The Empiricist

An interesting look at the moon shots, Apollo 11 the untold story. was published by Popular Mechanics.

It’s the 40th anniversary of the Apolloa moonshots, and there’s been lots of discussion around the web about whether we should be expanding space exploration or forgetting it.

Those arguing for continued exploration, such as more moon shots, a moon base, or putting a man on mars, argue the following:

1. space exploration is inspirational, and is akin to spirit of the early explorers such as Magellan
2. we need to learn how to get off the Earth and colonise the rest of the solar system and then the galaxy for our own long-term survival
3. there are numerous spin-off benefits (look at Tang, for example).
4. Space travel is mankind’s destiny.

Those arguing against say the following:

1. There’s nothing on the moon worth getting, and even if there was, it’s not worth the cost
2. Space exploration and travel will be worthwhile if and when it’s cost-effective
3. Throwing billions at a vanity project is not money well spent
4. The money could be spent on other, more practical things. (pick your worthy cause of choice)

The sad truth is that NASA’s best days are past it. Without a huge boost in funding, it won’t be able to implement ambitious new plans.

This is because they have become a government-funded job creation program, and lack the zest, passion and talent of the NASA of fifty years ago. The people who implemented the Apollo mission, by and large, don’t work there any more.

There’s a sort of regression to mediocrity with government run enterprises. They start out with new people, new ideas, new systems, and can achieve great things. Then over time, without any hard incentive to excel, they become increasingly mediocre. It is the fate of any public organization like NASA.

Humans will one day set up camp to the moon and even try to colonise the solar system and the rest of the galaxy. But that’s in the distant future. And when it happens, NASA won’t be involved.