| Are space
missions worth the money? |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
The
United States will send astronauts back to the Moon to prepare for exploration further
afield, President George W Bush has announced. He said
astronauts will be back on the Moon by 2020, and will establish a lunar base to prepare
for human exploration of Mars. The US
space agency will get an extra $1bn over five years and the US says the
"affordable" programme, including plans to replace the space shuttle, will
benefit all Americans. But
critics are describing the President's proposals as an over-expensive election year
gimmick. Meanwhile,
The US robotic probe that landed on Mars 10 days ago has rolled off its lander and on to
the Martian surface. Should
humans go into space? Are the missions worth the huge investment? Will signs of life be
found on Mars? The
following comments reflect the balance of opinion we have received so far: You
could argue that £750 million spent on the new Wembley, or the £2 billion for the London
Olympics is a waste of money better spent on poverty. Space exploration has never used a
great deal of money compared to these projects. As to what it has it given us I think the
answers to where we all come from are well worth it. The
mysteries of space should be left untouched. Mankind has already destroyed earth why
should we destroy other planets? I think
there is enormous scope for reducing the amount of public money being spent on useless
things, but the exploration of our surroundings is certainly not one of them. Al Gore
is right to criticise Bush. Instead of spending billions of dollars to make a small part
of the Moon/Mars habitable, the money could be spent to conserve Earth for future
generations.
Do you
remember when you needed oil to make pancakes, because they used to stick to the pan?
Funny, but the space exploration has brought you Teflon, and if you dig Google for a while
you can find there's more to space research than meets the eye, and however huge the
spending seems, it's only a very small fraction of budgets for projects that we really
don't want to receive any funding at all, and yet they do. Keep
sending unmanned explorers, if you must. But, don't waste our much needed finances on
sending men. Man's
ultimate goal is to explore the world(s) around him and beyond we should already have a
base on the moon, enough time has been wasted lets get out there and say hello. You know
what? I think space missions are not a waste of money. For our own safety we must learn
more about these planets and possible asteroids that could hit the earth. However-I think
Bush is going overboard. There's no point in going to Mars. Who cares? An
absolute waste of money. Spend the money on more hospitals, better school buildings, more
police and help the poor and needy, poverty would be eliminated if all that money was
spent wisely.
Any form
of exploration has been, and will be beneficial. Mankind may gain little from the act of
setting foot on Mars, but we will gain much from the endeavour itself. Anything that
expands our knowledge in mathematics, biology, chemistry, physics, human physiology,
technology, geology, etc. benefits all of us here on Earth. It is
the natural thing to do. Humans are curious and that is why we are where we are. We want
to know more, see greater things, and experience new emotions. We must begin the
exploration of Mars forthwith. We should have already established a Lunar Colony AND a
space station. Money must be found! Can you imagine if Columbus had not sailed because of
lack of funds? So we
cut military pay and funding for education because we simply need the money for this war,
yet we can afford to send people to the Moon and further to Mars? Were exactly is all this
new money coming from? What an
enormous waste of resources. Let's devote that money to cleaning up our own backyard
before sending people to space. Devote the money towards sustainable energy, disease
control, and education.
It's
wrong to compare the 16th-century Age of Discovery with space exploration. The mariners
who explored the Atlantic and Pacific did so for short-term financial gain. Their only
interest was in making money. They had no notion of the so-called human urge to explore.
I'm in favour of scientific exploration, but I'm completely against trying to put people
on Mars, it's just romanticism, and it certainly won't be a solution to overpopulation. It
would be easier and more practical to try colonizing the Antarctic. At least there's
oxygen there! If
international co-operation can be achieved, then the money is better spent on this than
being at war with each other. Yes,
humans should go into space, it is in our nature to explore. Yes, the program is an
election gimmick, but this is how projects of such vision are developed in our society. I
hate to be cynical, but the chance to further explore our solar system is much more
important. We are ready to go to Mars. Send us your suggestions To be
perfectly honest does anyone genuinely believe it will happen as stated. The US stumps up
a large amount of money initially. Other partners, EU, Japan, China put up some limited
funding. The US administration potentially changes twice over the next 5 years, budgets
are redrawn and once the US is seen to be cutting back on the project other partners will
drift away. Personally, I find the 'idea' appealing but diverting a few $bn extra to speed
Fusion research would yield dramatically more benefits, ITER is an international
collaboration too. We
should go to space, we should colonise the universe.. But it should be done on behalf of
all mankind, not solely on behalf of the US. I do not feel this should be a priority for
any nation's spending: there are much more important things for us to worry about on
Earth. Before
sending explorations into space Bush should 1. Take care of the homeless people of the
USA. 2. Start ploughing money into halting global warming (considering the US is the
country causing the most damage to the planet) and 3. Do something about the gun laws in
his country (has he not seen Bowling for Columbine?) Then and only then should he spend
$$$ on space missions. Space
missions are definitely worthwhile. Opposing them is stupid, it is just like opposing
Columbus' trip in 1491... Furthermore, they stimulate technology developments and provide
incalculable spin-offs. They are a better investment than the many misdirected and
mismanaged social programs we spend money on. I am all
for space exploration, the benefits to mankind on earth have been huge. I do however worry
that if we have such little reverence for the earth and its resources do we really deserve
to find more? We live on a planet were billions use much more than they need everyday and
billions have close to nothing. If we cannot be bothered to resolve that discrepancy then
is finding more resources on mars really going to solve our problems? READ
SARCASM: As long as Bush gets more votes I'm happy. Why should we worry about trivialities
like the current account deficit, aids, domestic unemployment or the like when there are
other galaxies to explore?
