Quote:
Originally Posted by DarkKni9hT
Just playing Devil's Advocate here, but, at this particular juncture in time, couldn't the BILLIONS of dollars consumed in the effort to land a robot on a cold, desolate planet with another robot to collect air and dirt samples we can never verify be better spent .... oh, I don't know .... feeding the hungry and shoring up your flailing economy?
Just a question.
|
This question has been asked over and over again since the sixties. Bare in mind that we spend half a penny of federal discretionary spending on all of NASA, and as a percentage of GDP, we are spending the smallest amount since NASA was founded.
www.federalbudget.com, NASA barely shows up compared to what we already spend, look at health and human services and entitlement programs and compare to NASA. Answer, we already do spend on the hungry greatly. NASA isn't why people are hungry, it IS an answer to keep people from going hungry....
The economy and other benefits, please watch these two short videos for your answer.
Here is why it is so very important and put so very well by Dr. Neil deGrasse Tyson...
http://www.haydenplanetarium.org/tys...estimony-video
http://youtu.be/RQhNZENMG1o
I can't put it better then Dr. Tyson. He has the gift.
I hope people take the time to listen.
We should be investing more in NASA. Flat out. Double it.
I'll also add, the nations that lead on the frontiers, dictate the course of human history.
When we challenge ourselves, reach out and push ourselves, we grow and expand.
It's the nature of life.
And perhaps even, if humanity has a future history, if we stay here our species will forever
be tied to the fate of this world.
The late author Ray Bradbury said, when we learn to live beyond earth, one day beyond our solar system even, we can live forever.