[Travis McGee]

Just like the thousands of "colonists" living on the moon since 1969, right?

Absurd non-comparison.

35 years after Colombus, Cortez or Lewis and Clark, the new lands were swarming with colonists. They just sailed over or walked in, the same way as the explorers.

How do your "colonists" get to Mars, in a way that is self-paid and self-sustaining? And not as part of a trillion dollar stunt project?

Show me your self-paying colonists on the moon, and then talk to me about Mars.

[LibWhacker]

. . . in a way that is self-paid and self-sustaining? And not as part of a trillion dollar stunt project?

In the same way that I can get up on a hot August morning and drive out alone into the middle of Death Valley without a care in the world and only one jug of water. Technology. Technological development has made that possible. It would've been crazy to be caught out in the middle of Death Valley in August with only one jug of water 150 years ago.

But then, I have an awful lot of faith in technology! :-)

[ambrose]

Well, I don't see the moon as a suitable place to colonize. We'll certainly want to have lunar bases. That was the original plan, but the Sheeple and politicians quickly grew bored with the space program, and NASA dropped the ball via bureaucratic incompetence.

As for Mars, why wouldn't it be a good place to colonize? I am sure there will be no shortage of willing volunteers who will want to be a part of history.