> 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...
In his experience with anything health related. He’s 100 years old.
James Lovelock: 'I Would Not Waste My Fortune on Colonizing Mars'
91–100 of 330 posts
Re: James Lovelock: 'I Would Not Waste My Fortune on Colonizing Mars'
#92This brought a smile :)
'Lovelock: You see, when I passed 100, I thought, "What is there to do now? What is there to look forward to?" I don't have any more duties. I enjoy life now... When I wake up in the morning I often think: "Oh, it’s a nice world!" I live here with my wife, we are still in love, what more do I want?'
Re: James Lovelock: 'I Would Not Waste My Fortune on Colonizing Mars'
#93I stopped reading when he said, “eh, cancer’s not so bad” and “rich people don’t die from cancer anymore, so we shouldn’t worry about.”
Re: James Lovelock: 'I Would Not Waste My Fortune on Colonizing Mars'
#94Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
No offense, but you could not possibly be more wrong. While just 1% the quantity of CO2 is enormous and large important resource. With CO2, ice and martian soil you got everything to get plants to grow. Nothing can grow on the moon unless you import carbon. Also CO2 can be used with electrolysis of water and sabatier reaction to produce methane which can be used as rocket fuel. The fact that the atmosphere is almost…
> you got everything to get plants to grow. Nothing can grow on the moon unless you import carbon.
Nothing is going to be growing on Mars either, outside of pressurized chambers, which, in the event of a loss of pressure, will kill everyone inside. The atmosphere is so thin that you really aren't gaining anything by not just bringing the carbon with you.
Frankly, the idea of colonizing the Moon or Mars, except in the sense of a temporary science post like the ISS, is a sci-fi fantasy that will never make practical or economic sense. Why am I going to want to build an industrial base on Mars? Why is it economically feasible? How many people are going to want to live in a cramped cage their entire life, never able to go outside, afflicted by low-gravity diseases? What can be produced or gotten on Mars that can't be on Earth for 1% of the effort and cost?
People don't want to live in Antarctica or the bottom of the ocean right now, and these environments are much more survivable than the Moon or Mars, and more economically feasible to boot. Why is anything going to change?
Re: James Lovelock: 'I Would Not Waste My Fortune on Colonizing Mars'
#95Perhaps it might have been possible in some long distant past to underestimate Elon Musk and write him off as a crazy person. That time is gone. If Musk appears to be doing something crazy you've not understood it. > It’s crazy, completely crazy. Elon Musk has read too much science fiction. He got carried away with it. If I were in his position, I would not waste my fortune on colonizing Mars. And all they would lear…
JFK sold us on space because "we choose to do these things because they are hard." It was an aspirational exploratory message. The reality is that we are in space because it is required for great power contests. I'm mired in space as a DoD executive, so I promise you space - at least inside the GEO orbits - is extremely practical. Starlink is honestly amazing. Mars though? I've steel-manned that one and I don't see i…
> I don't see it as anything more than what JFK did. Tickling the never-ending exploration/expansion desires of humanity.
I would agree. This is what fuels SpaceX. Aspiration. He's generated excitement and interest in space that rivals what JFK did, it doesn't have to be more. People in my life with no previous interest in the subject now want to hear all about it.
Re: James Lovelock: 'I Would Not Waste My Fortune on Colonizing Mars'
#96Earlier quoted context omitted.
JFK sold us on space because "we choose to do these things because they are hard." It was an aspirational exploratory message. The reality is that we are in space because it is required for great power contests. I'm mired in space as a DoD executive, so I promise you space - at least inside the GEO orbits - is extremely practical. Starlink is honestly amazing. Mars though? I've steel-manned that one and I don't see i…
Is that true of nuclear winter or a major impact event? Wouldn't either of those render the Earth temporarily uninhabitable? Is the argument that it would be easy enough to build on Earth places to survive such events rather than going to Mars?
> Is the argument that it would be easy enough to build on Earth places to survive such events rather than going to Mars?
I'd say the argument is that Mars is currently a (much) less hospitable place for life as we know it than the Earth in any nuclear winter scenario that I know of.
Re: James Lovelock: 'I Would Not Waste My Fortune on Colonizing Mars'
#97Earlier quoted context omitted.
He almost made the point that the nuclear accident killed far less people than the tsunami that caused it, but instead went down the route that cancer isn't a big deal. The tsunami killed over 15,000 people. The nuclear disaster is estimated to eventually kill 100-ish people due to excess cancer cases from radioactive releases.
Don't forget that interviews are usually edited ("for brevity"), and especially in Der Spiegel of 2020 (as opposed to, say, 1980), I wouldn't be suprised if they heavily edited it.
It's not like they put words in his mouth...
Re: James Lovelock: 'I Would Not Waste My Fortune on Colonizing Mars'
#98Musk sees the future, the future where we destroy Earth. Lovelock has an incorrect understanding of the future.
Re: James Lovelock: 'I Would Not Waste My Fortune on Colonizing Mars'
#99This topic comes up a lot and I know it excites investors, but I have yet to see a viable plan for kick-starting the magnetic field on Mars. No magnetic field means no way to have an atmosphere, water or life and everyone has to stay in caves or incredibly durable modules indefinitely. The only O2 and H2O is what you bring with you or produce in the modules.
The only reason I could see doing this is if we knew of impending extinction events coming to earth that would pass quickly and then we could return and re-populate. Is there another reason to colonize a dead planet? Are we trying to find a root cause for something and need a team to stick around longer than a regular mission time-frame?
Re: James Lovelock: 'I Would Not Waste My Fortune on Colonizing Mars'
#100Perhaps it might have been possible in some long distant past to underestimate Elon Musk and write him off as a crazy person. That time is gone. If Musk appears to be doing something crazy you've not understood it. > It’s crazy, completely crazy. Elon Musk has read too much science fiction. He got carried away with it. If I were in his position, I would not waste my fortune on colonizing Mars. And all they would lear…
Not only that, but the cynic in my says... what SHOULD you be spending your billions on? Carefully grabbing more billions and political influence/power so you can have more influence/power? Or, you know, try to make humanity better?
My reply to thoughts like these are always the same: In the US we spend an insulting amount of money on military and defense. The amount of money Spacex is spending is nothing in comparison. If one is truly interested in helping humanity, then one should be advocating moving funds from the military to any branch of science or social welfare. To nitpick the small difference someone like Musk could make by doing something else is to not have your priorities set.