The world's space agencies should leave astronauts to go to the moon and Mars to explorers and billionaires who can fund and risk such adventures, according to a royal astronomer.
It is no longer necessary for space agencies to front human missions in space due to the fact that robotic missions are now more capable of exploration and even construction.
We should not have publicly funded programmes to send people to the moon. It is a bad bargain for the taxpayer.
His comments prompted a strong defence from some experts who said that government-backed spacefaring is a way to project soft power and that the private sector could turn space into the Wild West.
Every weekday morning at 7am, you can sign up for First Edition.
We should encourage and cheer on explorers and billionaires who want to leave Earth in search of adventure in the spirit of Scott and Shackleton, argues Rees. There is a good chance of death if you move to Mars, according to the founder of SpaceX.
Mars settlers would be free to modify their children to cope with life on the red planet. He said that doing so could lead to the divergence of the species, and that Silicon Valley entrepreneurs could be the seed stock for a bunch of puny post-humans.
The changes are going to be rapid compared to Darwinian evolution, and they will have every incentive to redesign themselves.
Fifty years ago, astronauts last set foot on the moon. Humans haven't ventured further than a few hundred miles into space since then. The US, Europe, China, and Russia are some of the space agencies that plan to return to the moon. Next in line is Mars.
Humans are fragile and the cost is considerable. The US president, Joe Biden, has requested $26 billion for the US's space agency in the next five years, with $7.5 billion earmarked for the Artemis programme which aims to put the first woman and the first person of colour on the moon.
Many people think that humans are essential to the idea of science in space. The kinds of robots we will send in 20 years may be able to decide where to dig on Mars as well as any actual.
The phrase "space tourism" underplays the danger in the activity, according to Rees. He wants it to be known as a high-risk adventure so tragedies don't become national traumas like when the space shuttles were lost.
The risks of suborbital flights are less traumatic and seem less of a disaster if they are viewed.
The astronomer believes that private spacefarers will inspire people as much as space agency astronauts. Others are not convinced.
Prof David Southwood, a former chair of the UK Space Agency and senior research investigator at Imperial College, said: "If you've ever been in a room with Tim Peake and a couple of hundred children, there's a chance." They think he is like me. You don't have to be rich.
The head of the strategy and coordination group for robotic and human exploration at the European Space Agency said the trend for human spaceflight being used as soft power and power projection would continue.
The robotic versus human spaceflight rhetoric has been superseded by the US and Chinese new race for the moon and Mars.
Leaving human exploration to the private sector risked being like a wild west approach in space.
It is a duty for governments, and not the free market, to encourage the younger generation.
All Rights Reserved © 2024
