I like space, but i saw this in my class and i thought i should ring it up. Please SUPPORT your answer because more than likley its gonna be an assignmnet

Space exploration is necessary to ensure that humanity can continue to grow and expand, even beyond what our natural world here can provide. At some point in the future, Earth simply will not be enough anymore, and space exploration is the only chance to move beyond it. Our very instinct to perpetuate our species demands that exploration continue... It is an investment in the future of our decendants.

Instead of space exploration, I'd like to see more development in space travel. I think it'd be really cool to be able to float in zero G and look at the entire earth from space. And I think there'd be more economic payback with development in space travel rather than space exploration. And as more and more people are travelling into space, then we can explore beyond earth.

Its a good thing a few Europeans didn't feel that way in the 13th Century, otherwise, there'd probably be no America. Just a bunch of boats floating in the Atlantic, overlooking Europe.

Yeah, but they had a specific economic goal for their explorations (shorter/alternate trade routes). Whereas, there's no economic goal for space exploration. Now, if we knew there were huge gold deposits on the moon or some other planet, that'd be a different story. But, now space exploration is just purely for scientific purposes.

I'm not discounting scientific research, there's a place for that. But, if you can find an economic payback, then it'd be much easier to fund and pursue.

I understand what you're saying here... While somewhat limited, resulting from expense, there's already been a great number of discoveries made in space that benefit us financially. Everything from medicine to botany has felt some beneficial effect from research that occurs in space.

Don't get me wrong, either... I would absolutely love to take a Lunar vacation, too... I don't, however, think that will be affordable for the average joe at any point during my life-span. You're right, too, that the economic development of space in the immediate could have an 'accellerant' effect on further research, making it less expensive, and more accessible. Point taken.

Well my position is pretty simple. I am in favor of space-exploration in light of it long-term benefits. I believe it is only reasonable that we expand into space seeing as well... it's there. Well that and the fact that unless we take measure to control population growth, which must happen eventually, the human race will need more space.

When Earth is too crowded, where are we going to go? I support space exploration. If not now, when?

I had the pleasure of hearing Scott Carpenter on a talk show last week. Wow ! It was so refreshing to hear his outlook on national goals compared to our current ones.

Having men on Mars would be a perfect national goal. I much prefer it over
"which country do we invade and fix now". The gains in knowledge would be immense. It is the sort of project where the pay off is unknown. Discovery is powerful. We are closing off the most important aspect of humanity by not funding space exploration at higher levels.

Just as public education should be the number one domestic issue, exploration should be our number one intellectual project. Both stances have taken big hits in the past 30 years. There is a connection between these two issues. Our country is worse off because of our failings in these areas. Diseminating and discovering information is important.

Any new opinions on this matter? Juber has this assignment come to pass or been put on the shelf?

Mars would be nice...too bad it's a magnet for asteroids

Juber, giving out assignments now?

America should definitely continue space exploration.

To this point, the quest to explore space has lead us to many great technologies.

According to NASA, they have played a part in developing the following:

• Medical Imaging
  
• Bar Coding (NASA invented it)
  
• Vision screening for small children (before they can speak)
  
• Ear thermometers
  
• Fire fighting equipment (fabric for suits developed for space suits)
  
• Invented Smoke Detectors
  
• Cordless tools (originally developed for Apollo)
  
• Lithium batteries

Of course, NASA didn't set out to invent the ear thermometer, or smoke detectors for that matter. These inventions evolve out of necessity, and make their way into our lives.

I believe that continued space exploration will lead to further inventions which will further benefit the world.

Mike

Yer dern TOOTIN we oughtta be space explor-atin'...

And shame on anybody for casting doubt that anyone alive today is not likely to see the earth from space personally. We have such better technology than was in use on the 25 year old technology being used up till this shuttle disaster. It is no longer a technology issue, but a political one. Too many changes too fast, cause fear in the regulatory mechanisms responsible for national security and there are so many earth-based "problems" on our plate the socio-political resistance to "out of this world" progress is similarly dis-enfranchising.

