Subject: Is space exploration worth while?
Posted by: cmt101
Date: Nov 29 08
Do people think space exploration is worth while or simply a waste of tax payers money? Give me your opinions x
Posted by: cmt101
Date: Nov 29 08
Do people think space exploration is worth while or simply a waste of tax payers money? Give me your opinions x
44 replies. On page 1 of 3 pages. 1 2 3
BIG_Flicker
|
I would say that space exploration is very much needed and worthwhile. Study of the universe is vital to the whole future of mankind. If you can imagine what planet earth would be like without science right now, no cars, x-rays, nutritional knowledge, farming diversity.... indeed study into the real tangible things that keep humans alive and surviving, it really doesn't make any sense to live without progress and research. To put it bluntly, without the sun and rain, humans couldn't exist. Exploration and study can enhance our world, despite those who are trying hard to ruin the blue planet with silly schemes and stories of doom and gloom from years gone by. You'll never know until you go. Reply #1. Nov 29 08, 8:20 PM |
dj168
|
Knowledge is power. But then the money may be put to better use, but money from weapons could be put to better use. So I say I think it's great we're learning about the universe. Reply #2. Nov 29 08, 10:45 PM |
| vene
|
Space exploration costs heaps and heaps of money, seemingly just to satisfy our curiosity about far away galaxies which have no impact on us, so I'm not surprised that some people are against it. But because of the heavy requirements on new materials etc. to be invented (lightweight materials, development of stronger & more efficient equipment and computer technology, efficient use of fuel, etc.) the whole enterprise offers much to technological development. Reply #3. Nov 30 08, 9:37 AM |
| BIG_Flicker
|
Totally agree about the cost of space exploration, but it will be worth every penny in the long run. If exploring space can detect, and hopefully prevent an impact of an NEO in the future, what price the survival of mankind? I believe we are to have a visit in 2016 by an NEO, and if a few combinations all come together at the right(or wrong) time, it'll be back even closer 7 years later, passing between planet earth and our communications satellites. We got a lucky break when an airburst happened over Tunguska in Siberia in June of 1908. If that had happened over a city, it would have been wiped out. Highly improbable, but not impossible. http://www.pibburns.com/catastro/impacts.htm Reply #4. Dec 01 08, 11:47 AM |
satguru
|
It's provided lots of new technology (just like war does) but what exactly has it taught us? There might be water somewhere in the solar system (it's only made of hydrogen and oxygen, fancy that!), we still can't see the dark side of the moon, people get health problems in zero gravity (so why do it?), you can calculate better missile trajectories from space (great...), and many other 'so what' moments. What we'd have lost without all this information since I was a baby is uncertain to me. If there's anyone out there they'll find us, we won't need to make the efforts ourselves. It's also a very expensive way of countries showing off who's got the biggest rocket. Have I missed something? Reply #5. Dec 01 08, 4:30 PM |
daver852 
|
Space exploration is one area where I'd like to see more government spending. If mankind is to survive, we're eventually going to have to leave Earth and spread out across the solar system, and then to other stars. Wish I were going to be here to see it happen. Reply #6. Dec 02 08, 6:09 PM |
Schoonie101
|
The thirst for discovery alone transcends any arguments against space exploration. Satguru, how can you be a Star Trek fan and be against the concept of space exploration? Not sure I get that. How do you think the satellites which air your TV shows got up there? You wouldn't even be using a cell phone if not for that space exploration. I think it is sad that people take it for granted. It is no different than the quest for discovery on our planet 500 years ago, just broader horizons. Reply #7. Dec 04 08, 10:36 PM |
| satguru
|
In theory I am in favour of space exploration, and any new science we find there is all very useful. But the actual barren wastes and 'so what' moments when they find things we've already spotted from Earth I really do wonder what they hope to find now the solar system has been more or less covered and found little more than some ice and perverse flows in Saturn's rings. The money it hoovers up does not seem in proportion to the results somehow. Star Trek however is more of a spiritual and social parable. It's about universal friendship, removal of economic barriers (they have no money) and spiritual growth. Many of the stories were adapted from Buddhism and other eastern traditions and the space travel is more of a means to present the scenarios than the vision of a future probably quite unlike reality. If anyone watched Tomorrow's World 20-40 years ago very little turned out the ways they expected, even most of the new inventions that never took off. Our cars and trains have barely changed in 100 years besides efficiency and reliability. The basic designs though are little different and the trains are actually slower in many cases. Brunel's wide gauge could make the trip to Bristol faster than today but the then government chose to ignore it and use something lower quality but cheaper. OK, not about space exploration directly but all examples how time does not always equal progress, far from it in fact. We could apply all the ideals of Star Trek today without a single spacecraft if we all followed the lessons it has to offer. That is by far the main message it carries to me. Reply #8. Dec 05 08, 8:46 PM |
| Schoonie101
|
