What's more important?

Question

Spending money on the space shuttle, moonshot, Mars-shot or spending money on solar system exploration in places like Titan, Europe, Enceladus and other high priority targets for extraterrestrial life? What about mission such as the Terrestrial Planet Finder (TPF) and other telescopic missions that aim to search for habitable extrasolar planets, should we fund these or divert cash to the shuttle program and the moonshot?

Answer 1

What's wrong with funding all of these?

Also, consideration should be given to refinancing DAWN and other asteroid missions.

Some day it will become too expensive to mine metals from the earth and asteroid mining will become economically viable and necessary.

Like Stephen Hawking says, the sooner we get off Earth and into space, the more secure our future as a species.

Answer 2

Extra-solar stuff is a waste right now. Moon shot might be OK if we're going to do something there besides plant another flag.

Space shuttle missions have some practical utility (fixing telescopes, etc.)

Mars is probably the next logical step there, as we can do it, and it's a big leap from the last thing we did.

Therefore, I think our priorities should be 1) a shuttle replacement, and 2) a Mars trip.

Another telescopic mission is fine, but we need a shuttle replacement to support it, and it's pretty small potatos anyway so it's not an either-or kind of thing.

Answer 3

We can't rush it. The journey into space will be made thru small steps so that we learn about surviving (both us, and our equipment) in space. Venturing to Mars will lead to enterprises to Titan, Europa and further. I'm not saying it will be sequential - we are still learning about Venus.

It's hard to make a definitive call on which is more important, but I would say that while projects like the TPF are nice on a grand scale, our immediate solar neighborhood exploration is vital.

Answer 4

I think it is more important to colonize the moon first. If we construct a lunar base it will be much easier and a lot cheaper to launch further mission from there. Some have suggested using the magnet technology currently used in super speed bullet trains from a lunar launching post. This will drastically cut down costs as no fuel is needed for takeoff, the magnets do the work. Of coarse this all sounds possible but its completely theoretical.

Answer 5

There is the hope that we can find subterranian ice on the Moon. If you can tap water, you could set up a viable spaceport on the Moon, and maybe mine it for other stuff, and last but not least, point nukes at that country you don't like back on Earth. As far as the Jovian or Saturnian moons go, we are curious to see what they got. But, at -270 degrees Farenheit, it's not like you're going to build your summer cottage there. But to answer your question, I personally feel it is more of a priority to look "out there." Because we can.

Answer 6

If we don't even truly understand what's right next door to us how are we going to manage to understand a whole other neighborhood?
It's way more improtant to study the moon and mars and such verse rest of the solor system. The better know that, the easier it will be to know everything else.

Answer 7

hey lets not get too ahead, i mean they havent even gotten to kwn othe moon or mars very well yet, and if they go research soemthign even farther its not gonna do them any good. i think they need to do some hands on researaching on moon and mars. they went to the moon one or whatever and they all liek yaaa. but they need to make some stations ther or soemthing sealed with oxeagen so u can breath ther then go to mars and bring people there to look at things closer not robots that break