Slashdot Mirror


Bill Nye: We Are Not Going To Live on Mars, Let Alone Turn It Into Earth (usatoday.com)

pgmrdlm writes: Bill Nye says the idea of Mars colonization and terraforming -- making a planet more Earth-like by modifying its atmosphere -- is science fiction. "This whole idea of terraforming Mars, as respectful as I can be, are you guys high?" Nye said in an interview with USA TODAY. "We can't even take care of this planet where we live, and we're perfectly suited for it, let alone another planet." As for living on Mars permanently: Sorry, Nye says that's not happening either. "People disagree with me on this, and the reason they disagree is because they're wrong," he quipped. The famous science educator and CEO of The Planetary Society appears on National Geographic Channel's series "MARS." While the series explores human beings living on the Red Planet and even mining it, that doesn't mean Nye buys into the idea. For starters, he points to Antarctica, where scientists are stationed even during the harsh winter months but no one lives permanently.

"Nobody goes to Antarctica to raise a family. You don't go there and build a park, there's just no such thing. Nobody's gonna go settle on Mars to raise a family and have generations of Martians," Nye said. "It's not reasonable because it's so cold. And there is hardly any water. There's absolutely no food, and the big thing, I just remind these guys, there's nothing to breathe." Plus living in a dome, then putting on a spacesuit to go outside will get tiring -- fast. "When you leave your dome, you're gonna put on another dome, and I think that will get old pretty quick," he said. "Especially the smell in the spacesuit 00 all the Febreze you can pack, I think it will really help you up there."

30 of 646 comments (clear)

  1. gratuitous insult by cascadingstylesheet · · Score: 2, Insightful

    In the interests of unity ... whatever our positions on various issues might be, can we all just agree that the guy is annoying as heck (on anything but very basic science education)? ;)

    1. Re:gratuitous insult by Ensign_Expendable · · Score: 2, Insightful

      A bowtie does not make you an expert on all things scientific. I'm with the OP. Sorry.

    2. Re: gratuitous insult by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Pull your lips off of Bill Nye's asshole for just a moment. Nye is inflammatory and alienates a lot of people who might otherwise be interested in science by mocking them. You don't get people to understand climate change by making them feel stupid or insulting religion, according to another science, i.e. psychology. He's also against nuclear power, which is potentially mankind's near-term best hope to quell CO2 emissions and air pollution. His knowledge is shallow compared to real scientists like Carl Sagan or Neil Degrasse Tyson.

      So no, "pretty much" everything he does isn't so great.

    3. Re:gratuitous insult by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Insightful

      yeah, in the recent past he seems to have gone the way of a lot of our political leaders... if you're not with me, your wrong.

      We are long past the point where anyone who denies climate change gets the benefit of the doubt. If you are still a denier you aren't just wrong, you are against the survival of the species. Not sorry this hurts feels, better to be butthurt than extinct.

    4. Re:gratuitous insult by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      People have been going to Antarctica for 200 years now and we still aren't able to live there permanently due to the harsh conditions. So, maybe ~500 years from now we'll figure it out,

      Oh, I don't think it's going to take 500 years for us to solve that problem. At the rate we're going, Antarctica should be a pretty nice place to live within the next 100-200 years. Downright balmy.

    5. Re:gratuitous insult by Joce640k · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Sure, I'd love to believe we'll terraform Mars. It'd be cool. I can't say it won't happen in 10,000 years. But it certainly won't happen in even 200.

      With you 100% there.

      Crazy 'ol Elon Musk think we're going to establish colonies there in the next 30 years!

      Maybe his definition of 'colony' isn't the same as yours (or his is the definition the newspapers want to hear.

      It would be pointless to send some guys to mars for just a few hours like they did with Apollo. I'm thinking more like the pressure domes in the martian movie. The technology to build that and send it to Mars will certainly exist in 30 years at the rate Elon is advancing his rocketry.

      Artificial gravity so that people can survive the two month flight isn't too difficult - a long wire with the humans on one end and the cargo on the other spinning through space would do it.

      Will anybody sign up for the trip, no matter how risky? You betcha.

      --
      No sig today...
    6. Re:gratuitous insult by timeOday · · Score: 3, Insightful

      When somebody says "we" are not "ever" going to do XYZ, it's usually safe to read as, "nobody reading this will be around to see the day when..." I think people generally understand that making predictions about technology 10,000 years from now is impossible, beyond the very basics like speed of light or conservation of energy.

    7. Re:gratuitous insult by Applehu+Akbar · · Score: 3, Insightful

      In the interests of unity ... whatever our positions on various issues might be, can we all just agree that the guy is annoying as heck (on anything but very basic science education)? ;)

      Yes, and also he's wrong as heck. Physics fundamentals dictate that Mars will never resemble Earth, but it's human nature that people will one day live on it in a self-sustaining manner.

