"resource-intensive project like life on Mars"
"I don't take this perspective seriously"
Yeah. They say "resource-intensive" like we're not spending many MANY more resources on making big sticks to shake at each other.
And they say this as if the resources on this planet were a significant fraction of what's available in the solar system.
They say things like "earth is a zero sum game" as if sunlight didn't exist and materials we mine from the asteroid belt won't fall down a gravity well.
Or as if the resources required to put life on mars are a significant fraction of any meaningful measure.
It's almost like they think earth is big. ;)
- its pursuit will lead to unintended tech advances
- it's such a small expenditure relative to other wasteful crap we engage in.
- there is a valid argument for diversifying life, the next gigantic asteroid isn't following your timetable
- it's private money and isn't negatively impacting you and doesn't have its hand in your pocket, as long as externalities are being taxed you're not worse off
I see so much hand wringing about this but I'm sitting here wondering why we are wasting so much money on movies and video games instead of these aspirational projects.