You were a math major right? I've explained why Mars is best over and over Larry. Your handwaiving dismissals are unconvincing in the light of actual math and historical cost analogies. Not to mention you haven't even tried to address a lot of the issues I've raised favoring Mars. Run the numbers I give above yourself.

It's pretty simple Larry. Start with the basic principle:

To go to space to stay we either have to:

1) Make it pay

or 2) Make it self supporting.

Convince me you have a solution that does either and I'll support it. As of now I see no sure bets for either, but see Mars as the only thing that comes close to 2. I see nothing that has a good shot at 1 in the near future. The doubt about Mars for 2 is balanced by its high interest as a science target so the gamble can be justified.

Regards,
Mark