What a waste. At least we got Tang when we went to the moon.
2007-07-22 16:01:36 · 3 answers · asked by Anonymous in Science & Mathematics ➔ Astronomy & Space
Manned missions to low Earth orbit have not yielded any new data since the 1960s. They are, in effect, a huge waste of money. Their only redeeming quality is that they can sometimes catch a broken satellite and repair it. However, there is nothing new to discover in low Earth orbit.
In my opinion, manned missions in general are too expensive to be worth doing unless terraforming and permanent colonization of another world is planned. Robotic probes can do almost everything humans can, anyway.
2007-07-22 16:06:40 · answer #1 · answered by lithiumdeuteride 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Space exploration has always been risky. We lost three astronauts just testing Apollo 1 on the ground. The Russians also have lost cosmonauts. We got more than Tang out of the Space race. Thousands of peoples lives have been saved by the weather forecasting now just taken for granted. In the past Hurricanes often hit without warning. Medical procedures, of many kinds, are now possible due to the sensors developed for the space exploration programs.
Some people may be correct in saying that the shuttle program may not have been the most efficient use of our space resources but there have been numerous successes like the repair mission for the Hubble Space Telescope which would have been next to impossible without it.
2007-07-22 23:32:47 · answer #2 · answered by anonimous 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
I don't know what you mean by "caring". I also doubt if after 49 missions, the next one blows up, as your statement states. I wouldn't consider Tang a great advance; it tastes awful unless you are desparate.
2007-07-22 23:09:41 · answer #3 · answered by cattbarf 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