HypotheticalOpenCloses in 16d 14h

Should humanity spend money colonising Mars?

A second home for the species against every problem the money could solve on the first one.

No votes yet — pick a side.

4 arguments

Pick a side

One click. You can change your mind.

Arguments

2
AgainstVerdyct editorial

As insurance it is badly priced. Earth after an asteroid, a nuclear exchange or a pandemic is still more habitable than Mars on its best day - more air, more water, a magnetic field. If the goal is a surviving human population, hardened shelters here cost a fraction of it and start working immediately.

0
AgainstVerdyct editorial

A self-sufficient colony needs closed-loop life support that has never worked on Earth for more than about two years, in 38% gravity whose effect on a pregnancy is entirely unknown. The backup-planet argument requires the backup to work. We currently cannot keep eight people alive and fed in a sealed building in Arizona.

0

Share this debate

Challenge a friend

Send them your side. They get the other one.

Sign in to challenge someone.

Related debates

The verdict reflects the arguments submitted to Verdyct. It is a judgement about which side argued better — not a statement of objective truth.

Can we measure how the site is used?

Only to count what people do here — never sold, never shared, never used to advertise to you. The site works the same either way. Privacy policy