Please Support The RUMBLE Channel
50% of all support (after fees & tax) will go to a private Moon mission
RUMBLE Has More Videos & YOUR VIEWS Help Raise Money For a MOON Mission!
[ Ссылка ]
Patreon:
[ Ссылка ]
Buy Me A Coffee?:
[ Ссылка ]
Donate With Cash App:
[ Ссылка ]
Total Updated Weekly on X/Twitter:
[ Ссылка ]
Why is Mars better to colonize than the Moon?
According to what I know, Mars is a more suitable candidate for colonization than the Moon because it possesses all the raw materials necessary to support life and a new human civilization. The Moon, on the other hand, is deficient in essential elements like carbon, nitrogen, and hydrogen, which are crucial for life.
Mars has abundant carbon dioxide, nitrogen gas, and water ice and permafrost, which are readily accessible forms of these elements. In contrast, the Moon only contains these elements in trace amounts, making it unsuitable for supporting life.
Furthermore, Mars has a history of volcanic and hydrologic processes, which have led to the concentration of various elements into high-grade mineral ores. This suggests that Mars could potentially be rich in mineral resources, which would be essential for a thriving colony.
The Moon, however, has no history of volcanic or water activity, resulting in a lack of mineral differentiation. This makes it less attractive for resource extraction.
In summary, Mars offers a more promising environment for colonization due to its abundance of essential elements, potential for resource extraction, and past geological activity. The Moon, on the other hand, is deficient in vital resources and lacks the geological history necessary for supporting a thriving colony.
Kyplanet's original video:
[ Ссылка ]
