Colonising Mars is unlikely and a bad idea

The best I could find as to why colonizing mars is unlikely:

> But according to a new study, published in Nature Astronomy, Mars has lost so much of its potential greenhouse gases to space over billions of years that there is now no possibility of transforming the remaining atmosphere into a breathable one with available technology.

... of course terraforming Mars would be difficult with available technology. Certainly the author doesn't imagine technological process standing still?

On the second stipulation, that colonizing Mars is a "bad idea," could we please get there first then figure out the ethical issues? Does the author really think we should have a perfectly correct ethical plan of moving off of the planet?

And nothing in the article indicates why terraforming is unfeasible, except the caveat of "with available technology."

* Potential life after recent detection of suspected liquid deep water

* Not enough reserves of gases remaining to eventually thicken the atmosphere

* Lack of a magnetic field to preserve the remaining and new atmosphere if created

1. Life has always been possible on Mars. The discovery of liquid water improves this but doesn’t affect possible colonization efforts. Short term, people will be setting up to survive either on or near the surface. It will be important to stay away from such areas except for study, but that doesn’t preclude human settlement efforts.

2. Terraforming in any form is a long term (centuries) goal. The state of the atmosphere won’t degrade in anymore significant way in the mean time. There are more than enough resources in the solar system to import material if that ever becomes a goal for Martians.

3. There are proposals already for satellites in Lagrange points between Mars and the Sun to generate artificial magnetic fields to slow down and prevent the stripping of the atmosphere. By the time technology like this is required, millions of people will already be living there for at least a century or more.

So overall the gist of the article would be like telling colonists to the Western Hemisphere in the 1500’s that it’s not worth trying because building a highway across the continent is impossible with current technology. While true at the time, there was no need for such a long term goal back then and wasn’t for centuries.

Plus one thing about Mars is that no one’s there to displace. Scientifically I care a lot about planetary protection and discovering if life exists there, but that is ultimately less important than colonizing Mars. It’s not like it’s going to spring complex life on its own and we would ruin those chances. It’s a planet’s worth of gravity and natural resources that aren’t going to do anything on their own.

Technically we could theoretically recreate a magnetosphere and import gases from other sources but calling it recordbreakingly expensive would be a massive understatement. Even attempting it calls for a degree of megalomania.

Truth be told, lots of people would be interested in giving it a shot. This leaves the idea in a space of political hazard, as a high risk zone for cults of various flavors, each according to leaders that manage to establish themselves or stir vectors of internal influence.