| ABOUT US | ARCHIVES | LINKS | RSS FEED | MONDAYS | |

3quarksdaily

An Eclectic Digest of Science, Art and Literature

« Spy Princess: The Life of Noor Inayat Khan | Main | Michael Chabon on Cormac McCarthy's new novel »

January 30, 2007

Sending a man to the moon was an immensely expensive distraction of little scientific or cultural worth

Greg Ross interviews Gerard J. DeGroot, author of Dark Side of the Moon: The Magnificent Madness of the American Lunar Quest, in American Scientist:

ManonmoonTo Americans in the 1960s, putting a man on the Moon was a noble, even romantic challenge. "No single space project in this period will be more impressive to mankind," President Kennedy told Congress, "or more important in the long-range exploration of space, and none will be so difficult or expensive to accomplish."

But in re-examining the Apollo project, historian Gerard J. DeGroot finds it largely an empty dream. In Dark Side of the Moon: The Magnificent Madness of the American Lunar Quest (New York University Press), he argues that the Moon race was essentially just a new front in the Cold War, "an immensely expensive distraction of little scientific or cultural worth."

In announcing the Apollo project, Kennedy referred to moving with what he called "the full speed of freedom." Do you think he saw it chiefly as a scientific endeavor, or really as a symbolic contest of ideologies?

I think very definitely the latter. It's very difficult for some people even still, given Kennedy's mystique, to accept that he wasn't quite the person we thought he was. I think the really telling bit comes in a conversation that he has with the NASA administrator James Webb, in which he says, "I don't really care about the moon. I know it's important; I know there are people who really want to go there, but I just want to beat the Russians." So it really comes down to that. It is purely a symbol of American supremacy in the Cold War. Because the Cold War didn't provide real wars, this is in a sense a sort of surrogate war, and almost seemingly chosen with the same sort of cavalier attitude that, say, a Civil War general might choose a battlefield: "Well, we're here, let's fight right here."

More here.

Posted by S. Abbas Raza at 11:52 PM | Permalink

Comments

We would've gone to the moon, cold war or not.
Sure, all scientific data could've been obtained by unmanned means, but to stand on the moon, call it a stunt or not, it would've happened.

Posted by: beajerry | Jan 31, 2007 10:15:31 AM

To characterize the Apollo program and mankind's first off-world footprints as a waste is absurd.

It abnegates the incredible benefits that the pursuit of this ideal engendered in an entire generation of children. Children, incidentally, who founded the Intels and Microsofts and Amgens of today.

It was the goal of the moon and the desire to be a part of something that so galvanized this country that led countless youths to answer the question "what do you want to be when you grow up" with answers like: "an astronaut" or "a scientist" or "a structural engineer".

Look at this country today and what has happened to the level of proficiency in science or math? In countries that are currently striving for these sort of goals now, namely India and China they have kids that are focused on excelling in these disciplines with an intensity that our obese, video-gaming insolent little rugrats only manage for the 25th level of Super Mario.

You really think the Apollo program had no value? Look around and think about that again. Seriously.

Oliver Starr
http://owstarr.com

Posted by: Oliver Starr | Jun 25, 2008 10:38:09 AM

Post a comment






Subscribe to this blog's feed  

PayAnywhere with iphone credit card swiper

Android Tablet

Bluetooth Headset

2013 New Style Dresses

Compare Car Rental Prices

DHgate.com Wholesale

3QD on Facebook

3QD on Kindle

3QD by Daily Email

Receive all blogposts at the same time every day.

Enter your Email:


Preview 3QD Email

3QD on Twitter

Miscellany

Lijit Search

AddThis Social Bookmark Button

Add to Google

Recent Comments

Doogle on Why Steven Pinker Is Wrong

Kyle on Syria: Inventing a Religious War

Peter John on Gezi Park

dthoko on The History of Typography - Animated Short

Richard on John Gray’s Godless Mysticism

Abbas Raza on Why Steven Pinker Is Wrong

nogodrod on Syria: Inventing a Religious War

Lusine on Quest for 'Genius Babies'?

Bill on Syria: Inventing a Religious War

j_93 on Gezi Park

j_93 on Syria: Inventing a Religious War

Norman Costa on The Insanity Virus

Dave Ranning on Political Ideology and the Avoidance of Dissonance-Arousing Situations

Sundar on Quest for 'Genius Babies'?

Sundar on Syria: Inventing a Religious War

gaddeswarup on What is ‘smart’ and how does it fit our consciousness?

gaddeswarup on What is ‘smart’ and how does it fit our consciousness?

musafir on Syria: Inventing a Religious War

Lusine on Syria: Inventing a Religious War

Brad Wilson on Gezi Park

Raza Husain on Syria: Inventing a Religious War

Brad Wilson on The Insanity Virus

billy on Syria: Inventing a Religious War

rafiq on The Insanity Virus

Ben Schwartz on Here He Goes Again: Sam Harris’s Falsehoods

Acclaim For 3QD


"I couldn't tear myself away from 3 Quarks Daily, to the point of neglecting my work. Congratulations on this superb site."—Steven Pinker, Johnstone Professor of Psychology, Harvard University.

"I have placed 3 Quarks Daily at the head of my list of web bookmarks."—Richard Dawkins, Charles Simonyi Professor of the Public Understanding of Science at Oxford University.

"Just wanted you to know I’m one of many who reads and enjoys 3 Quarks....almost daily."—David Byrne, musician, former lead-singer of the Talking Heads, artist, intellectual.

Read more here.

The 3QD Prizes

Subscribe to this blog's feed