Space Exploration Controversy

Billions of dollars go into space exploration projects every year. Some people feel that this money should be used to solve problems on Earth. All of the “NO” arguments come from people who seem to know nothing about space. First off, the most widely used argument that does not support space exploration is “We have too many problems on Earth, so why go into space?” This argument is definitely not appropriate. While there are many problems on Earth, a lot of them can be solved using the technologies that we develop for space exploration. For example, NASA helps on research into cancer and preventing, treating, and even curing it.

Space exploration, in its beginnings, were considered one of the humanity 's greatest achievements and throughout time the commonly considered by the public to be an incredible achievement for science. Although as the years have passed the idea of space exploration have soured, and the space program is being criticized for its millions of dollars being invested into the space program other than using it to explore our own oceans. while others feel that the effort put into the space exploration have helped economically and scientific breakthroughs, There is a split divide in opinion of the space program since some may before it while others are against it. The main actors of this controversy would, on one side, are a community of people who have decided that supporting space exploration can be incredibly beneficial to our development in science. While those that oppose to funding millions of dollar to travel into the unknown will state that we should attempt to understand our planet before attempting to learn about others. They are referring to that to our scientist our oceans still carry deep seeded mysteries that seems to go unfunded. Communication strategies that help promote contact zones would be when engaging in an opinionated article, or study that reject what they believe to be true. During these confrontations, the two communities would discuss facts in order to persuade others to agree with their conclusions or beliefs.

Carl Sagan once said “every planetary civilization will be endangered by impacts from space, every surviving civilization is obliged to become spacefaring--not because of exploratory or romantic zeal, but for the most practical reason imaginable: staying alive... If our long-term survival is at stake, we have a basic responsibility to our species to venture to other worlds.” The National Aeronautics and Space Administration or NASA, is executing Sagan’s words every day. President Dwight D. Eisenhower created NASA in 1958 with the purpose of peaceful rather than military space exploration and research to contribute to society. Just 11 years after the creation, NASA put Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin on the moon, the first humans to

Space exploration has exploded in the past 56 years. From the first successful satellite mission in 1961, to the first mission space walk in 1969 a to the first time lettuce was grown and eaten in space in 2015. These are just the beginning steps towards potential space exploration and advancing technology to the maximum.

The Space Race was a time of great exploration, and created many new techniques in the studies of science and technology. Many new techniques of engineering and technological advances resulted as positives of the Space Race. The cause of this great exploration and learning was fueled by rivalry and competitiveness of two governments, the Soviet Union and The United States. The Soviet Union and the United States were in a race to see which could reach space supremacy first. This rivalry unfolded in front of millions of spectators, and instilled a sense of competiveness into the viewers. During the mid nineteen-sixties, the achievements of the United States space program caused them to leap ahead of the Soviet Union space program, which was very unexpected. The achievements by the United States during the Space Race in the nineteen-sixties created a gap in space exploration between the Soviet Union space program and the United States space program because the United States was able extremely motivated by government forces and was able to achieve great technological advances in their space crafts.

Nasa was a very important part to the Space race as it was the U.S. organisation that helped build an aircraft that could launch human beings into space; hence ‘the first man on the moon’.

There are a couple viewpoints to consider when it comes to the topic of space exploration. The Earth is constantly changing and is not going to live forever, but does this mean that humans have a moral obligation to find and explore habitable worlds outside of our own for the soul purpose of inhabiting them? According to Colin Barras, fossil records indicate/predict that Earth still has about a whopping 3.5 billion years until it dies (Barras, 2015). That is more than just a spec on even Earth's timeline. However, even though some scientists estimate that Earth has a couple billion years left to live, that doesn't necessarily mean that the living beings that thrive off of Earth's natural resources are going to be able to live on this planet for 3.5 billion more years. Serious negative effects of global climate change can grow to be extremely devastating and could kill off the human race as well as other plant and animal species. So, searching for another planet to live on is not such a terrible, far-fetched idea after all.

NASA has stopped space exploration because they don’t have anymore funding, so they’ll ask private organizations to give money. Many people believe that the government should spend money on anything else, such as fixing the environment, rather than funding space exploration. While I do support the fact that space exploration could take years before we get any type of new discovery, I also support the fact that the Earth is aging and we cannot stop that so we need another planet to live on before the Earth dies off. If the Earth is going to die off anyway, why not fund the space program so we find another planet? When we get to the new planet, we can either take care of that one or continue to find another planet to live on. Rather than spending

“That’s one small step for man, one giant leap for mankind”-Neil Armstrong. This quote was stated by the first man on the moon, imagine what famous words could be stated by the first person on a new planet. The government should continue space exploration because of jobs, low resources, pollution, and for educational research.

Cognitive Anthropologist Bob Deutsch discusses the current state regarding the U.S’ space exploration program as a whole. He particularly points to the fact that America seems to have lost its zeal to explore due to the fact that they are so caught up in their own “hunkered down existence”. For example, it was only a little over a decade ago that mars passed close to the earth; relatively a stones throw away and people looked up but even more said “so what?” and moved on. They did not understand the gravity of what they had just witnessed. Such feeblemindedness it disappointing from the people of the land of the free. It is as if America is hunkered down on a treadmill constantly working but going nowhere fast. What they seem to be working on has no effect for the greater good of mankind as it used to be.

The world today revolves around technology and is in an ever upward spiraling path of new advancements. This path is now at what some people call the “final frontier”, or the space age. The discoveries being made on this front are overwhelming in comparison to the technology that the world had only twenty years ago. Space exploration was once left up to the governments, as they battled to be the first country in space, but with national debts raising and the cuts made in response, space exploration is beginning to become new grounds for private business owners. Private companies are already beginning to send off rockets at a fraction of the cost that government does, but if more money was put into the government space program, then they

I am writing this paper to claim that space exploration is a huge waste of resources and we should focus our efforts on the sustainability of the Earth. I plan to explore the benefits of sustainability and discredit arguments for space exploration. Sustainability is the more realistic and feasible choice.

I think that the government shouldn't continue to fund space exploration because it takes a lot of time and money to make sure everything is right. Mars exploration can be dangerous and we can't predict what will happen. One mistake can waste lots of investments that people have made.

Manned spaceflight is a crucial argument in society. Two writers, Seth Shostak and John Logsdon, both believe that America is making a mistake by ending manned space exploration. Seth Shostak is the author of the article “Why Hominids and Space Go Together” in The New York Times Room for Debate; his article is about how President Obama’s new vision for the NASA program is not a good plan. John Logsdon also wrote an article for The New York Times Room for Debate called “American Patrimony.” His article is more focused on how it will be a loss of patriotism to end manned spaceflight in the United States. Both Shostak and Logsdon agree that manned space travel should continue, but Shostak’s rhetoric is more effective because his argument is well organized and credible, he ties in his readers’ emotions efficiently, and he logically explains his beliefs.

In the early 60s, President John F. Kennedy led America into a space race against the Soviet Union. American men and women across the nation backed this goal, allowing NASA to take great leaps in advancing its space exploration programs. This unified nation fulfilled its goal, and Neil Armstrong became the first man to walk on the moon. However, since then, America’s space exploration has only declined. Funding for NASA has been drastically cut, thus greatly limiting the opportunities for exploring the cosmos. Understanding and exploring the universe is detrimental to the advancement of the United States and opens the door for vast possibilities. If the government chooses to limits its own advancement, then that responsibility must fall