A colony on mars will never be entirely self sustainable, at least not for centuries. So they will always rely on some resource from earth, even if it's just replacement computer chips or upgrades and new hardware. As they expand, they'll also want more things, like more types of seeds, other equipment, etc. And that's not even counting the amount of people they would need for a true colony, which would take tens of thousands of people to have a successful breeding population that doesn't end up inbred. And that's even if people can be born on mars due to the low gravity or some other issue. If that's a limiting factor, then a mars base will never be anything but a glorified space hotel / research outpost.
Even if an asteroid hits earth and wiped out mostly everything, it would still make more sense to wait in orbit and re-colonize earth than to colonize mars. You'd be able to put way more people in orbit than on mars. Even if there was a mars colony and the earth was hit by an asteroid, going back to earth after X number of years or centuries would still be better in the long run than trying to establish a permanent new home on mars. That's what these mars colonization dreams fail to realize....earth will always be the best candidate.
Just imagine you're on mars and earth is hit and X amount of time passes and the dust starts to settle. Even if the atmosphere is toxic, as long as the oceans haven't boiled away, that one sole reason alone would be enough to go back to re-colonize earth. Not to mention the gravity. Live in habitats on a desert wasteland with low gravity....or live in habitats on a toxic atmosphere earth with readily available water and other resources (that may eventually recover on its own) that is the right distance from the sun for liquid water with a thick enough atmosphere that you would only need breathers and not pressure suits. It's a no brainer!
Yeah true. Though it depends on supply chains and how sustainable Mars can be.
A colony on mars will never be entirely self sustainable, at least not for centuries. So they will always rely on some resource from earth, even if it's just replacement computer chips or upgrades and new hardware. As they expand, they'll also want more things, like more types of seeds, other equipment, etc. And that's not even counting the amount of people they would need for a true colony, which would take tens of thousands of people to have a successful breeding population that doesn't end up inbred. And that's even if people can be born on mars due to the low gravity or some other issue. If that's a limiting factor, then a mars base will never be anything but a glorified space hotel / research outpost.
Yeah really even Antarctica is more hospitable.
Here's hoping Mars is a start to spreading out from this rock.
Even if an asteroid hits earth and wiped out mostly everything, it would still make more sense to wait in orbit and re-colonize earth than to colonize mars. You'd be able to put way more people in orbit than on mars. Even if there was a mars colony and the earth was hit by an asteroid, going back to earth after X number of years or centuries would still be better in the long run than trying to establish a permanent new home on mars. That's what these mars colonization dreams fail to realize....earth will always be the best candidate.
Just imagine you're on mars and earth is hit and X amount of time passes and the dust starts to settle. Even if the atmosphere is toxic, as long as the oceans haven't boiled away, that one sole reason alone would be enough to go back to re-colonize earth. Not to mention the gravity. Live in habitats on a desert wasteland with low gravity....or live in habitats on a toxic atmosphere earth with readily available water and other resources (that may eventually recover on its own) that is the right distance from the sun for liquid water with a thick enough atmosphere that you would only need breathers and not pressure suits. It's a no brainer!