[throwawayoaky]

> A settlement on Mars could conceivably preserve our cultures and current civilization in the face of such an event.

huh. most honest answer I've seen so far. "We're going to mars so we can later to go war with Earth, ideally when they are weak"

BTW Do you guys think building big chemical rockets just automatically advances your matsci/chem/bio timeline? It doesn't. That's the effect of massive government cheese.

Fun fact about the age of discovery: shit was already discovered. Domesticated food, fresh water, and abundant friends were already there.

The universe is bored of generating new challenges for your particular kind of aggressive. It has lots of fun new problems for people who are willing to work together though. Sorry.

[493579620678]

I'm not suggesting Mars should go to war with or colonize Earth after such an event, just that there may be value in our cultures and civilization continuing to exist somewhere. I could imagine how Mars may choose to do that, but I would consider that to be a bad thing.

Perhaps it would be better if our civilization ends in the event it destroys itself on Earth, but why should we assume what comes next will be better? How would being born out of an apocalypse affect a civilization?

[m4rtink]

Abundant friends were not always a given or would often not be friends anymore after repeated visits for some reason.