"Two possibilities exist: either we are alone in the universe or we are not."  -- Arthur C. Clarke.  Out of all the many conundrums posed to humans, whether or not humanity is the only form of intelligent life in this universe might be the most exciting, because one day, we might find out.  Most likely, actual evidence for a deity will never be discovered.  Nobody will be able to prove with absolute certainty that there is or is not life after death.  We may never know what happened with Black Widow and Hawkeye in Budapest.  However, it is entirely within the realm of possibility that life will (or will not!) be discovered on some distant planet, as eager to meet us as we are of it.  The problem facing America today, is that it costs money to visit our potential neighbors in space, and a lot of it.  With all of the (very expensive) crises America is currently dealing with, is it wise to consider a trip to Mars at this point?

In northern Japan there is a city called Nagano that has great snow for skiing in the winter.  While walking back to the lodge at with I was staying one night, I chanced to glance up at the night sky and was struck dumb by the multitude of stars.  The absence of light pollution revealed more stars than I had ever seen in my life.  The ethereal, majestic beauty of the star splashed sky on that night has haunted me since then and has remained one of the most beautiful things I have ever laid my eyes on.  Among other things, this gave me a liking for all things pertaining to space, which is why I chose this particular research question.  However, my experience in the field of space is more along the lines of the appreciation aspect and less about the exploration or study.  

The fact that one may not have as much experience in a particular field should not, however, exclude them from researching and forming opinions on said topic.  This is especially true when the said topic directly influences some aspect of the person's life.  Innovations in space travel have indeed directly influenced the lives of American people by way of satellites, air conditioning, morale and unity, and even Velcro.  Yet, it is not only the inventions that have affected Americans, it is also the cost of those inventions.  According to NASA.gov, congressional appropriations to NASA in the year 2015 exceeded 18 billion dollars.  A sum this high has a direct effect on the national budget, which has a direct effect on American citizens.  Therefore, anyone who has done research should have the right to formulate opinions on this matter and talk about it with others.


"Manned Mission to Mars By 2030s Is Really Possible, Experts Say," is an article basically summed up by its title: Mars may be reached by 2030 or possibly even sooner.  While the benefits of such a mission other than the knowledge gained are never discussed, problems facing this potential mission are.  These include the necessity of international cooperation, budget constraints, the utilization of the International Space Station, and others.  If these hurdles are overcome, says the article, many other missions other than the mission to Mars may become possible, such as a flyby of Venus, "capturing" an asteroid, and possibly colonizing Mars in the not so distant future. 

One of the major players on this stage is the budget of America and how we will find the money to fund all these missions.  On the opposite end is NASA, in it for merely the joy of discovery and innovation.  Caught between are the common folk who must on the one hand pay for these missions with their tax money yet on the other hand experience the wonder of being present when the first man walks on Mars. 

Coming from the website "space.com", it is fairly easy to guess the bias of this article.  Through the fact that they don't address the myriad of other ways America could spend 18 billion dollars or more and the fact that they don't really give any reason why this whole mission is necessary in the first place, it is clear that they are vastly in favor of supporting the space missions.  Credibility is also called into question due to the fact that they never specify exactly who these so-called "experts" are.  This being said, their whole website is devoted to space and space exploration, so it would be foolish to assume they know nothing of what they are talking about.


Firmly on the side of funding NASA, "The Path to Second-term Success Goes Through Space" details exactly what benefits this nation, particularly under the then newly reappointed President Obama will garner from it.  Some examples of the benefits include technological and scientific advances and a sense of inspiration and motivation to become scientists among the youth of this country.

The interests and values of this article are very much similar to those of the previous article with one change: the way the general masses are presented.  In the other article, the people weren't discussed at all outside of subtext, in this article they are the brave new world, the next generation of scientists who will take humanity to the stars.  

While this article and this author are clearly biased in favor of space travel, it is not to be denied that Huffington Post and professors are both two things that people set a lot of credibility by.  As two things of high report in the world, it would be safe to say that this is a fairly credible source.


On the polar opposite of the spectrum from the previous two articles is "Should we cut NASA funding?" which argues in favor of a resounding NO.  Its main point is one that was rather glossed over in the other articles, that of monetary concerns.  There are many far more important things to put our money towards, insists this article.

Introducing a new player on this stage, Levinger points out the fact that the 18 billion dollars we are currently spending on NASA could be much better spent on the poorer folk who actually need it.   Placing much more emphasis on the fact that America simply cannot afford this expense, he paints NASA to be a rather wasteful use of our money.

MIT is a college reputable to have one of the best mathematics and technological programs in the country.  Therefore it is fairly safe to assume that a student from there would have done an, even minimal, amount of research before writing an article in the school paper.  While this doesn't completely certify that he knows what he is talking about, as discussed earlier, anyone who knows even a little about this issue can formulate an opinion and talk about it. 

Clearly, there are many discrepancies between these sources.  The war between NASA and the budget, between space travel and domestic issues is explained, parsed, and argued over three separate times in three separate ways with two opposite conclusions.  While it is not a matter of life or death, it is still an issue that is relevant to Americans today.  Reading these different perspectives and the evidence that supports them, the only thing that I can conclude is that there is no easy answer to this question.  Regardless of what the final decision will be, it is clear that we will not be discovering the answer to the question posed by Arthur C. Clarke any time soon, unless they come to us first.  "Two possibilities exist," he said, "and both are equally terrifying."

