Space Programs: Do we really need them?

[Derald]

[FONT=Trebuchet MS][SIZE=1][COLOR=Sienna]Space. The final frontier, but do we really need to go out and explore it in order to benefit humankind? My answer - no.

To me, NASA and other space exploration programs are really a waste of resources. I mean, we're spending billions and billions of dollars to send rockets into space, but how does that really benefit humans? It doesn't. All of that money could have gone to raising the standard of living of people here on earth. Think of all the research that could have been done here on earth, all of the poverty-stricken masses that could have had a better life.

Many say that these programs will provide a way for people in the future to colonize other planets, therefore justifying their actions. Do you really believe it will be that simple? To colonize anything it is essential that it can support life. Mars? The Moon? Neither of these can support human life, and in order to do so it would take billions, even trillions of dollars to possibly terraform the surface of either (if the technology even exists in the future). It's just not a very likely scenario.

As an added point, why would we even consider moving into space if we can't even get along here on earth?[/COLOR][/SIZE][/FONT]

[KatanaViolet]

Lets see if I can try to dig up what I learned in astronomy from the vaults of my brain....

I guess an easy arguement that one could make is that when we thought the world was flat, I'm sure it seemed like a rediculous idea for Christopher Columbus to sail towards North America. But he did, and that eventually led to where we are today. Then again, I'm sure someone would have done it sooner or later. But back then, that was a huge discovery.

People thought the Earth was the center of the universe, based on the Ptolemic system. Until I believe Copernicus argued that theory.
And where do you think the idea of heaven came from? It was assumed that heaven is in the sky, and hell is below the surface of the earth.

We have made so many discoveries because of going into space.
I don't see what's wrong with that.
As for colonizing on other planets? I see that as nothing but a basis for science fiction movies.
Mercury? Too Close to the sun.
Venus? No human being could withstand the atmospheric pressure
Mars? It may be the most likely planet for us to colonize, but it would mean alot of new technology to create some kind of atmosphere for us to live in. Plus the landscape would be rather bland.
Jupiter? It's just a swirling mass of gasses.
Saturn? Again, atmospheric pressure and I also think that it is too a swirling mass of gass.
Uranus, Neptune and Pluto? All too far from the sun to sustain and human life, and any other organic organisms at that.

I'm pretty sure I'm fairly accurate... I've always loved astronomy. But the point is, is that although it's nice to entertain the idea, it's pretty unrealisitic that we'll ever colonize other planets. We've allready done enough damage to the Earth anyways, do really want to do the same to the universe? With our luck, we'll end up just like Venus, which is theorized to have experienced a runaway greenhouse effect some billion years ago or whatever. Now it's nothing but a big ball of nitrogen & carbon dioxide. Not to mention the temperature on Venus' surface is hotter than Mercury's.
yea... there's a little bit of food for thought ;)

[Gavin]

[SIZE=1]Interesting, most interesting.

Do we really need to go out and explore it in order to benefit humankind ? The answer is a simple and emphatic of course, for how many millennia did human gaze up at the stars and desire to know what was out there ? How many different cultural benefits have come from just staring at those little white pinpricks in the night sky ? Art, philosophy, God knows how many religions ? Now imagine if we could actually look at a world thousands of light-years away that looked like Earth, that same blue and white jewel in the heavens. How many people would say that space exploration is unnecessary ? None. At the moment, despite the general perception, our space exploration abilities are still in their infancy and like any infants they will continue to grow and expand and our children will see the fruits of our labours.

As for the finance used up by the likes of NASA and the ESA, there are innumerable other projects across the globe in which similar amounts of money are spend for far less noble ends. Nuclear weapons research anyone ? Sure we could shut down every space exploration agency across the planet, take all their funds and plough them into charities and aid organizations and we'd find that the cost of bettering the entire human race is far, far more than exploring space. Not to sound cynical but unless the change to better themselves come from the aid receivers, nothing changes. All too often the rampant corruption in those nations eats up a fair portion of the aid, more is spent on pointless wars between these countries and finally a small bit might drip down to those who need it most.

