
Why Explore Space? A 1970 Letter to a Nun in Africa. - mike_esspe
http://launiusr.wordpress.com/2012/02/08/why-explore-space-a-1970-letter-to-a-nun-in-africa/
======
jxcole
I don't know if this makes me cruel, but whenever people talk about donating
money to starving children in Africa, I always imagine the following: If I
were to donate some amount of money to starving children in an impoverished
nation every year I could, theoretically, bring some of them out of
starvation. However, these children would then grow into adults, and then
these adults would have children of their own. The number of these new
children would almost certainly be higher than the number I originally helped
bring out of famine, so at that point there would be just as many if not more
starving children than we had to begin with. So in my mind the question really
goes the other way, how does donating money to buy food for starving children
in Africa improve Africa's condition in the long term? What problems caused
these nations to produce more children than food and what is being done to
eliminate the source of these problems, rather than just the symptoms?

~~~
dmlorenzetti
When Bill Gates' wife began pushing him to work on issues of third-world
health, this was more or less his argument against it. She dug up the
statistics to show that this idea, while intuitive, is not supported by fact.
As health improves-- and in particular as child mortality goes down-- birth
rates fall accordingly.

As we all know, Gates got on board, and now funds a lot of health research and
on-the-ground initiatives.

~~~
vecinu
I'm weary of these statistics as one can manipulate data to suit one's
purpose. Source please?

~~~
dave_sullivan
[http://www.ted.com/talks/hans_rosling_the_good_news_of_the_d...](http://www.ted.com/talks/hans_rosling_the_good_news_of_the_decade.html)

That video does a very good job of explaining this. As child mortality
decreases, family size goes down. I'm sure the data is manipulated to suit
someone's purposes, but all seems reasonable to me...

~~~
noselasd
I'd recommend watching all the TED talks by Hans Rosling, they are pretty
awesome and eye opening, in particular these:

[http://www.ted.com/talks/lang/en/hans_rosling_shows_the_best...](http://www.ted.com/talks/lang/en/hans_rosling_shows_the_best_stats_you_ve_ever_seen.html)

[http://www.ted.com/talks/lang/en/hans_rosling_reveals_new_in...](http://www.ted.com/talks/lang/en/hans_rosling_reveals_new_insights_on_poverty.html)

<http://www.ted.com/talks/lang/en/hans_rosling_at_state.html>

------
patio11
It certainly reads better than "We need to funnel some money to the guys who
build the rockets so that, if the Russians get frisky, we can credibly
threaten to can end the world."

~~~
Rastafarian
Or "99% of US Congressmen own shares in the
military–industrial(–congressional) complex, so we need any excuse to funnel
$trillions over there"

~~~
ghotli
Man if that's true it really ruined my day. Do you have proof?

~~~
patdennis
It's not true. If it was nearly that simple, it would be a lot easier to fix.

~~~
cpeterso
But who would fix that problem? Congress?

~~~
patdennis
We're talking about changing fundamental aspects of our society, not patching
some code.

It would require a massive cultural shift, on a number of levels.

------
MarkMc
I don't buy the argument. A $100b space mission is going to have a bigger
benefit to the desperately poor than a $100b medical research program? No way.

But then, why does the space program need to be defended like that? People
prefer buying big TVs, big cars, big houses instead of giving the money to
starving Africans. So why not view the space program as just an extension of
that?

~~~
saraid216
Because hedonism isn't really a good argument when being offered to a nun.

------
vacri
A more curt, but more direct response would be: As a Christian Nun, you
wouldn't even be in Zambia if it weren't for explorers increasing the bounds
of our knowledge. Apart from the Copts in Egypt, there's not a lot of 'native'
Christianity in Africa.

~~~
WiseWeasel
I doubt it would have the same impact; I don't think the Catholic church is
anticipating the conversion of godless Martians.

~~~
vacri
Given the location she may have been a C of E nun, but if she was Catholic,
another curt response would have been: Why doesn't the Catholic Church spend
its incredible wealth on the starving children? Why is it immune from the
question of 'what's more important than hungry kids'? The Catholic Church is
an _astoundingly_ wealthy organisation and could make a mint from sales of
both art and property, both of which they have plenty lying unused.

------
confluence
A relevant quote:

> _When he [Michael Faraday] demonstrated his apparatus [the dynamo] to His
> Majesty's Government, the prime minister, Sir Robert Peel, asked, "Of what
> use is it?" To which Faraday replied: "I don't know, but I'll wager that
> some day you'll tax it."_

\- Michael Faraday

Source:

<http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/A_Race_on_the_Edge_of_Time>

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dynamo>

We will tax space in good time my fellow skeptics.

