Debunking Skewed View Of The Cost Of Manned Space Exploration

Many seem to believe that manned space exploration has no place in the future, despite its proven excellence in the past. It was officially established by the Obama administration, in 2010, that NASA would no longer work towards sending human bodies into space (Davis). This decision spurred from budget, competing methods (unmanned resources i.e. robots), and other factors. This decision is quite the blow to those who wish to know space better. If we wish to explore and understand space more, we must send the ultimate explorers to do so, humans. This idea that a manmade robot can do the work of a men themselves is overly hopeful and unrealistic. In this essay, I will focus on debunking skewed views of the cost benefit of robots versus humans,

The Apollo Lunar Missions are also a great reference when talking about space cost because they were not only widely successful and costly, but one of the most referenced spaced missions when space budget is argued. Costing around 175 billion dollars, scaled to modern day value, the Apollo Lunar Missions were overly expensive (Crawford). When looking at the price tag of these missions, one must realize the factors went into generating such a lofty charge. The Apollo Missions were not largely about space exploration at all, but about egoism. Amidst the Cold War, no monetary sacrifices were made in to pride in the pursuit for moon. It is also notable to mention the scientific successes of the Apollo Lunar Missions. Visiting six sites and returning 382 kilograms of lunar material, the Apollo Lunar Missions accomplished tasks that robotic missions simple have not and could not have done, even in the many years since that time (Keller). Another reason why human exploration is both costlier and more promising in comparison to robotic exploration is because when humans are sent to space they are expected to return. This of course is obvious, but what may not be apparent

This quality also separates us from robots, and other manmade machines. The problem is not only in the time it would take a robot to complete a simple human task, but if a robot’s programming could even comprehend its surroundings well enough to initiate the proper reaction. When some human encounters something new or unexpected they can quickly evaluate, reason, and develop or refocus a plan to ensure the most worthwhile research is being done. This is something that a robot simply cannot be programmed to do. There are only so many if, then, and or statements that a robot can predict and react to. Even the most advanced robots, which involve real-time human commands, are not functional at distances further than the moon, due to communication delays (Crawford). It simply is not practical to expect a robot to think or react as a human would. And using robots in place of humans could greatly stunt space findings. Humans do not even know all there is to find and look for in space, so there is no way a robot could know; however, humans are able to comprehend and evaluate unexpected trials quickly, which something current robots are not programmed to