>>13897710>The same people who are "more credible" then I am said the shuttle would be cheap, safe, and reliableWow, your strawman really suck.
>because Elon said so...my eyes are rolling so hard they achieved orbital velocity.
>And I noticed you didn't even debate my actual claims - you accepted the fact that there will be a 1-5% increase in lifetime cancer riskFirst, do not put word in my mouth.
Second, that argument is retarded because the amount of protection you use is a variable you control. You could have a 0% increase on Mercury if you put up with the price. That's why there's no point debating those numbers.
The only thing worth debating is that there's no foreseeable cheap method of protection from (the very real) radiation that give the fantasy like "personal dome and pressurized radiation-proof car for every Martian and their kids in kid-sized spacesuit".
>In this thread the anti-mars people fired the first shots>first shotsOh because it's not about fact? It's about looking like you won over other?
If you were honest you would have admitted you were the one saying "Mars only",
Meanwhile you can reread all my arguments, all I've said/implied is that Mars is nowhere close to the New frontier meme the Mars-fag push.
There may be a few troll because you Mars-fag are so autistic you take any alternative way for colonization as an attack against your cherished Mars-based scenario.
So don't over-react because we shoot down the fantasy that let you pretend Colonizing Mars is the only or even best way.
>>13897733See above, and your point was sophistic. Plenty of people do argues for orbital colonies/space-mining, you were even desperate to try excluding Besos just because he didn't get lucky.
>>13897719You admit colonizing Mars have no profit motive but that Mars/Spacemining in Orbital station would bring something to the economy of Earth. By simple deduction reducing the cost of Lunar/Orbital mining operation will mean making them self-sufficient.
