
That President was John Fitzgerald Kennedy. Of course, he also wanted to go to the Moon to beat the Soviet Union and win a political war, but there were a thousand more reasons to make that trip. All of them were good. As a result of his political will, the Apollo program became the most complex, most advanced, most successful, most beneficial technology endeavour ever taken by the United States of America.
It put the country decades ahead in every aspect of technology, and its effects, the technologies that came directly out of it, are now an indispensable part of our world: From the development of new metals and microprocessors, to clothing and medicine, the Apollo program touched every single aspect of our lives. Those developments are responsible for your smartphone, your desktop computer, your television set and even your winter underpants.
But most importantly, the Apollo program inspired generations of kids to become scientists and engineers, indirectly pushing technology even further. Humans were going to the fucking Moon! How cool is that? I can’t think of a more inspiring challenge than to conquer the stars, and those kids thought the same.
Inspiring a new generation
That inspiration made American universities thrive with new talent eager to push technology forward. We – not only America, but the entire world – are still enjoying the benefits that those students and the ones who followed brought to all of us decades after Apollo ended. Those kids went to work at IBM, Microsoft, Apple, Google, Boeing, Lockheed, and the thousands of high tech companies that bring us the amazing technology that we use on a daily basis.
So while some people may want to convince you that President Obama’s decision to fundamentally kill NASA’s manned space program is a great move for the future of space, I’m here to tell you that all that is bullshit.
First, it’s an excuse for a President who has failed to deliver on his promise of a better space program. His proposal is not better than what we had before. Actually, it’s only good for the private space sector which, incidentally, for the most part is just reinventing the wheel that NASA and the Soviet Union space organisation invented decades ago.
Even if you agree that the Constellation program wasn’t going anywhere – many people disagree, like those who created the video above – you can’t have the US manned spaceflight program disappear in favour of private space cabs to Earth’s orbit. Even Burt Rutan – the poster child of private spaceflight, creator of Spaceshipone and Spaceshiptwo – agrees that this is an incredibly bad idea:
That is not a “NASA plan”; it is the proposed budget from the White House. It will likely be revised by the Congress. I am for NASA doing either true Research, or doing forefront Exploration, with taxpayer dollars.
Ares/Orion is more of a Development program than a Research program, so I am not depressed to see it disappear. I am concerned to see NASA manned spaceflight disappear, since they provided world leadership in the 60s and part of the 70s. The result was America’s universities being the leader in cience/Engineering PhDs.
Many American kids will be depressed by the thought that our accomplishments will not be continued and thus America will fall deeper away from our previous leadership in Engineering/Science/Math. I believe our future success depends on our ability to motivate our youth.
I would support a restructuring of goals and funding so NASA can be allowed to perform like the 60s on space Research and on Exploration. There is not a shred of evidence that the President sees any value in those goals.
Rutan made those comments yesterday, and I can’t agree more with him. It’s good to see him – of all people – saying this out loud, especially while the rest of space private companies are gloating about how Obama’s “think small” plan will increase their benefits in a big way.
The greater good
In a world of fast forward, short attention spans and materialism above all things, we need humans in space. Not just tweeting from orbit. But out there, on the Moon and Mars. And if the United States can’t do this on its own, that’s OK. In fact, that would be perfect: NASA should work together with the European Space Agency, the Russian Federal Space Agency, JAXA, and anyone who wants to achieve the greater good and really push humanity forward.
And yes, we need the satellites and the probes and the telescopes, absolutely, but you can’t replace humans with probes. Not because humans would do a better job, but because robots photographing things is not the same as being there. Being there like everyone on Earth arrived to the Moon when Neil Armstrong put his foot on it.
From a bean counter point of view, if you do it right, the economical and technological benefits will be as great as those brought by Apollo, now and in the future. From the point of view of anyone who thinks that the world is about more than counting beans, the benefits are even more obvious than that. The fact is that photographs taken by robots neither push technology forward nor inspire entire generations or bring economical and technological benefits that reverberate through decades to come. That’s what the humans in Apollo did.
Maybe Obama needs to watch the entire JFK’s We Need to Go to the Moon speech, at the Rice Stadium in Houston, TX in the fall of 1962, and remember that the reason the United States chose to go to the moon:
We choose to go to the moon in this decade and do the other things, not because they are easy, but because they are hard, because that goal will serve to organize and measure the best of our energies and skills, because that challenge is one that we are willing to accept, one we are unwilling to postpone, and one which we intend to win, and the others, too.
Kennedy ended that speech with this:
Many years ago the great British explorer George Mallory, who was to die on Mount Everest, was asked why did he want to climb it. He said, “Because it is there.”
Well, space is there, and we’re going to climb it, and the moon and the planets are there, and new hopes for knowledge and peace are there. And, therefore, as we set sail we ask God’s blessing on the most hazardous and dangerous and greatest adventure on which man has ever embarked.
I can’t add anything else to that.



















MrScuba
Saturday, February 6, 2010 at 4:58 PMYes, it seems a great shame to have the organisation that put man on the moon pushed aside because the cost of running that organisation have become to high. It a way it’s like we lose direct contact with living history. There is however another way to view this, and that is that if offers the world an unprecedented opportunity.
By effectively distancing itself from space exploration, the US government relinquishes an element of control. For decades, nobody would dream of attempting to recreate what NASA has done. Why would a small company with a relative handful of people re-invent the wheel when there is an organisation that is funded by billions of government dollars. You can’t compete with that. Likewise for those of us who grew up dreaming of becoming astronauts, the reality was that unless you were a solid US citizen and associated with it’s military, your chances of making the cut were (pun intended) astronimical!
