Welcome to European Tribune. It's gone a bit quiet around here these days, but it's still going.
Display:
Ironically enough, someone mentioned the following idea to me just yesterday. Suppose that we spend the next few decades sending robots to Mars and Venus and wherever, and maybe humans to Mars or perhaps the Moon again. And then suppose that we finally figure out that there's nothing up there that makes it worth moving there, and that further exploration is just a big fat waste of money.

And then suppose somebody comes up with a way to do something useful, but it's an environmental disaster for the extra-terrestrial object under consideration. (Perhaps the word "environment" doesn't make sense if there's nothing there for it to be the environment of.)

For example, suppose that platinum was in short supply on Earth, and was desperately needed to make fusion power reactors work safely.

Would it be ok to strip mine Mars for platinum? Imagine total destruction of the planet's surface. But, humans get to live on Earth in a pastoral paradise. Is that ok?

by asdf on Thu Jun 23rd, 2005 at 06:37:16 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Interesting question - hard to answer. Considering the imperfection of human beings and of our science, despite its advances I would say I tend towards no. If you look how we are destroying our planet earth, it is always that there is one need (Energy/Oil) out of many that is considered and then tried to fulfill, ignoring other needs like clean air for breathing. Unless we humans learn to act with consideration for the system as a whole, what makes you think it would be different with strip mining mars for platinum for example. Just because we do not know what the function for the mars platinum is up-there or in the entire solar system doesn't mean it doesn't have any. Unfortunately I have lost my faith in any wisdom of the human race as a whole. However, I hope and still am willing to be proven the opposite.
by Fran on Thu Jun 23rd, 2005 at 10:30:15 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Display:

Occasional Series