Why we cannot allow the colonization of humans and life Mars. | by ...

Why we cannot allow the colonization of humans and life Mars.
Humans cannot live on Mars. This is a scientifically proven fact: humans cannot survive in a Martian environment or with that atmosphere. We can actually live nowhere, other than Earth, sustainably, and even that is up in the air. Human bodies are not suited for Mars; they will collapse and die instantly without support. Childhood hero Bill Nye said, “it’s not reasonable because it’s so cold. And there is hardly any water. There’s absolutely no food, and the big thing, I just remind these guys, there’s nothing to breathe” (Carbone). Mars is somewhat comparable to what Earth would have been like during the Ice age, but way worse and way more deadly. The surface of Mars will boil every ounce of liquid in a human body in seconds: the heat and radiation on the surface of Mars is infinitely more deadly than any natural exposure here on Earth (Stoner). Evidently, this is not a suitable environment for animals or even bacteria; humans should not try and risk a life in an environment that cannot provide for even the simplest of creatures (Carbone). Growing food or living on Mars would require confinement to domes. Having to step from one domain to another, it would be like living inside, never experiencing the outdoors, which does not seem like an ideal way to live (especially considering we have a perfect environment that can sustain humans at the moment). It is important that humans recognize this colossal risk: Mars is not habitable and never will be naturally, without human interference.
Living in endless domes
Going to Mars would be messy to say the least when the politics behind doing so are taken into full account. Accomplishing a massive mission like this would take international efforts, and even putting a team together would call for the incorporation of government agencies, private companies, environmental programs, and many others. Because of the numerous groups involved, it would be difficult to distribute the claims on land, stocks, and shares among them. Each group is going for very different reasons, for the governments, it would be to gain popularity among citizens, for private organizations it is to “broaden horizons” and develop human exploration (Azam). Consider that the Earth has already been divided into plots of land for different peoples and different needs; there is conflict over resources, governmental ties, and allegiances of people. To incorporate all of what is currently happening while trying to maintain a new civilization far from help or aid seems impractical if not impossible. With a project that fundamentally involves all aspects of life, one must consider the societal impacts that this will cause globally overtime. Each time humans do something extraordinary or revolutionary, there are impacts. For example, with the introduction of nuclear power, people became fearful and did not trust one another or the government. How will something like this make an impact on media, advertising, sports, technology, and overall culture? This will set up a new set of ideals and there is no way to know or prepare for how this might affect humans and relationships (Azam).
Broadly, when all is taken in to account, three things must happen in order for a project like this to even be conceivable. It needs international cooperation, economic growth and stable funding for resources, and enabling technologies (Azam). Technology seems to be a small concern seeing as humans are steadily progressing further to keep people safe, transport people, and live outside of a terrestrial environment. If it is not yet advanced enough, it probably will be in the near future. However, regarding economic growth, we are decades away from being in a position where humans and the world are able to maintain a stable economy long enough to pool resources from it that can provide equipment, food, and aid to those living on Mars. Additionally, tensions are currently rising among international counterparts. At this point, no one can commit to political ties strong enough to cooperate peacefully and unselfishly in this project. Additionally, financially, who is really going to be reaping the benefits of making it to Mars? If all Americans are paying taxes that are going into a space travel fund, how many of them will be able to travel to space and be a part of this? If we are leaving to have a fresh start and create a new society, then who is involved in this process, who gets to say who is more worthy to participate in this “escape” (Stemwedel)? Even if humans do colonize Mars, it will not be for much, much longer, for society is far from ready for the commitments it would entail.
Prospective mining on the moon
One of the most appealing aspects of colonizing Mars is to utilize it’s natural resources: things like natural gasses, iron, titanium, nickel, the list goes on. Not only are these valuable, but they are also extraordinarily easy to harvest. This is because they are not trapped in the bottom of gravity wells like most planets, but they are on the surface and accessible (Stoner). This, although seemingly beneficial, does not give a reason as to why humans must actually colonize Mars in order to benefit from its resources. It would be more efficient, energetically and financially, to set up a mining system that does not require full colonization. Finally, the same resources found on Mars are found on our moon (also Earth, although most of the resources here have been expended), where it would be easier, cheaper, and safer to instead harvest them. Why, then, is this not being taken into account as a viable, perhaps much better, alternative? Even though humans can take from their moon, many people have qualms about digging into such an important aspect of their life. Will disrupting the moon affect human life on Earth? These precautions are taken very seriously because it is easy to see the effects doing so may have on human life. However, when considering digging into Mars, humans lack an understanding of its direct and indirect effects on the Earth, and therefore disregard those same worries that they feel for digging into the moon (Stoner). Although there are benefits to mining and harvesting resources are Mars, it appears to be unwise to focus the efforts on an entire colonization in place of a system for mere extraction of minerals.
