Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by cmn32480 on Thursday October 06 2016, @12:26AM   Printer-friendly
from the location-location-location dept.

Assuming that SpaceX can refuel an orbiting spacecraft, build boosters capable of launching 1,000 times over, establish a propellant factory on another planet and of course, that you've got US$100,000 to spare, you could soon be faced with some pretty tough life choices. Earlier this week Elon Musk outlined his plan to send one million people off to colonize Mars, but there is a lot to consider when sizing up your own little patch of rock and dust. To get a handle on some of the likely settlement sites if Musk's interplanetary plans do materialize, New Atlas checked in with who we'll call realtors of the Red Planet to find out some prime locations to set up shop.

The fact of the matter is that there are tens, if not hundreds of potential Mars landing sites being bandied about by scientists concerned with such endeavors. At a NASA workshop last October, hundreds of researchers from around the world debated the strengths and weaknesses of 48 strong candidates, and the reality is these will be chopped and changed as we come to learn more about our dusty red neighbor. But hey, it's been a big week for Mars and the romantic notion of dreaming big, so we'll get into the spirit of things and let our imaginations run wild just a little.

What's your choice, the bottom of Valles Marineris, the Gale Crater, the Medusae Fossae Formation, or other?


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2) by Joe Desertrat on Thursday October 06 2016, @10:37PM

    by Joe Desertrat (2454) on Thursday October 06 2016, @10:37PM (#411249)

    I will get crucified for this by those who only think in terms of short term human economic benefit, but would it not be great if the human race matured enough before colonizing the Moon, Mars, or anywhere else in the solar system (universe?) to survey them and set aside the most beautiful and spectacular places for the future benefit and enjoyment of all? I foresee a day when, after generations of rape and plunder have made a horrible mess of most of these places, that we will look back and ask "what have we done?". Alas, I don't have much hope, when you still have those that lust after the idea of building condos and mining right up to the edge of national parks here in the US, that any thought at all will be given to the subject.

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   2  
  • (Score: 1) by khallow on Friday October 07 2016, @04:07AM

    by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Friday October 07 2016, @04:07AM (#411339) Journal

    I will get crucified for this by those who only think in terms of short term human economic benefit, but would it not be great if the human race matured enough before colonizing the Moon, Mars, or anywhere else in the solar system (universe?) to survey them and set aside the most beautiful and spectacular places for the future benefit and enjoyment of all?

    If we never go out there, then there is extremely little future benefit to be had. It's putting the cart before the horse. My view is that in order to "mature" to the point you would like, space colonization is a prerequisite.

    I foresee a day when, after generations of rape and plunder have made a horrible mess of most of these places, that we will look back and ask "what have we done?".

    With most of the histrionics coming from people who never will see these places.

    Alas, I don't have much hope, when you still have those that lust after the idea of building condos and mining right up to the edge of national parks here in the US, that any thought at all will be given to the subject.

    Just make sure the edges are ample. It's not rocket science.

    • (Score: 2) by Joe Desertrat on Tuesday October 11 2016, @02:30AM

      by Joe Desertrat (2454) on Tuesday October 11 2016, @02:30AM (#412762)

      With most of the histrionics coming from people who never will see these places.

      Well so what. Just because one personally will not see them does not mean one cannot hope that others receive the benefit of doing so.

      Just make sure the edges are ample. It's not rocket science.

      Spoken like one who has no conception of what makes wilderness valuable. I am not surprised.

      • (Score: 1) by khallow on Tuesday October 11 2016, @10:01AM

        by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Tuesday October 11 2016, @10:01AM (#412869) Journal

        Well so what. Just because one personally will not see them does not mean one cannot hope that others receive the benefit of doing so.

        Funny how the people allegedly "hoping" are the ones who want to block those who would "receive the benefit".

        Just make sure the edges are ample. It's not rocket science.

        Spoken like one who has no conception of what makes wilderness valuable. I am not surprised.

        Let's go over your original comment and my reply again.

        Alas, I don't have much hope, when you still have those that lust after the idea of building condos and mining right up to the edge of national parks here in the US, that any thought at all will be given to the subject.

        Just make sure the edges are ample. It's not rocket science.

        See? Make the parks bigger and they can't build to the edge of the old park, but only to the new boundary which is further away. Another problem solved via the internet with minimal effort.