>>16536907
>least healthiest, place for human-type-organisms
eugenics via genetic engineering permitted by a free market solves this
>large space habitat would ever be more cost effective than simply building an encased dome
Planet>Space is cheaper than Planet>Space>Planet
Future niches allowed by a free market market will exist there. In the same way not everyone lived in the town with the steel works, some stayed on farms - as the market dictated.
>I'd also extend this criticism to "Generation Ships".
I don't think there's ever going to be any point
Venture capitalists will be allowed to waste their money any way they choose in the future free market civilization that space faring man will become.
>Simply because the resources you'd use to make one could be used to terraform our own planet into a 'better' planet
Building a glorified ISS costs much less than transforming the moon. Time resource alone is much less.
>threatened by a meteor
Cost a pittance to a future civilization economically suited to building decent sized o'neill cylinders. We could do that with todays technology.
>more than enough time to develop some method to move faster than the speed of light.
People still sail the ocean despite aircraft. Also assumes FTL is possible.

You're thick. Watch more Isaac Arthur.

Back | Go to board

Board:

/sci/

Thread:

Sciebtifically speaking, when if ever might me have o'neill cylinders and stanford torus habitats in space?