As for the process of terraformation, [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terraformation[/url]. Read the Wiki article and understand that it's not all just science fiction. I must admit of all the threads I could make my two-thousandth post in, I'm quite glad it's this one. [/SIZE]

[eleanor]

[color=darkslateblue] I think space programs are valid and deserve the money that is funding them. Throughout history, people have always been pushing to further their knowledge, or at least discover new things to benefit economies and whatnot. Space exploration is just another one of them. Thought I'm guessing a lot of people think it's not the same as the Age of Exploration, I think it's just as important.

As for the moving onto other places before the original land was in peace... I don't think that will ever happen. Things in Europe weren't exactly fine and dandy-ho when everyone started colonizing the Americas to reap profit.

I mean, yeah, I'd be happier if more money was spent on Education and the Fine Arts Programs, but NASA is also important.[/color]

[SunfallE]

[COLOR=DarkOliveGreen]Exploration is the very essence of improving humanity. It?s the spirit of exploration that has lead to improvements in technology. Space exploration is valuable in that there is great potential in the possibility of finding even greater things.

If you are looking to remove a waste of resources, well there?s certainly a lot of political porking so to speak. I can think of several bills passed by the state I live in that in the last week alone will amount to millions of dollars of wasted resources. And others have mentioned things like weapons research. Do we really need to spend billions on refining the art of killing each other? It would certainly be nice if there was no need for weapons.

If we were to wait to do something until people got along, well nothing would ever get done. ^_~[/COLOR]

[DeathKnight]

[quote name='SunfallE][COLOR=DarkOliveGreen']Do we really need to spend billions on refining the art of killing each other? [/COLOR][/quote]

[color=crimson]Yes. We do.[/color]

[quote name='Gavin][SIZE=1'] Nuclear weapons research anyone ? [/SIZE][/quote]

[color=crimson]Your statement reminded me of something pertaining to space exploration, actually- check [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_pulse_propulsion]this[/url] out. Fun **** right there.

Oh, and, yeah I support nuclear weapons research too. Bummer.[/color]

[quote name='Derald][FONT=Trebuchet MS][SIZE=1][COLOR=Sienna]Think of all the research that could have been done here on earth, all of the poverty-stricken masses that could have had a better life.[/COLOR][/SIZE'][/FONT][/quote]

[color=crimson]Surely you realize that is idealistic at worst and unlikely at best.

Oh well, fret not. Even with the horrid dedication to exploring a vast, exploitable frontier I don't believe humanitarianism will completely die.[/color]

[quote name='Derald][FONT=Trebuchet MS][SIZE=1][COLOR=Sienna]Many say that these programs will provide a way for people in the future to colonize other planets, therefore justifying their actions.[/COLOR][/SIZE'][/FONT][/quote]

[color=crimson]I don't really see it like that. That's not an attempt to justify their 'actions'- it's just one of the possibilities of their 'actions'. Their research, exploration and so on. You know, exploring unknowns? Probing the vast depths of darkness? Seeking out new facets of knowledge? Etc.?

Like, what humans have been doing for thousands of years pretty successfully?[/color]

[quote name='KatanaViolet']Jupiter? It's just a swirling mass of gasses.[/quote]

[color=crimson]Helium 3 truckload, baby!

Well, in theory. [/color] ;)

[Retribution]

[QUOTE=Derald][FONT=Trebuchet MS][SIZE=1][COLOR=Sienna]Space. The final frontier, but do we really need to go out and explore it in order to benefit humankind? My answer - no.

To me, NASA and other space exploration programs are really a waste of resources. I mean, we're spending billions and billions of dollars to send rockets into space, but how does that really benefit humans? It doesn't. All of that money could have gone to raising the standard of living of people here on earth. Think of all the research that could have been done here on earth, all of the poverty-stricken masses that could have had a better life.

As an added point, why would we even consider moving into space if we can't even get along here on earth?[/COLOR][/SIZE][/FONT][/QUOTE]
[size=1]I think you're pretty much spot-on, Derald. I really have nothing else to say.

