Siberia is not survivable without technology.

Mars requires more technology, but that's a matter of magnitude, not impossibility.

Keeping people warm is the only problem to solve in Siberian winter. Humanity solved it thousands of years ago.

Antarctica is cold year around, lacks food, lacks sun light for half a year. Almost no one wants to live permanently in Antarctica.

Mars has all of the Antarctica problems, almost zero sun light, lack of air, lack of water, radiation, toxic soil, low gravity, extreme remoteness.

It may be theoretically possible for a colony on Mars to survive, but it remains to be seen if enough people would do it in practice.

> Almost no one wants to live permanently in Antarctica.

I mean, that's at least in part because you can't on a legal level. There's no private property rights and any of the Antarctic Treaty participants has the right to enter and inspect any installation on the continent. It's a set of research stations, not a colony.

Siberia has other problems similar to Mars. Water is frozen, so you have to melt it (as on Mars). Growing seasons are short (similar to the sunlight issue, which we've solved on Earth with grow lights...).

Focusing on the "Mars has more things to solve" thing continues to ignore the point.

> Focusing on the "Mars has more things to solve" thing continues to ignore the point.

I would like to know if solutions are feasible or even wanted.

Hypothetical Antarctic colony could simply ignore Antarctic Treaty. Did anyone seriously try?

Mars frozen water is likely not directly drinkable after melting. After all, martian soil seems to be toxic.

Comprehending orders of magnitude is the problem of humans not groking exponentials.