Let's
get it right on this planet before we go and start doing to others what we have done here.
We don't look after this planet as we know we should and the thought of doing the same to
others is frightening. There are far better things to spend this type of money on than
space exploration. Have people forgotten that millions of people are starving? Oh sorry I
forgot that doesn't matter does it? If these
programmes were affordable Bill Gates would be investing in them. There is no reason why
anyone's tax money should be invested in such schemes. How many
people can honestly say that they don't get even a little bit excited at the prospect of
exploring space? For centuries, man has explored. Why should we stop now? Yes it
is worth it, this is all about aspirations and investing in the future of mankind. Not
only that but lets not forget the vast sum on money required doesn't just vanish it is
actually ploughed back into the economy, stimulates scientific research and technologic
innovation and creates jobs. Of
course it is important to discover what lies beyond our current base of knowledge. But why
don't we put the billions towards sustaining THIS planet so we can STAY on it. Instead of
having to move off Earth when it has been destroyed by our lack of concern, we should
focus first on saving this world, and second on exploring others. We
belong in space; we belong in the cosmos. The greatest achievements, discoveries and
knowledge will be gained in space. I just hope I'm around long enough to see these events
happen! Humans
can and should go to the Moon and possibly Mars. The cost is only few percent of the US
Military spending! It
depresses me, in this day and age we still do not know how to cure cancer etc and waste
time and money on space missions. We know so little about our own planet but we seem happy
to continue destroying it. If only America would spend this sort of money on their
pollution impact on the environment. I also feel that Bush is pushing space missions to
try and divert attention from the WAR. Absolutely!
Anyone who complains that space exploration is a waste of money should consider the
billions of pounds/dollars poured into pointless TV programming and entertainment. It
might not be a cure for cancer or a new school, true, but it's a damn sight more
worthwhile than another Hollywood hit or TV series. Definitely
not! When the US deficit is at an all time high - the President should be pumping these
funds into solving domestic problems such as crime, education and poverty. That would
benefit all Americans - not sending someone up to Mars - to find out what? Spend the money
on what really matters to the everyday American! This is another one of Bush's ego
boosting, ridiculous ventures. I find
it surprising that so many English responses to this endeavour are "it's a waste of
money" or, that "it's controlling space in a strategic way". Have you
forgotten your countryman's response to why he should climb Mt. Everest? "because its
there". Stop being so cynical and revel in the sense of adventure that our President
has instilled in his people, election year or no!
Whether
or not it is an election year gimmick is irrelevant; it is great news! Finally George W.
is looking beyond Iraq. Is human (not robotic) exploration of space worthwhile? What's the
cost of dreams? I firmly believe that humanity's ultimate future is in space. Space
exploration is definitely worth the cost. The money spent on the war in Iraq could easily
have been better spent on the space program. The only country that has the real knowledge
and resources to go to Mars are the Americans and Godspeed to them on this. It's no
accident that shows like 'Star Wars' 'Star Trek' and the thousand other movies and TV
shows are so popular: they fuel our dreams. It's time that all of us got the courage to
aim a little higher than the horizon. Let's go! You have
to ask yourself this simple question. "What do you get after a few generations when
you invest only in human comforts? Not much really when you realize that societies are
remembered by their grand achievements not for providing high levels of comfort for all
citizens. As humans we should set our goals very high and sacrifice a bit of our material
comforts in order to achieve these ideals. Bush
declared man would be returned to the moon by 2020. Whether it is a great or a misdirected
idea I shall leave to history to decide but why, over 40 years ago, did it take 9 years to
put man on the moon for the first time but now 16 years? Like the scrapping of Concorde,
we seem to be taking backward steps in technology. I
believe this type of forward-looking vision has been lacking for too long among our recent
world-leaders. The Russians set the first goal, by putting the first man into space, as
well as putting the first un-manned probe on the moon. That spirit of brave exploration is
an extension of the spirit embraced by the many brave explorers from every culture on this
planet that ventured forth from their "known world" to find the unknown. Even if
the President's initiative fails, I hope that the same ideal of exploration continues,
whether it is the ESA, Russia, Japan, China, etc. Regardless of the politics, our human
race as a whole is using natural resources at an alarming rate, and the other bodies in
our solar system may present the best solution to this problem. . The day
man stops exploring will be the day all progress stops. No one foresaw the technological
benefits arising from such projects. Man has this natural urge to explore the unknown,
always has done and hopefully always will. A poor
destination for this money considering there are somewhere between 30 and 50 million
people without health insurance in this country - maybe the entertainment value of this
project will distract the public form what its government does not deliver to its
taxpayers - compassionate welfare and health services. Virtually
every technological advance is due to space exploration. The benefits are not only
space-related, but the technology derived from mission support. These are the products,
which have become essential tools of everyday life that we often take for granted.