However, if we never considered going somewhere else if we didn't get along as we were beforehand, well, forget the colonization period. People will never get along, but all we can do as humans is to press onward. This, however, does not justify the billions we spend on a relatively inconsequential space program.[/size]

[Delta]

[COLOR=#656446]Check this out: [url=http://www.google.com/mars/]A Mars Frappr![/url]
Lovely isn't it?

I'm all for space exploration. Without it, we would probably have never realized the biggest oversight in history: the number of big-*** extraterrestrial matter crossing the Earth's orbit every year. Imagine being forced to replay [i]Armageddon[/i]. It sounds bad enough in theory, let alone live(/die) through it every month!

And besides, who said that the funding for them space programs (should governments lose interest in that big black yonder) will get channeled to humanitarian efforts? I'm willing to bet all the moolah wouldn't have been released if it wasn't for the sake of space exploration.[/COLOR]

[John]

[quote name='KatanaViolet']As for colonizing on other planets? I see that as nothing but a basis for science fiction movies.[/quote] Most things in science fiction won't be fiction, eventually. ;)

Man kinda sorta has a knack for overcoming problems. Moving people to other planets and making the planet habitable will take a lot of work and even more time, but so has everything else humans have ever accomplished. It's an issue of "when", not "if".

And of course, we don't need to do anything of the sort right now, and we won't for who knows how long. Sure, we should have scientists working on the issue, but right now it shouldn't be anything more than a pet project, and a small investment in the future. Not a multi-billion dollar money vacuum or a grant excuse for rocket physicists.

[Fasteriskhead]

This is an interesting question, although more in terms of [i]how[/i] it is asked (as an issue of "need," "benefit," "waste," "improvement," etc.) than the content itself. I won't go into a discussion of opportunity costs, i.e. whether or not the resources spent on the space program could be better used elsewhere, or into talk about a kind of manifest destiny where it is somehow essential to what mankind is to expand itself outwards until it fills all available room. Actually, I would see both these thoughts as indicative of something that's much more fundamental: here we think of outer space only in terms of how it can be [i]used[/i].

I tend to agree with John when he says, "Man kinda sorta has a knack for overcoming problems.... It's an issue of 'when', not 'if'." Barring a true catastrophe of the kind that either completely destroys or disables the species or fundamentally changes the core of humanity (neither of which can be discounted, I will admit), one day we're going to break free of the earth and move out to the new frontier of space. But to me the question isn't so much when this is going to happen, or how "useful" it's going to be, but whether we're going to be [i]ready[/i] for it. This isn't really a new question, even if the question of space colonization makes it all the more urgent. Human being uses technology to achieve its ends, falls back on instrumentality to extend its reach to all things. As technology grows so does that reach, which will arrive at its widest length yet once the use of space (as more than just hopping from adjacent rocks collecting dirt samples) finally becomes simple and everyday. So when I ask "are we [i]ready[/i] to use space?" I really ask "are we really prepared for the day when technology (and here I do not mean only specific tools or machines, but rather what technology is and does at its heart) has stretched us out that far?"

This is a question that anime in particular has always been very good at thinking into: Akira is of course the most famous example of this, although it's certainly not alone. For Akira, the question is what happens when human being, as a creature (Akira most often sees humans as animals driven by base instincts) whose strength is given to it by technology, uses that technology to take up the power of god. Of course, everyone who's seen the movie knows the results. And, while it can be taken most obviously as a cautionary tale, more subtle and perhaps more meaningful is the quiet suggestion it seems to make that, in order to be worthy of the immense power granted to it by technology, human being must itself undergo a very deep kind of transformation.