I am confident that any space-goals we NEEDED to reach would be easily met, if we as a society were willing to evolve our interests out of the muddy political posturing that has entrapped our society. Right now, the newly developed space station/shuttle dilemma has stirred a lot of healthy controversy about technologies, and progress related thereto in our space-program.. and perhaps even inspiring it to new heights for more than 1 reason. One... albeit trivial perhaps.. there is the race to maintain the investment already made in our "space presence" on the station, where we don't want our global endeavor to fall-apart for lack of functional resources... and we sure don't want all that tax money burning up in the atmosphere, possibly landing in the wrong lap(s). Two, we as a nation have just endured a BLACK MARK in "space technology 101" in the eyes of the world. We are now behooved to generate the next generation "Program". Not just a band-aid to move supplies between earth and the space station or other satellite deployment maintenance issues. The "shuttle-horse" has served it's purpose, and next generation fully re-useable craft will be used in short term with an emphasis on cost abatement and reliability, we are likely to experience a "new frontier" paradigm shift, right outta the sci-fi movies... because it can be done. It seems that any further non-critical use of the antiquated shuttle fleet will be seen as BAD policy, and new missions will help to justify this new fleet of vehicles and the ramped industries which need to produce and maintain them.... and create Millions of jobs too... I think our civilization is approaching the point where the cost of not doing a thing is seen as more relevant than the cost of actually doing it especially where hi-tech and the future of mankind is involved...

'course I'm an optimist.

Many of you have the same ideas I do. To close the deal though lets put the UN in charge of space exploration. Draw up and objective plan that the world benefits from and get the heck on with it. SUppliers from all over the world, economies growing out of the dest...it could be an amzing industril sociopolitical economic machine....who do we talk to?...


GBYA

Aahz

I think of course space exploration should continue. They only thing I think maybe should be changed is like a car you have to buy a new one after so manys years. It was mentioned this last week how old the shuttle Columbia was but I forget. What are your thoughts? Should we use them for say 5 yrs. 10yrs? Depending how often we use them?

I don't think that America specifically should continue with psace exploration, but rather that humanity as a whole should.

In addition to the possible long-term benefits of asteroid mining, population expansion etc, I think space travel offers a great opportunity for nations with dispirate interests and attitudes such as the US, China, Russia, and the European Powers to work in co-operation rather than competition.

However, I don't think any space programme should be a financial priority, given the huge problems facing the planet we already inhabit.

I've always liked Arthur C. Clark's vision of a monofilament tether that stretches out to low orbit. Since one of the biggest costs in space travel is the very difficult job of escaping earth's atmosphere, this way you ride a sort of elevator up the tether and then launch from a position of low orbit. I can't find the source now, but I read an interesting article about the current feasibility of this idea. One massive investment which would result in much cheaper space flight. It would be safer, plus space craft would not have to be designed for re-entry. We could get down to business on designing space craft that use huge scoops for gathering stray hydrogen and converting it to fuel.

Eventually, we could learn that very cool maneuver where we sling ourselves around the sun, taking us back in time so we can save the whales!

OK, the last bit was a joke, but the first part is for real...

Here's your supporting article, Quark:

http://popularmechanics.com/science/space/..._up/index.phtml

Very interesting indeed.

They think it may be possible to eventually build a platform 22,236 miles above the earth, tethered to the earth on one and, and anchored to an asteroid we catch and place into geosynchronous orbit 29,204 miles above the earth.

We would ride an elevator to space. Apparently the elevator would travel approximately 1200 MPH, so we'd be looking at a travel time of about 18 1/2 hours.

Sounds good to me!

Mike

its just not a sexy time for space travel and probably wont be for many decades (at least). The primary purpose of the space station is to get more zero g experience and find ways to counter its damage to the astronauts health. Once we do that its on the mars.... then... not much. Nowhere else close to go.

We learn far more from robotic probes today but cant afford to drop manned space entirely. Its like a stock you *know* is going to soar one day and cant afford to sell, as painful as it may be.

I like that analogy. I would buy that stock.