Everything about Mars is the worst (2017)

Moon vs Mars for Near-Term Habitation

• Many argue the Moon is a far better first target than Mars: only days away, real-time communication, emergency resupply possible, and tourism is at least plausible.
• Proposed lunar advantages: peaks of (near) eternal light for continuous solar, potential lava tubes for radiation-shielded habitats, easier construction of large telescopes and spacecraft in low gravity, and mass drivers / gun launch for exporting materials.
• Mars is seen by many as a “worst of both worlds”: poisonous perchlorate dust, near-vacuum pressure, weak sunlight plus dust storms, no magnetic field, significant radiation, unknown effects of 0.38g on long‑term health, and huge distance / launch-window constraints.

Venus Cloud Cities and Terraforming Concepts

• Some prefer Venus at high altitude: near‑Earth pressure and temperature, strong solar flux, potential for balloons / “cloud cities” using plastics like HDPE or PTFE, with breathable air as lifting gas.
• More speculative ideas: giant sunshades to cool and partially terraform Venus, using Venus platforms as power stations, or even retirement colonies exploiting 0.9g gravity.
• Skeptics question economic purpose, political stability, and vulnerability to Earth-based crises or attack.

Space Habitats, Asteroids, and Cislunar Space

• Strong current for “skip planets, build orbitals”: O’Neill cylinders and asteroid mining seen as more flexible than planetary gravity wells.
• Cislunar space and near‑Earth asteroids suggested as prime industrial zones; planets and moons mainly as science or staging sites.

Radiation, Dust, and Health

• Mars and Moon both pose significant radiation risks; underground habitats are repeatedly proposed.
• Lunar and Martian dust are viewed as severe engineering and health hazards.
• Long-term effects of partial gravity (Moon/Mars) are unknown; ISS microgravity data may not extrapolate.

Energy and Nuclear Power Off‑World

• Debate over lunar nuclear reactors: moonquakes seen as manageable; lack of biosphere and water table reduces meltdown consequences.
• Others stress maintenance burden and historical issues (e.g., Antarctic reactor); modern remote/robotic operation could help.
• Some favor solar at lunar peaks of eternal light over nuclear, at least initially.

Mars as Backup vs Earth-Based Resilience

• “Backup civilization on Mars” is widely challenged: a self‑sufficient Martian colony is seen as vastly harder than robust Earth bunkers or even an Antarctic colony.
• Counterpoint: redundancy on another world—even if initially fragile—is still better than a single‑planet species, especially for some low‑probability disasters.

Motivations, Economics, and Psychology

• Many doubt any near‑term economic case for Mars (or Venus) colonies; extraction and export to Earth look uneconomic.
• Others defend exploration for its own sake, technological spinoffs, and “because it’s there” human drive, while acknowledging high risk and likely long timelines.