But none of us thinks of technology, including the technology of space travel, in these terms - we think of technology merely as something useful. This is not merely a kind of flawed or uncautious consideration, though: that's only the tip. As technology (which is, again, NOT merely specific tools) develops and spreads, everything in its reach begins to be thought in terms of the technological - that is, in terms of its use for a specific end. Our cars, a common piece of technology, are something to get us to work and back. We work in order to make money. We make money in order to buy things, including food. We buy food to eat. We eat to survive. We survive to... [i]what?[/i] What's the point? Experience pleasure, continue the species, improve mankind? Well, what's meaningful in any of [i]that?[/i] Technological thinking, taken to its greatest extreme (which we approach every day), says: nothing. Technological thinking also says: the purpose for going out into space must be either specific benefits to the human species or because the species, in a kind of Nietzschian will to power, has no choice but to expand itself. Both of these mean the same thing - growth and extension, endless and constantly on the verge of starvation, which is kept up only because it cannot be stopped. Everything that is becomes technological, a tool for mankind, until like a cancer technology even begins to make "useful" what it was supposed to be "serving" in the first place.

This is not something we can get rid of by simply smashing our machines and returning to the bronze age: the fact that we think about such a smashing as an "in order to" means it itself is fundamentally based in what it hopes to do away with. Today we think technologically - we think of the use of things. This is why, when we do eventually go out into space, we will almost certainly do so because space is useful for us; we will use space for its zero-g (advantageous for industry), for colonization, for new kinds of research. A scant few years ago, some of us as children may have looked up at the starry sky on a clear night and been awestruck at how anything could be so unimaginably huge: if we do this at all anymore, it is mostly only nostalgia. Now, by no means do I suggest a [i]regression[/i] to this kind of idyllic childhood conception of space (a trap easy enough to fall into)... but we should put a great deal of thought into precisely [i]how[/i] this transformation in our thinking, from awe and wonderment to utility and cost analysis, could have taken place, and what it means.

The danger is not in my machines, or my travelling into space, or even technology itself: the danger is in the illusion of my control, in thinking that everything that is can and must, though technology, be made to serve me. This danger cannot be overcome by any purposeful action on my part, which will only seek to grab ahold of things anew: the danger can only be surpassed once I [i]grow up[/i], and discover the possibility of my meaningfully living in attunement with the cosmos. It is possible, at that point, that I may be able to think technology as something other than the merely useful: zero-g manufacturing, planetary colonization, and all else, though "beneficial" to me, may one day be done not for some other reason but as a way of living life and contentedly habitating space. This is not new-agey sentimental crap by any means. On the contrary, it is the only hope I have of not crushing myself under my own weight.

To answer the question above: we will be "ready" to go into space when we have thought through the meaning of technology and are ready to approach space as something to be [i]lived in and lived with[/i], rather than something to be made servile. If this seems excessively abstract and idealistic, it could just be because I'm an intellectual dope who's read too much and whose views have nothing to do with the topic because they are "not useful." For much thinking, this judgment is absolutely correct.

[Aaryanna]

[COLOR=DarkSlateBlue]While I agree that right now a lot of the money going into Space Programs is being wasted, I don?t think we should give up on it. Unlike the money being wasted in other programs commonly referred to as ?political porking?, Space Programs as least have the possibility of helping future generations.

If we waited until we all got along to do stuff then nothing would ever get done! lol! My only regret about Space Programs is that it?s unlikely that I will get to travel into space. I know I would love to get to see the Earth from space.[/COLOR][quote name='SunfallE][COLOR=DarkOliveGreen] Do we really need to spend billions on refining the art of killing each other? [/COLOR][/QUOTE][QUOTE=DeathKnight][color=crimson']Yes. We do. [/color][/quote][COLOR=DarkSlateBlue]Actually no we don?t. Think about it. Weapons are not a need, they are a want. In ancient times humans relied on crude weapons in order to hunt, and defend themselves from predators. Now technology has improved enough that the need for weapons has been replaced by farming and other methods. A very small amount of ?weapons? is needed in order to butcher meat and other tasks like defending yourself from something like a bear, but the deep need for weapons no longer exists.

Unfortunately there are people who interpret ?want? as a ?need? They want what others have so they build weapons so they have the power to go and take what they want from others and in turn those who they are taking things from then need weapons to protect themselves from those who wish to take what?s not theirs.

