Author of Red Mars calls 'bullshit' on emigrating to the planet
Claims that humanity will soon migrate to or terraform Mars are widely challenged as unrealistic given current technology, costs, and what we’ve learned about the planet’s harsh conditions, from pervasive toxic perchlorates to radiation and uncertain effects of low gravity. Commenters argue it would be far cheaper and more practical to protect and “terraform” Earth, or to use robots and Moon bases for science and industry, while a minority still see Mars settlements as a long‑term hedge against existential risks and a symbol of human exploration.
Feasibility of Mars Colonization and Terraforming
- Many commenters argue long-term settlement is vastly harder than popular narratives suggest.
- Key technical issues raised: toxic perchlorates in ubiquitous fine dust, high radiation without a magnetic field, very low atmospheric pressure, unknown effects of 0.38g on long-term human health.
- Terraforming is seen as technologically out of reach and requiring extremely long timescales; realistic scenarios involve pressurized, shielded habitats and largely underground living.
- Closed, self-sustaining ecosystems are noted as an unsolved problem; past Earth experiments (e.g., Biosphere-style projects) struggled even under ideal logistics.
Earth vs Mars: Priorities and Ethics
- Strong view: it is cheaper and easier to “terraform Earth” (repair climate and ecosystems) than to terraform Mars or build a self-sufficient colony there.
- Others counter that humanity is large enough to pursue both remediation and exploration, and that insisting on “solve Earth first” would have blocked historic exploration.
- Some suggest Mars colonization discourse functions as escapism for elites, potentially leaving “the rest” on a degraded Earth.
Humans vs Robots for Mars Exploration
- Pro-human side: astronauts can adapt, fix unexpected failures, and do in days what current rovers take years to achieve.
- Pro-robot side: humans require enormous mass in life support, shielding, and return capability; robotic missions are far cheaper, safer, and can be multiplied across sites.
- Future autonomous, possibly humanoid robots plus compact reactors are proposed as a better path, though others note such systems don’t yet exist even on Earth.
Economics, Technology, and Program Realism
- Several commenters highlight budget constraints, national debt, and political risk aversion as major blockers.
- There is skepticism about current heavy-lift programs that have yet to demonstrate orbital payload capacity while being placed on critical paths for lunar or Martian plans.
- Some see hype around Mars as investor-facing rhetoric rather than an engineering-backed roadmap.
Existential Risk and “Backup Planet” Argument
- One camp sees off-world settlements (Mars, Moon, or orbital habitats) as a hedge against catastrophic Earth events.
- Critics argue that most conceivable disasters are better mitigated with Earth-based bunkers and resilience measures; Earth post-disaster is still likely more habitable than Mars.
- Very small, dependent outposts are not viewed as a meaningful “backup” for civilization.
Psychological and Cultural Themes
- Several commenters express melancholy as classic sci-fi futures (FTL, fully terraformed Mars) look increasingly implausible.
- Others argue these were always fantasies, and that improving life on Earth for billions is a more compelling, “cool” grand project.
- A minority worry humanity is an ecologically destructive “invasive species” and advocate treating other worlds more like protected parks than real estate.