Do you think the benefits of Nasa space exploration programs justifies the costs.?

Question

I'd like yes/no and why please. I'm trying to incorporate historical , economical, and philosophical references in my answers. Thanks!

i'd like to focus on space exploration programs not just whether NASA is good or not or if the science is important. thanks for the responses so far though.

if you give data, please give sources as these are important for me to consider them true facts to back up.

Answer 1

Definitely. If nothing else, in terms of the attraction it created for good minds to enter the sciences and engineering in years past.

Aloha

Answer 2

Can you actually put a cost on knowledge? Of course space exploration is justified in its cost. Besides the fact that the amount of actual expenditure that is made on the space program is more of a "fake" cost. Each quadrillion dollars spent on the space shuttle is basically a government subsidy for various different sectors of industry. Some company has to come up with the nuts and bolts to put it together, some company has to build the launching pad et cetera, et cetera. It keeps the American aerospace industry thriving much in the same fashion as the cold war did. It some what resembles portions of the new deal during the Depression in which workers were paid to dig holes and then paid to fill those same holes. It is a stimulus to the whole economy, give one man a dollar and he'll spend it thus passing it on to someone else.
Furthermore, the space program invites discovery and invention. It does not just give us answers to what exists on the moon, rather the minds of invention are used to create new chemicals and compounds and machines for the program. This is a major reason why companies such as GE, Dupont, and GM all actively participate in the program. I.E. no space shuttle no microwave. Or even more so, no space program: no carbon fiber, no poly-rubbers and the list goes on.
But this still leaves the greatest reason the benefits outweigh the cost: knowledge. Trace your philosophical roots to Socrates and Aristotle and you cannot put a value on knowledge, look to the allegory of the cave and just rearrange the setting, the cave is the Earth and everything is good next to the fire inside but there is an entire world outside the cave that could hold the answers to everything, why not leave the cave (Earth).
Exploration is inherent in human nature and without it we would have never existed because we would have all been wiped out with whatever bubonic plague or typhoid fever that hit our condensed populations. The world would still be flat.

Answer 3

Yes. Even if one does not see the benefit right away, there could be huge advantage to have done all this hardware developemnt. Just think how relieved if, in a few years, we discover a meteorite heading for Earth that could wipe out everyone, and that rockets could be used to deflect it.

And quite honestly, the more money we put in space exploration, the less there would be left to build and use weapons.


So, philosophically, we are a race of explorer. We need to set hard to reach goals, that is why olympic atheletes are always trying to put the bar higher, that is why we play video games, not because they are easy, but because we need the challenge.

Economically: all the money spent there is going into paying salaries. If there was not for NASA employing them, there would be lots of jobless scientists. And technological advancements required by science brought the IC chips that power all the computers we have.

Answer 4

No, not at all.

Not that there should not be a NASA and a space program, but I think most of the programs have been born out of politics than out of a legitimate scientific purpose. Putting a man on the moon, for example, was a political maneuver to show the U.S. had a better space program than the Soviets did. Putting a man on Mars is also a political thing; remote explorers are far cheaper and better adapted to Maritian exploration than man is.

While Congress is funding the exploration of Mars, they are doing very little to fund defending Earth and all of mankind from killer asteroids...the kind that probably killed off the dinosaurs 65 million years ago. Astronomers do not talk about "if" a killer asteroid strikes us, but "when". NASA has the technology basis for protecting us, but it has not been developed and, until just a few weeks ago, there were no funds for that development.

Check this out:

"Asteroid Defense: NASA to Formulate Planetary Protection Plan
By Leonard David
Senior Space Writer
posted: 28 June 2006
09:03 am ET

VAIL, Colorado – NASA has begun a fact-finding appraisal of how best to detect, track, catalogue and characterize near-Earth asteroids and comets—and what can be done to deflect an object found on course to strike our planet." [See source.]

I call your attention to the by line date, June 2006. Until June 2006, NASA had no killer asteroid protection program whatsoever. They were busy spending our tax payer money satisfying political gains, not scientific.

Answer 5

Totally, i mean, every year about 15 billion go to nasa(im not sure about the amount) and compared to the 90+billion going to the wars in Southeast Asia (middle east) it is a better investment. Historically, all the national spending on nasa has brought many technological advancements to our lives, i can't list any of them from the top of my head but i'm sure there are lots. Also, these past 50 or so years of space exploration by NASA have probably given us hundreds of times of more info about our universe than all the stuff we discovered in the last 2 milleniums.

Answer 6

The most important thing to keep in mind is that our Sun will not last forever.We as humans if we expect to survive millenia from now will have to leave this planet Earth for other hospitable worlds.This is not science fiction, it is a fact. Stars are born, and they give light, then they die. Another problem is the threat of a comet or asteroid strike which could happen now.Our Sun has millions of years left but the technology and sheer engineering to vacate Earth could be on a scale of thousands of years away. The moment is now. I'm sure future human generations will have much respect for us for ensuring their lives by not sticking around here and ignoring the Earths certain peril.

Answer 7

NO . What benefits have there been due to space exploration? THey only way I feel all those Trillions of trillions of dollars would of been put to good use is if they start shipping all the toxic waste to mars or one of the other planets. We will never live in outer space and for the last 30 years they havent came up with anything that is of any use and its not like there is a whole lot to do out there in space other than sight see the world all at one time. IT amazes me like how so many across america are complaining about illegals and how they cost the tax payers millions of dollars each year. At least the illegals are working and helping to keep the price of food lower but no one seems to complain about the 2.8 billion dollars that was spent in just one mission to go catch some comet dust. or for that matter the 1.5 million just to fly the shuttle home that doesnt even include the trip up and all the other expenses there are each flight up. Amazing simply amazing.

Answer 8

Surely, yes. It gets 'BIG science' done, and when you're doing the big, flashy stuff, you run up a lot of blind-alleys, and develop stuff that you haven't yet found applications for. The fuel-cells used on the Apollo missions were the fore-runners of the fuel-cells being fitted in the first FC-cars, appearing near you soon. Just as in car technology, motorsport is the hot-bed of testing that improves the breed for the regular road-user, as makers improve the product to win trophies, the spin-offs end up in the showroom.
Getting back to NASA, when we pull that first alien signal in, or spot that Doomsday asteroid, and have time to steer it away, then people will appreciate the value of what was spent.

Answer 9

Yes.


We are but mere mortals. Our time spent on this planet is but a tiny glimpse of the magical universe. If anything, nothing could possibly be more fullfilling than to understand just a piece of the mystery.


However, if you want to get into purely political considerations of the matter, then my answer would change a bit. But space exploration as a single entity, is a must for human beings.

Answer 10

The MANNED space program? No, we haven't learned much of anything useful, or done much of anything interesting, since the days of Apollo.

But as for the robotic space exploration program....most definitely YES!! We have learned a great many things with our robotic explorers and the cost has not been that much compared to many of the things that our government wastes money on. If all our money was spent wisely, one might have a better debate as to the worthiness of space exploration...but since so much is wasted on pork barrel projects, this is at least something interesting in the pursuit of real scientific knowledge.

Answer 11

Yes.

Besides such neat products like Velcro, Tang, Duct Tape, Space Blankets and Space Pens.

A lot of science is done in space, especially on the space station.

Some of that science is about energy.

What would happen if we discovered a renewable energy source? If we were not spending so much of our income on energy [heating/cooling/transportation/manufacturing] how many of those resources could be reallocated to humanitarian aid and lifestyle enhancements.

Some of that science is about medicine.

A cure for cancer? Any cancer? All cancers? Or other diseases. These are all being explored in zero-gravity experiments.