      Look at all the national claims on Antarctica. The only reason it's not colonized is that it's an international research park by treaty.

    8. Re:gratuitous insult by lgw · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Physics fundamentals dictate that Mars will never resemble Earth, but it's human nature that people will one day live on it in a self-sustaining manner.

      We could make Mars Earthlike in all but gravity and the blissfully longer day, but I'm not sure what the point would be. (Sure, that atmosphere would be lost in a million years, but so what?)

      I don't think it will ever make sense. It will just be much easier to make huge orbiting habitats for those who want to escape Earth. Starting at big enough to hold 100k-1 million people, these start to make a lot of sense. You get the gravity and atmosphere you want, without the mind-boggling time that terraforming would take.

      If we can only get robotic asteroid mining started, so that heavy industry isn't at the bottom of a gravity well, everything else becomes practical. And mostly-self-directed robotic mining equipment no longer sounds like far-fetched SF. More like inevitable loss of all the mining jobs on Earth. Start making millions of tons of rocket fuel in high orbit and suddenly the Solar system is ours for the taking.

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    9. Re: gratuitous insult by 110010001000 · · Score: 1, Insightful

      He mocks people who willingly ignore science for their personal delusions. People like that should be mocked.

    10. Re: gratuitous insult by ChrisMaple · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The fallacy ad hominem (abusive) is "This guy is evil, therefor his claims are wrong." The first post is This guy is irritating; he may or may not be right. Not the same thing.

      --
      Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
    11. Re: gratuitous insult by PopeRatzo · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Glasses, bowtie and/or tweed jacket... and be sure to never say anything, just look at them inscrutably when they speak.
      You'll get tenure in a fucking week.

      Spoken like someone who has no idea what it takes to get tenure.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    12. Re: gratuitous insult by quenda · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The only way people will move to Mars is if something is actively driving them away from earth.

      The way we're polluting the Earth, it could still happen.

      We could pollute earth beyond the most dystopian imagination, and it would still be better than living on Mars. Sorry.
      I find the Antarctica comparison convincing. Sure we want a scientific base, and a few rich tourists will go. But nobody wants to live there in a permanent colony. It'll be easier and more useful to colonise the bottom of the ocean than Mars.

    13. Re:gratuitous insult by apoc.famine · · Score: 5, Insightful

      You're technically correct, but missing the bigger picture.

      Sure, we can't live in Antarctica permanently. But we haven't spent any of the last 200 years there trying to make the outposts there permanent either. So of course we can't.

      If we had wanted to, we probably could have. We could have built giant underground farms with grow lights, dropped in a nuclear power plant, built an underground infrastructure, etc. And we could most likely be pretty self-sufficient there, since it's got oxygen and a lot of ice to melt for water. (I'll note that Mars doesn't have either. At least, not relatively pure water ice, not mixed with perchlorates.)

      You can't use Antarctica as proof we can't live permanently on Mars since we didn't try to live permanently there. If we had tried and failed, that would be another story.

      --
      Velociraptor = Distiraptor / Timeraptor
    14. Re:gratuitous insult by kaatochacha · · Score: 3, Insightful

      OH MY GOD!
      If they came out with a Science show hosted by Dolph Lundgren and Brian May, I believe I'd watch nothing ever but that show.

    15. Re: gratuitous insult by DNS-and-BIND · · Score: 2, Insightful

      "This guy is evil, therefor his claims are wrong." works just fine when it's Donald Trump. Why's it a logical fallacy again?

      --
      Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
    16. Re: gratuitous insult by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It isn't. It is actually a reasonable, if incomplete statement. A more robust expression would be that due to the nature of evil, there can be no reliance on Trump. In fact, however, Trump is not simply evil, but a selfish moronic blowhard asshole who is known to lie over even easily disproved matters. Not to mention his tendency to reverse his position based on whatever inanity goes through his brain.

      Therefore, you should assume he is wrong until demonstrated otherwise, or even better, ignore him utterly. And you ought to have been doing this twenty years ago.

    17. Re: gratuitous insult by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      No, they should not.

      To quote Carl Sagan from The Demon-Haunted World:

      "And yet, the chief deficiency I see in the sceptical movement is in its polarization: Us v. Them - the sense that we have a monopoly on the truth; that those other people who believe in all these stupid doctrines are morons; that if you’re sensible, you’ll listen to us; and if not, you’re beyond redemption. This is unconstructive. It does not get the message across. It condemns the sceptics to permanent minority status; whereas, a compassionate approach that from the beginning acknowledges the human roots of pseudoscience and superstition might be much more widely accepted."

