The Instigator
Con (against)
4 Points
The Contender
Pro (for)
4 Points

Should humans colanize mars?

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 2 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 11/4/2015 Category: Places-Travel
Updated: 11 months ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 446 times Debate No: 82059
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (0)
Votes (2)




I never understood why humans wanted to go start a nation on Mars. Mars is far too cold to sustain any possible crops that humans could grow for food. All of the stuff people on a Mars colonization would have to import everything from Earth. The atmosphere of mars gives off very little gravity in comparison of Earth, meaning that a lot of our stuff that we would bring to Mars would have to be nailed to the floor, least it floats away.


Humans have for a long time wanted to explore and possibly colonise Mars. This is not because Mars just seems like such a nice place to be, because it"s not. As you mentioned, Mars is cold, hospitable and has gravity issues for us humans. But the exploration of Mars is more a monumental scientific feat. Colonising Mars would give us valuable information regarding the sustainability of life, the possibility to explore life from its very beginning and learning how to create environments that can support it.

We have discovered planets in other solar systems that show environments that are even greater suited for human life but until the technology is available to reach these planets, Mars can be the largest and most useful test site in the world, just imagine creating the technologies to terraform and sustain life on Mars and then bringing it to a planet better suited for our life.

Finally, there is the main reason people want to explore the possibility of colonising Mars is the simple fact that were not taking care of our planet very well; we've had industrial disasters that have made parts of our environment uninhabitable, we are speeding the effects of climate change through our reckless burning of fossil fuels, we have allowed cities to become so saturated with industry that we can"t even see the sun and we are constantly running out of precious land mass for agriculture and homes for our ever expanding population.

Humanity will always find a way to sustain ourselves and right now Mars is our best shot.
Debate Round No. 1


Just because we CAN, does not mean we SHOULD. What we should do regarding our planet is just take better care of it. And we cant "create an environment that can support us" its not a simple thing. You cant just throw some chemicals in a planet's atmosphere and make it be able to sustain life over night. if that was the case, we would have done that YEARS ago. Now, i want to clarify that small, 20-ish people colonies with imports from Earth MIGHT be able to make it. But when i say "Humans should not colonize Mars", i mean having millions upon millions of people living on the planet. Maybe in a few hundred-thousand years we can do it, but not now.


While it's true that we should take better care of our planet, we have a higher chance of colonising another planet than getting all countries to cooperate with the same environmental regulation. There is also the fact that we have damaged our ecosystem beyond repair and were past the point of "taking better care", all we can do is delay our planets inevitable demise. I also stated, population growth is a present and ever expanding issue, we simply wont have enough space on this planet in the future.

Of course creating environments is not a simple thing, but you know what else was not a simple thing? Growing a human organ on a mouse, discovering the higgs boson particle, creating a limitless network of information capable of travelling at the speed of light, landing a man on the moon. This cynical approach to scientific development will get us nowhere, we have achieved things that people never thought possible, and we never would have if we assumed it couldn't be done or it was too difficult

Just because we can, does not mean we should, we need to and that's why we will.
Debate Round No. 2


Your absolutely correct. Our planets demise is now inevitable, but hey, so is Mars. For that matter this entire galaxy is going to blow in 5 billion years anyway when the sun blows up. Not only that, but I will keep my basis that we CAN and eventually WILL. But NOT NOW, that is my biggest point. Lets live on Earth for as long as we can before we go move to Mars.


Yes, Mars will eventually go away but, Mars is only the first step, it"s a chance for us to develop the tools necessary to colonise all worlds in the future, even those that are beyond our solar system. We need to start somewhere and Mars is our best shot right now, especially considering the recent discoveries.

The thing is if we put this problem off, we won"t be able to leave when we really need to. As you yourself have stated, this would be a very difficult and time consuming task, if we don"t figure this out now, we won"t be able to when we desperately need to.

In conclusion, our mission to Mars is driven by the fact that Mars is an appealing travel destination, it"s driven by the want for scientific discovery, the necessity of distributing our people and resources and preparation for a better future.

Thanks for this debate
Debate Round No. 3
No comments have been posted on this debate.
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by Tmurdock 11 months ago
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:41 
Reasons for voting decision: other solutions and best thought out
Vote Placed by HomelySherlock 11 months ago
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro's arguments were more convincing.