Arguments for & against manned space missions?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Miss_10
  • Start date Start date
M

Miss_10

Guest
What are some arguments for a) why space missions should be done by people, and b) why space missions should only be done by robots?
 
For Manned Missions:
1. People can do things robots can't
2. People are curious by nature.
3. People are explorers (robots are machines)

For Robotic Missions:
1. Can go to dangerous locations.
2. Are expendable vs. a human
3. They do not get bored
4. It's far less expensive to send a robot mission
5. Robotic missions do not need food and water
 
For : It's cool.

Against : It's a huge waste of money. Robotic missions are more practical and cheaper, and you don't have to worry about getting them back. The vast amount of money you save by sending robots instead can be better spent on funding many researchers and students.
 
a) Simply put robotic missions are a lot cheaper and provide a lot more bang for your buck when it comes to science.

b) However manned exploration is necessary for the long term benefit of mankind. Our knowledge of the universe will grow either way, but space technology won't grow much at all unless we shoot for the gold and send people up there.
 
Back
Top