Slate on-line magazine - covers the settlement of Mars

Bill White · 2004-01-08 14:30:27

This article, presented in a rather mainstream in-online magazine, seems to assume that settling Mars is reasonably feasible. In my opinion, the appearance of this article is a "good thing" for space advocates.

clark · 2004-01-08 14:39:56

This hope vanished when Zubrin leapt to the defense of Manifest Destiny

, shouting, "By developing the American West we have created a place that millions of Mexicans are trying to get into!"

Top quote of the day, from Zubrin himself. :laugh:

That's the kind of sensitivity I want in my visionaries.

Bill White · 2004-01-08 14:43:09

This hope vanished when Zubrin leapt to the defense of Manifest Destiny
, shouting, "By developing the American West we have created a place that millions of Mexicans are trying to get into!"
Top quote of the day, from Zubrin himself. :laugh:
That's the kind of sensitivity I want in my visionaries.

I agree.

Zubrin needs to become a diplomat was well as a zealot. My passion for MarsDirect comes from my belief that I see real wheat mixed in with all that "libertarian" chaff, so to speak. This author says the same thing, IMHO.

Zubrin has written that we need to go to Mars because it will serve the same function that "pioneering the West" did for American civilization, creating jobs and opportunity and relieving population pressure. If there were an award for "most unfortunate choice of analogies," this should win. It is historically inaccurate, culturally clueless, and fails to capture some of the most compelling reasons why we really should consider someday bringing Mars to life by inhabiting it and perhaps eventually altering its environment with (and for) living creatures.

Nonetheless, it remains a good idea even if Zubrin's explanation of the reasons is muddled.

And, I remain tickled that the ship in "Case for Mars" is named Mayflower while the ship in his novel First Landing is named "Beagle" if I remember right.

A Calvinistic-Darwinist?

Bill White · 2004-01-08 14:51:29

Is Mars ours for the taking? Do we have a right to it? Not to be too Clintonian, but the answer may depend on what we mean by "we." Mars does not belong to "America," nor to Earth, nor to human beings. But if by "we," we mean "life," then yes, Mars belongs to us because this universe belongs to life. I mean, without us, what's the point? But before we go there and set up greenhouses, dance clubs, and falafel stands, let's make sure that, in some subtle form that could be harmed by the human hubbub, life does not already exist there. If not, then by all means build cities, plant forests and fill lakes and streams with trout?bring life to Mars and Mars to life. We'll then be the Martians we've been dreaming about for all these years.

Jeez, Louise, I surely wish I had written this:

Is Mars ours for the taking? Do we have a right to it? Not to be too Clintonian, but the answer may depend on what we mean by "we." Mars does not belong to "America," nor to Earth, nor to human beings. But if by "we," we mean "life," then yes, Mars belongs to us because this universe belongs to life.

That's my view in a nutshell.

clark · 2004-01-08 14:56:01

A Calvinistic-Darwinist?

Or a man blinded by conviction?

Mars does not belong to "America," nor to Earth, nor to human beings. But if by "we," we mean "life," then yes, Mars belongs to us because this universe belongs to life.
That's my view in a nutshell.

Talk about insensitivity!

The TCOPFTLOIOFTCCOSATHOFA will hear about this, i assure you!

TCOPFTLOIOFTCCOSATHOFA stands for:
The Coalition of People for the liberation of inanimate objects from the cruel clutches of slavery at the hands of the animate.

clark · 2004-01-08 15:01:59

Colonization, huh?

Who should pay for it?

Would you support indentured servitude as a fiscal means for people to get to Mars?

Should we set up a special tax to help pay for colonization?

Should we set up quota systems for the various religions, ethnicity, cultures, nationalities, gender, and age for those who wish to go?

Should areas in space be set aside for third world nations for the day that they too can settle space?

Bill, if you're right, and the people who go off into space will secure the future for their culture for the next 1000 years, isn't going into space a neccessity? Dosen't it also become a neccessity to limit others ability to get there too, to better position yourself?

Colonization, huh?

Palomar · 2004-01-08 15:23:48

*Thanks for sharing this, Bill. Very thought provoking.

I've never agreed with the concept of colonization of Mars being a duty.

I agree with the author's call for caution regarding potential native life to Mars (now dormant?). Which could bring up another "branch-off" (pardon the pun) to the terraforming issue (I'm a Red...as many know): Are Greens divided between development of (as of now, *potential*) native life on Mars versus transplanting Earth organisms there (as regards flora)?

"This is why we need to first proceed with our current robotic explorers, to make sure that Mars, today, really is as dead as it looks." -- Agreed.

I also understand the author's concerns about "Ameriforming," and particularly like his pointing out that humans venturing to Mars will be more akin to the first humans venturing out of Africa 50,000 years ago...

"Any group that seeks to garner support for human journeys to Mars must reassure people that this goal is broadly humanistic and environmentally conscientious." -- Agreed.

I don't recall seeing anyone claiming Mars for the **U.S.**, though (at this message board or elsewhere).

It's interesting, Mr. Grinspoon talking about his youthful optimism and "L5 in '95!" Hmmmmm, I wonder if, to an extent, middle-age has set in

As for Zubrin's social gaffe: Well, should he be censored? Should he cow-tow to political correctness?

I wouldn't have phrased it that way...and I wouldn't have used that analogy either. It singles out one group of people, and so it's poor form (at the least).

People put their feet in their mouths; live and learn.

--Cindy

jadeheart · 2004-01-08 17:56:47

I couldn't help but chuckle at mars maverick Zubrin's PR 'savvy.' At some point, as more people get involved in this great adventure, it may help if he relinquishes his domination of the spokesmanship in favor of concentrating on the engineering, which is much more his forte. He will probably not want to, but now that the ball is rolling somewhat, a few cooler heads doing the talking may be helpful for our momentum in the near future.

I was a little scared to read many of the posted responses to the article on Slate's site. There seemed to be a bit less of the reasoned discourse I've gotten spoiled by here at NM. (One was entitled "Shut Up.") Maybe later when I have more time...

Thanks for the link Bill, I would never have known about it otherwise.

New Mars Forums

Announcement

#1 2004-01-08 14:30:27

Re: Slate on-line magazine - covers the settlement of Mars

#2 2004-01-08 14:39:56

Re: Slate on-line magazine - covers the settlement of Mars

#3 2004-01-08 14:43:09

Re: Slate on-line magazine - covers the settlement of Mars

#4 2004-01-08 14:51:29

Re: Slate on-line magazine - covers the settlement of Mars

#5 2004-01-08 14:56:01

Re: Slate on-line magazine - covers the settlement of Mars

#6 2004-01-08 15:01:59

Re: Slate on-line magazine - covers the settlement of Mars

#7 2004-01-08 15:23:48

Re: Slate on-line magazine - covers the settlement of Mars

#8 2004-01-08 17:56:47

Re: Slate on-line magazine - covers the settlement of Mars

Board footer