Ms Dania Adra
English 203
21 October 2015
Disagreeing:
Gerard Degroot in his article focuses on how the space industry is worthless and the money spent on it should be used for other more practical things on earth. He starts by describing the "space race" as "madness" and uses sarcastic words such as "lunacy" to show that the industry is not worth the money and time spent on it. I personally disagree with him saying that because i do not think that curiosity is madness and the sense of exploration is not lunacy neither. Without science and explorations, where would the world be right now? It is inappropriate to say that all the work Nasa is doing is a waste of time and money when they are trying to find solutions for the future. He also argues that space exploration is not important as practical things in Earth, "Obscenely expensive manned missions mean that practical, earth-based science suffers" (Degroot) , and that is absurd, he cannot compare the two things. People should have time and money for both, we can't just ignore the universe or else how would we know if there some kind of planet that sustains life or resources that we can use. Wanting to stop the space industry is like wanting to limit the curiosity of people which has driven humanity into the discoveries of today. He adds that the moon is a "worthless rock", thinking like that would bring people to stagnation, we won't know if the moon is worthless or not unless we explore it and find out. Resources may be available on the moon for example and even if we have little chance to find them, we should try because that is what keeps the world living today. He continues by saying that the money spent should be used on things on earth "such as disease, starvation and drought"( Degroot), these problems are not being dealt with correctly but he can't blame the space industry for it, it is the job of governments to take care of both. The day we stop having the taste for exploration and to expand our knowledge is the day when humans will be gone, without it for example the continent of America wouldn't have been explored, we have to think about it in that perspective.
Agreeing:
We can, however, agree with Gerard Degroot on many things, thus making sense and being logical and practical. He starts his articles by the metaphor "down to Earth" that shows exactly what the problem is: people are concerned with outer space more than practical problems such as "disease, starvation and drought" and countries like the US are paying lots of money in order to explore space rather than fixing problems that affects the world in a negative way. He thinks that the US are trying to race with China in the space industry and wants to show the world that they are better in technology and space travel,"desire to stay ahead of the Chinese in the new space race" (Degroot), rather than spending the money on things more important that are really affecting the world. He points out that space travel is not worth all the money and trouble because "Mars makes Antarctica seem like paradise" and it "would take 4,000 years to reach the nearest star system that might theoretically be hospitable"(Degroot) showing that we should focus on our world rather than trying to find a new one, it is nearly impossible to arrive to a solution outside our Earth.
Work cited:
Degroot, Gerard. "The space race is a pointless waste of money".The telegraph.The telegraph. 25 February 2009.Web.25 February 2009.
No comments:
Post a Comment