Humankind is driven by nature to explore and space is a valiant aspiration and objective. How can
people complain about this project that can and will ultimately improve lives here. Look
at the tiny cost compared to the waste of money spent every year by the US and UK on
military applications. Millions on "smart bombs" for example that can't even hit
their targets or worse hit allied targets. Just look at what we throw away on
"defence". Using that money would solve a lot of world health problems in only a
few years. Look at the bigger picture, its the military that break the banks of our
countries not our space research. I want
to see a multi-national party rocking and rolling all the way to the "Red
Planet" I envision every county in the world involved, every flag risen, every petty
fight put aside to take "one step for mankind". The US,
along with Britain and many other countries, funds numerous humanitarian projects here on
Earth. More should be spent, surely, on combating poverty and disease, but a mission to
Mars will not only fuel numerous new technologies, it will also fire young (and old)
people's minds. Those who witnessed Armstrong's first steps on the moon probably remember
a catch in their throat and an unavoidable welling of the eyes as one of our own species
sauntered about on the surface of our moon - that's the stuff of dreams and ambitions.
Make it so! The
estimated cost of manned space missions to mars is $180 Billion. If its US government
funded then it should be no problem. The results of the current unmanned mission, will
give rise to evidence that will either warrant the cost of manned space missions or void
them. Each
side has a view and right to decide. Perhaps a compromise is in order. For every dollar
spent toward space exploration, so much gets spent toward Earth-bound humanitarian
efforts? While I
support scientific research whole-heartedly, I have to wonder about the wisdom of Bush's
proposed plan. It seems to me that improving basic human rights, ending poverty, and
fixing the American education system should come before a hypothetical mission to Mars.
Bush has put our nation in enough debt as it is. I think
it is a basic feature of Mankind to be curious and to explore and a trip to Mars would be
the ultimate in exploration. I hope that this could be a totally international expedition
involving as many nations as possible. The cost
of this project is enormous, as it is meant to be. The research will benefit the private
sector, as will the contracts given to whichever contractors win the bids or have the
connections. This is just one more form of corporate welfare. Although
I feel it is important to explore our galaxy. I think it is more of a priority to combat
issues here on earth such as hunger, disease, the environment and establishing peace with
our fellow human-beings. After-all if we ever encountered life somewhere in space look at
the world we have to show them. We have
no right whatsoever to tell the Americans what to spend their money on, if I told my
neighbour what to spend their money on they would rightly tell me where to go. National
goals unite countries. This country needs a national goal. The cost
of going to Mars is huge. The cost to alleviate world poverty in respect to the cost of a
manned mission to Mars is tiny. Why not have both? It's only increasing the budget by
another 5%. This way, millions of people live better lives, scientific research gets a
boost, and the Brits might concern themselves in their own country's affairs for once. It's not
just about space exploration, it's about spending on research. Past space exploration gave
us everything from freeze-dried food to WD-40 oil. You could even argue it drove a US tech
boom. Just image what problems will have to be solved to get to Mars and what benefits
this might bring to those of us that never leave the earth.
A
trillion dollars is a lot of bananas, but let's not forget that that money filters down
from NASA to their engineers and suppliers and ends up spent in towns and cities up and
down the USA. This is basic Keynes economics. In the end it benefits everyone. I would
like to wish the Yanks the best of luck with this mission, and want to know... can I have
a job please? Please
enlighten me why are US taxpayers expected to alleviate poverty in other countries? We
spend OUR money the way WE want. Tough luck if in the 21 century your country cannot even
feed its own people. Why are
people so blind to America's real intentions? This is about controlling space in a
strategic military way. They wouldn't give Nasa money otherwise. Utopian dream of human
adventure? Don't make me laugh. Forget
about how much it will cost and think about this. It will take approximately three years
for a craft carrying humans to get to and from Mars - an awful lot can happen in 36
months... The
amount of money the USA is considering spending on space is obscene, but anyone who thinks
that they will spend this amount on health research /poverty or anything else to help
people on this planet is living in cloud cuckoo land. What did we get from sending a man
to the moon? Lots of iffy pictures and non-stick frying pans! The
trillion dollar cost of this idea is clearly going to make it impossible, regardless of
what anyone thinks. The only hope for it to succeed is to find ways to economically
exploit the Moon's resources in order to pay for the mission to Mars.
