We Aren't Going to Mars | Peter Schulze | TEDxAustinCollege
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 22 окт 2017
- If we can’t keep Earth livable, we can’t make a dead rock in outer space livable and keep it that way. Thus, we’ve nowhere else to go. We must take care of this planet, but we aren’t. Why? We are using the wrong criteria for deciding when to act.
Peter Schulze is a professor of biology and environmental science at Austin College, where he directs the College’s Center for Environmental Studies. He holds a Ph.D. in biology from Dartmouth College, serves on the editorial board of the journal Freshwater Biology, and was the J. Herbert Hollomon Fellow of the National Academy of Engineering. Schulze and his wife, Helen Schulze, M.D., have two sons, Ben and Matt. This talk was given at a TEDx event using the TED conference format but independently organized by a local community. Learn more at www.ted.com/tedx
Deeply important and real thinking. Such a valuable reality check and framing. We need to drop our mess up this planet, leave it fantasy. This is the only planet. There is nowhere else for us to go.
I hope everything goes well for the ones that stay
@@MarsStarcruiser you aren't going anywhere. You're staying too. Best get it through your head now.
@@tescheurich Nope, sorry. If you want to believe that, go for it. I have no illusions on the grim reality that would await me but I’d rather die trying than not at all.
@Plutarch you first, if it makes it, I’ll send one back😅
False there are many places to go we just can’t get to them yet
This guy makes pretty good points. Makes sense why the comments are so brutal. People often look past the truth because it gets in the way of fantasy land.
He’s totally wrong about space exploration. Politics and lobbying makes space exploration so expensive otherwise all of the spending are investment for technology improvements and make humans curious
@@forcedave4997 no he is not. A lot of these comments are from people who’s motivation for space exploration comes entirely from science fiction movies.
Going to Mars is not a fantasy, at least not for the few people who will go there. The odds are that the first humans to set foot on Mars have already been born.
This guy makes strawman arguments. We can't take care of our own planet? "We" aren't even TRYING. Developing nations are the biggest poulterers 100-fold more than more technologically advanced nations. There is no WE on this issue. China, India, Saudi Arabia, Puru, all using oil and coal. Fossil fuels are the single most energy/cost efficient source of energy by an incredible margin. And the reason you get push back on solar and wind in the US and other places, is not because we love freedom, or we're going to lose jobs in coal. It's because solar and wind are HORRIBLE. Solar requires hard to mine elements that cause more pollution in their mining and processing than coal does in it's burning, and for all that, solar becomes less efficient over time, only works during certain times, and couldn't meet the world needs if you covered the entire Sahara desert in solar panels. You know he's nothing but a self righteous feel-good hipster because when he talks about green power, he doesn't mention nuclear.
CO2 emissions are a red herring, levels are up and the global temperature hasn't risen according to the doomsday models, the ice caps are shrinking because they where abnormally large, and the ozone hole at the south pole, has closed itself.
Paper straws and inefficient solar is not the answer, THAT's fantasy land. MSR Nuclear and modernizing developing countries is the answer that will work in the real world.
@@jadespider7526 @JadeSpider I watched this video 4 years ago. During that time a lot of conversation was about humans living on Mars. What I got out of the video was that sustaining life on Mars would be impossible compared to what we can do here on earth. Around 10min he shifted his talk to environmentalism. I think pollution was a huge problem in the US. I think we should continue keeping our land and water as clean as we can. CO2 is plant food and not a cause of global warming. Not sure why you directed a comment to me. I agree with most of what you wrote.
Let’s save THIS planet. I would miss the plants and trees, animals and oceans.
It is shameful that so many people gave this video a thumbs down. It shows that still a vast number of people have the wrong idea about our planet and the need to protect it.
Space travel isn't incompatible with protecting Earth's environment. It's just that humanity is destined to live in the stars. Those who lack ambition want to use environment protection as an excuse to their lazyness.
@@faustin289 Environmental protection gets concerning when reducing population and living in caves would be the preferred solution. Some environmentalists seem to favor this in contrast to the presenter here. We need new products, we need new technology, and the goal to settle on Mars might lead to just the right technology as he stated himself, it requires the survival technology. Abandonment is not the solution for Earth, neither adandonment of technology nor just leaving Earth for Mars.
A couple of things. A mass extinction event from asteroid impact will threaten life on this planet, no matter how well we take care of it. So the "either" "or" scenario he is setting up is a false choice. Also, the trends are moving in a POSITIVE direction in the developed world. I grew up around Lake Erie...at a time when it was a dead lake with no oxygen below 2 feet and the Cleveland river routinely caught on fire. Now it Lake Erie is the cleanest of the Great Lakes. Cars are 95% cleaner, etc. Natural gas is replacing coal, etc. Our remaining coal plants have scrubbers for sulfur and other pollutants and are incredibly clean. The problem lies in China, India and Africa. Example: 93% of the worlds plastic in the ocean today was put there by 10 rivers: in China, India and Africa. But for some reason, based on his comment: "If we can't help people who live on a few dollars a day, who says we are going to pay for them to go on a rocket to space," I'm convinced that his solution is for the developed world to assume responsibility for the developing world's pollution and this is just another "wealth transfer" con job. "Just send trillions to developed countries and we can solve this problem." Bet'cha. The solution is to Boycott, Divest, Sanction all these countries for what they are doing to our planet... NOW, no excuses, and not send them billions of dollars for their corrupt leaders to stuff into their pockets (they always do). This guy is one of the more clumsy so-called "Intellectuals" who is pushing a social justice agenda. Unwatchable. Quit at @.
