THE PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE, USA
An Online Journal of Political Commentary & Analysis
Volume VI, Issue # 254, December 2, 2004
Dr. Almon Leroy Way, Jr., Editor
Government Committed to & Acting in Accord with Conservative Principles
Ensures a Nation's Strength, Progress, & Prosperity
THINKING ABOUT TRAVELING & LIVING IN OUTER SPACE?
THE MOON? MARS? FORGET ABOUT IT!
By Alan Caruba
THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT SPACE PROGRAM CARRIED ON BY THE NATIONAL AERONAUTICS & SPACE ADMINISTRATION
-- SPACE SHUTTLES, SPACE FLIGHTS, & HUMAN BEINGS TRAVELING & LIVING IN OUTER SPACE: A VERY UNWISE & COSTLY
ENDEAVOR INVOLVING BILLIONS OF DOLLARS THE U.S.A. CAN ILL AFFORD TO THROW AT A SPACE PROGRAM THAT ROBOTS
COULD PERFORM MUCH BETTER THAN PEOPLE
FULL STORY:
As entertainment, I have always particularly enjoyed any television show or movie about space voyage. There’s something compelling
about a group of people, dependent on a space ship to carry them to or from danger. It is, as any Star Trek fan will tell you, “the final
frontier.” It is also largely absurd. Particularly when it involves billions of dollars this nation can ill afford to throw at a space program
that robots could perform better than people.
Recently, I read an article by William Tucker entitled “The Sober Realities of Manned Space Flight” and published in the December,
2004, edition of The American Enterprise magazine. Tucker began by noting that President Bush’s suggestion of a 280
million-mile manned space flight to Mars was a good idea. It is, in fact, an astonishingly bad idea, but even presidents have a right
to have bad ideas. “A quick NASA calculation,” noted Tucker, “revealed that the Mars effort would cost nearly $500 billion over 30
years.” Now take that figure and double it. Any estimate like that which is provided by a government agency — any agency — is
usually wrong by a factor of two, three, or higher.
I was quickly reminded of the spectacular and tragic failures of two Space Shuttles, one when it was launched and the second when it
was returning to Earth. “The Space Shuttle was originally supposed to break even and fly every two weeks,” said Greg Klerkx, the
author of Lost in Space, a critique of NASA. Instead, “it ended up costing $500 million per launch, and flying four or five times
a year.” You should think of the Space Shuttle as a very expensive truck used to ferry cargo to the International Space Station.
Even the space stations, first Skylab, then the Russian’s Salyut and Mir, failed to lead to the development of larger facilities manned by
dozens of scientists and others who would learn what it would take to create entire space colonies. Nor, with good reason, did we ever
return to the Moon.
Today’s International Space Station, conceived in 1984, cost taxpayers $11 billion by 1992 and was still on the drawing board! At that
point, the Clinton administration brought in the Russians to help, scaled down the project, and, by a single vote in 1993, the U.S. House
of Representatives threw another $13 billion at it. The first stage was lifted into orbit in 1995 and, as Tucker notes, “when completed, the
ISS will hold six astronauts. The two in residence now spend 85 percent of their time on construction and maintenance. In essence, the
U.S.A. is spending billions so that two astronauts can build a space shed.” By the time it’s finished, it will cost an estimated $150 billion.
Why didn’t we return to the Moon? Why aren’t there huge space stations? As Tucker points out, the experiments on the longterm
effects of life in zero gravity demonstrate that humans do not belong in space. “The news has not been good. Muscles atrophy quickly
and — for reasons yet unknown — the human body does not manufacture bone tissue in space.” Moreover, the Moon “is a barren
oxygen-less desert.” Want to see a desert? We have them right here on Earth.
Humans returning from any extended time in space have the consistency of Jell-O. They are virtually helpless and take days to recover
from the experience. Now, think about the suggestion by President Bush that we send astronauts on an 18-month journey to Mars. Not
only would their bodies suffer ill effects, they would be exposed to huge doses of cosmic radiation. We’ve already managed to kill two
Space Shuttle crews, how many more times do we have to do this before we decide to abandon this bad and very expensive idea?