Mars is
uninhabitable and the costs and risks of reaching there are impossibly high. Nevertheless
we daft humans will continue to fantasise, and vainly attempt to use space travel to find
'signs of life' on other planets. We should instead humble ourselves before our Creator
and show proper respect and gratitude for the planet we have been given to live on and
share with one another. Good
luck to the Yanks! I hope the whole world can participate in this great endeavour. Go for
it! Mankind
has always looked towards the heavens and maybe that is where we originated. We may just
be going home! Forget
politics. Forget short term issues. Space exploration is a long term goal and essential to
humankind. Since we are still at the early stages, we need to invest time and effort now
into developing the necessary technology. This can only benefit mankind in the long run. It would
be a very sad day indeed for progress if all instigators of scientific research had to
look backwards in order to justify their proposed way forward. So much of what we have
around us has arisen from scientific discoveries made quite unexpectedly. Simple
inquisitiveness provides ample justification. Not only
would this adventure benefit the whole of human kind anyway, it would also have other
benefits such as long-term employment for possibly thousands of people and lots of support
industries would pop around the project, creating further jobs. Also discoveries made
along the way may help to resolve problems we currently face on Earth, so I say 'Go for
it!'. We are
continually being told that there is not enough funding for the NHS, and that cash for
education is cut every year - and then we watch the news and see that millions is being
spent on a mission to Mars (which failed). If there is one word of advise I would give to
the PM is 'prioritise'.
So we
make a mess of this planet and look for another to mess up. I feel this money would be
better spent on improving this planet. But let the Americans worry about their own money
and country. There
are plenty of issues on this planet that would benefit more with the money (e.g. medical
research, foreign aid etc.). Maybe Mr. Bush wants to escape from the problems here. Lets
send him to Mars if that's what he wants! Man on
Mars is an inspiring prospect and a great goal to aim for the future, but what about life
on Earth? We need to work on preserving endangered species and on improving human means of
survival in third world countries. A lot of
people complain that the £50 million spent on the beagle probe would have been better
spent on aid etc. Well how many of those people have spent money on trivial things this
year? What about cinema visits and holidays? How much do we spend on those? So before the
hypocrites start moaning about the cost of answering fundamental questions about life in
our universe (does alien life exist? If so, bye-bye religion, and hence millions of lives
saved!), stop buying things you don't need and give to charity instead. Use the
money to cure cancer. Now that really would be 'One great leap for mankind'.... Value of
sending man to mars can't be counted in dollars. But it is too expensive now. First let us
develop faster, safer and of course cheaper way of transport and other technologies. Till
then we should continue with our robotic probes. Man's
technical progress and inquisitive nature forces him to explore, but it will be man's
greed for profit which will fund any exploitation of other planet resources. Therefore the
inevitable will happen when it's deemed cost effective. Don't we
want to learn more about our oceans before going out to other planets? Please
will people stop banging on about "the money" "the USA". This is not
about money or any one country, this is about the future of the human species. Stagnate
and we die. Let's get some of our eggs out of this one small basket!!! The future is bleak
if all we do is look inwards and lose the desire to look beyond our little blue sphere.
Generations of humans have looked up and wondered about the universe, unfortunately now we
can go there too many people want to deny the rest of us the chance to get some answers.
What gives you the right? There is
such a thing as timing. If the US wasn't pouring billions into the wars in Iraq and
Afghanistan and hadn't just given massive tax breaks to the rich, I would say this would
be an interesting project. But when working people are without health care and many
workers are becoming homeless in the US due to the above, no. Bush is pushing for
re-election so all this is happening at once - the economy won't sustain it here. Those in
the UK can think it grand, we have to pay for it.
Jules
Verne, HG Wells and others would tell us never to quit. The venture is similar to
searching for the Grail. Humanity will become bored without this adventure. Star Trek and
Dr. Who and varied science fiction creations are the enticement to reach out to the
unknown as earlier seagoing explorers ventured into the unknown. Although
I have a passion for space research (since I was about 6 years old), and would love to see
NASA properly funded again after years of neglect, I suspect the motives are less about
man's exploration of the solar system, and more about re-election (galvanising people with
a vision for election year, only to de-prioritise it again after the election when those
nasty terrorists get back onto the agenda). Humans
have always been explorers, and I hope they will always be. I am very much in favour of
human space exploration. The things we could find on other worlds might lead to numerous
advances in our way of life, including possible cures to diseases. Someone
asked why go to Mars? It may answer one of the great questions about the universe. Are we
alone? How can
we know if it's worth the money or not unless we go there?
