Moon is better to colonise than Mars

I am asserting that colonizing Mars would be a better choice for humans than colonizing the Moon. It is because contrary to the Moon, Mars has more available resources, easily accessible water, more suitable gravity and atmosphere, and better temperature. Below are my supporting arguments, re: colonizing Mars is better. Definition of terms: colonize - to send a group of settlers in some place to live there. Resources/Materials Take note that here I am not talking about the cost and materials needed to send people into the Moon or Mars; I am talking about the resources available and abundant in each of the celestial bodies. Mars is abundant in carbon, nitrogen, hydrogen, and oxygen, all in biologically readily accessible forms (Zubrin, 1996). On the other hand, according to Zubrin, the first three only exist in the moon in parts per million. Oxygen is abundant on the Moon; however, it is not readily accessible because it only exists in firmly bound oxides. The Moon is (almost) devoid of other minerals/elements such as copper, phosphorus, or sulfur, unlike Mars. As stated by Hynek (2003), “volcanism has been a paramount aspect of martian surface evolution and this process has been active throughout much of the planet's history.” Pursuant to that fact, Mars is likely to have consolidated multifarious elements into large concentrations of ore. The Moon has no history of volcanic (or even hydrologic) processes; hence, we cannot say that it is as rich in elements and minerals as Mars. So, if we were to manufacture/construct buildings, electronics, power generators, etc. in either place, Mars would be a better choice because we would not need to import materials. Availability of Water As stated by Atkinson (2015), “there is water on the Moon’s surface, but interior could be dry.” The Moon is so dry that colonists would have to mine concrete-like materials to get the water out. Almost all water on Mars is frozen, so it would have to be dug up, melted, and separated from soil particles; nonetheless, the process would not be as complicated and difficult as the case of the Moon. Moreover, as surprisingly as it is, liquid water is confirmed to flow on Mars in the present time, as per NASA’s 2015 data. Gravity and Atmosphere Mars’ tenuous atmosphere, which is mainly composed of CO2, can be used alongside increased ammonia levels to create an ozone layer thick enough to block deleterious solar radiation (Exploring Space, 2005). By freeing water, accelerating plant growth, and raising the temperature of Mars using Greenhouse gases, Mars could have an Earth-like atmosphere. On the contrary, the Moon has an atmosphere which is composed of an unusual set of elements, including sodium and potassium (NASA, 2013). To keep the atmosphere from escaping the planet/moon, gravity is an imperative. The surface gravity on Mars would be able to keep an Earth-like atmosphere better than the surface gravity on the Moon. It is because the surface gravity on Mars is roughly 3.711 meters per second per second (38% of the surface gravity on Earth), whereas on the Moon it is 1.622 meters per second per second (17% of the surface gravity on Earth). By the way, lower gravity also implies that it would be harder to move on the Moon. Temperature The temperature on the Moon’s surface ranges from -183 to 106 degrees Celsius, while on Mars the surface temperature varies from -153 to 20 degrees Celsius. The range is lower on Mars, so I surmise it would be more suitable for humans. Rebuttals “Firstly, the Moon is closer than Mars from our Earth.” Yes, that is true. However, what use is the short distance if we would have to import materials from earth to the Moon repeatedly for it is not abundant in elements such as copper? It would take a longer time to colonize Mars, but the result would be beneficial in such a way that we would not any more need to import resources from earth. “The colonization of the Moon is proposed and is establishment of permanent human communities or robotic industries on the Moon.” Read this: http://www.nss.org... “Discovery of lunar water at the lunar poles by Chandrayaan-1 has renewed interest in the Moon.” With all due respect, that may be true; however, according to my argument above getting water on Mars would be easier to achieve than on the Moon. “A lot of focus over the past 12 months has been on NASA's journey to Mars. But a group of space experts, including leading NASA scientists, has now produced a special journal edition that details how we could establish a human colony on the Moon in the next seven years - all for US$10 billion.” I will not be convinced unless presented a reputable source. A link to the source would do. “According to the research papers, the lunar base would house around 10 people for stays of up to a year at first - and could eventually grow to a self-sufficient settlement of 100 within a decade.” Whose research papers? I am sorry but I need a reputable source for this. “Mars is covered up of 95% Carbon-Di-Oxide, Several elements have been detected in the lunar atmosphere. The Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter recently detected helium. Detectors left by Apollo astronauts have detected argon-40, helium-4, oxygen, methane, nitrogen, carbon monoxide and carbon dioxide.Oct 15, 2012” The atmosphere of Mars is composed mainly of carbon dioxide. Interestingly, the Moon’s atmosphere is composed of unusual elements like potassium. However, like I stated in my arguments, the Moon’s atmosphere escaping is inexorable due to its low surface gravity. References: http://www.nss.org... https://www.researchgate.net... https://www.universetoday.com... https://www.nasa.gov... http://www.pbs.org... https://www.nasa.gov...