What Mars offers that O'Neill habitats do not.

> If your goal is to explore the lava tubes of Olymus Mons, then Olympus Mons is > superior to every other location in the Universe for accomplishing this goal. Very true, but we've shifted topics here. When discussing O'Neill habitats, we're discussing space settlement. Your valid points are in regard to space exploration. Yes, granted, the points that O'Neill made in no way are an argument against the scientific explorations of Mars. They don't even rule out that some Mars explorers might chose to live permanently on the surface. But I think they may point to Mars being economically of much less interest than many currently suppose. > The surface of Mars is a superior location for Martian tourism. True, insofar that Mars becomes a locus for tourism. With travel times of a year or so, I would think it would be a much more limited kind of tourism than we might have of orbital or lunar locations. > These things Mars offers, and these things are reason enough to have people on Mars. > Please, Mars advocates, don't try to argue that Mars is the perfect place to grow food > for people mining the asteroids. It isn't. Nor is it the best place to get water, or iron, > or anything else that isn't going to be used on Mars itself. Andyou give very good advice to the Mars advocates here.