The Issue Of Space Exploration

In the past 50 years, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) has sent out many planned space exploration missions which have lead to numerous advantages in society and culture. NASA’s technologies benefit American lives with the innumerable important breakthroughs by creating new markets that have spurred the economy and changed countless lives in many ways. NASA is a federal agency and receives its fundings from the annual federal budget passed by the United States Congress. However, there are conflicting opinions that consider whether or not funding for NASA is a waste of government spending.

How would you like to explore a never-ending frontier filled with endless potential and possible benefits for humankind? When put this way, space exploration sounds like an enticing adventure. However, is it all that it’s chalked up to be? We’re here to answer that question. There’s a specific issue that we need to consider when referring to space exploration; should we continue to fund NASA? We acknowledge that some people may already have strong opinions on this, and we ask you to keep an open mind and try to avoid bias. After all, we’re discussing our future.

As President Eisenhower once stated, “Every rocket fired signifies, in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and are not clothed” (qtd in DeGroot). According to Jerry DeGroot, a lecturer in the Department of Modern History at the University of St. Andrews and author of the widely acclaimed biography “Douglas Haig”, every year, the United States federal government funds the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) with over $17 billion. When Keith Yost, a professor at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), was asked about government funding on NASA, he replied, “NASA is not only spending money, but also the sweat of our laborers, the genius of our scientists, and the hopes of our children.” As a powerhouse in the work industry, NASA is taking away from the remainder of the country. Before venturing off into space, the US needs to realize the importance of tackling the issues that lie before the citizens here on Earth. As Richard Truly, a retired Vice Admiral in the United States Navy, stated in agreement, “...I didn’t go to NASA for the United States to make international commitments that wouldn’t keep, to design space vehicles that will never be built (or will be then fail), or to make promises to the American people that will never be kept.” It would be in the best interest for the citizens of the United States federal government to cut NASA funding.

The concept of space exploration was first introduced to the American public in 1961 when President John F. Kennedy famously stood before congress and vowed that America would put a man on the moon “within the decade.” With hopes of defeating the Soviet Union in the “Space Race” and gaining a leg-up in the Cold War, NASA funding reached its all-time high in 1965-1966 when about four percent of the federal budget was devoted to exploring space. Since then however, funding dedicated to exploring space has nose-dived to about one-half of a percent of the federal budget (Tyson), with plans to cut that figure by an additional $260 million in 2017 (cite NASA funding cuts). Experts in the space-sciences field argue that increased funding in space exploration would re-ignite the American economy and return America to the scientific prominence it was once known for, while, on the other end of the spectrum, naysayers suggest that exploring space is an economic sink-hole that the United States can no longer afford to deposit to given its own earth-bound troubles.

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 impossible was reached on July 20th 1969 when we sent the first man on the moon. The Apollo missions are the largest and most well known explorations that NASA has conducted. Ever since we reached this new high, our curiosity of space has grown even bigger. Funding NASA’s space program even further will continue to help us amplify our available resources and discover new information to benefit humanity. Not only that, but it could provide many ways for us to find a new home and expand our species farther into our solar system, potentially saving future generations. The expansion of this space program would be able to answer more of our questions than from what we can find here on Earth. Although there

Humans have dreamed of leaving the earth and traveling space for many years, and up to this day they have taken many steps in the right direction. Yet, with every new frontier they approach, new problems loom over the horizon. Some of these problems arise right here on Earth. Some of the issues have been resolved, such as escaping the forces of gravity to reach outer space. Most of the problems are far more arduous and the solutions need more time to be worked out properly. In “The Coming Schism” by James E. and Alcestis R. Oberg, they posit that humans can colonize space. Humans need to buckle up and build the technology which will help to solve problems that would arise to

The author, Gregg Easterbrook (2011), has identified that the NASA resources are not being routed efficiently. "We’re throwing money at the wrong stuff". First, the "International Space Station" seems to be history 's most expensive mission and it is an advance space-telescope project. There are other projects that could be more inspirational such as sending people to Mars. Even though it is technically possible, it is surpassingly expensive at the moment. If there were an affordable way to reach orbit, it might open countless business opportunities in space. The reason Mars and the space business are out of reach is due the high cost of propelling weight into orbit. As an illustration, a mission to Mars could easily reach up to $ 1 trillion. The author argues that not because at the moment it’s not clear that a fundamentally new form of space propulsion can be invented, which represent an important challenge, does not mean NASA shouldn’t endeavor. Since the shuttle program began, excessive effort has been directed to maintain subsidies to contractors and congressional districts in comparison to the emphasis have been placed on seeking new ideas. According to the author, it is possible to restructure NASA’s budget, divert $1 or $2 billion a year from funding for manned space travel to propulsion research, and reducing Astronaut to the minimal level in order to free up the money needed. Alleging that any grand future in space will require a

In July, 1969 NASA proudly managed to send humans to the moon. This was caused by american citizens putting there money forth and managing to reach the requirements to reach the moon. This trip costed america $355 million dollars. This tells us that it is possible to reach our goals of going to the moon. NASA has also done other astounding things in space. One major benefit from NASA is their satellites. The satellites NASA has created

Since the beginnings of our existence as a human race we have been exploring. We have sailed the globe and civilized wilderness frontiers. Now that we have completely explored the earth, we begin to look toward space. Exploring space is an enormous challenge that requires brilliant minds and leaps forward in technology. In order for space exploration to be successful we need it to be a priority. The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) has long been a pioneer in the field of space exploration, but due to changing political attitude it is at risk to lose much of its funding. NASA should not have its funding reduced because: NASA develops the technology that benefits the public; their missions bring countries together; they are developing technology we will need in the future; and the advance to progress of the human race. The future of humanity will depend on the technological innovations and the international cooperation that NASA facilitates.

Our space program the National Aeronautics and Space Administration or NASA is underfunded and should receive more funding from our government. Since NASA’s founding they have done many significant things in history, we have all heard of Neil Armstrong the man on the moon and Apollo 12 a group of 12 astronauts successful trip to the moon and back. It has not just been these feats of technology accomplished either, the satellites in orbit around the Earth are something that they put up there and these tools have been invaluable communication around the world and even intelligence gathering for our country to keep it safe. So you see all these things, research and development, deploying more people into space for maintenance on our satellites require money and our government’s funding “has gradually fallen to about half a percent in recent years” according to CFR (Council on Foreign Relations) Backgrounds, this means NASA only has enough for critical operations and little remaining for else (Steven Markovich, Space Exploration and U.S. Competitiveness). NASA needs more funding if they want to continue approaching new frontiers of science and keep up with the rest of the world in space exploration.

The opening source from the Council of Foreign Relations gingerly introduces test takers to the space exploration controversy; the excerpt exhibits a predominantly balanced, nonpartisan tone as this article addresses both perspectives on space exploration, which are evidently constructed with the incorporation on statistics and expert opinions. Particularly, the highlight of both sides permits test takers to formulate preliminary ideas at their foundations as either proponents or opponents of space exploration. This source, furthermore, unearths several questions that the test takers can potentially speculate; for instance, the evident budget cuts of NASA may cause test takers to speculate the validity of the U.S. government’s actions, or,

Listeners, if you would name the most renowned and fascinating achievement that NASA has ever committed, I presume you would answer the Apollo moon landing, which is during the Apollo era, however, did you know that the Apollo program is actually the peak of NASA spending at approximately 4.5% of the federal budget, spending estimately 32.5 billion dollars it is the most expensive era in NASA history. Yet later in 2010 the spending of NASA dropped down from 4.5% to 0.5%. Clearly America’s interest in developing exploration in space is declining.

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