Show newer

@fm
Is it better to infest other planets and risking destruction of few alien cells, or to keep Mars clean, but risk the Life itself?

@LukeAlmighty So the idea is not to not infest other planets with our life, although I am sure for some delusional maniacs this is there, but that supposing life exists there and we have not found it, it would be a loss to science and destruction of a habitat if we contaminate it without discovering it.

Also plants cannot grow on Mars, not outside, not in the soil.

@fm
About the plants not being able to grow on mars:
Not all of them, obviously. But I am sure we know at least of some that could.

And that leads me to my main point. We have not yet discovered a single cell on another planet. And while we can speculate all we want, until we find life on another planet, there is a HUGE posibility that life is truly something unique for reasons we do not yet grasp.

That being said, we can change that. A single rocket to Mars or Europa could ensure, that if Senile Joe presses a button tomorow, and we manage to scoarch the entire planet to the last cell, the life itself will continue. And I am pissed that we refuse to ensure something that important.

@LukeAlmighty

And so, on fediverse, earth chauvinism became a thing. It was based. And red pilled.

I am so pissed at NASA.

I get it that creating a human colony is a herculean feat, but we already do know what plants could live on mars as well as how to get there.

All it would take to make life itself multi-planetary would be 1 rocket.

Yet, instead of doing this one simple thing, NASA is doing everything it can to "NOT infest" other planets with our liveforms... :blob_facepalm:

@mystik >You accepted to become human, with all that that means.

What the hell that I “accepted” to become human? BS.

@battlepenguin

Show older
Game Liberty Mastodon

Mainly gaming/nerd instance for people who value free speech. Everyone is welcome.