    18. Re:gratuitous insult by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      We could make Mars Earthlike

      How about instead we make Earth Earthlike and save the trip?

    19. Re: gratuitous insult by CohibaVancouver · · Score: 4, Insightful

      You should try venturing outside your echo chamber.

      And you should try not to make assumptions about people like me.

      I evaluate Trump, his surrogates, and his supporters based on whether what they are saying is *FACTUAL* - And whether their actions make sense based on the facts at hand. When Trump spends $120M of taxpayer dollars to dispatch 7000 troops to the southern border - Depriving those troops of their families at Thanksgiving and Christmas - Based on a threat that is not factual, then I judge him on that, because the facts do not support his actions.

      The people who *are* in echo chambers are the people who haven't critically evaluated whether sending 7000 troops to the border is a good use of resources, or a stunt to inflame their fears.

      That's one of many many many dozens of examples.

  2. Go Away by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Insightful

    He's not even a scientist...he's an entertainer...

  3. De-terraforming by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    At the moment we're showing great dexterity in de-terraforming Earth.

    I think as long as we don't tackle this one we should be at least careful with prospective terraforming projects.

  4. The Grass Is Always Greener . . . by NicknamesAreStupid · · Score: 4, Insightful

    . . . on the other side of the solar system. Obviously, he is right in the very short term, nobody is moving there today and, likely, not in the next decade or three. Will there be a base on mars in the next century? Maybe. Will we go there to live once we have mastered genetic engineering to adapt to any environment? Duh? We may live on Jupiter. Of course, that might be centuries away, so who gives a fuck?

    1. Re:The Grass Is Always Greener . . . by Gravis+Zero · · Score: 2, Insightful

      We may live on Jupiter.

      It's difficult to take you seriously when you fail to recognize that Jupiter is a gas planet so as far as Jupiter goes, there is no "on" to be.

      --
      Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
  5. Re:There are those that agree... by MightyYar · · Score: 4, Insightful

    How can we ever hope to colonize the New World, when we can't even live at peace among ourselves here in continental Europe? The climate experiences wild swings, our ships are not reliable, and the land is populated with murderous savages. I know you all really like Queen Isabella, but this is all just fantasy. There may be riches in the New World, but it will never be worth the time or effort to extract them.

    --
    W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
  6. Why is he just mentioning solvable things? by Ihlosi · · Score: 4, Insightful
    It's not reasonable because it's so cold. And there is hardly any water. There's absolutely no food, and the big thing, I just remind these guys, there's nothing to breathe.
    Cold? Well, you are going to generate power somehow, and most methods generate plenty of heat as a by-product.
    Hardly any water? Well, collect some and keep reusing it. Sounds icky? Well, here on Earth we're doing the same thing, except that the water here has been recycled and reused for millions of years. That's even more icky than anything you'll find on Mars.
    Absolutely no food? We've just talked about power, heat and water. If you have those three, you can make/grow food.
    Nothing to breathe? There's CO2. There are plants (for growing food, see above). Why shouldn't there be oxygen?

    Seriously. Dismissing life on Mars and then talking about the things that are among the easiest? What about radiation, (temporary) dependence on supply flighty that take half a year to arrive, or how to build a production infrastructure (so you can build enough domes that taking a walk won't involve donning a space suit)?

  7. Re:It's also poisonous... by jythie · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Which cuts to the heart of the problem : what exactly is the point of building there? Outside 'well, there is gravity!', the planet doesn't really have much making it worth being there and you end up living in a high cost sealed environment that you might as well just build on earth and cover the walls in pictures of mars.

  8. Re:It's also poisonous... by petes_PoV · · Score: 3, Insightful

    These arn't the sort of problems you can hand wave away.

    Sure you can. Every clean room on Earth copes with this minor inconvenience every hour of the day.

    --
    politicians are like babies' nappies: they should both be changed regularly and for the same reasons
  9. Re:He's not just a blowhard, he's an idiot. by religionofpeas · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Last but not least, exploration and pushing onward to new vistas is one of our defining traits

    Plenty of empty deserts on Earth where virtually nobody's pushing onward to new vistas, Antarctica included.

  10. The question by ElizabethGreene · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The immutable question is:
    If we don't colonize Mars, the moon, space, or somewhere else other than this rock then what happens to our species when (insert catastrophic event here) hits and we have no backup plan?

    We are an apex species, and evolution is not kind to apex species. There is literally an entire planet full of creatures evolving to kill us. It doesn't have to be that either. A giant meteor, nuclear despot, major tectonic event, biological weapon, or an as-yet unknown thing could pound off a big chunk of the population and we are back in the stone age finishing each other off with rocks and sticks.

    If not Mars, where?