Note, I'm only addressing the "lifeboat" justification, I still think sending folks to Mars would be cool as hell.
No, it wouldn't. That would make the Earth much less hospitable than it is now, but still much more hospitable than Mars.
> It might wipe out all humans on Earth.
This is not evidence of being less hospitable than Mars, since humans cannot survive on Mars. Even at the worst point of this disaster, human life would be easier on Earth than on Mars under normal Martian conditions.
This concept always feels slightly strange to me. Earth does not "recover" from anything, nor does anything that we or an asteroid could do "damage" Earth. Make it less hospitable for us, sure!
But Earth itself has always been constantly changing due to external and internal forces, sometimes at a rapid rate and always at a slow rate, and none of that change is fundamentally positive or negative to Earth itself.
Especially considering timeframes needed to improve Mars, vs timeframe to get past initial post nuclear war issues, which are likely not as bad as the worst case scenarios we've been taught about.
Also, I always found it interesting that the people that are so scared of us changing/destroying the world with nuclear war, are the same ones that don't think twice about basically doing the same thing (drastic manmade change) to another planet.
Or that they think it would somehow be easier than a similar feat of geo engineering to repair earth, either post climate change or nuclear war.
... but we're doing the best we can!
Not to mention that innovations derived from space exploration do end up in applications here on earth.
> Not to mention that innovations derived from space exploration do end up in applications here on earth.
That’s part of the bias towards space. Plenty of innovations derived from other large technological developments and projects end up in unanticipated applications. This effect is not unique to space technology development and is not necessarily a strong argument for its funding. A huge swath of modern technology comes from defense spending. Should we increase the defense budget?
Again, my comment was more of a lament in the way treat and view the ocean.
I agree with your sentiment but as best I understand, the race to get to Mars is
i) to provide redundancy for the species should things turn further to shit here, by our own hand or not
ii) we are in somewhat of a race against time to escape our own solar system before our sun burns out, and Mars is a milestone in that venture
"Why go to the moon when people are starving in Africa??"
"Why go to Mars when there are weird creatures in the sea??"
What the heck.
There are over 10 massive breweries local to where I live, and I have never even considered visiting a single one of them.
Same typically goes for the using/living near a beach and using/owning a pool.
If you are interested in finding out more about octopus evolution and intelligence I recommend: " Other Minds: The Octopus and the Evolution of Intelligent Life" by Peter Godfrey-Smith.
"My octopus teacher" on Netflix is also well worth a watch.
"X is just mostly..." is a reliable way to begin a falsehood.
Human beings as a species have shown the inability to even cohabit a 5 square mile space peacefully let alone colonize other worlds.
Better to stay here and explore and study the wonders of nature. We have yet to even understand how a simple protein evolves to produce all this wonderful life and consciousness and brains....
It is literally the entire universe out there that is waiting to be explored :)