All in good time.

------
slowpoke
I did not know the SU actually turned off all radio transmissions and sent out
ships to assist in the recovery of Apollo 13. That is an impressive display of
human compassion, even inmidst the Cold War (though the cynic in me assumes
there were ulterior motives, as well).

------
mseebach
So the argument that research for the sake of research is worthwhile is
perfectly sound, the condescending "let me explain to you how a budget works"
and "it's not my decision to spend the money" parts certainly rubs me the
wrong way.

~~~
drucken
How on Earth is that condescending?

How is a nun in middle of Africa meant to have even a basic understanding of
how a specific government's budgeting and economic system works?

I am willing to bet the vast majority of Americans themselves (to this day)
have no idea of even the basics so simply explained by Dr Stuhlinger, yet it
was a critical part of the bigger picture.

~~~
JohnsonB
>How is a nun in middle of Africa meant to have even a basic understanding of
how a specific government's budgeting and economic system works?

She can't have read a few books on economics? His explanation was pretty basic
and nothing that couldn't be found in econ 101 textbooks. He essentially just
assume she was uneducated.

~~~
GlennS
A nun, in the 1970s, in Zambia, is not going to have easy access to economics
textbooks.

~~~
JohnsonB
As if she lived there her whole life, never had a standard education, never
had any opportunity whatsoever to access a standard library?

~~~
vidarh
Some quick Google Books searches indicates that Sister Mary Jucunda might have
been a nun for maybe as much as 20-30 years by then (someone by her name shows
up in various documents from the Catholic church dating back quite far). While
I have no idea how much of her life she spent in Zambia, it is quite
_possible_ that she received her "standard education" in the 30's or 40's.

It would seem quite reasonable for a nun who received her regular education
that early to possibly have grown up going to a religious school somewhere
where the idea of teaching topics such as economics to a woman would not have
been particularly favoured, and/or where the use of a "standard library" to
read texts outside of the curriculum would have been discouraged.

In other words, depending on the wording of the original letter, it might very
well have been entirely reasonable to assume that she would not have had any
knowledge of economics (for that matter, you could assume a fairly substantial
percentage of adults _today_ would benefit from the explanation he gave).

------
joering2
Ok, so the story with microscope was a good one. I was initially shortsighted.
But coming back to the recent Mars mission, anyone has any ideas, more or less
accurate/detailed, of how this particular mission will/could benefit our
civilization? This is a serious question.

~~~
RandallBrown
Unlike other mars rovers, Curiousity isn't solar powered. It's nuclear
powered. RTGs
([http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radioisotope_thermoelectric_gen...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radioisotope_thermoelectric_generator))
are not new, but I have no doubt that plenty of refinements went into the
process to make this one better and more efficient.

Now what if this is the next fuel source for cars? We could dramatically cut
down on our use of fossil fuels. That's pretty world changing.

The automated landing represented a huge engineering challenge as well. Lots
of lessons learned can likely be transferred to earthly pursuits. Imagine a
rescue helicopter that can automatically fly into dangerous situations and
save people. Imagine robots that are faster and more efficient at producing or
harvesting food.

Then of course, every time we land on a planet, we get better at it. The earth
has a finite surface area. Barring major catastrophes, we'll probably fill it
up eventually. If the experiments of today can provide a place for the people
of the future to move, I think that will be the biggest contribution.

~~~
joering2
Great read, thanks Randall! [+1].

Interesting points, but I don't believe in next 100 years we will be able to
live on Mars, or there will be enough justification to move there and spend
trillion to pursue that vision (of course this mission only gets us closer).
Not only its still extremely expensive to fly there, further the only way to
live there is under the shelter, which would cost hundreds of times more than
building something similar on Earth.

One could only hope that down within the further explorations, there will be
possibilities to either mine or produce something that Mars' atmosphere is
perfect for, and something that would cost much more to accomplish here on
Earth. Eventually, possible monetary gains would create entire new industry
with trillion poured in. Wonder what Mars atmosphere is suitable to produce.

~~~
gaius
Well the instant someone invents the fusion reactor, all that HE3 on the moon
is going to be worth mining...

------
tmoertel
Does anyone know how this letter first came to be published?

Update: Google Books answered the question for me:

> Dr. Stuhlinger responded to the sister in a letter that was published by
> NASA/George C. Marshall Space Center in 1970 titled "Why Explore Space?"

[1] [http://books.google.com/books?id=qXuLydSqzDQC&lpg=PA55&#...</a>

------
PakG1
This is also a perfect parallel to CEOs who have to justify to their
shareholders why they spend so much money on R&D.

