why shouldn't we send people to space?

10 Answers

  • 8 years ago
    Favorite Answer

    I think for many governments, it's a vision that becomes a goal. Getting people in almost impossible places at almost unreachable distances and for the records, since no living creature has ever been off the Earth in the Earth's history. Except maybe their fossils in rocks after asteroid and comet miles across impact the Earth and blasting Earth debris at speeds that escape the Earth's gravity and thus, sending it into space where it may also leave the Solar System, or fall into the Sun or other moons or planets, including Mars. Pluto, though not considered a planet anymore is no exception. Visionary biologists even believe the fossils could be seeds for life on Mars. Some even believe like on Earth originated on Mars and got here that way. Not as fossils, but as bacteria, which evolved into the species and sizes that existed to this day. It's so far-fetched, and yet so believed, it's no surprise that even the government believe they could blow our money on space missions, or I should say blast our money out into space. I may be a visionary, but when it comes to projects that expensive, I like engineering projects. Particularly tunnels and bridges linking other countries seperated by water. Even miles in scale, it is a wiser thing to spend that kind of money on, because as massive as it is, and amazing it is to link them over/underwater, it's equally profitable. And could be less expensive than a space mission, depending on the geography of the building site of the tunnel/bridge. And it brings joy for travelers. And while selling tickets helps justify the construction, maintenance etc. costs, so does trading by train. Freight trains are faster than ships and using trains voids loading and unloading cargo ships of freight containers, saving money and more time, thus even more money again. And although no need to load and unload cargo ships means no jobs of that type (in only those coastal areas and not far inland), it would void the additional taxes that everyone (in those countries) is otherwise paying, including business people. And every tax saved would mean more money saved to improve their business(es) even more and thus making even more profit and opening more businesses and bringing more jobs and wealth and thus more business people could create businesses of their own. New towns in isolated areas could begin to take shape where the cycle could begin. The closer they are to regular/large populated cities, the faster and thus easier the cycle of creating another city and another source of national businesses that play a role in the nation's gross domestic product, the number of jobs around the nation working with those businesses, and money for businesses to grow and spread, thus providing even more jobs nationwide and more new cities for the same purpose. Sending people into space just for the exploration is as unwise each time as releasing lit money in the daytime sky as a show in a region where nobody lives. It's ridiculous on a cosmic scale.

  • 8 years ago

    As long as you are willing to do it at your own expense, and as long as you realise you will get very poor value for your money, then please go right ahead. The problem arises if you want the state to do it.

    Manned space exploration is really a bit of a con. Even at the time of the Apollo programme, it was far more political stunt than scientific project. You can tell that from the fact that the famous speech calling for the moon landing during the 1960s was made by a politician, and one who had absolutely no background in science.

    Now think how much technology has advanced since the 1960s when Apollo was designed. Computers, imaging devices, and all sorts of other space-exploration essentials have improved out of all recognition. Vehicles like Curiosity can do things that weren't even though of in the 1960s. Sending more vehicles like Curiosity out into the universe is the way forward. They are far more robust than human beings, far cheaper to keep going, don't whine if they aren't brought back to earth, perform the job far, far longer - and in general simply deliver enormously more bang for the bucks. Sending men into space is great for adolescent boys, but it doesn't get the science done.

  • 8 years ago

    What's the point?

    We have grown up (or at least some of us have) since the "space age". We now know that sending people into space is a total waste of time, money and resources.

    In case you haven't noticed, robots now totally dominate space. We have robotic craft at (or on) just about every planet in the solar system. People only blunder around in low earth orbit. NASA and other space agencies have now learned that the only effective way to explore space is by robots.

    Robots are far cheaper. They do everything a person could do in space at a tiny fraction (one percent or less) of the cost. This is mainly because there is no need to encumber a mission with ridiculously heavy and expensive life support systems. But also, robots need not return to Earth; at the end of the mission they can be just left to posterity on other planets.

    Robots are far more effective. Humans were never meant for space. They do not function well there. Robots can be custom built to survive in any environment.

    Robots are inspiration for the future. The human form is fixed for all time. It won't change or improve. It will always be soft, unreliable and a liability in space. Robots continually evolve and improve. They will only get better. How inspiring it would be to see an android robot walking on another planet, knowing that one day we will all have one in our homes, serving us and being an asset to society.

    The sight of some sod stuffing around on another planet would just look ridiculous and antiquated nowadays.


  • 5 years ago

    In binary options you will have the possibility to predict the movement of various assets such as stocks, currency pairs, commodities and indices. Learn how you can make money trading binary options https://tr.im/sytwO

    An option has only two outcomes (hence the name “binary” options). This is because the value of an asset can only go up or down during a given time frame. Your task will be to predict if the value of an asset with either go up or down during a certain amount of time.

  • How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
  • ?
    Lv 5
    8 years ago

    wait till a nation sends a man to the moon and watch him die of radiation before even reaching the moon let alone bringing him back again because with all the tracking systems a hoax like the moon landings will never happen!

  • 8 years ago

    Hate to break it to you, but we send people to space all the time.


  • oser
    Lv 4
    4 years ago

    Probes are deliver to diverse planets ,to income the universe.only no longer to area. Tycho replaced into deliver to income earth like planets round different stars, Lcross replaced into deliver to moon to income about water in moon.

  • 8 years ago

    Cost, waste of resources, waste of skilled people, no return on the effort. Machines are cheaper in every way and achieve more.

  • Robert
    Lv 6
    8 years ago

    Because they might end up all over Florida.

  • Anonymous
    8 years ago

    Because it is too expensive.

    Robots do it cheaper.

Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.