Need to protect it would be in leaving. Technology societies inherently breeds heat generated in the atmosphere by default. Thats every vehicle, car, home… fusion reactor etc, no matter how clean, escalation of heat being generated in the atmosphere will still happen. That excess heat may not be useful for an energy rich planet like Earth, but it will be useful for terraforming other worlds.
@@MarsStarcruiser Uh...yeah. So, humanity needs to exterminate itself, right? We exhale Co2. We have to clothe ourselves which requires industrial processes. We convert food to energy and put off heat. We have to create heat to not freeze to death in our homes. The only solution is for the 7 billion human beings to kill themselves. OH NO! Our dead bodies will cause methane...a more effective Green House Gas that Co2! Oh, no! Even in death Humans are such a threat to the earth! Wait...I got it. We'll launch all our dead bodies into space. That way we won't... Seriously, do you people even listen to yourselves once in a while? Shut up and point the finger at China, India and Africa: 90% of the plastic in the ocean ends up there traveling along 10 rivers in China, India and Africa. And their deforestation, and dioxins they are pouring into our fresh water table and oceans. Stop with the 'WE MUST STOP THE CLIMATE FROM CHANGING' and 'WE MUST ELIMINATE ALL CARBON FROM THE ATMOSPHERE,'--John Kerry, lunacy! Focus on the real problems.
Sci Fi has ruined people’s expectations of what it would be like to actually try to colonize space.
finally someone speaking about mars with common sense. i've been looking for a video like this and i had to pile trough 20 fantasy stories about going to mars and being able to live there while being totally dependent on cargo from earth for forever lol.
Yeah, doing agriculture on Mars is kinda out of the question and terraforming it not possible cuz Mars had no significant atmosphere and even if you try to fix it the solar waves would destroy it again cuz it has no protective magnetic field.
There's no place like home
This guy is realistic. It’s incredible to see how many people don’t like that in the comment section.
Since when do # of laws passed alwaS equal environmental protection? Have prior environmentally friendly laws been reversed? The speaker is missing another key concept- poor countries become more eco-friendly as they get rich. There is every reason to believe free trade and technology will solve the problem
Mr Chevier: My suggestion is you have a poor appreciation of the needs of some humans. It's alright and they shouldn't be rude. Don't get in their way.
@@DocDanTheGuitarMan Care to explain those reasons? If free trade and tech alone can solve so many problems, why haven't they solved everything already?
To those who want to go to Mars I say: I hope you like it there. You probably will never return to Earth (alive).
Thank you for your well considered thoughts and presentation. I'll act increasingly on your suggestions.
I LOVE THE EARTH , BEST PLACE EVER .
@Kyle G -- and you have been off planet , when ?? wingnut .
Ikr lmao. But fr I rlly don't want to go to mars I'm terrified of leaving earth.
@@isle_of_avalon7856 If people 100,000 years ago where like you all humans would still be in Africa it's in our nature to explore that's why were are the most dominant species.
@@ihadforeskinwithporkbellyf9306 they aint going anywhere
@@ihadforeskinwithporkbellyf9306 true!
Pick on the money spent on armies and not the tiny budget given to space
Money isn't limited. Human labor & knowledge is limited over a time period. Other resources are limited. Time is limited to 24 hours per day. Even labor augmented by intelligent machines has near term limits.
Money is unlimited.
Paying for war - for certain good or bad geopolitical purposes - costs the effort and training that might have been applied to different things.
Money is created by keystrokes, even automated keystrokes.
Mars can’t be reliably terraformed. Its core is solidified, has almost no atmosphere, and almost no magnetosphere to speak of. It would take thousands of years of consistent effort and would require technology we can currently barely even conceive of.
Terraforming Mars is science fiction. Mars simply doesn't have enough gravity to hold a atmosphere in place.
D.B. Cooper Some of the things we have now was science fiction 50 years ago.
But Arnold did it 😅
@@d.b.cooper8178 this isn't true. There is evidence that it did have an atmosphere in the past, however it was slowly stripped away by solar winds because of the loss of its now long dead magnetosphere.
@@exitar33 I have some experience in agriculture. I know the amount of space needed to grow plants. We can do it on earth because we have the land, natural sunlight and abundant water. The food anyone living in space can expect is like what they had to eat in the movie, The Matrix. Some kind of gruel. Putting something on the Moon is easy. If they have trouble it only takes two days to get there. So as long as they have oxygen they will be O.K. If a ship left earth the same day things, survival things were needed on Mars, it would take at least 5 months to get there. They will all be dead. Any people who try to live in outer space will all die eventually.
He is absolutely right, spend money and energy here on earth to promote a sustainable development model.
Do you vote republican? Because certainly those people are interested in maintaining fossil fuels and are not interested in the environment at all.
good arguments, Peter, thank you
The point of populating another planet would not be so much about creating a replacement for the one that we have, but to increase the likelihood of our species surviving should there be an extinction event on earth.
Mars cannot be terraformed or have colonies without being resupplied by Earth, our reasoning doesn't matter.
@@richardaiden2975 Well I think we can, we doing closed loop ecosystems in greenhouse for decades growing plants that cannot grow Canada or Scandinavia. But I think read somewhere that you need 3 times the airea compared to human leaving space, for agriculture. Some planes are easy to grow, some are hard to grow, but you will need different types of food groups, for this to work.
I agree, the purpose of going to Mars is more about human survival. Depending on which scientist you listen to, there have been at least 10, possibly 26 extinction events on earth. That can be an asteroid, volcano (ex. Yellowstone had over 2,000 earthquakes/tremors last year, Old Faithful is significantly more active, etc.), the magnetic poles look like they are changing again and we don’t know how that will impact life on earth for humans since we were not around the last time it occurred, etc. If we don’t try to see if we can live somewhere else, it may mean the end of man. Before he died, that was one of Hawkins concerns. If man doesn’t find another place to live, our species WILL go the way of the dinosaurs.
