Continue to Fund NASA

The wreckage of the ship and the clay of her s hithertosome crew members were strewn all across Texas and parts of Louisiana. Even the most block NASA believers contemplated their support for the agency as fire rained from the sky. It had been nearly 17 eld since the last fatal disaster of the Challenger explosion, and this served as a nonher frighten reminder that pose travel till is non safe.The incident caused the question that every wiz asked themselves that day Is the journey Of distance travel and exploration worth the let go of human lives? This line of thinking has ultimately lead to the debate everyplace whether we, as American tax payers, should continue to fund NASA in its explosive charge to explore and understand the universe. I propose that NASA is non lone(prenominal) an alpha part of our government, but an absolute critical piece of our development as a human species. We ar a race destined for the stars, and the physical composition of agencies like NASA were the prototypical steps to that suppress.To better understand NASA, we have to sapidity at the agency from its inception. NASA was essentially born out of fear of Soviet office superiority. On October 4, 1957 the Soviet Union launch the worlds first f personationitious satellite into space by the name of S vomit upnik (Gerber, Lanais). As a exact result, or so exactly one course of study subsequently NASA was formed with 8,000 employees and a 1 00 million dollar budget. The initial goal of NASA was to make up lost ground on the Soviets in the space race, but on May 25, 1961 President John F Kennedy gave NASA its prime directive put a man on the moon and bring him patronize feely out front the end of the decade.With an astonishing pace and efficiency, that goal was achieve on July 20, 1969 when Neil Armstrong took his first steps on the moon and gave his famous One Small trample for Man speech. At that era, the whole country was behind NASA and its mission. The very act of putting a man on the moon changed our society in many ways. Man was no longer bound to the estate, and it changed our perception of the universe. geographic expedition of space and the stars seemed within our grasp. It looked like only a matter of time before the common man would be colonizing the moon. Fast forward almost forty years later and we find that Man has not been plunk for since.The supposition that we were able to send a man to the moon in eight years, but spend the next forty idly by on Earth and our low orbit space stations does not sit tumefy with some. And, if you atomic number 18 totally feeling at the teensy-weensy picture of manned space travel, it would seem that NASA is moving at a snails pace. Since the last moon landing, Man has not moved an inch preceding(a) our low orbit space stations. When looking at faults, there argon many to be found as to why this has occurred. The first liaison we can look at is the faltered support NASA recei ved from our entry in the past few decades.When Americans started dying for the cause, we all slowly started losing our taste for space travel. This also occurred when we realized the high cost of move man into space. The globe does not see the benefits of sending a man to the moon again, as the been there, done that mentality has prevailed. This is especially apparent as of late when Obama just sweetly canceled the Constellation Program, which aimed at getting a man back on the moon by 2020 (Atkinson). The ultimate goal was to start towards nominate a lunar base from which we could launch other space sessions from.Yet, even though we had already spent 9 billion dollars on the project, it was axed. NASA was cited as over budget, behind schedule, and lacking in innovation due to a failure to invest in critical new technical schoolnologies. Instead, NASA was urged to invest and advocate the centralization of space flight (Belton). This comes about because the space shuttle ov erstep go forth be retiring this year, and the US will be stallionly reliant on the Russian space agency to ferry our astronauts to the supranational Space Station for the next few years. It is suggested that spurring growth in this sector will achieveBeams angle of creating jobs and will be better economically than sending our money to Russia. While I find the centralization of space flight a step in a good direction, I believe the can kioskation of the Constellation program shows an enormous lack of fore breathet on the Obama administrations part. While this move harkens back to when the government spurred growth in technical aviation sector by use of the Airmail initiative (Simmers 2), one must realize that the money is just not there soon enough for commercial study and exploration.The projects NASA have undertaken have required massive budgets with usually very little monetary return. This is not necessarily the arena for mysterious industry, who have a bottom line to wo rry about. There has been much than outcry as to the cost of supporting NASA through public funding. This year Annas budget actually increased 6% to just under 18 billion dollars, which to some, are not being spent wisely. It is unfortunately accepted that NASA has become the government agency that nobody wanted it to be big, bloated, inefficient and expensive.It seems it has fallen into the pit that most other government agencies have. For proof of this e can look at Annas latest deflower rover project, the Mars Science Laboratory (MS). The rover was supposed to launch near the end of 2009 and now has been delayed (twice) to 201 1 (Chance). The budget for this project was approved at 1. 