Which is more feasible? Underwater colonies or colonizing another planet or moon?

None are practical. Shallow water colonies are the least impractical but even that would be tough to be self sustaining.
 
None are practical. Shallow water colonies are the least impractical but even that would be tough to be self sustaining.
How so?
 
None are practical. Shallow water colonies are the least impractical but even that would be tough to be self sustaining.
How so?
Because there's no commercial reason. There's no economic feasibility.
This is obviously based on the hypothetical that something happened and we had to do something to survive.
I'm only pretty sure that won't save us. But why not go into caves instead and avoid all of this stupid pie in the sky dreaming?
 
I wish i could live longer so i could see how advanced we are in space travel in a few hundred years :(
IMO, until they find a more suitable way of traveling the solar system it is not feasible. Until they can come up with a way to get from here to Mars in 4 or 5 days, it's too dangerous and time consuming. Plus they need a way to get off Earth without chemical rockets.

What's wrong with a six month trip to Mars?
 
Wouldn't the circumstances that required considering these options dictate the direction? Why would people need to move underwater? There is plenty of unused land on the surface. Is this hypothetical based on all land already being used? If the problem is that the Earth's surface were no longer 'safe' then off planet is the only option, but humanity would be screwed anyway.
 
Back
Top Bottom