A manned
mission to Mars would be extraordinarily difficult, highly dangerous, and hugely expensive
and, at the end of the day, of only very limited scientific value. It would be better to
put the money into projects of real scientific value. More and increasingly sophisticated
unmanned missions to explore the entire solar system (Mars included), new particle
accelerators to probe the heart of matter, enlarged research programmes developing new
medical cures and researching into global warming and other environmental issues - all
these things could be undertaken for only a fraction of the cost of a manned mission, and
are unlikely to be done if all our resources are ploughed into what is largely a pointless
exercise. The need
to explore and learn is far more noble a goal than waging war. The amount of money and
time invested in finding new and imaginative ways of killing each other would be put to
far better use if it were spent on furthering human knowledge, but it needs to be balanced
against the need to alleviate third world debt. The
question of exploring Mars is answerable in one word: Columbus. Obviously Queen Isabella
thought the high price of a mission to the new world was worth it. A rather good return on
her investment I would say... Back to
the moon is a good idea. Hope Bush has his flight suit available. It would be another
great publicity stunt.
How can
ANYONE justify spending that kind of money on space exploration when we see what little
return on investment we get already? Besides we've already been to mars and the moon
costing billions and what did that get us? Ask the average person on the street how they
benefited from the US space lab or Mir or the international space station. That honeymoon
is over. Can you imagine what wonderful cures we could gain by spending that money on
medical research instead of rock research. Let's
use the proposed $1.4trillion to fix this planet. Imagine the schools, hospitals, the
food, computers we could give to the third world. Whilst
there are homeless and starving people on this planet and a "commitment" to
rebuild invaded countries, how can President Bush morally justify a pointless exercise
like travel to Mars? Presumably he is going to use the revenue from the future sale of
Iraq's oil to fund it! Our
bodies are not made to live in an environment such as that on Mars. So why waste money
trying to go there. I guess the rich must have their toys. A 800 million dollar remote
controlled car.
I think
many westerners including myself are complacent when it comes to spending money. I think
this extends to the government. Why are we spending trillions of pounds on going to Mars
when there are huge problems in the world with poverty in Britain and abroad? Why do we
spend stupid amounts of money on war when our universities, health service and
infrastructure need serious investment? Please tell me how we can stop this cycle of
production and waste at the expense of humanity. How
about spending the money on a few things that need sorting on Earth? Building hospitals;
helping victims of famine; fighting AIDS in Africa... also.... It's a real shame that the
mega brains at NASA and ESA don't put some of that IQ they have to real use. A lunar
space station is feasible. The notion of someone going to mars is a bit far fetched. I
think that we are living on earth, and should perhaps direct our attention to issues on
this planet. We have
to go to Mars. We have to overcome our petty differences and unite as a species. It is the
only way forward for humanity. Our government often spends vast quantities of money on
improving public services, what improvement have we seen? Here at last is a goal that is
achievable. Lets spend the cash, develop the technology, and see the results. President
George Bush is proposing to send Americans to Mars, and back to the moon?! Are they all
going? Is President Bush going to lead the expedition? I'll vote for that! I
believe that it is ignorant to squander money on fruitless endeavours such as this when we
have thousands of children starving and dying from avoidable illness. Americans definitely
have their priorities screwed up when they can condone one $820 million dollar project
that will never benefit anyone and to make it worse these explorations are probably the
number one reason our air is unsafe to breath and nobody could convince me that our
problem with global warming isn't a direct result of this as well.
I
thought that this day would never come - finally we are talking about taking the next step
in our exploration of space. I have always felt that the great redeeming quality of the
Americans is their ability to believe that nothing is impossible, their lack of cynicism,
the romanticism of their dreams. We spend millions on "helping" the third world,
but none of it will do any good until we get rid of every last dictator in the world.
Until anybody is willing to do that, let's invest in our dreams and take the next step. If
anybody knows how to advance the frontier of exploration, it's the Americans. I see a
lot of comments about one day needing to move off of earth for our survival. I would
rather fix earth, than move to MARS and live in a bubble because we wrecked earth.
Besides, our Sun will blow up before we get out of our solar system. And even if we could
get out of our solar system, the Galaxy is heading for a collision with another one
anyway. We cannot escape cosmic ruin and survive for eternity. Let's live well here for as
long as we can. The NYC
doesn't have money to spend on public libraries yet we need to show to the world how rich
we are, Bush can exercise his own money. I think
it's important for NASA to have an actual mission, a goal. And it's important to remember
that the sooner we do this, the better. If we plan this for 20 or 50 years in the future,
chances are it won't happen. But I'm not sure if teaming up with foreign space agencies is
the best way to go about it. I highly doubt that would make it any easier. Maybe bringing
in foreign astronauts would work though. In
twenty or thirty years, by the time they could actually get around to travelling to Mars,
oil will be in such a decline that it will be hard enough travelling across London. We
should stop dreaming and get down to reality.
