I think the moon would be better. Closer to him, less expensive, we have more knowledge about it and it would benefit earth more given all the stuff there and the feasibility of shipping it back.
So, I say the moon.
If you watched the video he explains why the moon is not a good choice. No atmosphere, no water, not enough resources. Mars is a much better option.
The Martian atmosphere is about the same as the moon. Furthermore, the amount of water on mars isn't really useful or practical or easily obtainable. Most of the water is mixed with other chemicals and other than the relatively large amount of energy needed to heat it up, you'd also need to remove the impurities. In the long run, in both cases, you'd basically need to ship all your supplies, food water and all, to mars. You're not going to live off of the martian surface or any resources on mars any time soon.
Mars would be incredibly difficult to terraform, given it's distance form the sun, the lack of surface water and it's inability to hold an atmosphere due to the lack of a sufficient magnetosphere. Not only is that outside the realm of our technology but it might never be possible. The only difference is it's slightly higher gravity (3/8ths of earth's gravity compared to 1/6th for the moon) and the fact it's significantly farther away. Realistically, a moon base would be better due to it's proximity to earth, the ease of delivering supplies, the numerous deep craters which would be good to build a moon base in, and the fact we can study the moon to learn more about early earth and gain valuable insight in to how the earth and other planets function. Mars not only has very little practical value, but any of the perceived benefits people like to talk about are so unrealistic as to be somewhat ironic to mention at all. Even if we built a base right outside a giant amount of frozen water which, we wouldn't since there would be other problems associated with living there like a need for solar radiation to power the place or good terrain that isn't likely to be pelted by meteorites or be commonly caught up in sand storms; it wouldn't exactly matter. Because we wouldn't have an efficient way to obtain or use the water and in comparison, it would just be easier to ship more water on a rocket and, the base would be supplied by subsequent rocket launches rather than relying upon anything on the Martian surface anyways. We aren't going to build a space base on the wishy-washy promise that we might be able to produce water and then have them all die by accident if the process is delayed. We basically have to get them all they need to survive in the first place.
There's also water on the moon, 1.3 trillion pounds of it. xP The highest temperatures on mars are about 68 degrees Fahrenheit, where as it can get to 400 degrees on the moon. So it would be easier to melt the water as well.
Edited by Manoka, 02 October 2016 - 06:55 AM.