A sound-bite argument from Charlie Young, an ex-Rocket Engineer (yeah!), on off-Earth colonization as a means of saving ourselves…

The long term survival of the human race is a topical issue which is gathering media pace - perhaps due to the effects we are having on this, our only planet? So, is survival of our species beyond Earth important?

Previously, human Space exploration was poorly justified except by ego, the appeal of technical wowiness, and an urge to push human endurance to new levels. It was risky, expensive and time and distance limited. Robots, however, were more durable, didn't suffer disease or neuroses and were generally compliant for years on end.

Times are a-changing though, earthlings, and as a species we have entered a unique epoch of human development - we have both the technology to explore Space and the technology to realize our vulnerability. The risk of a strike on Earth from an NEO (Near Earth Object) is no fallacy (but no occasion for Hollywoodesque scaremongering either) - the likelihood of death by air-crash or death by high speed interstellar iron are not that remarkably different. This is sufficient reason for promoting research into off-Earth colonization: on asteroids, the Moon or on Mars. Since NASA, China and India all want to rub their toes in the dusty seas of the Moon, colonization is an inevitable goal; only the questions of 'when’ and ‘how?' remain. Can we, as a planetary community, achieve such goals? And can the dreams of the adventurers outweigh the power mania of the politicians running this planet?

Further reading: Pale Blue Dot, Carl Sagan, 1993