There are things you can't just "engineer around" in any meaningful sense. Unless we make a major fundamental discovery, the issues the article brings up are unsolvable.

I always wondered how anyone could just dismiss the fact that Mars would simply loose any artificially created atmosphere like it has before. What "invention" or "technology" could prevent that?

The planet is inhospitable for reasons that humans won't be able to change, at least not in the next millennium.

[–] NOT_RICK@lemmy.world 7 points 2 days ago (1 children)

I always wondered how anyone could just dismiss the fact that Mars would simply loose any artificially created atmosphere like it has before. What "invention" or "technology" could prevent that?

Pressurized habitation structures is what I’m imagining. That would hopefully help with the radiation too. More or less the ISS but on mars rather than in orbit. I’m no engineer though so maybe I’m trivializing something that’s crazy difficult or overlooking an issue beyond “it’s hard”.

[–] falcunculus@jlai.lu 3 points 2 days ago (1 children)

You're agreeing with the article, the author says a small outpost is feasible but nothing comparable to a "colony" in the American frontier kind of sense : it will always be utterly dependent on earth, barely tolerable to live in, and all at a constant upkeep it won't pay back. Like scientific bases in Antarctica but much worse.

[–] BigMikeInAustin@lemmy.world 2 points 2 days ago

The article is making up an argument with itself about the definition of "colony."

load more comments (5 replies)