But for the current state in the USA, it looks like we’ll be lucky to get current projects completed such as the James Webb Space Telescope.

@31. Jack: While I don’t subscribe to said doomsayers, we should never discount the very real threat of a nuclear war. A look at the situation in Europe 100 years ago, just a few years before world war 1 tells a cautionary tale of how what should have been a regional crisis or at worst a regional war turned into the continent wide cluster***k that was the great war.

This is very sad. I’m sorry that you have been influenced so strongly by the doom meisters. If you are really into literature, you should realize that nearly every generation feels this way. I remember the hysteria over the very first Earth Day (my graduation year from High School) which was in the heyday of Paul Erlich (Population Bomb), Alvin Toffler (Future Shock) and other less notable prophets of doom. We’re still here and the planet, despite what you read, is in better shape than it was then.

- Jack

I suspect you mean your younger brother was born post Explorer 1. Pioneer 1 was launched in 1973.

- Jack

I think that all who want mankind to reach the stars, should group together and start preparing the grand escape. Even if it takes leaving all others behind.

Wait a minute, you learned the names of all 50 US states?!? I think you’re ahead of most American students…

14. Michael S. Pierce Says:
“I think most kids, most people, that would be inspired by manned exploration, would be just as inspired by say Hubble.”

Hubble images inspire a lot of “Cool!” and similar responses, but that will be about it. Most kids (I’m thinking elementary school age) are more inspired by “doing” things than “thinking about” things. As singular events, the astronaut describing his experience of being in space will always attract a larger audience than an astronomer describing the latest ovbservations from Hubble.

Sorry but to me that is no reason.

Soon nobody who has survived the Holocaust will be alive either. That won’t change how we Germans will always remember it. I never spoke to anyone who was in a concentration camp and that surely wasn’t needed. We will _always_ remember what our ancestors did and will always adhere to what basically became our mantra “Wehret den Anfängen”. Every time there’s a small gathering of neo-nazis there are thousands who gather as a counter-protest.

All that was needed was a strong emphasis on educating our youth (me included) about what happened back then in history class. Oh and the tons of programs on TV about the Nazis also seem to do their share of the work.

I think in the days of 3D Cinema, Television and Computer(-screens) it’s more than enough to have breathtaking pictures like the ones you post on this page nearly every day Phil, the IMAX Movies and a good science education in schools.

And that last thing there, at least to me, seems to be the problem. I have never EVER been shown a SINGLE picture about space, the moon, the sun, or ANYTHING like a movie in school. I had to discover how great space is by myself. We did have ONE excursion to a planetarium. ONE. In 13 years. We never EVER spoke about dimensions in space. We spoke about the speed of light briefly. And that was that.

If only a fraction of the hours and hours (and hours) of history lessons wouldn’t have been about the Nazis or crop cycles in the middle ages or learning the name of every large river in Russia (yes we did stupid stuff like that… and every river in germany and every state in the US and what have you) then maybe, MAYBE kids in school would be more excited.

Because I really think that the Apollo program and how people got bored with the landings after only two flights to the moon and how the subsequent program was scrubbed shows exactly that in this day and age you won’t even be able to compete with all the BS that is on TV.

Do you really expect that all channels will cover the next moon-landing live? That the world will hold its breath?

Or that they rather keep watching Oprah? (or the equivalent since she’s retiring). I don’t think that any single viewer of a talkshow would switch over.

Because, you know, the other problem is that all those who saw the moon-landings live are ALSO still alive. You will have to wait for THEM to all die before the moon landings will be something novel again. And even then only because they aren’t getting a good education about space in schools.

We can go back into space as soon as space killing us will be a problem. At the moment we are clearly having a problem not killing ourselves. We don’t even have an energy source that isn’t killing people yet. How about we focus on powering our world first, then maybe take care of the death problem and as soon as we don’t die anymore, we can go into space. Because as soon as we live hundreds or maybe thousands of years, surviving in space might be a smaller problem.