Yeah, that's one way to think about it. But that's not the point he's trying to make.
The argument for preserving the human species by setting up colonies away from Earth has been made many times elsewhere. He is making a different point - and one that doesn't necessarily contradict that endeavor. The human species might survive if earth dies, but most humans won't, because most humans will live here for a very long time. Basically he doesn't want us to get too carried away with setting our hopes on other worlds. It's most likely that most humans hopes are entirely dependent on Earth
Excellent talk! Thank you!
yeah i'd rather be here too , lol
Just wait another 10 years...
@@svirrsvarr its white peoples fault
@Michael Vannuffel like Elon musk?
@Michael Vannuffel Not Elon - My Tesla S is amazing 😎
From another angle, if we came to the Solar System from outside of it, Earth would be by far the most interesting planet, and we'd explore it before anything else. Now, considering that in reality we depend on Earth for our survival and it is our home, I don't think it's a bad idea to take care of it rather than giving up early and trying to find somewhere else to live. Heck, if we think we can somehow "terraform" some other planet like Mars (which by the way is much smaller than Earth) to make it habitable someday, then why not save Earth first?
exactly, rbtck
If we live on one planet, no matter how great our lives are.....we can be easily wiped out by some freak cosmic(or human caused) accident, but if we're a two-planet species, this is far less likely to happen.
But corporations can maximize profits if they dispose of their waste in the air or water! Profits over the welfare of the people, the people and the planet are the most important! Well that and religion and guns and fossil fuels and getting the US into unfunded trillion dollar wars based on lies, spin and fake news, tax cuts for the corporations and the wealthy and quadrupling the national debt and deregulation for their own political agenda with no regard as to the consequences if it get's in the way of maximizing profits and greed!
It's not really about freedom, it's about the profits, money!
Giving up early? The whole idea that it is one or the other is false. We can and should obviously take care of our home. No one is suggesting we stop caring about earth. Would be nice to be on more than one planet though since we need to worry about asteroids and other extinction level catastrophes on earth. We could go 100% green get everything under control on Earth and get wiped out anyway by an asteroid. All the eggs in one basket kinda thing.
I'd say if we can do both, we should do it. Protecting the Earth is the first priority. Exploring and colonizing Mars is the secondary priority, but it is also very important.
Why is it that in so many areas people are willing to use the old expression "better to be safe than sorry" about almost anything else, EXCEPT taking care of the environment?
It’s all comes down to money
NASA has just found that astronauts that have had long stays on the space station have experienced permanent changes to their brains. Also, they've experienced vision loss. It is now likely that any crew that would travel to Mars would reach the planet legally blind.
Look up rotational gravity. By making spaceships spin really fast we can create artificial gravity.
@@LakesideTrey why has NASA not built one yet? its not fisable.
@@finalfrontier001 there are but they aren’t useful in earth because earth’s gravity and rotational gravity is mixing together.
2nd mars is not like living iss there is gravity
@@LakesideTrey Great. What happens when we GET there? Specific gravity there is 0.38. I don't think our bods are gonna like that very much, what do YOU think?
The idea of colonies on Mars reminds me of the crazy trooper in the book "War of the Worlds." He envisioned building great cities underground to escape the Martians and he had already gotten started by digging a 12 foot deep tunnel in the basement.
Not so much about going to Mars as it is about protecting our planet and realizing the tactics used by the those who use biased arguments to refrain from implementing laws that would protect said planet.
Yeah the title of this video sucks. I don't remember him saying that "We're not going to mars". My hypothesis is that we're actually going to mars reagardless of the state of the ecosystem.
We will not be able to save our planet alone, yet the fact remains: We have destroyed our economy while other countries such as China send more pollution into the atmosphere and oceans than we do. What we need to do is force our will on these other countries for the greater good... at least that is the belief of many. The issue is, Americans cannot seem to look past our own back yards for pollution but look everywhere to try and save someone who typically doesn't want us saving them.
@@jasonholliday6755 Stop blaming everyone else. It starts with you. How much plastic did you buy or dispose of today?
it's actually both
Sarcasm aside... I think Earth is like Paradise IF we learn how to take care of it. 😎
A lot of comments in here saying we should invest in both Earth and space... We are the only organisms that we know of, I think, that can decide what kind of organisms we are going to be. Will we be parasites, wantonly consuming our host before seeking another to destroy? Or will we be something we have yet to experience -- something that, today, exists only in our imaginations? We seek to explore the universe, yet we cannot create and do not invest in systems that are much simpler. We cannot create and sustain basic social and geopolitical constructs that foster human and ecological stewardship. We remain tethered to our violent origins. We want to be a part of the universe, but we don't deserve access. Our choices will set our evolutionary path. We may get to Mars with choice A, but choice B leads to a path beyond time and space.
I would like to have a discussion with him on his idea's but implementing the idea of diversity and what this does for ideas and challenge that cause growth. Structure is developed on earth and is hard to change but to developed new structure on " hard mode" may bring diverse changes to other grounds like on earth. Good speech.
Trying to settle Mars does not mean giving up on earth. It’s not a zero sum game.
He should give this talk in China and India.
the good old not me not now not here excuse... charity begins at home as the old saying goes.
