Human Spaceflight: No Single Rationale Justifies it, NRC Report

[Eve Charm]

I'd like to know how many billions or trillions is sunk into the US's military budget a year before they say there's no money to go in space.

Hey let's look at it this, when people send up rail shooting satellites into orbit that can destroy a building in a matter of seconds your gonna want a way to go up there and blow it up.

 

[DaWaffledude]

Where's the option for "because Star Trek got everything else right"?

Somewhere out there is a little alien boy dreaming of meeting a friendly creature from another planet, and the only obstacle in the way is we can't agree on a budget.

Didn't Star Trek say there was going to be a war over genetic modification by now?

 

[shadowstriker86]

I'd like to know how many billions or trillions is sunk into the US's military budget a year before they say there's no money to go in space.

Hey let's look at it this, when people send up rail shooting satellites into orbit that can destroy a building in a matter of seconds your gonna want a way to go up there and blow it up.

And there's the answer right there. Every time someone has gone exploring, there was an underlying profit margiain under it. The explorers were more than happy to do it but they were financed by those who sought capital gain. Now if you could convince a few multinats to invest in space exploration to create something like...

Then you'd actually see money and dedication being put into space travel.

 

[Cowabungaa]

It depends largely on the scientific view one takes. From a strict pragmatical view? No, there's no rationale. From a broad pragmatical view? Taking into account things like the natural human curiosity and our need to build a coherent worldview; plenty of rationale to be found.

 

[Casual Shinji]

As long as there is no defense against all the types of radiation out there, manned space exploration is impossible. Unless we want every colonist on Mars to die of space cancer.

And let's say we get to Mars, then what? Is it just for the sake of saying we've been there, like the Moon? Or are we actually going to establish a colony there? And in that case, does that mean some company is going to own stretches of land on Mars, or the entire planet? Are other countries going to get pissed that they don't "own" Mars, and take steps to change that, violently if need be?

Apparently now those facts aren't enough to completely destroy space exploration. Now we've upped the game by attacking that moment of inspiration itself, by sending a message that 'doing something great' isn't great at all, only pointless and expensive.

Wonderful.

If it's at the expense of millions of people starving just so one man can say he was on Mars, then yes, that would be rather pointless. Unless he met an alien there that had the solution to world hunger.

As stated before as well, we're on a ticking clock until SOMETHING makes Earth unsuitable for humans, whether this something is natural, cosmic, or just us ****ing things up too much.

Not to sound overly down here, but if that's the way it is then that's the way it is. It'd be a bit arrogant to think we as a species won't go extinct one day, just like every other animal on this planet. You're going to die, I'm going to die, the Earth is going to die, even the whole universe is going to stop existing one day.

And let's say we fuck up our own planet, and by some miracle find another inhabital planet that we can actually reach. Does that mean we should just pack up so we can screw up that one too?

 

[MCerberus]

And let's say we fuck up our own planet, and by some miracle find another inhabital planet that we can actually reach. Does that mean we should just pack up so we can screw up that one too?

Unless there is no value in our society, unless there is no value in continuing human life, then yes. As someone that ascribes to an ethical system that borrows key points from Kant, it isn't even a question.

Fatalism is not a viable system when it comes to making decisions because it's prone to death-by-inaction, among other things. So many other things. A freaking lot of other things.

 

[Olas]

i cant subscribe to the because of overpopulation argument as people in space will have babies too and then we will have two overpopulated worlds see: farmer in the sky. war is probably the most efficient population control next being abortion but those are very grizzly and touchy realities, and a one child per person polocy may become not so barbaric.

I don't follow your logic, if the people having babies in space stayed on Earth they'd just be having babies on earth instead, same number of babies but in less room. We may end up with 2 overpopulated worlds, but I'd still rather those people be spread across 2 worlds than condensed onto one.

I agree that space exploration isn't a viable solution to overpopulation, but not for this reason.

I also don't see how war is an efficient method of population control, wars are super fucking expensive, the amount of money needed to wage any sort of war would almost certainly exceed what it would take to simply house and feed all the people we would be lose.

Let's face it, the solution to overpopulation is pretty simple, wear a condom.