Obama may have failed to deliver what people have expected, but he hasn’t killed the dream. It lives with those who see this as an opportunity to stand on their own. Now, it’s not just the US that have the opportunity or the will to go into space, but as Burt Rutan’s group has shown us, it is entirely feasible that a relatively moderately funded group can do for a handful of millions what would otherwise take NASA billions of dollars to achieve.
Now credit where it is due, none of this could be possible without the experience and knowledge that was gained through the efforts of those that literally gave their entire lives to space exploration.
The reality is that any organisation that sees the opportunity to exploit space exploration will have the opportunity to reap the benefits of the technologies it develops, and the discoveries made on the journey into space. The novelty of space hopping will fund further developments in the field. Companies will form because opportunities to make money from this will be seen, and new industries will likely arise as a result.
JFK’s speech though is just as relevant in a world without NASA as it was when he spoke his famous words. The goal will continue to serve to organize and measure the best of our energies and skills. The challenge is one that many more will accept. New hopes for knowledge and peace are still there. Best of all, with more groups attempting to reach space the burden will be shared, and we will be more likely to get there.
gargravarr
Saturday, February 6, 2010 at 7:30 PMIt’s very sad. The space geek part of me thinks that if the US follows this path, they may never go anywhere in space for a long time (hell, they can’t even go to the Space Station without the Shuttle).
However, if I was an American, I could see the value of universal health care instead. Provided they achieve an outcome which actually benefits the average citizen.
matt
Sunday, February 7, 2010 at 12:48 AMI’m sorry, I can only ever remember one thing that stuff like this brings up.
it’s the episode(s…) of Dragonball Z where Goku for no reason gives up fighting Cell, a seemingly invincible monster, and sends his own son in instead, he then stands idly by while his son gets the living crap beaten out of him. He knows and he says out loud, only when he is pushed into the corner, when he is truly on the brink will he unleash his full potential, and only at that full potential was anyone strong enough to win.
I’m sure many more poetic examples exist but I’ve never seen one portray it so clearly (it was for kids after all)
the key words to take out of these typically hard-sell speeches are “win” and “first”.
they didn’t do it for any of the reasons they mentioned in this speech, they did it because they new they were against the wall, the prospect of a war they could very well loose was the consequence.
you can hear all the motivating speeches you want, every new president will talk about going into space – even Mr Bush. but it all falls apart as the reality hits that it will take effort, and they are already safely in office.
the simple question is WHY would we go into space?
Money doesn’t do things, because it’s curious, Money doesn’t care about the greater good which you mention, it will never know the thrill of being the first to step onto a new world.
Money needs cold, logical reasons to do stuff, the feelings Armstrong must have felt when he planted his foot on the surface of the moon can’t be expressed in a pie chart.
any person could find a group of like minded individuals, cut down a tree, build a boat and explore the world, but even they probably wouldn’t if a probe had told them the rest of the world was just a desolate wasteland of nothingness.
I more than anyone agree hole heartedly with what you are saying.
the fact of the matter is no matter how enthused you are, going into space costs money, a whole lot of money, and thus you are a slave to it.
so unless we end up with another cold war, with our backs against the wall, or the oceans start boiling,
prey they discover pluto is made of gold.
wtfamireading
Sunday, February 7, 2010 at 1:02 PMDon’t you understand that the economy cannot fund this and that the national debt of the US is huge. Where the hell is he going to get the money for this from?
jggg
Monday, February 8, 2010 at 5:26 PMObama like people before him lacks the vision and appreciation of what the United States is all about. This will be just another in a long line of failures that will be HIS legacy. People who really l;ove this country will take his place and get us officially back on track.
Where will the money come from. A lot of places. Cut off foreign aid. If we can’t pay our bills why are we sending money elsewhere. Cut off subsidies. Cut pork projects. Throw out people who are not US citizens and collecting benefits. Demand responsibility from US citizens and corporations to keep their affairs in order and to discourage their reliance on the government to continually bail them out. Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness are all that’s mentioned. There are no guarantees for success. We can dedicate all our money to helping out the so called disadvantage. The result so far has proven that it just leads to more dependency. Learn from history. Man does best when he reaches for the stars.
Steven Hutchinson
Tuesday, February 9, 2010 at 1:35 AMIf i own a small scientific research company, and i have $10 million dollars to spend over the next 5 years on a project of my choice… i’m now more likely to spend it on space related technologies
The opportunities exist to make a fortune of cash, and cash is the greatest motivator… it’s simple privatization
For a country who doesn’t even have a decent public health system, why should they have a public space program? I think they need to get their priorities straightened… this policy seems to be a step in the right direction
Bud Martin Budzynski
Tuesday, February 9, 2010 at 9:31 PMIf the USA doesn’t return to the Moon sometime in the next 20 years then some other nation will. I can imagine the possibility of an anti-American country achieving a Lunar landing/Moonbase then quietly removing all traces of the Apollo landings stating that ‘Americans on the Moon’ never happened. If the US is not prepared to defend its monuments to greatness then they can expect those achievements to be trashed.
mc
Wednesday, February 10, 2010 at 1:48 PMChina has said they are going to the moon. I suspect India has made a similar statement. China will get there before 2030.
Truth
Friday, July 9, 2010 at 2:08 AMYou do know that the moon landing was fake right? Their technology wasn’t capable of breaching the earths atmosphere in space without getting radiation burns (see soviet cosmonauts) They still can’t even go there now.