I am sure Darwin had plenty of so-what moments also in his journeys but then you find something like the Galapagos islands, that makes it all worthwhile. You still keep looking. We are still infants when it comes to space technology and exploration and I see no reason why we shouldn't continue that growth. Of course, you never know what direction scientific knowledge will take us. But you don't quit in the middle just because you are temporarily unsatisfied with your findings. Would Columbus ever have discovered the Americas with that mentality? Not to derail this thread but I never really looked at Star Trek that deeply at all. No desire too just considered it some pretty B-quality acting. Personal opinion though, just never cared for the show. Ironic, I suppose, considering Gene Roddenberry's son went to my high school. Not that I had a clue who that was anyways... ;-) Reply #9. Dec 05 08, 9:24 PM |
| vene
|
So Schoonie, do you think we should try to discover as much as possible no matter what? No doubt there is this kind of thirst for discovery (knowledge), but do we absolutely have to follow up on it? To make the question somewhat bolder: do we *have* to discover, invent, etc. just because we *can*? Reply #10. Dec 06 08, 6:01 AM |
| KING_OF_ALL
|
Yes! why would it not. Dont you want to see if there is anything out there? Reply #11. Dec 06 08, 7:03 AM |
| Schoonie101
|
Why not, vene? Wouldn't life be rather mundane if given the alternative? Do you ever feel like one day, you just want to stop learning, stop all activity that might lead to incresed knowledge? Then again, that concept might be why reality TV is so successful... Reply #12. Dec 06 08, 10:30 AM |
| satguru
|
I think the difference between exploring earth and beyond is we know earth has life so wherever we look will find something interesting as no two places are identical. But if I dropped you on The Moon, Mars, Titan or any other rock body you'd see just that, rocks. As far as the eye can see. Brown rocks, red rocks, high rocks, planes of rocks. And as for the gas giants, I can't think of a lot more they can tell us. When the comet hit Jupiter a few years ago it was possibly the biggest anticlimax in the news that year as what happens when a solid hits a gas? Yes, nothing! My basic points are there is little more within our scope we can find as beyond the solar system is a lot of near vacuum before we hit another one. And the cost of continuing to explore our own when it's unlikely any more than some more ice is going to be found, unless that yields some primitive life, is unlikely to get any surprises. The near earth activity is more about life down here being enhanced than discovering anything. I will also point out there is no question NASA edit photos with ufos as a matter of course, so anything of any real use is removed before the public get to see anything. The added fact a few of these got out in their full version tells us it's not where we go any more than counts, but who's coming here. That would really change the world. Reply #13. Dec 06 08, 12:06 PM |
| Schoonie101
|
Not so regarding Jupiter and the Shoemaker-Levy comet! The impact showed us more of the gaseous compilation of the inner atmosphere of Jupiter as it was spewed to the surface from the impact. And it sure did leave a mark! Not to mention quite a bit of seismic activity from the impact. Humbling when you compare what might happen if a comet or large meteor impacted us here on Earth, given the size and makeup of our planet. Discovery is a long process. Also, the more progress is made, the more efficient interstellar space travel can be made. Rocket travel won't be the solution as research has been conducted a while to get us closer to the speed of light, if not exceeding it. http://www.space.com/businesstechnology/080813-tw-warp-speed.html Who knows? But if you don't try, how will you ever find out? Give me some proof about NASA editing out UFO footage. You are saying they saw flying saucers and photoshopped them out? I have serious doubts about that. Keep in mind both of my parents worked extensively with NASA in their day. I am sure I would have heard plenty about that or any similar conspiracy theories. Just rocks? Words from a non-scientist (and especially a non-geologist!). The canyons on Uranus' moon Miranda for one, that is an exciting discovery. Does knowledge of it help cure cancer or anything so dramatic? Of course not. But it is sure interesting and discovering more of our surroundings in the universe, that is what human progress is about, not who will be next years American Idol. Hey, I (and many others) find astronomy and space exploration fascinating. I am sorry you and others don't. As far as results go, space exploration sure offers more than just throwing welfare money at crackheads. Reply #14. Dec 06 08, 12:30 PM |
| satguru
|
I used to like astronomy a lot more but more and more the discoveries were either very specialised and technical or just to satisfy curiosity 'wow, we've found another star/nebula/quasar whatever' we can name. I love exploring and collecting as well and the majority of astronomers do it from home or the local observatory as well without actually going up there in person. That sort of exploration is cheap and catalogues our environment, but I think manned flights ending after the last moon visit (as they can't yet get to Mars) was because there wasn't a lot more they could justify the cost and effort for. Skylab etc have mainly taught us about science rather than space, as the satellites which observe earth from above rather above from earth. Of course we had to visit the moon to see what was there, and send probes round the planets, I just wonder what is now left to discover by carrying on. Unless the new technology you linked worked which will open up new horizons, it was on the news last night as well. I'll dig up the NASA material, it's not the sort of stuff most employees would be aware of and the ones who are certainly wouldn't tell anyone, not even their families. When I do I'll start a new thread here as there seems far too much evidence they are photoshopping, whatever it is they are removing. But there are before and after photos and if they have been found it's clearly not an exception. Reply #15. Dec 06 08, 4:39 PM |
| Schoonie101
|
