argument top image

Do we need manned space flights? Show more Show less
Back to question

Seeing a man on the moon was one of the coolest things of the 1960's. Since then, shuttle have been sending many, many people up to complete missions. These are costly and incredibly dangerous. Are manned missions economically viable or is it more effective to focus on less expensive drone missions?

Yes, manned space flights are worth it Show more Show less

Manned expeditions even more costly provide an advantage towards a completely drone missions
(1 of 3) Next position >

People need to start colonizing other planets

An Extinction Level Event on Earth will not mean the end of mankind
Colonization Space Exploration

The Argument

Concept behind is that if a Extinction Level Event (such a big meteorite impacting on Earth) will cause life extinction on Earth, mankind as a race will continue exist into colonies. This hypothesis assumes that colonies are numerically large enough to avoid extinction by simple low natality rate. Further that they have to be independent from Earth in term of supplies. Even if this goal is remote the initial effort is worth to eventually reach it. The possible options are terrra-forming , i.e. change the planet atmosphere/soil to make it similar to earth or create artificial habitats who could survive by exploiting planet resources

Counter arguments

Most of the planet in the solar systems are not habitable. Terra-forming is not a viable option since it would take centuries if not more. Self-containing habitat might be unable to be self-sustainable and a minor issue could put colony survival in jeopardy



There is a push to continue space exploration. Human colonies are the logical step forward in this process.


We should resume deep space exploration 50 years after initial Apollo missions. It

Rejecting the premises

Technology can not allow a self-sustaining environment nor terra'forming


This page was last edited on Monday, 26 Oct 2020 at 15:16 UTC

Explore related arguments