------
repoman
Well, US produces lots of surplus every year. We don't give them out. Instead,
we burn them. Really now?

------
malkia
"You may ask now whether I personally would be in favor of such a move by our
government. My answer is an emphatic yes. Indeed, I would not mind at all if
my annual taxes were increased by a number of dollars for the purpose of
feeding hungry children, wherever they may live."

Amen to that.

~~~
antidoh
Coupled with improving the effectiveness of distribution of aid to recipients,
which would involve increasing the cooperation of the recipient governments
and decreasing the corruption of those same governments and independent thugs,
alluded to in the letter.

And now it gets complicated. Money is necessary but far from sufficient, and
the problem is very much _not_ lack of resources.

------
nathan_f77
This letter is timeless, and provides such brilliant perspective. It's a
fantastic answer to questions I've also been thinking about.

As an aside, I wonder if something so convincing could be written about
military spending.

~~~
TheComedian
I think you can certainly make an argument for military spending in terms of
the side benefits associated with developing any complex technology, but I
don't think the societal cost of increased militarization justifies military
spending.

~~~
will_work4tears
Only if it is done right.

------
pippy
I'd love to compare $billions in expenditure / angry letters from conservative
nuns, for both NASA and the Department of Defense.

Even better would add the estimated lives saved by NASA technologies and DoD
bombs.

------
vincentperes
Somebody said "It's not by looking at improving the candles that we would have
discovered electricity.". Like fundamental research, a lot of people are
having a hard time to understand that it is a long term investment.

------
ninguem2
>He was a member of the German rocket development team at Peenemünde

Just the guy to be answering ethical questions...

~~~
aroberge
Anyone who discounts a thoughtful response based on some other criteria than
that found in that response is not someone qualified to comment about ethics.

~~~
ninguem2
The important things are not what he discusses but what he doesn't discuss.
For instance, why the space program is supported instead of other initiatives
in science and technology or the connection between the space program with
defense and propaganda. On the other side of the coin, he doesn't address the
use of foreign aid as a tool of international relations and how it destroys
local markets for food production. How corruption and lack of infrastructure
often thwart well-meaning programs.

He was a smart guy who could spin a good yarn and seemed to care. I sincerely
doubt that he did and don't value his opinion.

~~~
jlgreco
You were doing pretty well there, then dove back into the ad hominem. Who he
is as a person is entirely irrelevant, if you want to criticise the letter
then _criticise the letter_ , not the man.

~~~
ninguem2
I am talking about my emotions, yes. All I can say, if you don't like it, is
that I am sorry. But I don't believe one can have an entirely objective
discussion on this topic which will arrive at an incontrovertible answer. Most
tech inclined people (e.g. HN readership) are positively biased towards the
space program. I am not, despite the fact that I fit the profile. I think it's
science done for the wrong reasons. In addition, I don't like this guy and I
expect to disagree with him and I can't change that.

~~~
jlgreco
The issue is not that you don't agree with other people here. The issue is
that you were disagreeing incorrectly.

------
fragsworth
This guy has incredible tact, and knows his audience well.

> Ever since this picture was first published, voices have become louder and
> louder warning of the grave problems that confront man in our times:
> pollution, hunger, poverty, urban living, food production, water control,
> overpopulation.

He even took care not to mention climate change, which I assume was in case
the reader has a strong bias against it.

~~~
btilly
That letter was written in 1970.

The possibility of human-caused climate change did not start come to the
awareness of the general public until 1988, and did not become a political
issue until this millennium.

He therefore cannot legitimately be criticized for his inability to predict
where science would go in future decades. However he can legitimately be
praised for being prescient about the role of satellites in researching a
number of environmental problems, including global warming.

~~~
mturmon
"he can legitimately be praised for being prescient about the role of
satellites in researching a number of environmental problems"

Good catch to notice that. I was impressed this too, but didn't post until I
saw your reply.

To me, Earth remote sensing is the most clear-cut example of near-term benefit
to humanity by space technologies. It's amazing what can be done -- way beyond
inputs for weather forecasts.

You can assess health of forest canopy from space (because you can measure
water content of leaves -- it's a delicate measurement, but it can be done).
(Hyperspectral radiometer)

You can measure full-air-column CO2, CO, and other gases, from space.

You can measure sea surface salinity and temperature, and even surface wind
velocity, from space. (microwave radiometer, radar scatterometer)

You can measure tiny post-earthquake land deformations -- not at selected
sites, but continuously over a broad area. (Radar interferometry)

All this is way beyond where it started, with pictures of cloud formations.
Having these physical inputs allows much better modeling and prediction of all
kinds of activity: weather/ecology/seismicity.