Much of what is required to launch and maintain those machines we send into Earth orbit can be and is done without using Space
Shuttles. They have become the equivalent of trolley cars. Trolleys are useful on the sharp inclines of San Francisco streets and
picturesque in New Orleans. I’ve been on both. They’re slow and most people still drive their own cars around these cities.
It is the unmanned space probes that have been the most successful ventures of NASA, and therein lay several simple truths:
(1) Humans are neither designed nor intended to function in outer space;
(2) Technology permits us to do all the exploration we need to at this point in time;
(3) Space probes are far less costly than Space Shuttles that have to be rebuilt
from scratch every time they fly;
(4) Space probes are far less expensive;
(5) When space probes are conducted, no one gets killed.
At this point, I am sure there are those who want to speak poetically of the need to explore outer space by sending manned expeditions
“because it is there” or on the chance that there is intelligent life “out there” with which we might come in contact. If it is intelligent, it
already knows that the Earth runs red with the blood of its habitants every day as humans kill one another for political or religious
reasons and we animals eat one another. Moreover, despite some lovely beaches and spectacular mountain ranges, large areas of the
Earth are not the most hospitable places for the humans and other creatures that inhabit it.
So let me suggest that we not waste more billions on NASA’s Space Shuttles and International Space Station. Let’s not go to the Moon
again or even think about going to Mars. It’s a really dumb idea. Those privately funded space vehicles will cost you $200,000 a seat to
float around for a few minutes or look out the window and see the Earth floating and spinning.
Like we say in New Jersey, forget about it. What I really want is an automobile that will run on salt water. We have plenty of that.
LINKS TO RELATED TOPICS:
Outer Space: Space Projects & Space Travel
Fiscal Policy: Taxation & Government Spending
Alan Caruba is a veteran business and science writer, a Public Relations Counselor, Communications Director of the American Policy Center,
and Founder of the National Anxiety Center, a clearinghouse for information about media-driven scare campaigns. Caruba writes a weekly
column, "Warning Signs," posted on the Internet website of the National Anxiety Center
(www.anxietycenter.com). A compilation of his past columns, entitled Warning Signs, is published by Merril Press. In addition
to Warning Signs, Caruba is the author of A Pocket Guide to Militant Islam and The United Nations vs. the United States,
both of which are available from the National Anxiety Center, 28 West Third Street, Apartment 1321, South Orange, New Jersey, 07079.
Copyright 2004 Alan Caruba
Published with Permission of Alan Caruba
ACaruba@AOL.Com
Return to Top of Page
Go to the WEBSITE INDEX
Return to Beginning of
THE PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE, USA,
Public Issues & Political Controversies
Return to Beginning of
THE PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE, USA
Most Recent Articles
Return to Beginning of
THE PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE, USA,
Volume VI, 2004
Return to Beginning of
THE PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE, USA,
Subject Matter Highlights
Return to POLITICAL EDUCATION Homepage
CONTACT & ACCESS INFORMATION
This is not a commercial website. The sole purpose of the website is to share with interested persons information regarding civics,
civic and social education, political science, government, politics, law, constitutional law and history, public policy, and political
philosophy and history, as well as current and recent political developments, public issues, and political controversies.
THE PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE, USA
An Online Journal of Political Commentary & Analysis
Dr. Almon Leroy Way, Jr., Editor
Conservative & Free-Market Analysis of Government, Politics & Public Policy, Covering Political, Legal, Constitutional, Economic,
Cultural, Military, International, Strategic, & Geopolitical Issues
Government, Politics, Public Policy, Legal Issues, Constitutional Law, Government & the Economy, Cultural Values, Foreign Affairs,
International Relations, Military Defense & National Security, Geopolitics, Terrorism & Homeland Security, American National Interests,
Political Systems & Processes, Political Institutions, Political Ideologies, & Political Philosophy