We need more scientists like Neil deGrasse Tyson. He does such a great job of explaining science in a way that is clear and interesting.
When Dr. Tyson was on the Daily Show a week or so ago he pointed out that the Apollo program only got the amount of funding it did because of the Cold War competition with the Soviets. We spent tons of money to beat them to the Moon, then when we figured out they weren't going, we stopped going.
He made the comment that if the Chinese decide to build a base on the Moon, we'd be back there in under two years.
I am a scientist and, not surprisingly, I'm all for spending more on space exploration. I also think basic research (what some people call "blue sky research") is vital to the advancement of science. Applied science and engineering is what converts discoveries into useful things for humanity, but you can't plan out a breakthrough discovery. Breakthroughs don't necessarily happen by accident, but they do happen by pushing the current boundaries of what is known. Oftentimes this requires doing research for the sake of doing research, as some people would put it. "Blue sky" research is what keeps science and technology growing. It's also what helps inspire young people to go into those fields.
At a time when the President (and others) regularly talk about how the US needs to encourage more children to go into science, math, and engineering, it seems foolish not to increase the funding of one of the highest profile, most advanced scientific organizations in the world (that being NASA).
Unfortunately, most of those making the decisions in the government don't have any appreciation for the value of science. They only see it as another metric to compare how we're supposedly superior to other countries. Until some other nation develops a space program that might be more advanced than the US's, they're not going to start sinking big money into NASA again.
|