Mike Solana

i appreciate any billionaire addition to the human potential club but this is extremely not true. there’s almost nothing of value on the moon and it can’t (practically speaking) be terraformed. given current technology, mars is the only way forward.https://twitter.com/trengriffin/status/1086740028951162881 …

Do you think it will be easier or harder to build an O'Neill cylinder than a Mars colony? If easier, then I think Moon makes more sense; can be used as supply depot and dry dock for manufacturing.

much much much harder. in terraforming, mars does most of the work itself. mainly what we need to do is warm the southern polar ice cap (frozen CO2).

from there, a runaway greenhouse effect builds an atmosphere and oceans. we start washing out perchlorate, seed the biome with plant life, and start building colonies.

Terraforming mars won't be easy, the atmosphere might not be able to retain air in high enough density. maybe even impossible, but i will take mars over the moon. Venus is underrated; it can sustain floating cities high up in its atmosphere, plus no concern for health like Mars.

And it's a readily available source for the gases we'd need for mars. We could basically create frozen missiles and launch them at Mars fm Venus. And gravity would be closer to Earth's.

I would not waste resources sending gases to mars. Use all that energy on venus surface to break down co2 in venus, and bring more water from asteroids or frozen moons in the giants gas planets.Terraforming venus would be hard, but not an unknown risk like mars(which is hard too)