He is giving it in the US, but (of course) it would also be good to deliver it in China or India or every other place. As "per citizen" India is probably one of the most environmentally friendly countries? But still: there is a lot to be done for improvement
China has already mandated all electric vehicles. Since China is the Number 1 world market the European car makers are catering to Chinas shift to electric. Tesla is already stealing sales from fossil fuel in Europe and no auto manufacturer wants to miss the boat to electric. China will beat the world to electric vehicles and will cut their need for oil by over 70%. If the shift in the US is the same (US is the Number 2 marketplace) to electric at the same rate as China fossil fuels will finally find profits tough to come by. Then we can make the shift to renewable energies and save our planet.
@@breeze787 Electric cars leave a larger carbon footprint than gasoline cars. Where do you think the electricity comes from?
@@michaelwoehrl1746 So you were led to believe by the oil industry. Okay then what would be the carbon footprint of electric cars once fossil fuels is completely out of the picture? The Oil Industry takes our $4 Billion subsidies from taxpayers to mislead the public on the impact of oil. We have to replace the fox that is guarding the hen house. Come on I don't believe you drank the Koolaide.
I’m pro-space and pro-environment. I’m always disturbed by this either-or reasoning about the two. I see space as expanding the biosphere and the parameters of evolution. Yes, space is currently uninhabitable. However, so was land a few hundred million years ago. But algae created oxygen and the ozone layer. That allowed lichens and algae to survive near the surface of the oceans and eventually on land. Early space colonies will be like that. Slowly creating value by expanding the biosphere beyond its previous limits. Later, more complex colonies like plants or insects can survive. Then one day animals. When I here Mars will never be colonized it sounds like it’s coming from a fish or a trilobite.
Looking back I can see value in gaining access to land and think there’s value to be gained by evolving for space.
Saying everybody can escape to Mars in a disaster is like moving everybody moving from one continent to another. That’s ridiculous. Mars and other space habits might be able to act as backup biospheres in an emergency where we lost Earth. Earth may also be re-colonizable after the disaster. But this isn’t for disasters that environmental policy can avoid. It’s more of an asteroid collision scale disaster. Some disasters are too big even for Mars as backup.
Dismissing space as a solution for sound environmental policy doesn’t make sense. Space technology won’t work for that. It’s a very long term project for evolving beyond Earth. Besides, the sun is getting warmer and in about a billion years Earth won’t be habitable either. By that time Mars will be the more attractive location. Though, in my personal opinion, by that time life will have adapted to all the planets, moons, and planetoids at least as far as the Oort cloud. Possibly even throughout the galaxy. Or, all known life in the universe could just go extinct right here on Earth.
I'm of the opinion that on one day we should massively crank up the budgets for the world's space agencies and give them marching orders to turn the moon into the next China within ten years, then the next day implement a punishing carbon tax to give industry down here a strong financial incentive to get off fossil fuels. With any luck by the time all new satellites have "Made on Luna" printed on them, all fossil fuel power plants will have been turned into museums.
Roxor128 to solve our current carbon problem with your plan, we'd have needed space elevators 10 years ago.
Lukas Böck - I think you're treating two independent things as one thing. The punishing carbon tax could be done at any time, and is the only thing which actually deals with the carbon problem.
Industrialising the moon is just something that's worth doing which we should have been working on anyway and is something you can easily unite the population behind. Though I will admit the carbon tax can certainly fund it. And no, you don't need space elevators to do it. We already have all the technology needed to get people and stuff there. We do still need to work on life-support systems, but getting there is already a solved problem.
The latest reusable rocket design can send something like 10 tonnes to Mars and a lot more to closer destinations. Let's say 20 to the moon. If you need to send 1000 tonnes of stuff there to get basic manufacturing up and running, that's only 50 launches. Perfectly possible inside of a few years.
ah,
and how much carbon gets released into our atmosphere by getting 1000 tonnes of stuff to the moon?
once there, you'te talking almost full autofac?
how much for a pint of lunar beer then? 10 large?
Depends on the fuel used in the rockets. If it's hydrogen, then it could potentially be none if it's extracted from water using renewable energy.
Our current factories down here aren't completely automated, so our initial lunar ones would still have some humans working in them, perhaps only in supervisor roles. It really depends on what the factory is making.
As for the lunar beer, if you're one of the colonists, probably comparable to buying it from the local brewer here on Earth. Importing it from the moon would cost a lot more, but it would still be a lot cheaper than getting the same amount of water there from Earth.
You wouldn't really be buying stuff like beer from the moon, though. You'd be buying satellites and space habitat kits. Stuff that's going to go in orbit, and which would be much cheaper to build on and launch from the moon than from Earth (due to the moon's lower gravity). Practically all the farming on the moon would be for the colonists, rather than for export.
YES! Thank you for this talk. Humans have disposable patterns of use, tear down & throw away. We forget this Earth is alive & like anything living it's our responsibility to take care of this planet rather than find another & continue our disposable & irresponsible patterns. Instead of depleting this earth, let's take care of each other on this earth. Thank you Peter.
@tinwoods who is Mark? :). yeah, and that doesn't change our responsibiity. :) you rock.
We aint going nowhere. Only under.
I'll post this a few more times: Ahem, typical mention the environment and the death cultists show up, totally different nihilist crowd.
Agree.
Says it all in just 6 words......
´some´ will go to Mars. After ripping off the tax payers with thousends of billions of Dollars. Money we would need to keep our Earth in shape...
We must make humanity multiplanetary. Its the only way to be somewhat sure we will survive.
Well, we did go to Mars, with rovers.
A very good presentation with really strong points. The exact same double standard arguments for polluting industries are used in Malaysia and, I suspect, everywhere else in the world where businesses get to abuse the environment and the government!
