and walking outside could probably only be done once per week or once per month, due to having to filter out all the dust

Whish wouldn't be cost or time effective at all

and having suits that are left ouside is dumb.... how do they maintain them?

the entire mars venture isn't time effective or cost effective lol

But yeah colonizing Venus seems more feasible

why venus??

Sun

oh solar power?

is that it?

lol

i mean we can't really terraform venus either

but whatever

https://medium.com/@Jernfrost/why-colonize-venus-instead-of-mars-c490d14c0531

Honestly just build a ton of solar panels on some planet and Beam power back to earth

lol

i guess

not as efficient as oil tho maybe

or nuclear power

I wrote this comment in the kurgeCRINGE mars video
-----------------------------

2019: Debut some spaceship.
2020: Get more investors.
2021: Deliver more hot air.
2022: Get more investors.
2023: Sweep 10 more failed ventures under the rug, and bribe the media to 'forget' about it.
2024: Get more investors.
2025: Start a minor LEO space tourism venture.
2026: Get more investors.
2027-2035: Virtue signal more and more about Mars as investors dump in money.
2036: "Go to Mars" reality TV show is a flop. There's is a plan to go home, but some things go wrong, and the whole crew dies.
2060: Elon Musk refuses to retire, but is so senile that he can no longer give coherent speeches. This continues for a year or so until all investors have finally lost confidence. No one now mentions Elon Musk, except in the past tense.
2037 - 2088: A handful of more ventures occur, driven by entrepreneurs who were inspired by Elon and charismatic enough to attract continued investment. Mars mania is about to fade until some crews succeed in return trips, but no venture is taken beyond this. The thrill is lost by 2087 or so. This is just like the moon landing.
The Next 1000 Years: No one cares about Mars beyond tourism possibilities or science. Space stations orbit above mars, to send probes down to collect samples. The probes then blast off back to the space station above, to deliver the samples back to the lab. That sorta thing.

The moon however? There is a future on the moon, IMO; even a few permanent colonies. The distance makes it more economically feasible, and there was an argument for benefit to industry.

@What Would Jack Conte Do? I agree with the message mostly

However oil isn't actually that efficient

If you consider the war cost to keep the world status quo on America's part

And I agreed when should have some colonies on the moon, but the problem is that there isn't anything there

Water, minerals

mercury's also a good place for colonies, if we wanna get that dyson sphere built (and utterly destroy mercury as a result of massive strip mining to build the sphere, lol)

there's elements and metals on the moon or something

i was some essential element

can't remember which tho

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z3pJflDc9AA

i think it was this one

helium-3

used with deuterium for fusion (assuming fusion is invented)

supposedly 1.1 million tons of helium-3 in the first few meters of lunar topsoil

shorter video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n9EMcyfGMDA

that is crazy tho... the moon could become the saudi arabia of the future

can't wait for moon dictators who keep their women in space burkas

just saying

since this is a history channel

landing on mars will be to space expeditions what the storming of the bastille was to the French revolution

getting people on mars is really just a symbol