A couple of days ago Al Gore made a speech that terrifies me because so many people will accept his argument against Bush's space proposal--in fact will feel as he does whether or not they know what he said--and his attitude is so tragically ironic.
I am not an admirer of Al Gore and there's much in his speech that angers me, as well as much apart from the space issue with which I strongly disagree. But I don't doubt that he does care about preserving the environment of Earth, though I think his rhetoric is to a large extent politically motivated. And certainly most people who see or hear this kind of emotional appeal do care. He, and they, honestly believe that "Instead of spending enormous sums of money on an unimaginative and retread effort to make a tiny portion of the Moon habitable for a handful of people, we should focus instead on a massive effort to ensure that the Earth is habitable for future generations." And this is not surprising, since the majority of space advocates have done little or nothing to point out the reasons why such an attitude is self-defeating.
For the long term, the only way to preserve the environment of Earth is to make use of extraterrestrial energy and resources, including lunar resources, and to ultimately move polluting industry out of the atmosphere and into orbit. The true goal of the space effort is not "to make a tiny portion of the Moon habitable for a handful of people" but to do just what Gore advocates: "Ensure that the Earth is habitable for future generations." A permanent base on the moon is essential to this goal. It is essential whether or not we eventually build orbiting habitats from lunar materials, as O'Neill proposed and as I advocate in Space and Human Survival. One way or another, a time will come when there are no more resources left on Earth to use, and unless we start using other resources long before that time, Earth's environment will be destroyed, whatever we do or don't do in the short term. Gore is right when he says we have a responsibility "to preserve and cherish the pale blue dot, the only home we've ever known." He is wrong when he claims we can do it without a major, ongoing commitment to space.
Unfortunately, Bush does not understand this either. His proposal is a step in the right direction, probably as large a step as there is any chance of getting funded at present, although certainly not the "massive effort" that is needed. But Bush did not present the right reasons for supporting it, and is probably not even aware of them. He focused on future exploration, and whereas I agree that the exploration of the universe is important, it is not the most pressing reason for spending money on space, nor is it one likely to convince a large enough percentage of the public. I can't blame people for being swayed by words like Gore's when no one in the public eye has explained what's really at stake. Even strong space advocates generally fail to grasp it -- although many quoted on my Space Quotes to Ponder page have done so.
This issue transcends politics. Both Bush and Gore are motivated by the desire to impress voters; we can expect nothing else in an election year.
Yet everyone concerned about Earth's environment, of whatever party, should
be in the forefront of the push into space! It frightens and enrages me when opponents of the space effort appeal to voters' concern for human welfare to advocate spending for the benefit of present generations (spend the money on feeding the hungry, etc.) at the expense of the welfare of future generations -- or to their concern for future generations in a way that would ensure the eventual destruction of our home world's biosphere. However well-meant such appeals may be, they are dangerous. We do not have unlimited time in which to make a start toward using the resources that will be crucial to our descendants (see We Must Waste No More Time on my Space Quotes page).
As long as the public believes that the purpose of the space program is merely to advance scientific knowledge or to enable explorers to visit other worlds, the funds needed for space are unlikely to be forthcoming. And who is enlightening the public, as distinguished from the small number of people who visit relatively obscure websites like mine and those it links to? Who is getting the word out? If it's left to a shouting match between political parties over the only space goals acknowledged by either side so far, I fear the answer will be "no one."
Bookmark this story with del.icio.us
Digg this story
Furl this item
Have you Reddit?