It is undeniable that space investigation has become an essential part of human life. However, there is no absolute agreement, whether the funding this kind of research is squandering and should be allocated to otherwise things or not. Personally, I tend to think that it is more acceptable to continue financing the examination of the cosmos.
First and foremost, it is well known that finding as much as possible about the universe outside of Earth may extend humans’ opportunities. What I mean here is that if scientists manifest more inhabitable locations which are consist of water, food and other required resources, the state authorities will be able to transfer the half quantity of dwellers to other planets in the case of prohibitive overpopulation and battles for food and water. The explanation lies in the fact that currently scholars are providing the myriad of available data about their discoveries and explorations related to celestial bodies such as stars, asteroids, meteors and also about planets, which still have been examined by academics and colonists e. g. Since 2002 in Mars.
On the other hand, it can be also argued that calamities caused by the fall of asteroids or meteors are likely to be prevented by experts who thoroughly studied about celestial objects or just to notify where this disaster will probably occur. If there is not sufficient funding of cosmic research due to the fact that people decided to spend money either on averting famine in poor countries, which are clear evidence that a catastrophe is coming, or invention of unnecessary weapons, it might peril the safety of every inhabitant of Earth, including flora and fauna, and nobody will need to be fed. Moreover, the development of technology is partially owing to the immense curiosity of mankind, which is willing to comprehend everything.
In conclusion, taking everything mentioned above into account, I completely disagree that financing the cosmic examination is outlay, and the money ought to be allotted for this as usual.
It is undeniable that space investigation has become an essential part of human life.
However
, there is no absolute agreement, whether the funding this kind of research is squandering and should
be allocated
to
otherwise
things or not.
Personally
, I tend to
think
that it is more acceptable to continue financing the examination of the cosmos.
First
and foremost, it is well known that finding as much as possible about the universe outside of Earth may extend humans’ opportunities. What I mean here is that if scientists manifest more inhabitable locations which are consist of water, food and other required resources, the state authorities will be able to transfer the half quantity of dwellers to other planets in the case of prohibitive overpopulation and battles for food and water. The explanation lies in the fact that
currently
scholars are providing the myriad of available data about their discoveries and explorations related to celestial bodies such as stars, asteroids, meteors and
also
about planets, which
still
have
been examined
by academics and colonists
e. g.
Since 2002 in Mars.
On the other hand
, it can be
also
argued that calamities caused by the fall of asteroids or meteors are likely to be
prevented
by experts who
thoroughly
studied about celestial objects or
just
to notify where this disaster will
probably
occur. If there is not sufficient funding of cosmic research due to the fact that
people
decided to spend money either on averting famine in poor countries, which are
clear
evidence that a catastrophe is coming, or invention of unnecessary weapons, it might peril the safety of every inhabitant of Earth, including flora and fauna, and nobody will need to
be fed
.
Moreover
, the development of technology is
partially
owing to the immense curiosity of mankind, which is willing to comprehend everything.
In conclusion
, taking everything mentioned above into account, I completely disagree that financing the cosmic examination is outlay, and the money ought to
be allotted
for this as usual.