Because at the moment I think we don’t gain anything from trying to send some meatbag guinea-pigs to space.

I want tons and tons of probes and new telescopes but as long as there’s no real gain from having someone on the moon trying hard not to die, there are bigger fish to fry.

I partially agree on that.

However, most of my anger is directed toward former NASA admin Mike Griffin, for choosing a highly expensive method of getting to the moon; a method that was bound to be canceled.
We could’ve chosen a much more affordable method.

My point being: This is a goal I wholeheartedly believe in, but let’s not confuse it with the short-term goal of human footprints on other worlds.

The reasons for that sad graph originated 30 years ago. Scrambling to do something now just so that graph doesn’t reach zero, even though that has nothing to do with the long-term goal, would be silly. Instead, accept the reality of the past, acknowledge that, sad as it is, there may be a time when no living human has walked on another world. And make sure that the next time one does, they can stay there for a while. And bring lots of friends.

It’s not about bootprints, it’s about progress.

Of course we may not get either, and the sadness of [i]that[/i] is something I think we can all agree on.

By the way, I am a fan of people in space, including eventual space settlement.

N

Ensuring our survival? I think there are questions much closer to home in that regard that could use both effort and adequate funding.

False dilemma. We are completely capable of doing both; it’s a matter of scraping together the political capital (or actual capital in a private-industry-based plan).

In the long term, there are existential threats which cannot be solved purely from the ground, so expansion into space is not just “interesting” or “romantic” but necessary. No amount of social improvements will protect us from rogue comets or nearby supernovae or any number of other large-scale disasters. And we should start as soon as possible, because people are bad at long-term planning. If we put off important projects now it becomes all the easier to put them off later as well, until something big happens that we’re unprepared for and it’s game over.

The Earth is a nicer place to live than Mars or the Moon for humans, even after massive global warming, running out of oil and a mid-scale nuclear war. From a survival of the species over the next thousand years perspective, our money is probably better spent finding way to keep us from getting whacked by sneaky comets or building a big space station with lots of seeds and sperm/egg banks.

What about permian extinction level global warming, several bouts of all-out nuclear wars, and complete exhaustion of all minable resources. Good luck defending the planet against a comet/asteroid with a stone axe. Compare that to terraformed mars PLUS large self-sufficient bases on the moon PLUS asteroid mining colonies.

These things may inspire, but not nearly to the same level. I’ll read a good article on robots in space. I dream of humans living there.

The last Apollo flight happened before I was born. I found it shameful that Apollo is celebrated so much in Smithsonian, yet we haven’t gone back. We know we did something great, but then we just seemed to stop dreaming.

We should be careful about how we justify such things… The old question of how best to spend what little funding we have is not an easy one. And while manned exploration certainly strikes an emotional “awesome” chord in my heart, I don’t know that it’s really the best thing in all cases.

Are there interesting questions that could be answered by exploring the moon or, more generally, be studied there, mars, or in in low gravity? Certainly.

Are they worth spending money on? I think so.

Of those questions, what can be done remotely and what has to be done by people directly? That’s a more difficult question and one that needs an expert, say a planetary scientist for example, to answer. However, at least naively, it would seem that many of the potential questions could be done remotely at a fraction of the cost. And if it’s done for much less, then perhaps we could do much more.

As for inspiring future generations? Well, could you, with a straight face, tell the people doing astronomy and planetary science using satellites and robots that it’s not inspiring. Maybe it’s a question of imagination… Find me a child that would only be swayed into science, or more generally inspired to learn and be educated about the universe, by manned exploration and not by such incredible things as can be done through remote exploration. I think most kids, most people, that would be inspired by manned exploration, would be just as inspired by say Hubble.

Ensuring our survival? I think there are questions much closer to home in that regard that could use both effort and adequate funding.

And with regards to “live”, the time lag, while noticeable on human scales, is relatively nothing.

As always, best wishes Phil.