Re:Bill Gates questions worth of space exploration for impro...
by wavesandwind on Sunday May 14, 2017 @09:36AM
(#14335562)
So, polluting 2 worlds instead of one? Nobody will stop exploiting Earth even once new worlds become accessible.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:Bill Gates questions worth of space exploration for impro...
by WalterBright on Sunday May 14, 2017 @09:56AM
(#14335628)
I'd much rather pollute Mars, a dead rock, than the Earth.
Re:Bill Gates questions worth of space exploration for impro...
by wavesandwind on Sunday May 14, 2017 @10:13AM
(#14335700)
Agree, yet it's not an either Mars or Earth question. Judging by priorities of corporations (making money, of course) it will certainly be both Mars and Earth.
Re:Bill Gates questions worth of space exploration for impro...
by WalterBright on Sunday May 14, 2017 @01:56PM
(#14336652)
In fact, the whole concept of "pollution" on Mars makes little sense. We could convert it to radioactive slag and plaster it with "Eat at Joe's" billboards, and it wouldn't hurt anyone or anything.
What we ought to be doing with Mars is terraforming it. I'd start by collecting extremophile bacteria from Earth and letting it loose on Mars and see if any of it takes hold.
Re:Bill Gates questions worth of space exploration for impro...
by ekianjo on Sunday May 14, 2017 @09:47AM
(#14335592)
> polluting 2 worlds
How are you polluting another world if there is no life there in the first place?
Re:Bill Gates questions worth of space exploration for impro...
by wavesandwind on Sunday May 14, 2017 @09:51AM
(#14335611)
Good question. Perhaps. However, my point still remains that it will not stop the pollution on Earth - which will remain much cheaper to do.