I found this piece pretty unimpressive.
"The tropics are awesome, we'd never survive at high latitudes, it takes too much technology." — some paleolith guy https://t.co/jmC6lGkTY8
— SafeNotAnOption (@SafeNotAnOption) October 28, 2015
I found this piece pretty unimpressive.
"The tropics are awesome, we'd never survive at high latitudes, it takes too much technology." — some paleolith guy https://t.co/jmC6lGkTY8
— SafeNotAnOption (@SafeNotAnOption) October 28, 2015
Comments are closed.
I just ignore pieces like this.
Sorry, but the article is right; living somewhere that’d require a large amount of engineering and energy just isn’t possible. That’s why Holland is entirely fictional; it’s all underwater. It’s also why all of Alaska is uninhabited, and why there’s no such place as Phoenix or Las Vegas.
We have no business colonizing Europe until we’ve colonized Mt. Kilimanjaro.
For a far, far more intelligent treatment of the same question, see Kim Stanley Robinson’s latest, “Aurora.”
Though it really is a downer.
Eh, at least it didn’t waste a lot of my time on pugs and ice is cold.
IMHO it could have used more pugs.
Living anywhere else in our solar system would require a huge amount of energy and engineering,
She is right on that point but I dislike the idea that people interested in space based activities, like colonization, want to escape Earth.
a huge amount of energy and engineering
Isn’t very specific and certainly not a deal breaker when you look at the details. Putting a habitat on mars into the temperate zone requires low tech solar panels, some batteries and heating elements. With a large enough habitat, they don’t even need a control system. Just plug in or out for comfort.
The only real hurdle is the cost per person to get them there.
That logjam is broken by mindset and creative financing. People create value where ever they go.
Engineering is not the problem (although over engineering may be?)