 

[epicdwarf]

Here is a question. If they are worried about public apathy towards space exploration, WHY don't they try harder for Mars? Something as simple as a manned fly-by could spark A LOT of interest.

 

[joshuaayt]

We can't just not shoot for space, we need to at least be able to colonise other bodies in our solar system - if for no other reason than to ensure that humanity sticks around. I don't really think we're about to destroy this planet, but we should absolutely spread out as far as physically possible, get some of the eggs out of this one basket.

It's not about getting to Mars TODAY!, it's about getting to Mars at all. I'm always hearing that the human race won't be around forever- well, not if we all stay in one place, we won't.

 

[Daaaah Whoosh]

I think the best rationale for space travel can be found by asking why humans get up each morning. If we consider ourselves superior to animals, we have to prove it by desiring something other than our own sustenance. Man does not live on bread alone, they say, because man needs to leave this universe having made some sort of connection to a higher cause. That's why we have history and art and all sorts of mostly useless things; they help us to see where we've come from, where we are, and where we're going. If mankind is content to live on Earth until the sun burns us all to hell (or some other catastrophe), then I don't really want to be human any more. If, on the other hand, mankind desires to expand their horizons, travel into the unknown, and eventually transcend any limitations that could ever keep us down, then I think we're on the right track.
However, one of the many flaws we've inherited from our ancestors is short-sightedness, so I agree that the future of space travel is looking kind of bleak.

 

[RJ 17]

[...]saying that there's no reason to explore space would be like telling Columbus there's no reason to sail west[...]

Point of Pedantry: What sane person was going to tell Columbus not to go West?

All the people that still believed that the world was flat and that he'd be sailing off to his doom? Indeed he did want to find a shortcut to India, but everyone thought he was nuts.

He had to shop the plans for his voyage around to different nations just to find a backer because most monarchies thought it was a fool's errand.

Looking at the other posts, people seem to forget all the crazy things we are researching here on Earth. We have found bacteria that eat petrol, learned to regrow human tissue from almost nothing and developed a magnetic donut twice the size of Gibraltar that hurls Hydrogen atoms around at nearly the speed of light, just to find a single particle. For goodness sake, someone just regrew Van Gogh's ear FOR ART. I know it's not as spectacular as a space launch, but come on guys, we're still doing incredible things.

You mean like sailing west when everyone thought it was a death sentence? We've explored all there is to explore on this planet (generally speaking). There's a reason that space is considered "the final frontier". For all the mysteries and wonders on our own planet, there are vastly more out in the vastness of space, just waiting to be discovered.

 

[Shilefin]

Putting humans at needless risk by sending them on missions from which they may not return, yet alone establish a colony or discover something useful with the technological limitations we have now is indeed not very wise, but that hardly means space exploration should be abandoned. Quite the opposite - space should be studied, along with other scientific fields, of course, to overcome those obstacles. Going to places we've never been before always breeds innovation. It creates a culture which is powered by scientific discovery, like Neil deGrasse Tyson has often pointed out.

The benefits of such a culture and enthusiasm for science booming are countless. One of them, perhaps not as regularly mentioned, is the tendency to unite people. A good example of this would be the ISS.

 

[Cowabungaa]

le snip

Did you know that a few decades before Columbus the Chinese empire had their own exploratory fleets? They looked like this:

That scrawny little boat in front of that huge ship is Columbus' flagship the Santa Maria. They got as far as the eastern coast of Africa. And then, thanks to a new emperor, they turned inwards and stopped all exploration, just poof, gone. But thanks to our little continent being filled with competitive nation-states Columbus could find his funding and off he went. And there started the reason why Europe became the dominant power on Earth (took until the 19th century) and why we have the current Global South vs. Global North dichotomy and why we're not all speaking Mandarin as our second language these days.

Bottom-line: insulating yourself ain't a good idea in the long run, and I have no doubt that it'll be the same with space exploration.

 

[MarsProbe]

Why do you climb a mountain?

To see if it can be done? And if you can, then what other reason do you need to do it?

Ah well, if humanity gives up in space, I'll just jump back into my spaceship and head home. No big deal.