Elon musk:
hehe rocket go brrrrrrr
Let's see how far this will go. We will not be able to go to mars even in 100 years.
@@ehrro looks like someone has those not know all the other companies that are also trying to go to mars.
@@ehrro it took 66 years for the first plane and humans to touch down on the moon
I am 80 years old and I remember real pollution in the 50s, 60s and 70s when sunrise and sunsets were brown-gray and animal life disappeared near the highways. All that is in the past now. Nature has largely recovered where I live in NYC.
Green and brown snow's no more in Pittsburgh.
As for employment, Bertrand Russell is correct in his short essay "In Praise of Idleness". In essence, he points out that not all employment is productive of Goods, whether these be material goods like food, clothing, and housing, or of the same sort as entertainment, enjoyable exercise, health, or mutual respect. "Work" is a concept that is sometimes necessary, and the one form of Idleness that deserves no approbation is that which comes from employing another person to do that work for you.
I am amazed at the changes in attitude and knowledge since 2017
This whole story about Mars colonisation is a fantasy born out of disappointment with the situation and trajectory of the world.
true, well said.
You guys just don't understand the gains. If you really are against it, stop using all technology we got from learning space, no more computers and a heck of a lot of other stuff. Your line of thinking will be welcomed in the Amish community.
Good video. I certainly don't object for people like Elon Musk having a go, but we need to keep it real and acknowledge just how difficult an endeavour it is. 🚀
Thank you brother for what you do.
The presentation was really good but the title and the overall flow is a bit weird, since he talks about Mars in the first half and then switches to environmental conservation in the second half.
The atmosphere on Mars will have to be similar to Earths before becoming a desirable place to live. Oceans of water are also desirable. Perhaps this could be done by bombarding Mars with meteors, but nobody would want be there at the same time, so this type of terraforming would have to be done prior to settlement. I know this is not a practical solution and more suited to science fiction, so maybe he is right.
He makes some very good points. Humanity will travel into space but it won't be any of us.
Nobody
Elon Musk: hold my starship
how the pictures of the mars rover are taken?
Selfie stick from the rover
Why do we want to go to another planet when we can't look after this one. This planet is a gift that we dont even respect
God gave us a garden.
And we paved it.
It is because we cannot take care of this ine that Elon wants to move to mars
Its His plan B
@@Nine-Signs how exactly does an imaginary figure produce anything?
@@johnbell6114 I am using the term loosely, it is a well understood figure of speech from Science Fiction, denoting we had something good, and due to our stupidity and hubris we no longer have what we took for granted.
Why you have to be so pedantic given the seriousness of the wider picture is anyone's guess. You want to be an ashiest, good for you. It however makes you no more or less of a human than any other so why not keep the pedantry to yourself and engage with the larger message at hand at least.
@@Nine-Signs
If your god is real and produced this planet or anything, where's your evidence? Empty assertions and ridiculous books by unknown authors don't produce anything, do they? Have a nice day, adios
With all due respect, I’d rather be on mars for curiosity’s sake. It’s what keeps the human race going
There’s nothing on Mars except sandstorms and radiation lol
@@ianm8218 it’s not about what there is, it’s about what there could be
@@ianm8218 you don't know what your talking about
When you find out there's not a single McDonalds on Mars, you might change your mind.
@@alexverdigris9939 but I could just build my own McDonald’s up there
I agree. however, its important to be a interplanetary species to make sure we can live even without earth
Filippo Cucina - We can’t live without Earth, as a species.
My god. Nothing is going to happen to the earth and we are never going to live without earth. Your getting this concept from science fiction and Hollywood
Probably the most important talk on the internet.
I hear you on environmental laws
Every word he says is true. Why does this have 1.1 thousand dislikes?
The title is"We Aren't Going to Mars" and he mostly talks about common sense problems we ignore on Earth and not any sensible reasons why he thinks we are not going to Mars. I guess its kind of click-bait. He makes good sense but I would liken it to someone in 1965 listing the reasons why will will never get to the moon. he should have picked a different title maybe why are we wasting energy on going to Mars when we should concentrate on the problems on this planet. I disagree but the title would have been correct
it's a fraud.
Those are the "down" votes by companies that are the biggest polluters......
Thank you. Very Logical point of view.
We are better off than we were 20... That's twenty years, ago. I have been all over Asia, Australia, Central America..and I will tell you this! The U.S. is NOT the problem on this subject.. Wise up kids.
I AGREE ,WE'RE FROM EARTH AND WE WILL BECOME EXTINCT HERE ...IT'S JUST THE WAY IT IS !!!!
johnnie cameron WOW JOHNNIE FROM RUclips THANK YOU FOR TELLING ALL OF RUclips “THE WAY IT IS” ! YOU KNOW EVERYTHING ! CONGRATULATIONS
Age gracefully. Sounds write
Speak for yourself
This is what I've always said-- begin teraforming on EARTH-- we need it!
Yeah, there's even a few steps towards that which can be started by regular people, like changing your roof colour to something light so it'll reflect away the sun's heat and thus save you money on cooling in summer. If every house in town had light roofs, it might even counteract the heat being absorbed by the roads.
We have begun terraforming on earth, jungles are now farmlands and our oceans are full of plastic...not looking very good..
Defund military then
Excellent TED Talk, my sentiments exactly!
Him saying to columbus, hey why sail over there? Its nice here, stay here...
He said nothing like that. He talked about MIGRATING to Mars, not merely stepping on the Martian soil.
I miss your excellent lectures, Dr. Schulze. Glad to see you’re still fighting the good fight!
That means a lot Annie. Thanks. Send me your email address if you see this reply. ( I don't reply to the other comments because that doesn't seem to be the culture of baby TED (e.g. TEDx) talks.
