The study of space exploration is not only important for us to partake in its future mission but it can also improve life on earth as we know it today. The arguments against its worthiness in terms of positive contribution and benefits have been misrepresented ,being diminished by years of understudy and uninformed consensus based on falsehoods. In this report, I will outline the benefits from space exploration not only from past exploits, but also the future possiblities it can hold for the people of earth.
From the start, the whole idea to market the space program's benefits have been a problem in itself to not only past generations, but present people who work and live in our world today. People see the many social and economic problems they must face on a daily basis, and if someone were to introduce to them a multi-billion dollar budget for something like Space Exploration, the general mindset produces images of strange science fiction movies, or the tragedies of the Challenger and Columbia shuttle missons. They don't feel a need to press fourth with cutting-edge ideas from people who haven't' proven that such plans can affect them in a positive way while being compared to current problems throughout the world. In “ Marketing Space for the General Public”, author Jeff Krukin had said that “We've been marketing space by talking about technologies, missions, programs, and government policies, and using bland warm and fuzzy slogans, as if these are the motivators for human activity in space. They are not” (Krukin, 2004). People cannot relate to things on spiritual and metaphoric levels, more or less, the average person lives in constant realities of time management, work related issues, and trying to find better means of making their daily lives easier. In Krukin's marketing angle, he illustrates the need with the idea of “emphasizing something that has been missing almost entirely from the national space debate outside the space community: a commercial space transportation infrastructure, which is required to enable and sustain all our space goals. Regardless of the destination, this is the best way to proceed if we want to remain wherever we go. This can be marketed to the general public as a natural extension of commercial aviation, leading to discussions of near-Earth space activity that is more desirable and sensible to people who otherwise care little about space”. (Krukin, 2004) In this light, it appeals better to the lay people who are not scientifically inclined to know about all of the complex ideas and general know how that is associated with the science of space or its extension to benefits in regards to life today.
A second argument that is provided for the debate is the need to figure out how to alleviate highly over-populated areas that through the use of mass human consumption and activities, lessens the healthy nature of the surrounding environment. In an example, John Carter McKnight of the Space Exploration foundation offers the idea of space colonization by saying that “Our species is threatened by environmental dangers both natural and human-made, and the myriad consequences of too many of us in too small a space. Space can offer protection against these dangers only to the extent that our species is genuinely spread out across many habitats and worlds - small-scale efforts can at best be only a lifeboat for a resented elite, not a promise of safety and salvation for us all. Of course, the hope is always that new lessons from the frontier can be applied to end the dangers back on Earth.” ( McKnight, 2003). The idea of exploring new worlds and establishing human-friendly settlements to stretch out the borders of the earth, can offer a multitude of means to provide more room for the world's population to grow, as well as adding economic and social benefits that come with it. Countries like China or even our local urban areas that are being affected by overcrowding populations, can look forward to fresh new cities being built, with re-newd possibilities of better paying jobs and growth for their own lives and their families.
The next and most common and powerful argument that is addressed, is the question of the costs that are asked for, and the comparison between space exploration's benefits versus common problems like healthcare and paying off the countries deficit. Let me throw a few figures provided by Virgiliu Pop a scientist with the UN Space Advisory group. In his comment in comparison with the people's call for money to be used elsewhere, Pop replies by saying that “the high profile of space exploration makes it appear more expensive than it actually is. The uninformed, yet caring citizen is under the earnest impression that the money would make a genuine difference in the fight against poverty. The real dimensions of the social needs are, in reality, out of proportion with the money spent in space - be it in the past, now or in the immediate future”(Virgiliu 2004) he then continues by showing a direct comparison in terms of un-needed expenses that are already being used for things of which critics of the space program continue to claim as useless when it talks about its benefits. Virgilu writes that people want to “point the finger at the US government for wasting their tax money in space instead of helping the poor, but they are not feeling guilty for their own consumerist life style and for their own scale of priorities.