 

[Ace Morologist]

Manned space -exploration- right now is pure lunacy. There's nowhere to go that could support us. Okay, fine, nowhere we know about right now. But you don't just go out into the hostile limitless void of space and hope you find somewhere you won't die immediately as soon as you open your bubble.

If we can--from here--find another Earth out there, then yeah, let's race to see who can get there first and plant a flag. Otherwise, we'll have to put a lot more time and effort into terraforming (changing other worlds to suit our peculiar biological adaptations) or transhumanism (forcibly adapting ourselves to survive and thrive on non-Earthlike worlds).

--Morology!

 

[joshuaayt]

We can't just not shoot for space, we need to at least be able to colonise other bodies in our solar system - if for no other reason than to ensure that humanity sticks around. I don't really think we're about to destroy this planet, but we should absolutely spread out as far as physically possible, get some of the eggs out of this one basket.

It's not about getting to Mars TODAY!, it's about getting to Mars at all. I'm always hearing that the human race won't be around forever- well, not if we all stay in one place, we won't.

You do realize the prospect for long term colonization on other bodies is slim to none right?

I mean do you know the host of ways the human body starts failing once it leaves the earth's shell? Our bodies were designed from the ground up to work in this environment. Think I'm talking bull. consider this. and I've always said this. Before you colonize a planet colonize the bottom of the sea. You'd have to deal with many of the same problems, minus the issues caused by gravitational differences causing things like 'weakened immune systems' , 'Space diabetes', Spinal dislocation' 'bone thinning', the list goes on
...
My best bet would be.. rather than try leaving this planet. we trick this planet out and rig this thing for intergalactic travel. We plant some big mutha honking thrusters on australia and whoosh Alpha Centauri here we come.

Absolutely, those are huge road blocks- But it's either find ways to deal with that, or die out the second earth stops being habitable. Or try to find ways to deal with it, fail, and die out any way. Still, at least we'd go down fightin'.

Also, I'll do you one better- we build a giant space ship around the inner four planets, use the sun as a power source/tanning salon, and go cruising off to Gliese 581c in style.

 

[EvilRoy]

I wouldn't say I'm anti space exploration, but I don't really think its a great idea. Economics and sciences are both pretty good reasons to do it, but it will be a while before economics becomes viable, and scientific progress isn't exactly explosive even in the private sectors of space exploration development where they have money.

The drive to explore is nice, so long as I'm not the one who has to pay for it, especially since it is going to be a one way trip for the vast majority of explorers. I certainly don't fault people for saying 'I want to go out and explore in space', I just don't want to do it myself and I can't reasonably say that other people should.

Staving off the extinction of the human race is an interesting one to me, because I guess my disinterest in this argument shows my own weak connection to my species? I'm not trying to be edgy here, I honestly don't feel attached enough to my fellow man to care if after I'm dead the species goes extinct.

I do wonder why it is so important to some though, primarily because if some humans actually did manage to survive the trip and landed to make a new home... Generations living and adapting in space, in a completely different part of the galaxy, with no way to communicate with Earth, are those really still humans? Even if so, do you really feel some sort of connection with them, despite the fact that you could never really be sure that they still exist?

 

[zehydra]

things don't have to need a unified rationale to get them done.

As long as we can all agree that thing in questions needs to be done, it will get done.

 

[Vigormortis]

Why does there have to be one core rationale? Doesn't the lack of a single consensus show that there is a multitude of reasons to go up there?

I would imagine economic growth, medical research, advancement and sharing of technological and scientific discoveries, and taking further steps towards interplanetary colonization[footnote]Which we desperately need to do to survive in the long term.[/footnote] would all suffice. Even individually. And besides, if we are to further the latter, manned space flight is a necessity. Only sending probes into space doesn't help us better understand and advance human space flight - something we'll need to improve if we're to colonize other worlds.

But what do I know? Clearly the public is right on this. Space is big, scary, and full of aliens, maths, and other confusing science-y stuff. We should just stay away from it.

 

[Crackerjacks]

If this is the common opinion then there's the risk that we're all going to die on this rock when it stops supporting human life and that will be the end of us.

We won't even get to orbitally bombard aliens from space because they are tentacle monsters, and this makes me sad.