• bolexforsoup@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    edit-2
    5 months ago

    You’re missing the forest for the trees and way over estimating how much pollution rocket launches put out.

    We have to leave the planet, which means we need to practice so to speak, and those rockets are the only way we are going to get out there right now. The pollution produced by them is well worth it.

    • laurelraven@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      5 months ago

      We need to leave the planet? For where?

      For a planet that’s completely incapable of sustaining life?

      Do you realize that it’ll take many, many orders of magnitude more resources, time, and effort to make literally any other celestial body within several years of space flight of us capable of sustaining life than it will be to fix the habitable planet we have right here?

      We’re not getting off this rock without stabilizing it enough to sustain us long-term first. And by then, we won’t need to leave. Either way, though, evacuating isn’t a viable solution.

      And if you don’t believe me, go talk to some biologists.

      • bolexforsoup@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        5 months ago

        Gotta do it eventually dude or this will be our grave.

        It’s strange to me that you can have the foresight to see the existential threat that is climate change, but not the risk of having all of our eggs in one basket.

        You’ve also moved the goalposts. Your original argument was that they pollute so much and use so many finite resources that they’re bad. Is this no longer your argument?

        You’re never going to convince me that space exploration is something we should stop.