The U.S. Federal Government should increase its exploration and/or development of space

I shall first defend my initial points, then rebut my opponents arguments. 1.) "That is all childhood dreams, when I was a kid I wanted to be a scientist, but now I don't." Many people don't follow their childhood ambitions through, however I was saying was that the impression that the program left sparked an interest which, even if someone strayed, would have set them on a career path that would land them in a field related to science and engineering. If we look directly at what the space program yielded at the time, it was the moon landing. Children, as impressionable as they always are, saw this event, and to the ones who took an interest found a goal, "I want to be an astronaut!" they would exclaim. Even if they changed their mind later in life, the very drive instilled in them from the program was a positive force in shaping their lives. Of course there are other important career fields that exist to help (or impose) society to function properly, however I'm discussing the space program benefits, and the career fields which it could affect. (scientists and engineers) 2. "... how can America know more about our planet by studying other planets? They're different planets, they have different features, studying Jupiter won't say how the Earth will turn out.Global warming is a myth... " Planets have different features, however matter and physics behave the same way throughout the Cosmos. I was referring to a comparison of the Earth with Venus, not Jupiter. Venus has an atmosphere just as Earth has an atmosphere. However Venus' atmosphere contains a high abundance of greenhouse gases. These gases behave the same way on Venus as they would on the Earth. By studying the average surface temperature of Venus we can see what happens to planets that have high amounts of these gases. The amount of greenhouse gas in Earths atmosphere is rising[1] and the Earth is getting warmer. So Venus is a very real example of what happens to worlds with high levels of those gases. We have our study of space to thank for what we know about the Big Bang, along with the origin of the chemical elements in the nuclear fusion process that occurs within the stars, which is the concept we are now basing nuclear fusion reactors on. 3. "...as soon as the human race went further in technology it would get shorter and shorter to get some new technology, this is called Moore's law, where technological discoveries would come sooner as time went on." Moore's law applies to computer hardware, not technology in general.[2] Not to mention Moore's law will start to become invalid around 2030 at the latest due to physical limitations. The spin off technologies developed by the space program yield wonderful benefits. These include aircraft controls, microcomputers, golf ball aerodynamics, shock-absorbing helmets, fire resistant material, MRI, radiation hazard detectors, the list goes on.[3] [Note: Yes some of these have not been invented because of the space program, however they were fine tuned and improved drastically because of the innovation and technology the space program yielded which would have otherwise have taken decades or more to advanced to the present level they are at today] 4. "...America wasn't in a big debt crisis back during the Apollo missions, and now that America hit the debt ceiling." Despite the "debt crisis" as it's so called, America is still spending money. Spending money on social security, income security, and international affairs. When you examine the specifics of these matters you come to find that a large portion of funds are going to the "wrong places" as many would say. Or that they are even regulated in such a way that's causing the debt to skyrocket. "For every $1 the federal government spends on NASA, it spends $98 on social programs(2007). In other words, if we cut spending on social programs by a mere one percent, we could very nearly double NASA's budget."[4] Associating America's large debt with no context can mislead people into thinking space research is getting some unreasonable amount of the budget, and this simply isn't the case. Now my responses to my opponents defense: 1. "Well first of all, times have changed, and America would get more harm then benefits for going out to Mars or to the Moon for expansions." It's difficult to really pin point what the potential harm and benefits we would incur from such a project, however if Apollo, Hubble, or the Space Station are any indication, more benefits surely will follow despite several horrible disasters. Projects don't have to only involve Mars or Moon colonization either, they can involve anything related to space research such as new satellite technology, interplanetary study via robots, or more experiments on the space station. The material resources do exist, however the problem was the goal process, money, and political figures, that generated an "artificial" scarcity that crippled the idea. It's highly likely we won't see world peace until quite far into the future, assuming we(humans) even have one. Even so, we can't neglect the avenues that provide advancement, grant knowledge, and promote scientific literacy, even if our enemies find reasons to attack us. These enemies want to attack us regardless if we are advancing some aspect of ourselves or not. 2. "The U.S. is in major debt! The U.S. can't afford major missions to the moon or mars or any where else in space! " [Addressed in more depth in my defense of my point 4] The spinoff technology provides plenty of opportunity for economic stimulation, not to mention the vast array of jobs it provides. 3. "...there are hospitals if something were to go bad like the gallons of gasoline that we sit on every day to get to work, but in space, there are no hospitals, just like the Apollo 13 mission..." A. Thankfully, the crew of Apollo 13 made it back to Earth alive though. This exemplifies how important it is to be self-sufficient, and have plenty of redundancy built into the vessel that is to be used. The way things seem to play out is that a few people will take risks and eventually everyone else will gain the benefits. We owe a lot to the people in the past who have taken risks, and without them we wouldn't be where we are today. B. Presently we haven't found life anywhere else in our solar system, the quest for life doesn't necessarily imply we will find life, or life as we know it for that matter. What's to say that life would form elsewhere in the Cosmos with the exact same chemistry as we have? Viruses that lie dormant on a planet or asteroid throughout time only to come in contact with Humanity with dire consequences? The only place anyone hears premises like these are in the movies or fiction books. C. "Do you really think that new technology is more important than life?" I'm not sure how I came across that way but as I touched on earlier; the people undertaking these missions are intelligent, well-informed people who assume all the risks with the endeavor. The final launch of Space Shuttle Endeavor occurred Monday, May 16, 2011 and Endeavor's commander Mark Kelly had this to say moments before lift off, "As Americans, we endeavor to build a better life than the generation before and we endeavor to be a united nation. In these efforts we are often tested. It is in the DNA of our great country to reach for the stars and explore. We must not stop."[5] I think what this man conveyed makes it pretty clear that exploring space is not just about spinoff technology, which is an economical and technological stimulator, but the medium through which advancement and oneness with eachother and the Universe is realised. [1] = http://www.eia.doe.gov... [2] = http://en.wikipedia.org... [3] = http://www.thespaceplace.com... [4] = http://www.thespacereview.com... [5] = http://www.space.com...