In a system where there are no lifeforms, attempting to colonize or even transport objects into space would introduce mass amounts of bacteria and microbes that contaminate this space. When Elon Musk first announced his SpaceX project, introducing a formal plan for what a colonization on Mars would look like, he launched a car and a test dummy into the atmosphere, a feat named by scientists as the “largest load of earthly bacteria to ever enter space” (Bharmal). A few issues arise when considering this, one being that we will then be changing the biosphere in which this bacteria is living and growing, which may lead to a number of mutations that could be uncontrollable. We have no way of knowing how our impacts will create long term effects on the plants and animals introduced on Mars. Even exposing living things to radiation or other extreme conditions can change its cells, neurons, and many other biological aspects (Bharma). With that, going to an entirely new environment could have repercussions that we cannot know or even predict at this time. Can humans really risk contaminating space for personal gain? An additional biological concern is that humans may be stunting the development of Mars. We currently have no proof that life currently exists, but with the newfound discovery of water, it is likely that indigenous life could survive there. If it has not yet happened, the biome may soon working towards supporting and growing life forms (Stemwedel). If humans step in during this process, we will be destroying what has been set up naturally. It would be nearly impossible to distinguish what is indigenous to Mars and what is from Earth, or even what has mutated from Earth to Mars and vice versa. Humans would be distributing a natural cycle and possible developing ecosystem. It would be a travesty to know that humans ruined any chance of self-forming, natural, life forms on Mars, even if it is only bacteria.
Our planet has been sustaining life for billions and billions of years, must we take the first flight out of here and abandon the ultimate benefactress? Humans must accept that they have caused significant harm to the planet and work to resolve our current issues. We cannot use Mars as an escape route or a second chance. Elon Musk argued that humans must have a plan in case of asteroids or intense danger that requires humans to leave. This means people are choosing between fixing the planet that we already live on and working towards a new planet that currently cannot support human life. Humans feel they have an obligation to provide long term survival of this species in case an asteroid hits us, like the dinosaurs before us, or in the event that we face environmental destruction (Stoner). Being on Mars will actually bring us closer to deadly nearby supernovae and the risk of being hit by an asteroid is just as high, if not higher. We could protect the human race by taking significant measures here on Earth to save us from radiation, asteroids, or other significant dangers (Stoner). It would take trillions of dollars to colonize Mars, but if we instead channelled that into what we already are capable of living on, we would be resolving more current and pressing issues. Humans would be safer in large underground bunkers on Earth than being transported to a planet that we do not even know if it can sustain life (Bharmal). Is it fair for humans to escape the damage that they provided to this planet? With the oncoming evidences of environmental destruction, humans are beginning to fear for the future, however, few are working to make a significant difference. Leaving Earth would be like taking a shortcut that would lead us to a dead end, literally. Without learning any different, what will stop humans from destroying the Martian environment, will anything make them any different from how we treat Earth? Like in Wall-E, humans would leave their planet of trash, avoiding fixing their problems, only to later return to a planet of filth. Colonizing Mars would lead to a legacy of cowardness and the inability to accept and resolve massive issues.
In attempting to colonize Mars, humans would have to pool international resources into a politically and economically charged project, potentially eradicate a developing biosphere, and garner an excuse to neglect the environmental impacts on Earth today. Instead, it would be wiser to work on current issues such as creating a stable economy and cooperating with other nations. We should focus on living on this planet and work to improve quality of life here instead of funding research projects to allow life on Mars. Attention and technology should instead be improving with the efforts of creating a more sustainable life and governments should be enforcing the growth of our planet, not its deterioration. Whatever source you believe in, whether that is fate, God or Gods, divinity, chance and coincidence, or even just science, it brought humanity to Earth: a planet that is sufficient and loving to our needs. By denying this, we are denying a much larger deity or idea. Mars does not need to be colonized, instead, let us continue to colonize the world we currently live in and on.