A
mission to mars is long over due. Space exploration will bring all countries together. As
people start to live on other planets, we will start to forget our differences and join
together in a common goal of exploration. Most of
the criticism you see here is mostly because it's an American effort. I'm sure if it was
the British announcing these plans you would be singing a different tune. Enough with the
sour grapes already. I say go
for it! I'm not sure how important it is to put someone on Mars, but the discoveries in
technology we make during the quest will justify every penny. Those of you not happy with
America spending money on this as opposed to your own failing country, I say start taking
responsibility for yourselves. This is the American tax payer, taking on the bill. So, I
hardly see how anyone else should have a say. That being said, I think making this a joint
effort among space agencies around the world would be a positive thing. All the
money is spent here on Earth, so it is never a waste. I think Human-kind has to decide
whether we wish to stagnate, or to become a technologically advanced civilisation, which
will ultimately help everyone. At one
time people were sure that the world was flat. The "new world" didn't exist
until Columbus went out there and found it. The little MARS rover is the size of a golf
buggy on an entire planet - just because we see one picture of rock sent back doesn't mean
there's nothing out there to be found.
Without
Spirit or the Opportunity to explore, there would not be fun, excitement and advancement
for the earthy world. If $$ is not used for such great causes, the money will be wasted by
the governments in other ways anyway. So
George W Bush will spend billions on sending men and women to Mars, yet stalls on finding
measures to help with global warming? Reality check, please. I would
say that these missions are worth the money, because Mars, uniquely in the solar system,
is so much like our own planet. We can learn a lot about Earth, and life on Earth, from
missions to Mars. Over the coming years, we will learn much more about coping with space
travel and exploiting extraterrestrial environments. We need to look at return on
investment over very long timescales. The payoff for us now is simply the thrill of
achievement and the greater knowledge acquired. The payoff for future generations may be
incalculable - who knows? We may some day need Mars to sustain human life. Good
luck to anyone willing to undergo an airbag assisted crash land on Mars. And how are you
going to get off? Have you seen what it takes to escape Earth's gravity? You need Cape
Canaveral on Mars! Tell me what a human can do on Mars that a robot or remote sensing
cannot? This is George W pandering to American pride and hoping to echo Kennedy's speech
about the Moon. The whole thing is nonsense.
I find
it indicative of the cynicism and sophistry of the modern world that we complain a great
deal about wasted money. Governments waste far less money than individuals. They just do
it in more noticeable ways. The truth is that pursuing utilitarian ends do not really seem
to solve the problems of world poverty. What will is faith, hope and charity - virtues
which may well be boosted by the adventure of putting Man into the various reaches of
space. This sort of adventure is exactly what we need and it is likely to serve the ends
of the utilitarian far more than allocating the money to the UN such and such fund. There is
plenty of money to go around: believe it or not, we can actually afford both the space
programme and to feed the world. What we need is a little inspiration and optimism among
the people who have the cash. I would
like to volunteer myself for this mission. This has been my every dream since childhood. I
feel it could be possible for the American Govt to allow some other citizens to go.
Scientific
advancement and exploration reflects the best of humanity. To suggest we should stop
moving forward because there are problems in the US and around the world is totally
absurd. It's too bad so many people are being drowned by cynicism and negativity. Instead
of hoping for an amazing new human adventure, people are bitter because those humans might
be Americans. We're going forward; stay back if you wish. The
exploration of space is a wonderful, romantic dream, and I readily admit enjoying it. But
the exploration of space is also closely linked to the military and is not an entirely
peaceful endeavour. In contrast, the elimination of poverty, sickness and environmental
destruction is also a wonderful dream. How many potential Einstein's and Pasteur's -
people who could make a massive contribution to human betterment - are dying minute by
minute in the Third World through lack of basic needs? As with
the Apollo programme in the 60s and 70s, any effort to put man on Mars will necessitate
vast investment in technology that can only benefit mankind. So what if NASA spent $40
Billion on Apollo? None of us would be e-mailing these messages to the BBC, or enjoy many
of the other freedoms we enjoy today, if the Americans had decided to invest the money in
domestic issues.
I'd like
to know where our government is going to find the money. I mean, it's not like we're
running a surplus at this stage. Afghanistan, Iraq, the Department of Homeland Security,
Increased Defence Spending, Tax Cuts and now Mars and the Moon... Mr. Bush is presiding
over the biggest increase in Federal government spending in history. Couldn't
the European Space Agency offer to join in with NASA on the Mars effort and make it an
international enterprise - and maybe happen quicker? And how about letting people who feel
passionately about it being humankind's destiny (like me) put their money where their
mouths are and invest in the project? Countries
spend money on the poor, not enough, but it is spent. If a country stands still it will
wither and die. If it withers and dies it cannot support itself or help anyone. There's
money/resources in space, just like there are in mining the North Sea, Iraq and The Atom
etc. But in order to get to it we must invest, hence space exploration. Its that simple.
