this post was submitted on 20 Oct 2024
1154 points (99.7% liked)

Comic Strips

12988 readers
1973 users here now

Comic Strips is a community for those who love comic stories.

The rules are simple:

Web of links

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
1154
Mission report (lemmy.world)
submitted 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[โ€“] [email protected] 10 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

Yeah, but the distance to the moon is a lot shorter, better to practice colonization in an easier to get to location... Somewhere we can learn from our mistakes, rather than jump over that opportunity to a place it takes six months to get to... Where there can be no emergency parts shipped up when something starts breaking down.

Nah, much better to learn the most common problems near by, then take that knowledge and extra durability with us to mars.

Also that way we can develop generations of habitats, figure out the best requirements, and know what we'll need, and develop light weight robust versions of things.

Trying to "Occupy Mars" without having a single building on the moon? That's just some conman billionaires gimmick.

[โ€“] [email protected] 3 points 2 months ago

It's not just about distance. It's also about the ability to sustain. The Moon might end up being like Antarctica -- with resources always flown in. So the Moon might always be a bunch of research stations supported by the Earth.

Mars is too far to pull this trick off, and telerobotics is much harder there due to the latency. So Mars makes more sense to work on establishing self-sufficiency than the Moon does. It also, conveniently, has a better set of resources to support the same.

But I do agree that we ought to use the Moon to test some things first :)