The argument claims that the money invested in the "Space Race" in the 1960's was well worth the high cost due to the many technological advances and therefore, the government should commit to a Mars Landing by 2020. Stated in this way, the argument fails to mention several key factors on which it could be evaluated. The conclusion relies on assumption, for which there is no clear evidence. Therefore the argument is weak, unconvincing and has several flaws.
Did the landing on the moon actually happen, or was it all a lie? It seems to me that the moon landing was real. The U.S. is an advanced country and in 1969 we had the technology to bring a person on the moon. After many tests, we were able to successfully get a person, Neil Armstrong, to the moon. Although we were losing in
On July 20, 1969, astronaut Neil Armstrong walked on the moon: or perhaps not. That is what some people think. They believe the "Moon Landings" were faked, in order to cheat the public out of billions of dollars and so that we could win the space race against the Soviet Union. According to conspiracy theorists, the scientists at N.A.S.A. realized during the Apollo missions that either is was technically impossible to reach the Moon ir that it cost too much. So, the government built a secret movie studio somewhere in the southwest and used special effects to pretend that the astronauts had landed on the Moon.
If we are to be properly prepared for such a venture we will have to continue space exploration, regardless of the consequences of putting more foreign objects that potentially could pollute outer space. Topic 1: In ancient times, various cultures interpreted the strange objects suspended in the sky in various ways. Some thought it was just a work of god and accepted it.
Just none in the space exploration industrie. With more money going to the ocean exploration and technology advancements the human race could become a more advanced civilization than it currently is. Also the military could use the money for better equipment. They could research more advanced weapons to protect the country borders.
NASA has just released the most detailed view of Pluto to date. The images from the New Horizon spacecraft show a variety of unique landscapes of the likes never before seen. This would usually be cause for celebration, however, it seems the agency might have some explaining to do. According to some skeptics, these images of Pluto were released in 2012 and there is proof. If the agency is caught lying about this, it might open up the door to a wealth of other conspiracies like aliens on Mars or the Hollow Earth Theory.
This money could have gone to more relevant causes. NASA spent twenty three billion dollars on manned programs from 1961 to 1969(Granath). This money could have gone to much better causes such as education and healthcare. Many communities in the US need more funds for education that NASA is instead using for space exploration.
b. The exploration of space will go on with or without the united states and if wish to stay among the world as a power we cannot allow ourselves to not take on this new great adventure. c. We are obligated to pursue space because we cannot afford to fall behind other nations. IV. Transition:
They also believe that they will find new resources to genetically modify our society. And they just might get their wishes if people start funding for space travel. Finding cures, new resources, and studying space are only a few reasons why space travel is necessary and why people should do more to fund the cause. Cancer and Mono still haven’t found a cure but, with the help of space travel, people can explore space and find other materials to find a cure for diseases. “Medicine has been revolutionized by the space program.
A mission to Mars could last over a year, and even an entire person’s lifetime. If an astronaut is not compatible with his/hers crewmates, it could spell disaster for the mission. In chapter two, Roach brings up the argument to whether or not it is better to send couples into space or single individuals. If the couple got into an argument, they understand one another and are more likely to work it out, rather than two individuals getting into a dispute. Roach also mentions what physical attributes an astronaut must possess for them to be easy to live with, whether it be not having bad breath, not getting sick easily, or having
Additionally, if the moon was once wandering aimlessly through space, why is it that other large lunar and planetary bodies have not been found acting in the same way throughout human history? Capture theory could go on to support the Earth having multiple moons which would again negatively impact the tides and thus human civilization on Earth as we know it. Therefore Sister Theory is stronger than
The sun isn 't hollow! That 's what we previously thought. This picture suggests that the sun is not in fact hollow, but contains a massive alien world where they are doing God knows what. I 'd like to think they 're all on a series of stationary bikes, powering the Sun so we on Earth can live. NASA HAS NO SAY IN ALIENS
NASA actually went to the Moon SIX TIMES. There would have been absolutely no reason to continue the hoax after the first landing. Why take the risk? They could have simply said that the spaceflights are way too risky and expensive, with no real advantages. Nobody would have questioned these motives.
I also started to think about the Drake equation, which I learned about in high school. The Drake equation looks at different things like the formation of stars and the probability of other life-sustaining planets, which in turn gives us a number of civilizations in the Milky Way Galaxy that we can detect electromagnetic emissions from (The Drake Equation). While I thought quite a bit about extraterrestrial life, I also thought about the fact we are stuck on Earth. The first thing that immediately comes to mind with that is how we are going to produce enough food. In the paper we discussed during class on Thursday, the data showed that we are using a significant amount of our natural resources in the production of beef cattle, and my thoughts on this are that we should transition to meats that don’t use as many resources.
Not only is NASA conforming to the Outer Space Treaty of 1967, but they are doing a favor to the supposed life on Mars, as “The environment on mars potentially is basically one giant dinner plate for Earth organisms.” That being said, even if life is not found on Mars, we ought to keep it healthy in case people discover a way to live on the planet. Another reason as to why we should prevent as many microbes as possible from dwelling on Mars, or any planet, is that we would not be able to accurately study the planet when covered in Earth microbes. The planets are very different from Earth; however the more microbes from our rovers and satellites inhabit these places, the more they become similar to