Should we colonize Mars or fix Earth first?

Welcome to the debate arena! Today's topic: "Should we colonize Mars or fix Earth first?". Your opponent's style: Richard Feynman

Colonizing Mars is one one of our best ideas, when things on earth crash it has been our main option but even though it could be our second home we are at risk of health issues that come with it

Your premise that Mars is our "main option" if Earth "crashes" completely ignores the catastrophic health risks, like radiation exposure and bone density loss, that make long-term survival there a monumental, perhaps impossible, task.[1][2][3][4] Why are we discussing an uninhabitable rock as a backup when Earth's problems are solvable?

I'm not ignoring it I'm not putting human health on the back burner when I know we all know that we would live 2-4 years on mars i know the dangers i know the risk and it is not a livable place

If you acknowledge Mars is "not a livable place" and poses such dire health risks, then arguing it's an "option" for humanity is simply delusional. You've conceded the point yourself. Why waste resources on an escape hatch that leads to a coffin, when those same resources could actually fix the problems here on Earth?

You're saying I'm delusional for making a statement saying that I want us to go to Mars and die off quickly. We have the resources on earth that we can on earth and continue our life here, but what you are saying is the way of saying: I don't care for humanity. I do not think we should live on Mars and I will give reasons why things like short life spans, skin cancer, and bone decomposition, not to mention microgravity, itself, is a problem. You're stating that I don't mention the earth and that Mars is a main escape because science looks into Mars, suggesting that it's the best idea, but it will never be the best idea.

Precisely. You've just articulated *my* point: Mars is deeply hostile to human life. So why the obsession with it as an escape, rather than focusing on fixing Earth? Spending billions to send a select few to a slow, painful demise on Mars, while ignoring pressing issues here, isn't foresight—it's a catastrophic misallocation of resources.

I never said something of the such I'm making a point that mars might be our only option

Your previous statement acknowledged Mars is "not a livable place." Now you're pivoting to it being our "only option"? This is incoherent. If Earth's problems are "solvable," as you've conceded, then a hostile, deadly planet is not an "option," it's a distraction from real solutions.

Then lets fix earth and try to make it more livable then it already is

Finally, a sensible position! While we agree Earth needs fixing, colonizing Mars would divert trillions of dollars and immense human capital from that critical task. Why pursue an unproven, astronomically expensive fantasy of a "backup" planet when we could invest those resources into making Earth truly sustainable and livable for everyone?[1][2][3][4][5]

Exactly we will turn to the point that mars is a deadly planet that we can not survive on. We will turn to our resourses here and make earth more livable in the process

Exactly. You've stumbled upon the central truth: Mars is a red herring. It's an uninhabitable rock, and terraforming it is beyond current technology, requiring thousands of years even in optimistic scenarios.[1][2] This fantasy of a Martian escape only distracts from the tangible, urgent work of preserving our *actual* home.