@@petes3978 This is a great ted talk you have provided Dr. Schulze. I have been starving for someone to illuminate on why taking care of earth should be top priority, at least for now.
It makes me sad, to read all those upset comments of the followers of Musk. If you seek for inspiration you don't need to gaze at the stars. How about creating the foundations for a sustainable civilization here on planet earth? A world where the ecosystems come back to balance and justice has developed, will be a world where we can start to really explore the universe. Otherwise we'll just wont have the long-term investment and certainty space exploration - apart from sending 10 astronauts to Mars - requires. If you want to think big - start here!!
Will you start ? Will you deny your children stuff - will you deny yourself children with your new love since you already have two ? Do you want to become obsolete like the Amish ? Question's Do you want to share your wealth with africans - when you know (might) its wasted or asians or muslims or poor - what is they see you a big cow to milk your wealth and when you are dry they are a lot bigger - they might not care - You did and now you are the poor one along with others.
He is right I'm afraid
Why not create a space colony with everything we need to survive outside the Earth's magnetosphere first?
Might be a good idea to have it all sorted out before we go to Mars.
hahahahahahaha
I think this is a very valid point to make. The downward trend in environmental metrics is alarming and a large alarm bells should be ringing. I think we all like the fantastical idea of space travel etc but 4 billion years of evolution makes us all but tied to this planet. Sure let's try to goto mars, make a Dyson sphere, a kugelblitz, a warp drive, antimatter drive etc but in all likelihood we'll be marooned on this planet. Let's not forget that our large brain is a evolutionary experiment and 99.9% of all species are extinct. Let's not make for a failed experiment.
Well it should be possible to have two ideas in head at the same time. Way not do stuff that is good for the climate and go to space at the same time. Way does need to be one or the other.
We only have about 100k years of evolution as a species called "modern man". I personally do NOT believe we're descended from primates at all (thus NO Darwinism). Why not? There's no fossil link between the bi-pedal animals that have a LOT of hair... and us. Therefore we have not evolved here at all. not enough time to grow our brains. 100k years ago we were "flat-faced" and we're still "flat-faced" business as usual.
The title of this talk is highly deceptive.
Reminds me of mr smith from lost in space...
Makes sense to me
saving the earth is great message, but it has little to do with going to mars. crossing the oceans and bootstrapping life on a new continent may have once seemed similarly difficult. ironic that we can take that for granted now.
Except we never bootstrap life to another continent, life was already there, what we did to was manage to slaughter all sentient and non sentient life on that continent.
Going across an ocean on a life-sustaining planet is comparing apples to carbeurators when comparing that to making a dead planet habitable - one that is a 4 year space "drive" to ferry supplies to.
Daniel Stoner yes, and you know what else is like comparing apples to carburetors? Wood sailboats to space ships, holding your breath to oxygen tanks, modern culinary and food preservation technology to I don't know, surviving on ale and fish until you die of scurvy? Of course the differences between colonising a newly discovered continent and another planet are stark, but so are the differences in technology from then and now. Are we ready? No, not yet, but the folding of hands won't get us there, ambition will.
Daniel Stoner it used to takes weeks and even months to cross the oceans, with many casualties. We now do it within hours with rare loss of life. Is it that hard to imagine that space exploration will ever make similar progress?
Casey Spain
It does have a little to do with going to Mars.
What, with: false security, and people finding excuses to litter and poach... ...☹ ("oh its fine, I won't buy an electric or a hybrid car, because if we ruin the Earth: we can just live on Mars...."),
But yeah, I also think I see your point
Well, logically we would have to conquer the moon 1st.
Mars would be much more hospitable than the moon.
@@tomzjamz lol
Very well presented rationale ... makes complete sense to me.
He is 100% correct. We will end up with 10 living humans on Mars, and 8 billion dead humans on Earth, unless our motivations are changed at all levels.
Montgomery, a tiny emendment: ten short-living humans on Mars.
We need more people like you
A band member of mine works for a company that is working on the vehicles. We are going.
..."Not because it's easy...."
TJ Martin Who is going to pay?
@@thethirdman225 from what i understand his company has a contract through nasa.
No, WE aren't going anywhere. Multibillionaires are.
All excellent points and I agree with him 100%. The biggest challenge of course is getting all nations on board to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
Just because we need to work on keeping earth habitable doesn't mean we shouldn't explore and colonize other planets. Sure there are big technical challenges but 20 years ago a reusable rocket booster was science fiction. Today it's science fact. We can do both.
dvfreelancer agreed
I like how you leave our population growth. All the ways you say we’ve been tricked, are needed for jobs and to sustain the level of life we’ve created. The logical answer is to roll back the comforts we are used to and control population. Until you have a solution you can’t simply say bad and no more. You need a sustainable equal replacement. My thoughts at least
How much of a reduction in quality of life would you be willing to sacrifice?
Agreed, degrowth is needed but it looks like we will be choosing hard mode instead.
@@kendraabeene1173 you can always give example by practice what you preach.
Population growth has statistically been shown to not be as a big of a problem as you think it is. Research more
Actually, I used to fervently believe that overpopulation of earth was the elephant in the room that nobody talked about. I have recently done a complete 180 degree turn on that. The way things are going, depopulation is looking like a far more worrying problem, I urge you to look into it with an open mind. This situation could turn very quickly, within a generation or two, take a moment and think about it, please, I urge you to. Perhaps poorer nations will continue to produce large families, but relatively wealthy western nations do not seem to produce children, and especially smart , ethical ones, at a rate which will sustain their current population. So, migration of overpopulated ( poorer) nations is bound to increase over the foreseeable future, into perceived wealthier nations. I really urge anyone with an open mind to at least consider the ramifications of this trend.
