In terms of viable targets for colonization, the order of best to shittest goes Mars, Moon, Ceres/asteroids, Mercury, Callisto, Ganymede, Titan, Rhea, Iapetus, Europa, Tethys, Dione, Titania, Oberon, Umbriel, Ariel, Triton, Pluto/major Kuiper belt objects, Io, Venus, and the Gas Giants. Everything else is either too small to bother listing here or is lumped into group categories like the asteroids. This list considers surface resources and conditions, similarity to Earth, distance, and radiation environment. Moon is closer to Mars but much harder to live on so it comes second. Mercury is surprisingly easy to manage, because there are permanently shadowed craters to set up on initially and you can just live underground with unlimited, high power density solar energy. Io is near the bottom of the list because it has a thin and unstable crust with thousands of active volcanoes and is bombarded with enough radiation by Jupiter's magnetic field to destroy your DNA in seconds. Venus is garbage because of the extreme heat and pressure at the surface, cloud cities are a total meme, but it does beat the gas giants because at least Venus has any surface at all, even if it is nearly unreachable, and Venus also gets significant solar power.
I don't know shit about science, can some smart people explain something to me?
where does your moms arse rank lmao
floating c olonies on Venus is up there with Mercury
The moon would be a great place to manufacture spaceships. The low gravity and no atmosphere makes getting into orbit much easier than getting stuff off of earth. Plus it's got more or less the same composition as earth's crust so you can mine for raw materials.
Once you truly open your ass to the potential of space habitats build near asteroids, they clearly emerge as the best way of doing things.
the moon is by far the better choice for developing strategies before mars colonization, especially when it comes to robotics. it's a lot cheaper and faster to make missions to the moon than to mars. but then the question is, can't we just use earth for most of that anyway? plus a big part of it is simply getting humans to a new frontier and not dicking around on a mostly uninteresting rock.
Not him. There's no advantage of floating colonies as opposed to space habitats. None at all. Quite on the contrary. It's a meme.
Venus is the only place where you can conveniently find a location that has Earth normal termperatures & pressures
The moon has a lot of water ice, less gravity is no disadvantage, because this means launching things from it is easier, and the atmosphere of Mars is so thin it is almost useless anyways.
>Venus is the only place where you can conveniently find a location that has Earth normal termperatures & pressures
Which can also be found inside a spacecraft.
Having a colony on Venus would be like living in a never-ending Hindenberg floating above a misty void, constant bumps and storms.