My point was not to debate the details of a mars colonization scheme, but to point out that you’re doing a disservice to your own side of the argument by employing strawman and ad hominem arguments.
And like, hey, I agree with you and disagree with Musk But from what I know about him, calling him an idiot can only make you look bad. He has no formal aerospace engineering but he intimidates the rocket scientists at SpaceX. This is not a dumb guy, and he’s put a lot of thought into mars colonization.
Musk acknowledges pretty much all the challenges you cite, arguing that it’s still worth the try even if success is an extreme long-shot. And this is a guy who has already pulled off some incredible long-shots in his career – his concrete accomplishments in the real world lend his side of the argument credibility that some internet rando simply cannot hope to match.
So you’re not in a good position to argue that what he’s trying to do is stupid because it’s impossible. You could maybe argue that the attempt at mars colonization actively harms the earth and that’s why it’s a bad idea – that’s the tack I would take myself. But you’re arguing that it’s a bad idea because it’s hard and won’t work, and given that Musk acknowledges it’s hard and is trying anyway for moral reasons, that just makes you look like a sour grapes wanna-be instead of an intelligent and informed critic.
I don’t want my position – that we are creatures and not robots, and that we belong on earth not in space – to be written off as the position of sour grapes wanna-be losers, so I humbly beg you: find some better arguments.
