Congrats, Guys... Now You Need To Convince America WHY
By ANN Associate Editor Rob Finfrock
There was a full moon
this weekend. That only seems appropriate, given that it appears
NASA will announce Monday they're starting to get serious about
going back there.
If the timeframe proposed by NASA holds -- manned Earth orbital
flights would begin by 2012, with a lunar mission anticipated six
years after that -- then the first moon landing of the 21st century
would occur only 46 years after we last visited our celestial
neighbor, leaving behind six lunar landers, three rovers and a
multitude of golf balls.
I'm excited. Really, I am. The destination isn't what excites me
most, although I was born three years after Apollo 17 returned to
Earth. It's all about the journey, in my mind, and I'm looking
forward to seeing how we move down the path.
But what about the rest of the country? In a world of Katrina,
Osama and Iraq, how enthusiastically will the American public
support the idea of using money that pollsters say could be better
spent reinforcing Gulf Coast relief efforts, or aiding our troops
overseas, on a trip to the moon? A trip to a place we've already
been, a long time ago, and haven't seen fit to visit ever
since?
NASA will not only have to figure out the science of such an
endeavor -- as they have proven time and again to be more than
capable of doing -- but both the agency and the government may also
have to launch a massive public relations effort to convince us why
we should go back there in the first place.
John F. Kennedy was a master of such things. Few speeches have
ever come close to the veritas of his original 1961 edict to "go
into space because whatever mankind must undertake, free men must
fully share... I believe that this nation should commit itself to
achieving the goal, before this decade is out, of landing a man on
the moon and returning him safely to the earth."
Kennedy had a clear goal in mind, and knew how to sell it --
even as he knew scientists had no idea at the time how to
accomplish it. Remember that when JFK made his pitch in 1961, NASA
had a grand total of one sub-orbital manned Mercury flight under
its belt. That was all. As Kennedy looked to the future, the
reality was that NASA had blown up more rockets than it had been
able to launch successfully.
Yet the NASA of the 1960s rose to the challenge admirably,
accomplishing the improbable with style, with flair... and with the
broad support of the American people. Not even the tragic losses of
three astronauts in the 1967 Apollo 1 ground test could stem that
tide.
It was all about beating the Soviets, after all, and the Apollo
landings proved that America could come from behind and trump the
Soviet Union at what had been its own game since October 1957, when
Sputnik 1 was launched. Such competitive spirit seems almost quaint
now.
Today, we clearly have the ability -- for not only does NASA
intend to build on past lessons, they intend to utilize past
hardware, too. This isn't a bad thing, especially considering that
Russia has flown nothing but Soyuz capsules from the time of Apollo
through today. When the shuttle was grounded, Soyuz still flew.
Early efforts to sell such a program have been less than
encouraging, though. In his January 2004 speech proposing trips
back to the moon, eventually leading to Mars, President Bush said
"we do not know where this journey will end, yet we know this --
human beings are headed into the cosmos." Inspiring words, perhaps,
but where is our goal? More importantly, what is the point?
NASA hasn't done much better so far, nor have they inspired
others to stand proudly on the soapbox of space travel and shout to
the masses. In response to NASA's presentation of its plan to the
White House last week, George Washington University Space Policy
Institute Director John Logsdon told the AP that this time around
"the emphasis is on achieving goals rather than elegance."
Lacks a certain panache, doesn't it? NASA will have to come up
with something better than that when it pitches its plan to the
American public Monday -- something to rouse interest, and inspire
a spirit of adventure to carry us through the next, sheesh,
thirteen years. (It only took us eight the first time, and we knew
nothing then.)
Truth is, Logsdon's statement is reflective of a more pragmatic
philosophy towards space flight in this time, just as JFK's
stirring call roused the exploratory spirits of Americans at the
dawn of the Cold War. We aren't trying to "beat" anybody this time
in our race to space... except maybe China. Doomsayers say we must
keep our eyes on this awakening technological giant, as well they
should.
When the Chinese launch
their first vehicle capable of reaching the moon -- and they most
certainly will -- I'm sure some patriotic spirit will be kindled in
the masses. It may even happen before 2018. Until that moment,
though, the main concern would seem to be how a new space race
would affect our ability to buy inexpensive clothes and electronics
at Wal-Mart.
In the 1960s, not even the gruesome images being televised from
Vietnam waned support from the space program. You'd think the same
could possibly occur now; the situations are eerily similar, after
all. The war in Iraq has polarized the country, just as Vietnam
did. And the devastation of Katrina has filled our screens and
called race relations into question yet again, much as the riots of
the mid 1960s did.
Back then, America had plenty to be fearful of... yet if
anything, those atrocities inspired more people to look to the
skies, for relief and hope. I don't see that same
wary-but-hopefully spirit in today's America; not now, anyway.
I cringe at the thought of a talking head on CNN or FOX News
somewhat snidely asking the admittedly prescient question, "How
will going to the moon help America defeat Osama bin Laden?" You
know it's going to happen, if it hasn't already.
I only hope the person who is asked the question can come up
with a decent answer. Something along the lines of "because it's
what separates an ideology of hope, of dreams, and of freedom, from
a doctrine that maintains its followers must kill those who try to
aim beyond their understanding of the world, and even of
faith."
My tip to NASA, for what it's worth: start selling it right now.
Don't wait until we're closer to the first mission. You can even
use that quote; I don't mind. Our foe this time around is
closed-mindedness. That may be harder to defeat than the Soviets,
but remember that we've done it many times before in our
country's history.
How did we do it? By building on lessons from the
past... and that's why we need to go to the moon. Again.