6 billion but now is projected to surpass 2. 2 billion by launch. Even if you look at Annas more(prenominal) recent success stories the public has been asking is it worth it? The Mars rovers Spirit and chance launched in 2003 and were expected to last only 6 months.Six years later and we fin d they are still operating on Mars and sending back data. At a total cost of -? 944 million for a six year mission, you could say thats a bargain (Chivies). Yet, there are many who wonder how soil samples and weather patterns on Mars encourage us when there many more issues down on Earth that need attention. Some have urged for the slashing and outright abolishment of NASA in favor of shifting its budget to other social programs like intimately fare, national health care or education.While I am not debating the whether or not these programs need more funding, I am stating that change magnitude Annas budget and overall presence would be a huge century to the development of the IIS and he human race as a whole. When looking at the overall governmental spending budget, NASA is only a overtop in the bucket, totaling only less than 1% (Change). Compare that to the height of the Apollo missions that took 5% of the budget, it shows that todays program is affordable. The national defen se budget is nearly 40 clock that of Annas.While NASA does not without delay work towards the hyphenation of space (that is the Air Forces domain), maintaining space superiority does lend to our countrys defense. One can only imagine if Russia or China gains the upper hand. Regardless, the minute anis we exponent see by deviate Annas funding elsewhere would be greatly outweighed by the detrimental make this would have on our country and perhaps the world. So far you might say there havent been many pros for NASA that have been presented. The fruits of Annas labors really fall into both categories tangible and intangible.The intangible gifts that NASA has give us are really the hardest to make up as they may not directly benefit us. For instance, NASA has discovered more than 300 explants (planets orbiting stars outside our solar system) and are still finding new and better ways to detect them Cowmen). They recent launched the Keeper space background that will aid us in find ing even more explants. The knowledge that there are definitively more planets outside our solar system, tour not surprising, does nothing for us now and helps no one at the moment.Yet, the information we might glean from these explants may perhaps unlock how planets are formed in our universe and may even give a glimpse into how life is formed. One cannot put a price just the ticket on expanding the human understanding of the universe. But, knowing how life or planets are formed do not help the starving or the dying. For those who do not care that Uranus has 1000 MPH wind speeds or that at the center of every galaxy there may be a super massive black hole we must look at the direct and tangible presents that NASA has bestowed on our society.Many, many innovative technologies have been directly and indirectly created by NASA is pursuit of its goals. If you get lost in the woodwind instrument and your GAPS leads you back to safety you can convey NASA for that. If MR. scan catches the early stages of pubic louse and you get to live a full life because of it, you can convey NASA (Change 2). If your fire alarm goes off and you can get out of your steep before it is engulfed in flames again, you can thank NASA. If you have an ear thermometer, cell phone, satellite TV or cordless drill you can thank in whole or in part, NASA.The technologies NASA has given the world has not only made life easier, but has protected countless lives as well. Lets not forgot Annas enormous contributions to meteorology either, which have not only saved lives but have help the agricultural sector as well. solely these things we may not have come about if NASA hadnt help create them as a means to their end. If all of Annas contributions to humanity have not swayed you than reaps nothing will. You must take into account this though that the fate of the entire world and the human race may be on Nanas shoulders.Im certain(a) you have all seen movies like Armageddon and Deep Impact, a nd believable or not these Earth striking comets are a very real possibility. The only way we will have fair warning if this comes to pass will be through the efforts of agencies like NASA. The only organizations even considering the possibilities and contingency plans are those like NASA This is not fear mongering either the widely accepted notion that Earth has been hit by a comet before exulting in the extinction of species like the dinosaurs is proof enough that it is possible.It may very well be that one day NASA saves the Earth from destruction, and We will breath sigh of relief that we kept them around. When its all said and done, we need NASA. They have given us so much in the way of knowledge and tech analogical advancements that we shouldnt turn our backs on them now. Granted, they are not perfect and do have many glaring flaws. Perhaps they need a restructuring or new leadership to get them back on the path. The fact remains that we are indebted to NASA for eloping us gro w technologically and as piece looking up wide eyed at the sky.