> The best time to start terraforming a planet is 500 years ago.
For context, it took an estimated three-quarters of a billion years to oxygenate Earth's atmosphere. Even a speed-run of that is ... considerably longer than a few centuries.
The best time to start terraforming a planet is never. The idea is as absurd as a Dyson sphere/swarm. People should really grow beyond sci-fi ideas that were last fresh in the 1930's.
To your point, one of the most remarkable things I've read about both Mars and Venus, is that there was a time billions of years ago when they had more moderate temperatures and liquid water.
In a way, it's a tragedy that human civilization has only emerged at a time when both Mars and Venus have become much more uninhabitable than they used to be.
Probably because the period where the three (or even Earth and another) of them were inhabitable enough to sustain a technological civilization was very small, if it happened at all.
I’m only 1% serious, but how do we know for sure which direction evolution went in within the ape family?
It seems not entirely unplausible that we have at some point in the scientific chain of custody assumed the “lesser” apes “evolved into” the “more advanced” human.
But a species could easily branch and have the branch lose its geographic portability features (e.g.ability to manipulate environment, most exogenous behavior learning-based) if they are no longer selected for in a particular environment, and I’m not aware of anything in the fossil record that firmly establishes directionality. Am I wrong?
