Think about building a city in the Antarctic - with 1 million inhabitants.. That's like crazy hard - 1000x harder !
Think about building a city on the bottom of the ocean - with 1 million people.. That'd be nigh impossible, 1000 times more difficult..
Think about building a space station in earth orbit.. with 1 million people.. That's like crazy mind boggling ludicrous and 1000 time more difficult
Think about building a moon base with 1 million people .. Again 1000x more difficult
Doing that on mars is 1000x or maybe even 1 Million times more difficult !
Guys, we are not going to be an interplanetary species - EVER ! And if we are it'd be in 100 million years from now (by which time we will have been long extinct).
Depends. If two things happen, all bets are off. 1) Access-to-space costs drop dramatically (eg space 'elevator' technology) and 2) genomic research far enough advanced to design a 'hardened' body plan, able to withstand higher levels of molecular ionization damage at the cellular level. The bonus of the genomic research is the related mastery-preservation of Earth's macro environment. They kind of go hand in hand. If we can master ourselves and our local environment that efficiently, those are the techniques required to adapt THIS surface-dwelling species, into something more flexible, for traveling the distances to OTHER planetary surfaces and engineering reliable, closed-loop, habitable environments along the way. That's when interplanetary exploration starts looking feasible. But we're just beginning to face this last, greatest, hurdle, mastering the preservation of Earth's environment, before that journey can begin. 100 years? Maybe?
In the future, They may have biodomes that people can live in on the moon and Mars, but I don't think Terraforming will be possible. Plus, the trip there would be akin to being buried alive, and that is a fate worse than death.
Do you know of tech to shield biodomes from cosmic rays? Mars has no magnetic field.
Ron howard had it right in his Mars TV series. You would have to move underground. Makes the whole Mars thing more difficult and kinda pointless - except for science exploration.
@@douglascutler1037 you could produce an artificial magnetic field.
"We may be stuck on Earth." Why is that a negative statement? "We may be blessed with the chance to live our lives the most wonderful, life-sustaining, heavenly place in the entire known universe."
Thanks for sharing your thoughts!
I do hope we'll find some kind of highly valuable substance on the mars, moon, or asteroids. This way we'll have a reason to solve all problems with building colonies outside our planet
It's a myth that there's nothing valuable or worthwhile in space.
NEAs are easier to reach than the Moon, and for instance the little Apollo class NEA that hit near Chelyabinsk is denser with metals than the Earth's crust down 50 km deep.
Some meteorites are density 8+, greater than pure iron. King Tut's rust-proof meteoritic steel dagger is 6% cobalt. No mine on a planet or larger moon will ever work such materials.
Something larger than Mars had its guts spread across space, so metals are not difficult, whether its iron or Titanium, Paladium, Uranium.
They already have milllions of tons of valuable or useful elements (like gold, iron, etc.), problem is we are still developing technology for space mining. And yes maybe we'll find there some exotic, unknown substance of great value.
@@fernandochaves9665
It's accurate to say that there are no new inventions needed. No new fundamental theoretical or engineering discoveries need to be made.
Every process for catching an NEA or building a space habitat is known, and either in-use in some form in present industries, or known as an interesting side-effect that's not terribly useful down here but could be revolutionary and simple up there.
(many astronautical and mining engineers have published it in peer-reviewed engineering publications)
@@JFrazer4303 we are closer to achieving it than i imagined, then. Thanks.
Never say never. The outward urge is a very deep yearing. Do not underestimate it. There will always be people who will try. If it were made a national priority, the limitations could be overcome.
The low gravity and complete lack of magnetic field make long-term human habitation of Mars pretty much impossible. Even if the atmosphere, water, and energy issues can be solved, everyone will die of blood clots (due to the low gravity) or cancer (due to cosmic radiation) within 10 years. Without even factoring in gravity, just the radiation alone would make living deep underground the only option, and at that point, we'd be better off colonizing the bottom of our own ocean than Mars (it's more hospitable and at least getting supplies and people there wouldnt take 7-9 months)
A manned research facility on Mars (akin to Antarctica) might eventually exist, but not a colony
Fiddlesticks...😂😂
One reason we will never get this done is because skilled trades people will never help build these structures. Nobody is going to give up years of life, exposure to radiation, and physical toll working in that gravity. As a Union Electrician you would never be able to pay me enough to do this work. We make a great living on Earth. You have only the SLAVE OPTIONS or PENAL COLONIES.
No one ever talks about the space rocks hurling around at thousands of miles an hour. All it takes is a basketball size Rock to hit the craft and everything is going to explode
They used to say there was nothing across the ocean. Then said there was nothing to gain early colonies. There is always reasons to expand. Yes there are challenges and you know who solves challenges, inventors. A part of reason for lack of development is our leaders now are more concerned with social issues than expanding/growing.
There are only so many resources on earth, we have to go to space.
Mars will be colonizeidet - if not from Elon M. then from other players, just mater of time.
just matter of centuries
@@Mr11ESSE111 Yup and a matter of technology
@@HermioneGranger-sr4vz and todays tech for space are shit, basically nothing better then those in 60-s
@W we are in dark ages with space tech Dumbo!!and where is that tech then who shorteness flights?? don't talk theories and bullshits which don't exist yet!!and again it won't be colonize ,infact you didn't colonize orbit of earth yet or with few peooles in ISS which are in shitty conditions in those flying container there and when they comeback to earth they have problems with gravitation and muscles.... so with Mars will be much bigger problems,infact you will colonize with dead bodies first
We should join bud. Great life ahead ;)
It's not like there's just a few problems to overcome: there's tens of thousands, each requiring battalions of specialists. The virus threat, all by itself, makes off-world colonization prohibitive.
This channel should be called just: INSANE.
:-)