I'm not arguing against anything he's saying but this video could have been called environmental rant rather than we're not going to mars. I was looking fer technical data not a environmental speech,I've heard plenty of them already.
In Indonesia, the smoke of coal exploitation is no longer stated as dangerous materials starting this month March 2021. Have you heard this ?
Thank you
Why go to mars when we can build city under ocean and make city on Sahara desert
Glad we can do that but if that was it…boring. Atleast 7+ billion to explore every last possibility of Earth, but no one out there to explore new realms of unknowns. The new stories of humanity will be the person that can lift up sand at .38g, feel it, see those blue sunsets with their own eyes and explore a whole new land all together.
Seems like it would be much easier to save the Earth.
Dan Jones Thats the only option
no its not the only opinion and you shouldnt think about it that, im not saying that we shouldnt save earth
This guy is a fanatical Green, downvote this silly clip.
I feel completely disgusted by people criticizing this speaker basically for being a "green fanatics". If anything, it's the voice of " green fanatics" that will lead our planet to a safer place. Not the Trumpists who support takung down every environmental protection laws as though they are just hindering our progress. Those who don't think green are the midern Neanderthals of Earth. They have no clue about what their actions are causing.
This video may not be the greatest, but at least it was in the right direction.
My sentiment s exactly
So an accurate title for this video would be:
"We aren't going to colonize Mars soon" - or perhaps, "Please spend money on the atmosphere not space"
There are plenty of rich adventurers with an eye on Mars, but terraforming may be a next century kinda thing...
But once we've learnt to guide and maintain the earths weather, we can apply those techniques elsewhere.
21 billion mostly just goes to satellite maintenance and replacement to better run the tech of the planet.
The metal jets spray in the air is to track wind currents for the military and weather reporting.
This is how the military will track radiation fallout from missile attacks.
IF.
I mean we know how to start it and thats why elon musk wants to build there a city, so if life on earth for some reason ends there will be a self sustaining city on mars, maybe the scientists understand how to terraform it.
A place that averages minus 80 F with no air and no water has absolutely no appeal for me personally. Nobody can make me go.
This is exactly what I have wanted to hear... I knew about it and this just proved it. We are meant to stay in this planet and our job is to take care of it. We do not and never need another planet for we have the most beautiful, unique and only fully alive planet in the whole galaxy 🙌🏼
Even being on the space station is very very hard to live and dangerous. We have to complete the study on radiation and the effects on the human body.
I've noticed how many of these lectures that I thought would be technical ones about space travel are manifestos for environmentalism. Which is weird when I see the proponent discuss how the other side is so tricky.
conorlauren, are you opposed to having a decent environment? Would you rather have lots of motor cars and aircraft, than air you can see through? In London they used to have fog so clearly polluted they called it 'pea soup'.
No. But your question is like me saying, "Would you rather go back to the stone age where a human who lived to age 3 was considered old?" Your answer would, I suspect, be "no." And it would prove nothing.
Can I handle the smell of VOCs if it keeps my pipes from rusting?
The analysis is cost-benefit and this is entirely subjective - there is no right or wrong answer. If both sides would knock it off with extremism some solutions could be tried. But since your argument is the type that dominates, it won't happen.
My question is how can you build a viable colony on a planet with no magnetic field? Teraform all you want but with no magnetisphere, you are not gonna live outside of your man made protection.
This is the argument made by those who actually understand a thing or two about magnetic fields. With low gravity and no string magnetic field, an atmospheric mars is a short lived dream
I think you answered your own question
This is a great concern, but it is far beyond the most basic problems of sending even one or two people there at this stage.
We don't even have the tech to get a living animal to Mars at this point.
The problem of radiation shielding has not been solved AT ALL.
The ISS is in LEO.
And supposedly the only time men have been beyond LEO was during the supposed Moon missions.
Assuming you have faith that all of those missions were legitimate ( a matter of faith...), then look at the amount of cosmic radiation that the astronauts would have been exposed to during a three day mission.
Now realize that it takes a MINIMUM of 18 months to get to Mars...
It is a fantasy that has been sold to the public...
@@josephjones5070 there're no rovers on "mars" either. They've never been outside earths "atmosphere" or whatever is between us up there. Everything "space" is total make believe.
Are you serious? No rovers on mars is a joke. Let me guess, you are religious right?
Let’s be honest Elon musk is never getting us to Mars there’s a small fete of distance 250 million miles between earth and Mars and a rocket won’t get us there I don’t care how big it is
In the next decade this will age well
its our nature to explore and nothing will change that
exactly 6 years ago. On July 4, 2016 (on the ROUND 360th anniversary of the announcement of the Declaration of Independence of the United States), MARS unveiled not only its face, but also the famous Balanced Rock in the Murray Buttes area - is it the Banner of Independence or a colonization permit?
This is great. Very very insightful. im only 5 minutes in, and I see, Mr Schulze, that you are a great thinker. A very caring, thoughtful person. I am with you 100%. Thank you. Your ideas with regards to the fight or flight of the planet, highlights the extreme, immediate need to save the Earth, and that escaping the earth is a waste of resources and time. Save the people , then the planet, and nothing can go wrong.....I live by that, mostly. Unfortunately, it is humans trying to outdo themselves that create disasters. Things like colonizing Mars will not be without many (more) human sacrifice. RIP..... Space is not for humans. Any Earthly Astronauts travelling far beyond our moon, will likely not be anything like the human we know today. Getting there is possible, if your a satellite. But getting humans or any advance human species there physically, provides to many foreseen and more so, unforeseen variables that would hinder or prevent any long term human expansion to other planets. One day some few hundred might arrive on a distant planet. But for all they planned for and expected, in all their readiness, they didnt see that coming, And, they will perish, maybe to be rediscovered by a later expedition, who themselves are now subject to unknown uncertainty's, far from home..... Watching the rest now.....nanoo nanoo
Or course we're not. Pure fantasy for people who don't know how difficult space travel is. The Earth is it baby.
They have been lied to, brother. And they will fight the truth with everything they have so as not to have to live in reality.
How do we convince them that truth is the best way?
I wish I knew.
For now yes, but in the future it will be very possible.
I read the regolith is toxic so if someone goes outside when they re-enter the habitat that regolith dust will needed to be "scrubbed" from the suit so it doesn't end up floating inside the habitat, you could walk the suit into some sort of coupling device, a panel of the suit could be washed by chemicals or refiltered water, the front panel could slide into a compartment and someone could climb through the opening through a passage into the habitat, the suit is never allowed to carry contaminated regolith dust into living areas of the habitat, maybe its easier staying on earth, maybe all work will be done remotely using robots, separate compartment for robots.
I mean if you look at the current rate of spaceX and NASA we’re definitely set to explore space that’s just the way it is that doesn’t mean we still won’t invest into improvement of our own planet because that is done every day
I agree with everything he says about why we (or America anyway) have to start being honest about climate science and looking after the planet. But I'm also looking forward to seeing him eat his words about colonising Mars.
Colonising? Really? Maybe in the year 3000? He is simply taking a catchy intro to get to very interesting points after the half of the speech. If indeed we will live on Mars, then it will mean Earth will still be a great place to be (the environment saved by our good actions/remedies/technology)
Poison Toad, you won't live long enough, not even if you're now a precocious genius five-year-old. Anybody that wants human space travel even to Jupiter should be working on nuclear-powered space propulsion.
TED has become too accessible...
A large number of advances in space exploration are directly responsible for some of the most useful and helpful inventions in civilian use. This includes tracking our climate and learning more about it. Understanding what we can do, how to use clean energy, how to build clean energy, etc
He lost me the moment I realized he didn't actually understand this. The amount of ingenuity it takes to figure out how to live on another rock will drive advances on helping us live on our own. This line of thought has been true since we starting exploring space
TEDx means that it IS an independent event tho
@@praxxor718 naturally, but it carries the name of Ted itself. The name has weight
The very platform on which he makes these arguments can be tracked directly to space exploration and space-related endeavors. Long range communication to broadcast and share these videos? Started with long range radio communications that nasa developed for space missions.
Digital cameras? Not possible without CCDs, invented by astrophysicists to aid them with observations of space.
The very fact that anthropogenic climate change is real? Not possible without weather satellites again launched by NASA and other space agencies around the world
He's not talking about space exploration he's talking about space colonisation.
@@shakeyshapeshifter and how do we colonize space... Do we pick spaceships from space trees? Or do we conduct decades of research and come up with countless new ideas that are all public domain and have a very obvious benefit for society?
If the last 70 years are any indication, it's the latter.
This guy and his realistic views on expansion of civilization, is why we never really made it to our satellite....
I am confident that there were many people who did not believe you could circumnavigate the earth many years ago.
We’re still like Stone Age people when it comes to space travel and most definitely when it comes to sustaining life on mars ...
So what's your point? That since we can't do it now we will never do it? We are perhaps a 1000 times better off now than when we went to the moon with new rockets, new materials, incredibly more powerful computers and we are on the verge of 3d printing food. I guess it's all a matter of outlook. I view the last 100 years as a giant rush of knowledge lifting billions out of the same poverty we've had since we became a species. And I'm optimistic about the future despite the numerous doom and gloom crowd.
@Wax Me From the way you "write" I'll believe that last sentence.
@@smb123211
You should read more. And make sure that you understand the basic science behind what you are reading.
It's all fantasy... and being sold to the public as a feasible possibility. Ignorance is the friend of those selling space.
@@josephjones5070 ..and you'll still shake your head from side to side until your cheeks wobble in denial WHILE mankind is busy evolving into space beings..You probably believe the earth is flat too..The fantacy is you.
@@tonyelsom6382
I hesitate to respond to someone who goes straight to a strawman...
However, I would again encourage everyone toneducaye themselves on the hard aceience involved. I think that anyone who comes at this from a place of honestly, and valuing facts over wants; that person will be able to see the truth if the matter.
All I ask is that you educate YOURSELF so that you can ask the right questions and get away from relying on authorities to make judgements for you.
Why spend trillions trying to make another planet habitable when we have one right here ?.
Climate Change
Overpopulation
Further Space Travel
Human ambition and Conquest
one time I wanted to do a tesla experiment in kecksburg pa the owner of the property said NO
It took pilgrims months to cross the ocean to get to the new world, if someone told them one day people will be traveling that distance within hrs flying in something called airplane they would've ignored you as nonsense. Space travel is extremely difficult, no denying that, but how will that change in another hundred or three hundred years?? We will never know unless we try. Humans must become a space faring species if we are to survive, Mars is a small stepping stone in that journey.
We aren't to "survive", Andromeda will smash into the Milky Way.
And comparing crossing the Atlantic in a boat to a nice continent, with travelling to a dead and toxic planet says you haven't given it much thought and it's not your thing.
@@alexverdigris9939 you response is simply childish, you have no idea what you're talking about. Let me guarantee that far less ppl will die traveling/ colonizing that planet than the amount of ppl died traveling here and settling here.