Terraforming

Why put a station at an L-point? It's my understanding that only L4 and L5 can be maintained without adjustment propultion, and they're really not any better than looking from Earth. I'd say just put it in orbit.

In any case, I doubt anyone is seriously thinking about establishing a long term space-based colony so far from Earth for the short term. If something goes wrong, you have fewer backup options than if you're on solid ground. Perhaps, once spacecraft with ion drives become reality, but when it's a multi-month trip, terra firma is comforting.

I meant in the Earth/Moon system, and was simply pointing out that we didn't have to colonize Mars before having people taking pleasure trips there, was the point of my previous post.

I also agree that this type of thing is quite a ways into the future, as we don't understand enough of how to counteract low/no gravity effects on the human body (and low gravity has only recently begun testing).

I seem to be having a serious problem with communicating clearly, heh. Probably too scatter-brained posting at work...

Any natural beauty of Mars would be out of range of the masses unless we colonize it.

On the contrary. Any natural beauty of the planet would be diminished by colonization. When I say natural beauty, I don't mean something that we can see and admire. I mean the beauty that is inherent to nature -- inherent to the way "God" set things up. Other factors notwithstanding, I think that's something worth preserving in itself. Colonization would simply adulterate Mars, destroying God's art with it.

Small price to pay in the quest for knowledge, though.

I'd be for it even if there were alien lifeforms. RL Starcraft ...MJ can drive a siege tank.

Yes, but my arguement is that it is out of range to be appreciated in its current state. If it were colonized (or near-Mars space), only then could it be fully appreciated.

Perhaps I've been using the wrong word. You are, of course, correct in your argument. We could not fully appreciate the beauty of any celestial object without being in its vicinity. We may not even be able to do so without interfering with its natural setting. But by beauty, I didn't mean anything aesthetically appealing to any of the five sense. I meant that there is something magnificently exceptional about it which should remain undisturbed. I suppose I should have used the term exceptional rather than beautiful.

Towards D3V, KA, and Jizmo: This is why I write the way I do. I don't do it to be pedantic. This is a prime example of what happens when you use ambiguous terms. Had I used the term "exceptional" rather than "beautiful," it would have saved me an entire paragraph.

I'd be for it even if there were alien lifeforms. RL Starcraft ...MJ can drive a siege tank.

ROFL! Would be an interesting ride.

Perhaps I've been using the wrong word. You are, of course, correct in your argument. We could not fully appreciate the beauty of any celestial object without being in its vicinity. We may not even be able to do so without interfering with its natural setting. But by beauty, I didn't mean anything aesthetically appealing to any of the five sense. I meant that there is something magnificently exceptional about it which should remain undisturbed. I suppose I should have used the term exceptional rather than beautiful.

Exactly, I'm decidedly torn between feeling like you do and feeling that it just stands in the path of scientific progress, which has the potential to teach us many things in regard to planetary evolution and so on.

I'm not sure how I feel about our changing the natural order of things on an interplanetary scale. I suppose in the context I presented a day or two ago, that if this became an issue tomorrow, I would be against us changing the aspects of another planet because we still have a lot to learn about taking care of our own planet first.

I have nothing against terraforming and colonizing planets. Our species is a plague ...but I gotta say I'm quite fond of it =P. If we are ever to mature into something really great we just need more time.

By that logic, there is something exceptional about each of our bodies that shouldn't be disturbed, but people still cover it with makeup and tattoos, mutilate it with piercings and surgery; for the most part, these things are socially acceptable. How much more is noone going to care about your arguements about something they will never see with their own eyes?