Who wants to live on a red cold desert or an airless grey dusty rock if you can build magnificent cloud cities on Fucking Venus.
Benefits:
> closer to the earth
> unlimited solar power
> air is lighter than overall CO2 atmosphere, optimum for floating cities
> sulfuric acid rich clouds an be broken into water, oxygen and sulfur for fuel, fertilizer, water and air
probably colder than africa, let throw nias there
How we finna build those floating cities nigga?
Just bring shit from Earth
What exactly are people going to do in these cities?
Farm, Research, Set up trade between Earth and Venus. Maybe start a Scramble of Venus
Why not set up a farm somewhere, say, in Idaho?
>you can literally breathe the air without processing
>you have drinkable water falling from the sky
>a good portion of the year you can walk outside in nothing but light clothes
Wow. Earth is an amazing planet. We should colonize that
You may see a proper Mars colony someday in your lifetime. You'll probably never see a Venus colony in your lifetime, even if they start working on it right now.
And by colony I mean like a small city with people working in it, not a small lab with only scientists in it doing experiments(to be fair, almost all of the people in the small city would be scientists as well, but I think you get what I mean).
So Mars colony is a better option for us I think. We'll at least see it happen when we're old. And who knows, maybe some anons will en up there and post from the interplanetary interwebs.
Colonising non-habitable planets is pants on head retarded anyway. Why is no one seriously talking about rotating asteroid habitats/oneill cylinders?
Technically, user, there is no point in colonizing anything. We can do experiments on Mars and Venus by building labs on it with humans n shit without really colonizing it majorly. Or we can build better and smarter robots to do everything for us.
Only real reason I can think of major colonization is overpopulation on Earth, which isn't a problem at the moment (despite what media tells you).
Colonization, from a scientific point of view, is only useful once we go to exoplanets and shit. All the "space labs" and "fueling stations" can be set up on planets without having small sized cities on it.
Colonization doesn't do anything to reduce overpopulation on Earth since it takes more resources to send someone to space than to keep him alive on Earth.
Once we build a more efficient way to send people to space, or once we stop using fossil fuels in our lives, there's no point in breeding until the breaking point of the planet. You either send small groups away or you start regulating child birth like China did.
How to stop overpopulation of earth
>Stop foreign aid to Africa
Job done.
who wants to live on the surface of a planet when you can live on an O'neill cylinder
>no one seriously talking about rotating asteroid habitats/oneill cylinders
its cheaper and easier too
Trade what? If Venus isn't giving anything they aren't trading, they're taking.
A Venus colony would be the ultimate group of gimmedats.
If we could find and tow the correct asteroid into orbit we could make an almost self sufficient 1g habitat with existing technology. Fuck Mars, Musk is a moron.
shit, if we had the ability to manufacture things in space, we could have doneit with tech from a few decades ago
the original O'Neil cylinder was supposed to be made from run of the mill steel
Problem is that doesn't get you anywhere. Now you have a big space station that cost a few trillion and can house maybe a few thousand people who are doing what exactly? Not really anything. O'Neill cylinders only work in a post-scarcity society where things and resources are so abundant that we can justify building massive dead-end space habitats for the fuck of it.
Africans aren't really overpopulating the planet though. Just because there's many of them does not immediately mean overpopulation. If Earth had 1 million people, but each person wasted energy equivalent to that of 100 thousand people, it would be overpopulation.
African tribes/villages aren't really causing overpopulation because they don't waste much energy. Overpopulation is mostly caused by developed nations.
But the thing is, people in developed nations are living pretty decent lives, so once again there is no real overpopulation happening at the moment. But this is irrelevant to the main argument anyway.
I just realized my "1 million people" example was a bit too autistic.
Point I'm trying to make is that 8 billion (10^9) people would be considered overpopulated if everyone lived their lives as the average european/american. It wouldn't be considered overpopulation if the everyone lived their lives as the average african in the wild.
cont
Of course industrialization lowers the energy to keep an individual alive and well so you gotta think about that too.
whtatevr
> maybe a few thousand people
confirmed for not knowing how big O'Neil cylinders are
> doing what exactly?
assuming this is the case, how is this any different than say, Colonizing mars
How old is Venus?
How old is the oldest man made object in Space.
Space ship Venus, for the Win
We should colonize Mars because of similar gravity, the amount of existing research, materials available and because the risk of a floating city is massive vs a strong foundation.
uhhhhh because at mars you can use the resources of mars to do stuff?
You have no resources far into space
>what are asteroids
>what is delta-v
>what is travel time
>what is the tonnage difference between a planet and a small asteroid
>what is delta-v
a rocket that can fly from earth to mars or venus and carry a payload for a colony, is also powerful enough to get to the asteroid belt
>what is travel time
it already takes months to get to the other inner planets as is, so i don't see how this is a strike against asteroids
>what is the tonnage difference between a planet and a small asteroid
as if there aren't millions of asteroids from just a few meters across to several kilometers across, and getting from asteroid to asteroid is trivial in terms of fuel cost