By extension it would give more of an excuse for the top 1% to give even less of a fck about earth and the climate. Next thing you'd see is all the rich bailing to another planet while those who can't afford it are left with what's left of earth and the hellscape they left behind (and probably still have more agency over earth than those still living on there).

This is not risk free. When you give people access to space and still have terrorism and wars, things can end badly quickly.

There's also a valid argument around where to best focus those resources now. We are nowhere near ready for space colonization on any scale, let alone sustainable ones.

A City on Mars by the Wienersmiths dives into some of these challenges if you are interested.

Our bodies are simply not made to leave earth for a long period. It's a lofty goal but completely unrealistic when considering our biology has evolved specifically to live here.

Has no one learned anything from War of the Worlds?

Also, remember how humanity really messed things up when we started colonising other parts of our globe? We brought disease, we murdered and we polluted.

If you can make people survive on Mars, you're more than able to make pockets of humanity survive those disasters on Earth

Bananas make for a terrible time value storage in the real world

In donkey Kong country tho? He who controls bananas controls the universe

The limit is our distance from the Sun. After a certain point the greenhouse gasses can't make up for the fact that we just get less radiation than Venus does. The maximum potential I've seen is 10°C - almost all life would go extinct and we'd have to live on the tropical Antarctic archipelago, but not Venus.

Everything find equilibrium eventually. I'm sure any limits for a runaway situation depend on a lot of factors, but their ceilings are all far above anything we could tolerate. Runaway doesn't mean there's no point to level out, only that at the time it's not controllable and escalating fast.

The last "runaway" situation the Earth had was called the Paleocene–Eocene Thermal Maximum (PETM) 56 million years ago and globally had a 5-8 degree Celsius rise over thousands of years. That might be a good example of a natural situation and its limits. Keep in mind the differences in rate, we're increasing the global temperature faster than the PETM (or anything we've found in geological history) so we don't know how that faster rate will act in determining a peak. There's theories of pushing the Earth into a hothouse world that would have its own equilibrium that is far hotter than we can survive.

No way. Is that really happening? The magnetic poles are flipping the 2040s? How often does that happen? Old compasses won't be correct? Will it affect anything else (Aurora Borealis?, etc?)

I'm plumb flummoxed.

Maggy for short, I'm sure of it.

If people and government really cared that much about it, we all would be living in a totalitarian planetary government, controlling by the milligram every expense that is not calorically viable to post culling population of billions.

Either or they ALL would be pumping up so much nuclear centrals that we be drowning on the almost free energy

Either that, or they ALL would be pushing for the creation and implementation of a totally viable lunar base to construct a full orbital cache of microwave solar emitters, with the accompanying swarm of orbital mirrors to reduce the sun's impact on the atmosphere

We see advance in neither of those

So yeah who's bullshitting who. I know they don't care and don't have to pretend like they do

Your pathological need to believe a blatant lie due to your own powerlessness? That's all on you

Yes , you're right. The red giant will consume the Earth.

We won't be alive if there's a mass Exodus from earth, but is that even possible?

Probably not