So weapons are an unfortunate but necessary need on some level. But the reality is that deep down it?s a want. Breathing Oxygen is a need, without it you would die. Using weapons to take from others is a want. They don?t need your land or your possessions, they just want it.[/COLOR] [quote name='Fasteriskhead]To answer the question above: we will be "ready" to go into space when we have thought through the meaning of technology and are ready to approach space as something to be [i]lived in and lived with[/i'], rather than something to be made servile. If this seems excessively abstract and idealistic, it could just be because I'm an intellectual dope who's read too much and whose views have nothing to do with the topic because they are "not useful." For much thinking, this judgment is absolutely correct.[/quote] [COLOR=DarkSlateBlue]The problem with waiting to expand into another area of living until we are ready to just live in and live with it, is we will never go there. On some level we have to find a way for it to help us survive or otherwise we won?t be able to just live there. You can?t just live somewhere if the means to support yourself are not there. Though it would be more idealistic if we moved into space because it was not a complete need but rather a gradual one. Where on some level we are there because our means to survive are being taken care of elsewhere.
[/COLOR]

[DeathKnight]

[quote name='Aaryanna][COLOR=DarkSlateBlue']Actually no we don't.[/COLOR][/quote]

[color=crimson]Then we disagree. I doubt I could convince you otherwise and I'm very entrenched in my militarist opinions so I won't turn this into some sort of boring back and forth that ends up going nowhere. [/color] :p

[Fasteriskhead]

[QUOTE=Aaryanna][COLOR=DarkSlateBlue]The problem with waiting to expand into another area of living until we are ready to just live in and live with it, is we will never go there. On some level we have to find a way for it to help us survive or otherwise we won?t be able to just live there. You can?t just live somewhere if the means to support yourself are not there. Though it would be more idealistic if we moved into space because it was not a complete need but rather a gradual one. Where on some level we are there because our means to survive are being taken care of elsewhere.
[/COLOR][/QUOTE]
I think you slightly misunderstand me. I feel that it's certainly possible that one day we may be "ready" for the use of space, but more than likely we're going to be out there long before that ever happens. Or, to put it in a clearer way: we won't be ready for space, but probably we'll be out there regardless, and I have no idea whether this is a good thing or not.

On the other hand, I don't see any necessary connection between the kind of "supporting ourselves" in space you suggest and the technological thinking which demands that everything deliver the maximum output to us at all times. Even a dumb intellectual like me won't object to our subsistence and supporting ourselves as a foundation for our living - the larger question is how we will treat space beyond that, whether as something to be lived in or something to be challenged.

(and yes, most of the above post is stolen wholesale from Heidegger; [URL=http://www.culturaleconomics.atfreeweb.com/Anno/Heidegger%20The%20Question%201954.htm]click here[/URL] if you get particularly bored one day)

[Guest D. Resurrected]

Hmmm well I believe we should explore more into space.For one thing I believe we did resently find out that there was frozen water in mars which in tern may make it possible for substaining human life.plus who know what kind of illneses we could cure in space.such as waitless rooms for surgery,or even yeild crop we never could produce on earth.

anyway just my opinion(sorry if that sounded very science fictiony)LOL :animesmil

[Guest Gun Preacher]

Look at the world now look whats going on war,poverty,murder,abandenment space may seem the only solution we have because even if we stoped polouting the earth we would still drain it dry of natrual resorces.

and besides if we all stay on earth will all eventually die from being over populated and then there will be wars for the little things such as food and that will happen until we kill all of each other so space is are only choice in my eyes.

