Audrey Boyce A copy of The New York Times lays on your kitchen table, the word “aliens” spread across the front page. This word catches your attention and draws you into NASA’s fascinating plans and exhibitions. However, beside this fascination with other planets is a darker reality regarding Earth. Scientists say that Earth has roughly seven years before climate change becomes irreversible. According to The New York Times Climate Clock, the U.S. is just short of 30 million deaths due to the coronavirus, and despite the ongoing public health crisis, over $2 billion were spent launching Perseverance, a space rover aimed for Mars. This begs the question of why we use limited public research funding on applied science programs in the space industry rather than focusing on the immediate threat of our dying planet. NASA sent Perseverance to Mars with the intention of searching for evidence of past or present life forms on Mars. The landing occurred on Feb. 18, 2021, while millions sat glued to their screens watching it descend onto the mysterious planet. Nobody watched the newly made drones that are planting a billion trees per year, or the satellites that can spot methane leaks, or the pumps that are cooling down coral reefs at a rapid rate. The future of humanity need not rest on the slim hope for the habitability of Mars, which would once again allow humans to infest another planet to just, what, ruin again? Maybe let’s not add “planetary destruction” into the daunting, seemingly unstoppable cycle of human behavior. Preservation of Earth, not the infestation of Mars, should be the focal point now. Although the words “greenhouse gases,” “fossil fuels,” and “sea-level rise” may not be as stimulating as the thought of the existence of extraterrestrial creatures in our universe, our ability to focus on those words may determine whether or not our great-grandchildren will be able to live a life similar to the lives we live. It is always easier to choose denial or to choose ignorance of any topics that don’t yet directly affect us; however, we 36 HIGHLANDER OPINION
have a shot of saving the planet we currently inhabit, so why not take it? Space exploration has led to many discoveries throughout history that have benefitted the greater good and advanced technology—including firefighting equipment, artificial limbs, solar cells, and many more. While space research undoubtedly has benefits, the discoveries that come with space exploration are not directed. The problems facing our planet’s survival are different from the challenges of sending a rover to Mars, but the underlying science and engineering skills are the same. NASA scientists trained in studying the geology of Mars could be redirected to carbon capture projects on Earth. Scientists studying the combustion of rock-
et fuel could be studying carbon-free jet fuels. The engineers of the rover going to Mars could design a better solar-powered car for our planet. With the current state of our dying planet, it is necessary that our government invests our taxpayer dollars into applied science related to human health and climate change, not rocket ships. It is essential that we use our high level of technology to evaluate our planet’s current needs rather than investing in what is most appealing to the public.
Give Earth another chance
