Con: United States should consider scaling back instead of following our ‘heart’s desire.’
By Elice Giorgione
Staff Writer
In light of the recent Columbia disaster, it is inevitable to ask: should we, after such a jarring tragedy, continue to pursue manned space exploration? On Feb. 4, President George W. Bush answered that question at a memorial service at Houston’s Johnson Space Center held to honor the seven astronauts who lost their lives. It “is not an option we choose,” he said, but “a desire written in the human heart.”
Well, if the United States is choosing to continue a hazardous and costly program just because it’s our “heart’s desire,” perhaps we ought to reconsider.
Many people think a retreat from the space program at this point is merely succumbing to adversity. And granted, the benefits of continuing some of our nation’s various NASA programs are evident and irrefutable. In terms of science, technology and the military arena, the prospects and possibilities are endless. We do not know what untapped potential for progress, knowledge or medicinal advances may await us in such a vast, uncharted territory.
In terms of science, we are equipped to research and gather data about the earth, sun, moon and other planets in our universe. We are able to launch satellites that provide weather predictions, international surveillance and communication advantages. And as for the military, space programs are basically all about intelligence work and missile technology.
While all of these ventures are undeniably beneficial, what we need to realize is that manned space exploration helps achieve none of these goals — they are executed in space unaided by human intervention. Almost all of our information about the universe is gained from unmanned probes, satellites and vehicles. When one of these is lost, it’s nothing more than a shame.
With the Columbia disaster serving as a stark reminder of how devastating the consequences of a space program mishap can be, we need to rationally weigh the plausible pros and cons of manned space travel in terms of considering both the ever emerging risks and the outstanding economic ramifications.
It seems ridiculous to even entertain the idea of spending $15.5 billion on such a venture when there are thousands of starving, homeless Americans who could benefit immeasurably if even a portion of that sum were refocused toward aiding them.
And for that matter, in the midst of an economic downturn and impending war, would it not be wise for the United States to reconsider where the government allocates its funds? How can we justify spending billions on exploring the cosmos when we’ve got homeland defense and our nation’s economy at stake? The very infrastructure of our country is threatened and we are squandering away billions of dollars on dangerous and only marginally profitable space programs.
The advent of the space shuttle was predicted to reduce the expense of orbit; however, the reality is that launches of manned spacecraft continue to cost more than those of disposable unmanned rockets, and taxpayers end up subsidizing the difference. Also, the cost of losing one of these shuttles in an accident is an extreme fiscal setback. Additionally, there are phenomenal costs involved with sustaining human life in space when a manned shuttle goes into orbit.
All we’ve done by sending men and women into space is to prove that we can. There is practically nothing in our agenda for space pioneering that can’t be done without the need for manned space travel. Ultimately, human beings in space are burdensome anyway. They require oxygen, food, special suits and most important, a means of returning to earth — all of which require additional funds and planning.
It is obvious then that manned space flight is an exorbitantly expensive venture and will continue to be so until we find a cheaper substitute for chemical rockets.
Costs aside, the risk of losing more American citizens —more fathers, mothers, sons and daughters — is by no means worth whatever the calculated advantages of manned space exploration may be. Unless we have substantiated hopes for some life-altering discovery or any reason to believe that we may in the near future, there is no apparent reason to spend so much money to continue our expeditions to space.
There are so many problems with the country we live in, here on Earth, that it is unfathomable to imagine using so many billions of dollars for anything other than fixing these problems and supporting our citizens on this planet.
February 13, 2003