[Aaryanna]

[quote name='DeathKnight][color=crimson]Then we disagree. I doubt I could convince you otherwise and I'm very entrenched in my militarist opinions so I won't turn this into some sort of boring back and forth that ends up going nowhere. [/color'] :p[/quote]
[COLOR=DarkSlateBlue]I don?t know about that. ^_~ Most of my view is based on what I see in the news. All the shootings and robbery and other types of violent crimes. I?m not that familiar with military issues. I know I?m a bit naive when it comes to weapons and my wish that people would see that they aren?t necessary. But at the same time if someone were to ask me to join a movement to get rid of weapons I?d look at them like they had grown two heads or something! LOL! Even I know that we can?t just get rid of them and that if you don?t develop better weapons those who use them against you would end up being powerful enough to do just that. >_< I?ll still believe in my idealist view that in the end we don?t need them though. :p [/COLOR]
[QUOTE=Fasteriskhead]I think you slightly misunderstand me. I feel that it's certainly possible that one day we may be "ready" for the use of space, but more than likely we're going to be out there long before that ever happens. Or, to put it in a clearer way: we won't be ready for space, but probably we'll be out there regardless, and I have no idea whether this is a good thing or not.

On the other hand, I don't see any necessary connection between the kind of "supporting ourselves" in space you suggest and the technological thinking which demands that everything deliver the maximum output to us at all times. Even a dumb intellectual like me won't object to our subsistence and supporting ourselves as a foundation for our living - the larger question is how we will treat space beyond that, whether as something to be lived in or something to be challenged.

(and yes, most of the above post is stolen wholesale from Heidegger; [URL=http://www.culturaleconomics.atfreeweb.com/Anno/Heidegger%20The%20Question%201954.htm]click here[/URL] if you get particularly bored one day)[/QUOTE]
[COLOR=DarkSlateBlue]Ah, that makes more sense. ^_^ You were talking more about the exploring spirit vs only going there to make it serve us in some fashion, right? ^_^ [/COLOR]

[Burori]

Not sure if this was added or not but know more of what is out there in space then we do at the bottom of our own oceans.

Doesn't that tell you something NASA?

[Fasteriskhead]

[quote name='Aaryanna][COLOR=DarkSlateBlue']Ah, that makes more sense. ^_^ You were talking more about the exploring spirit vs only going there to make it serve us in some fashion, right? ^_^ [/COLOR][/quote]
This is fair, yes ("spirit" in particular is a good word), but only taken in a very particular sense of what the word "exploration" means (and yes, here I go again). We usually take exploring to mean "going to the farthest corners" of the world or the universe, or "mapping things out" by carefully placing things on a grid so that they can be properly utilized in the future. This kind of exploring constantly challenges everything, looks under every nook and cranny in order to precisely determine and make use of everything that's there. Exploring in this fashion is fundamentally something technological (see my first post), and isn't what I'm getting at.

There's another kind of exploring, though, and we still think it sometimes when we talk, for example, about children exploring their own back yards. What could be more familiar than a back yard? And yet the act (or, better: the state) of exploring immediately makes it mysterious and wonderous. We may spot, all of a sudden, a line of ants going up a tree, or a spider web refracting the sunlight in just such a way. These are [i]discoveries[/i]. And yet we do not appropriate these things to our use, nor do we stand in some kind of aesthetic awe of them (as some of the more vapid "nature lovers" would have you believe). In reality, we are more likely to just find those ants [i]cool[/i]. The fundamental feeling here isn't one of desire or will to use or "appreciation," but rather: the surprise and delight that these ants, in all their uniqueness, have been [i]living with us[/i] mere feet away from our home this whole time. The delight of discovery is the joy in having what was always there suddenly be shown to us (dis-covered). This kind of exploring, exploring what has been most close to us for all of our lives, goes hand in hand with what is usually termed "living a good life."

The question for me, then, is whether it may one day be possible to divert the extraordinary power and rigor of technology (which again, is itself no particular tool or kind of technology) to this manner of exploration, which is currently only vague and half-forgotten. My etymological dictionary suggests that "explore" may relate back to the Latin [i]ex-[/i], "outwards," [i]pluere[/i], "to flow." This would mean that exploring might be properly thought of as the everyday flowing out of discovery, in the places that are most familiar to us (the places that we live in every day). If space is to be where we will live one day, our "back yard," it may be easy to simply totally forget about "exploring" it (in my sense) in favor of simply spreading out everywhere in search of the useful. And yet this kind of "back yard," that which is already totally familiar, is precisely what's most worth exploring.