Asklemmy

43908 readers

1087 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy 🔍

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

Open-ended question
Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

Lemmyverse: community search
sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
!lemmy411@lemmy.ca: a community for finding communities

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~

founded 5 years ago

MODERATORS

135

On a low gravity planet, would it make more sense to build habitat domes or habitat sky-scrapers? (lemmy.ca)

submitted 1 year ago by lazylion_ca@lemmy.ca to c/asklemmy@lemmy.ml

44 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] pensivepangolin@lemmy.world 16 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Renounce the sky; become mole people.

[–] neshura@bookwormstory.social 7 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Just more proof that dwarves are the best humanoids.

[–] Cinner@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

Now I know next to nothing about it, but listening to the Art Bell Tape Vault and other alien/conspiracy theory/etc podcasts I know that one of the big theories popular amongst some in the UFO community is that the intelligence behind UFOs is some kind of breakaway civilization that survived one of the last cataclysms on Earth and kept advancing.