/sci/ - Science & Math

>>11096121
That's the opposite you see. You are just repeating another flavor of those fiction-friendly belief.
You need all the technologies needed for self-sustained space habitat before you can consider doing a more difficult version of that on the surface of Mars.
Mars would also require a constant stream of rocket as it doesn't actually have easily accessible resources or ore, even if you had a crazy good 3D printer.
I sometime get giddy at how much we could do if we made the capture of an asteroid our priority. As a source of resources, the training ground for ISRU, training to redirect asteroid, using its mass to clean orbit of debris, using it as a counter weight for heavier megastructure and factories...

The main reason to got to the moon is because it's essentially one.
Plus the most efficient way to transport lot of people to Mars would be to build a Mars Cyclers anyway, 100% space habitat.

>>11096160
Now you are just baiting.
Mars is a worse place to live than Antarctica, even the moon is actually more interesting for full colonization effort.

Just watch the video linked in my post.