Mars
missions are a complete waste of money! Why spent billions of dollars simply to determine
if there was once life on the planet? The money would be far better spent 'Terraforming'
the planet for future inhabitation by humans. NASA could send 'Seed bombs' to the red
planet full of Genetically Modified seeds that will grown in hostile environments. By
establishing plant life the amount of oxygen in the atmosphere would quickly increase
making it far more hospitable to animals and eventually humans. Time is quickly running
out for us 'earthlings' as we are using our planets resources at an alarming rate. We need
to start colonising another planet now or face extinction! I think
that overspend on these inventions is wasteful. I hope that the American President pays
attention to the poor nations instead of overspending on such missions. As we observe that
such countries like Afghanistan which suffers from destitution and African countries
suffering from the aggressive disease of HIV or AIDS, it is the responsibility of the rich
countries to come to their aid. George Bush declared that America attacked Afghanistan
because it was their duty to bring security for the people of the world. Now the question
is why they ignore all these problems and want to spend a great deal of money for a
mission to Mars. It can be never acceptable for me. So, the
United States is willing to spend the money to send a man to Mars and build a colony on
the moon, but God forbid they build better housing for the millions of people living in
the inner cities of the country. Wouldn't that money be better spent helping those who
really need the help? After that, they can worry about the cosmetic advances of being the
first country to put a man (or dare I say woman) on Mars. The
political costs of failure in manned space exploration are huge. A rule of thumb from the
two Space Shuttle disasters, and from the Apollo launch pad fire in 1967, seems to be that
a disaster that costs lives results in a halt to further missions for almost two years.
Unmanned mission failures aren't comfortable for NASA, but nor are they such a great
setback.
Surely
we should focus on allocating funds to technologies that would minimise (ideally reverse)
the detrimental impact of mankind on our current environment. The funding of expensive
space missions will only result in the eventual destruction of the moon, mars etc for our
own benefit, and conducted as usual, with little or no consideration for the associated
environment. Why can't we just put our hands up and say we're getting it wrong and all
focus on correcting the mistakes we have already made. If the
money were not spent on space exploration, who seriously thinks that it would be diverted
to improving the lives of the poor on Earth? Any money not spent on war and its weapons is
money well spent. Politicians
are often accused of short-termism - of failing to see the big picture. Indeed, the
decision to "go to Mars" is based on a sense of patriotic pride and short-term
nation-uniting. However, such missions serve a potentially vital long term purpose. Humans
need the ability to leave the planet - in case something happens to the Earth. We are the
first species with the ability to avoid (and indeed create) devastating natural disasters.
We shouldn't allow this opportunity to slip us by.
The
space missions are not worth the amount they cost. Private rocket scientists could put man
on the moon for a 1/10th of the cost NASA could. The question must be asked, why? All big
institutions waste millions on needless and pointless things. What needs to happen is a
halt to excessive spending. Space agencies (fully supported by the government and it's
motives) have no limit. How can
people challenge the cost of exploration? We could pay for many explorations and the
advancement of the human race if we were to divert all the billions spent on wars and
weapons to better causes including tackling problems on this planet as well as exploring
new worlds. Exploration has always been human nature and always will be. It does
appear to be the next step in exploration. My concern though is how they plan to get
anyone back off the Red Planet. My understanding is that getting people off the moon is a
lot easier due to the Zero Gravity. Mars I thought is more like Earth and my understanding
there is that a shuttle needs to burn huge amounts of fuel to get off Earth. Now, as life
on Mars is still unknown, I don't think anyone, once there is going to find a supplier of
rocket fuel, launch pads and everything else needed. Good
luck to all those involved if it does go ahead. I think it might be a marathon task
involving generations that follow us all needing to pick up where we get up to. To Neill
(Isle of Man). The moon does have gravity, it's a magnetic field it lacks. In fact, any
object with mass exerts a gravitational pull (including you and I). If you
"weigh" 80Kg on earth, you'd "weigh" 13.2Kg on the Moon and 30.1 on
Mars.
Rather
than thinking of sending people to other planets as individual nations, we should be
thinking of sending them as a species. I welcome with open arms the possibility of a
permanent manned station on the Moon and manned expeditions to other planets. Mankind has
reached a point of stagnation on Earth, our home world's natural resources are in terminal
decline and our evolution has stalled. Only by escaping the chains both of gravity and our
own small-mindedness can we as a species begin once again to advance. I would much rather
the US and others would put money towards this, a legacy worth leaving, rather than
turning yet another country into a plain of glass. From space there are no distinctions
between countries. Wouldn't the world be a better place if that were true on the surface
too? Were the
first human trips across the vast oceanic unknown, or risky explorations to the planet's
poles, darkest depths or highest peaks absolutely necessary? Humanity evolved to its
present state due to our hunger to explore fuelled by an innate inquisitiveness, to boldly
confront and conquer the vast unknown. Our destiny is out there, ever luring us onward
towards a future course of unimaginable opportunity. With opportunity comes certain risk.