Well, on the other hand, I don't know if you heard about it but they are using new imaging technology to discover nearby planets closer to our planet's size. Before, gravitational wobbles were pretty much the only way to detect other planets outside our solar system but with new optics and light-gathering technology (or whatever it is), they are finding more and more. In fact, just in the last year or two alone, the number of planets they are discovering are growing exponentially. The stuff I linked would be great if it did work but sounds like that is a long way off. Maybe if cold fusion could eventually become a reality? Who knows? I checked out some of those links and I am still quite skeptical. Back in the 70s and 80s, the technology to alter images wasn't nearly what it is now. Plus, what about the converse? That other people are taking old photos and photoshopping objects into them (doing a poor job to make it look antiquated) to create a conspiracy theory. Freaks they might be but some people do get a perverse pleasure of doing such things. Having a comet heading towards Earth with the end of the Mayan calendar date on it as a primary ad doesn't exactly enhance their credibility either. I've seen some seriously trippy stuff too, but there is usually some kind of explanation for it. Seeing some military laser (or whatever the heck it was) testing on the West side of Oahu just south of Yokohama, that was far more out there than anything else I have seen others allude to. Keep in mind that people thought the B-2 and F-117A were UFOs also. Discovery Channel did a great investigative report on the Roswell incident a few years back, really shed light on the origins of the conspiracy theories and soundly debunked them. Reply #16. Dec 06 08, 7:49 PM |
| vene
|
"Why not, vene? Wouldn't life be rather mundane if given the alternative? Do you ever feel like one day, you just want to stop learning, stop all activity that might lead to incresed knowledge?" No, not really. I am curious about what we will find out about the universe, including our own planet. I bet a lot of people are. That doesn't mean we shouldn't reflect on these feelings. Just because we feel like doing something doesn't necessarily mean it is the best thing to do. I'm not saying that space exploration can't be worthwile, I'm just saying we shouldn't just do everything we can do for no other reason than that we can do it. It would certainly be interesting to see (from a dispassionate perspective) what genetic engineering in humans may lead to. There's no doubt we can - or will be able to - do that, and that we will learn a lot in the process. But from an ethical perspective most people won't agree with actually doing it. Space exploration in itself doesn't seem to pose such an ethical dilemma, but by pursuing it governments prioritize - perhaps over and above other important issues that need their attention (such as, say, economy or welfare). Reply #17. Dec 07 08, 4:31 AM |
| Schoonie101
|
Keep in mind that space exploration does quite a job fueling the economy, creating a lot of jobs in the process. Said people with jobs also have money and they spend that money, fueling the economy. Welfare? Not so much. That is literally throwing money away. Fuels the local liquor store, corner dealer, and local maternity ward but aside from that? No, that's a total and complete waste in my opinion. I'd rather fund scientific research and exploration. You would not even believe the everyday things you use today whose invention was catalyzed by the space industry. Cell phones are just the beginning of that. There was a time, though, when a lack of learning and discovery took place and those were called the Dark Ages. Reply #18. Dec 07 08, 3:37 PM |
cag1970
|
As someone who has been a fan of space exploration for a long time, I'm glad that NASA has made the decision to move away from the space shuttle and back to single-use Apollo-type ballistic capsules. Not only will these new Orion-class spacecraft be safer, they'll actually be able to be used for the purpose they're really designed for. That being said, I think space exploration is worthwhile if we can continue to apply what we've learned up there to our daily lives down here. And I agree wholeheartedly about our learnings about near-Earth objects. If we can figure out how best to defend ourselves from incoming asteroids and comets, the money would be well worth it. Reply #19. Dec 07 08, 5:37 PM |
bassman68
|
The earth does not have an infinite supply of the raw materials we need to survive, and our rapaciousness dwindles even what we have at a phenomenal rate. Man is an epic consumer, and one day, all of this stuff (with the exception of water, and even that's a maybe) will run out. At that time, what will we do? Will we die, or will we have already become able to colonize other worlds by then--- to find and live on other worlds with environments hospitable to us, or to "terraform" worlds with environments that are not. One thing that we are extremely good at is the development of the technological means of achieving our objectives. It is very relevent here to note that we already have the technological capability to actually live on the moon...even to give that planetoid an atmosphere...if we had the will and commitment to endeavor on a project that would take at least a century to achieve any real results. The thing is, you have to start somewhere...and how do you get to being able to live on other planets that Earth if you never attempt to leave explore beyond Earth? And, as a consummate Star Trek fan, I agree that the show was all about moral lessons---but, in really no different way than all literature is. Moreover, though, it was also the depiction of those moral stories against the backdrop of space exloration and the challenges, dangers, and rewards of that exploration that were just as contriibutory. Because, the main moral that Star Trek imparted was that man had done what it took to reach out into space and become a species that could explore it on a par with any other. Reply #20. Dec 12 08, 7:30 AM |
44 replies. On page 1 of 3 pages. 1 2 3
Legal / Conditions of Use
|
|
: