Live data from Hacker News

James Lovelock: 'I Would Not Waste My Fortune on Colonizing Mars'

spiegel.de

31–40 of 330 posts

Re: James Lovelock: 'I Would Not Waste My Fortune on Colonizing Mars'

#31
post #16

Honestly, the moon is a much better goal.

Moon has nothing useful on it other than H3 -- and it doesn't really make us a multi-planet species in the sense we're protected from cosmic dangers (gamma ray burst, red dwarf etc) as the moon is relatively as vulnearable as the Earth to these.

Going to Mars won't save us from a gamma ray burst either. Not sure what you mean by red dwarf but I take it that you mean an event on the scale of a gamma ray burst. Mars ain't good enough for that.

I'd be curious to hear about events which would wipe out Earth and the moon but leave Mars intact.

Re: James Lovelock: 'I Would Not Waste My Fortune on Colonizing Mars'

#32
post #13

> I mean, nowadays, I think middle class and fairly wealthy people don't die of cancer. Sounds like James Lovelock has been pretty lucky in his experience with cancer...

And completely out of touch with reality

And enjoys universal health care and wealth.

Re: James Lovelock: 'I Would Not Waste My Fortune on Colonizing Mars'

#33
post #12
post #6

He may be a smart dude, but this answer is out there: > "DER SPIEGEL: Cancer is a silent killer that might get diagnosed long after the exposure, when it is too late. > Lovelock: I've had 10 cancers in the last few years and it hasn't been very bad. They just appear and grow. If you go to a good oncologist nearby, they'll take it out. It's just unfortunate for people who let it happen and it grows and grows until it'…

“out there” is a pretty charitable description. I stopped reading the article there. I am not interested in reading the crazy ramblings of someone disconnected from reality.

Yeah, the reading went from: "I wonder what this old, smart man has to say" to checking url if it is the onion

Re: James Lovelock: 'I Would Not Waste My Fortune on Colonizing Mars'

#34
post #8

Honestly, the moon is a much better goal.

How so? Mars has an atmosphere unlike the moon, it has water in some form and quantity and has approximately the same length of the day as Earth, plus it has gravity much closer to Earth than what the moon has.

Mars’ atmosphere is less than 1% the density of Earth’s. It’s completely unusable for any practical purpose and would likely cause more problems (dust and erosion) than it would help.

Re: James Lovelock: 'I Would Not Waste My Fortune on Colonizing Mars'

#35

> I mean, nowadays, I think middle class and fairly wealthy people don't die of cancer. Sounds like James Lovelock has been pretty lucky in his experience with cancer...

The paradox with cancer is that is grows much faster on young, healthy bodies than on old ones.

Re: James Lovelock: 'I Would Not Waste My Fortune on Colonizing Mars'

#36
post #16

Honestly, the moon is a much better goal.

Moon has nothing useful on it other than H3 -- and it doesn't really make us a multi-planet species in the sense we're protected from cosmic dangers (gamma ray burst, red dwarf etc) as the moon is relatively as vulnearable as the Earth to these.

I thought the moon had minerals, everything you need to grow an independent colony. I'm not sure saying it only has H3 is entirely accurate.

Re: James Lovelock: 'I Would Not Waste My Fortune on Colonizing Mars'

#37

Most of this reads as "this is how it worked for me so it must work like this for everyone". I understand he "enjoys controversy" but it's hard to take someone seriously who says things like "Oh, politicians should just ignore the protests and keep their minds straight. It will go away. It always does. They’ll find another big issue after a little while and switch to something else.", as if protests have never effect…

I read it as sarcasm and cynicism. For someone at 100 years of age and having been involved in several environmental movements it can be exhausting to think of another protest failing. I suspect he'd like it to work but seems more interested in folks making the politicians pay attention by other means.

Re: James Lovelock: 'I Would Not Waste My Fortune on Colonizing Mars'

#39
post #31
post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Moon has nothing useful on it other than H3 -- and it doesn't really make us a multi-planet species in the sense we're protected from cosmic dangers (gamma ray burst, red dwarf etc) as the moon is relatively as vulnearable as the Earth to these.

Going to Mars won't save us from a gamma ray burst either. Not sure what you mean by red dwarf but I take it that you mean an event on the scale of a gamma ray burst. Mars ain't good enough for that. I'd be curious to hear about events which would wipe out Earth and the moon but leave Mars intact.

By red dwarf I believe the GP means later phases of the star cycle when the sun increases in size and intensity.

Re: James Lovelock: 'I Would Not Waste My Fortune on Colonizing Mars'

#40
All respect for the man, but fortunately we can like and respect somebody without agreeing with them.

You get set in your ways with age. Some of his responses are a bit too much of the type "young people these days!"

Young people may get carried away at times but important changes tend to happen due to young people. Young people led the French revolution and other revolutions advancing democracy and freedom.

A lot of the good things that has happened through the environmental movement has happened due to young engaged people. It is not enough to sit in a lab and invent solutions if nobody listens to you.

Sure I have seen environmental movement ebb and flow ever since the 80s. However it would be silly to suggest that this somehow invalidates them. These organizations helped save the ozone layer, whales and other species. They paved the way for the revolution within renewable energy.

Post reply on HN