However, sooner or later we must heed the call of space, or cease being that which we have
evolved to become - intelligent explorers! Earth
does not have the natural resources for a sustainable end to poverty. Either we accept
that, reduce our level of living or get really controversial. Sending a human to Mars will
require a mission that is self sustainable for 12 to 24 months unless more rapid transport
is developed (which would be useful to all). This sustainability may give the pointer to a
more sustainable life on Earth. As for robotic or human missions it won't be long until
they are one and the same thing. As far
as the UK spending money on space, I don't see a problem if most of the money spent is on
products made in the UK and UK man power. The challenges also require solutions which
further UK knowledge. Government spending just circulates tax money back into the economy
one way or another.
They are
definitely more important than spending billions of dollars on weapon development and
abuse. I even think that space exploration has the power to bring people together world
wide and work on something which is inspiring to everyone and doesn't exclude anyone. I
always hear my parents accounts of the first lunar landing and how the whole world was
watching the same images and, in doing so, for a moment forgetting about all their issues
and problems. Europe, Japan, Russia, China, US and even India and Pakistan should join
forces and knowledge to make this work. Probably there are a bunch of other countries
which are also very keen in investing. Reading
what some people have commented, its a wonder we ever stopped living in caves. Humanity
reached for the Moon in the 60's and 70's - then we stopped. Pulled back. Stayed right
here. Why? Too many people in government listened to those who'd rather end up spending
the money on dairy subsidies, those who have no idea how we developed the technology to be
capable of supporting a population in the billions today Good to
see that this election year has started in grand style! There's no way congress will
approve the vast amount of money needed to do this, but that's a problem for another term.
I do hope it happens though - it's a glorious adventure.
Colin
Pillinger's team should be applauded for their efforts in sending Beagle 2 to Mars and
then the next thing that should happen is that our Government should have the courage to
follow this up by funding Beagle 3 and allowing our scientists to contribute to the
efforts in sending man to Mars and back to the Moon. How can
you quantify the worth of exploration ? Did our ancestors contemplate the cost of
exploring and discovering other parts of our own globe ? It's in human nature to explore
and push the boundaries of their surroundings and environment. I think
that getting a man on Mars in 10 years may be a little optimistic, but if we don't start
working towards that goal now, it may take more like 50 years to reach our neighbour.
People complain about sorting Earth out first but were the pyramids a waste of funds? No,
like Mars they are human achievements that we should all strive to. I do agree that it
shouldn't just be NASA's job in getting us there and all space agencies should join
together, surely that would make it easier. I think
it is an excellent idea to send Americans to Mars. The more the better. Will they need
visas? Evolution
has shown that we are successful as a race because we can adapt and are inquisitive.
Missions to Mars may well be a waste of money but they are scientifically purposeful and
drive the imagination of the younger generations. The IIS should not be abandoned to cover
the shuttle problems however, why not move it into orbit over Mars??
Waste of
money, time, effort and quite possibly astronauts lives. Space travel should be for
telecommunications only. It's just a dry rock! Never mind all the other planets in the
solar system, what about the one we are living on!?!? Who cares if there is ice on mars?
What about the ice that is disappearing on this planet? Who cares about the life that may
have existed on mars, what about the life that is currently in distress on this planet?
The $820 mill from the mission could solve a lot of problems on this planet. Perhaps
President Bush is looking for weapons of 'mars' destruction! The
short sightedness of many of the contributors here astounds me! The reason that we live on
a planet where millions starve and die every day, is overpopulation. The human race must
reach out beyond our own planet, for many reasons, but chiefly, we're 7 billion eggs in
one basket - and considering the weapons of mass destruction at our fingertips, surely we
should have some long-term goals to colonise beyond Planet Earth? I think
it is great to hear Professor Pillinger is going to try again. The Beagle 2 mission really
symbolised everything great about Britain - how people from all backgrounds helped to get
it done. It also got a lot of people interested in science. Designing Beagle has lead to
some great advancements in technology, which will help for future missions. Space
exploration is a much better way to spend money than wasting it on wars and spin, so
hopefully the government will be less stingy next time. Good luck Beagle 3!
I think
it is great that we are finally going to a) get a station on the moon and b) send a manned
mission to mars. The moon base will greatly reduce the cost of mismissions because it is
possible to create hydrogen fuel/propellant from existing ice on the moon. A (wo)man on
mars can perform a more detailed study of the red-planet and also dig deeper that any
exist probe has gone. Also if they could take some jump leads and a can of WD40 Beagle
will get in the record books for the longest AA callout. I
consider ALL space exploration a total and utter waste of money. Since the late 1950s vast
resources have been spent in space, to what benefit to humankind? If the same amount of
money had been devoted to relief of poverty, world hunger and medical research on earth,
it would have been better spent. Can anyone tell me the use of sending probes to Mars or
any other planet? So far all the money spent has given us the non-stick frying pan and
even that's not brilliant! |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
If you dig Google for a while
you can find there's more to space research than meets the eye 
