NapoleonXIV said:
Antarctica the most likely choice?? Antarctica makes Siberia look like Miami.
Who ever said living in Antartica was going to be a picnic? Likewise, I'd say, living in northern Siberia or northern Alaska/Canada isn't either. But if humans can manage to live in these locations & survive there's absolutely no reason why they can't at the other end of the world. So why can't they? What, living up north is fine, but here down south is bad or something?
NapoleonXIV said:
There is only one animal that lives entirely on the Antarctic continent, a type of wingless fly found in the scoured valleys.
There are also seals, whales, dolphins other than the penguins & goodness know how many different species of fish down there. So there's plenty of good tucker to feed upon. And this is besides the fact that whalers, during the entire 19th century, would go down to Antartica on a regular basis from bases in Australia, South Africa & South America.
NapoleonXIV said:
Resources aren't much use when they're under a kilometer of ice.
I'm only talking about the coastal areas, not at the south pole itself. Besides, once it gets out in the 1850s that there's gold down in a place free of any government, you'll get thousands, if not tens of thousands, of people heading for the place regardless if it's a desert or it's a freezer. Greed is good! lol
NapoleonXIV said:
You couldn't and can't have a colony where you must ship them ALL of their food as well as every other supply they need.
Additionally, Antarctica is probably the most environmentally sensitive place on Earth. In addition to having their food flown in the scientists living there have their wastes flown out, even that small amount could do horrendous damage.
Actually much of this is late 20th century environmentalism (not that I disagree with it BTW). But we're talking 1850's onwards here not 2004! No one will care less, sadly, what impact they have on the environment down there. Mind you, Antartica isn't the only environment that's sensitive. I think you'll find they all are! Australia is a perfect example where the importation of animals such as the fox, rabbit & cat has caused horrendous damage. But 200 years ago no one cared. Likewise the Cane Toad has caused great damage & the introduction of that creature was less than 100 years ago. Still no one cared.
Now, considering we're talking the 1850s, no one will care what damage is done so long as progress is made. And that is measured in how many settlements are established, how many whalers are catching whales, how many mines are in operation, how many factories are producing products, & how fast the various products from Antartica can reach the markets in Europe & America. That'll be what matters to any long term Antartica colony(s). Thus the environment will change as a result. Alas no one will say anything, until the 1950s, by which time it's far too late to reverse the human impact. Besides, in the OTL, Antartica has survived numerous oil spills, tons of human garbage, not to mention contamination from an American nuclear power station, over a period of a century. And it's only been in the last decade or two that the concerns & measures, which you speak about, have been taken seriously.
