Some people think governments should spend as much money as possible exploring outer space (for example, traveling to the Moon and to other planets). Other people disagree and think governments should spend this money for our basic needs on Earth. Which o

“Sooner, human will live in Mars”; said by scientist who try to transform human being to outer space. This statement was meaningless at one half century ago; however, its debate is extremely hot these days. Experts threw space crafts into the moon, walked on Mars, and embarked on living in there. Although, for some, such progressing in technology is so excitement, for others, the Earth has much more needs to attention; astronomical investments on such progressing should allocate for basic needs on Earth. By comparison, how can recognize the best taking side? For judging, worth of investing money should investigate on both sides on which, in my opinion, the latter group is superior to the first one due to current condition of other planets such as Mars and its comparison with Earth.

To begin with, other planets have not adequate essentials for living. Despite of lots of enthusiastic for transform infrastructures to other planets, lots of eagerness for exploring outer space such as galaxies, stars, and so on, and lots of attempt for providing rudimentary, a critical question pops into the mind that does it worth? An anthropologist explained: “provided that experts instead of going to unknown venues tried to explore known places, qualification of human’s life was much better than it is now”. According to him, had a vast large of money allocated on current environment on Earth, man would not have required to outer spaces.

Additionally, Earth that once was thought to not to be the-first-and-last place appropriated for living its qualification for living proved in comparison with any other planets. Our planet is the only place by clean, not toxic, and breathable atmosphere. “For traveling to other planet, especially for settling there, from water which use for cardinal needs to O2 which human require for breathing, all should artificially build by experts”; Thomas Jeffereson said, the Professor of Harvard university—all mentioned cases naturally exist on Earth. Either human can breathe, or he can take advantage from authenticity of running waters, without spending one penny.

All in all, I contended that on account of high investment for settling on the other planet and bonus existed on Earth naturally, human should concentrate for promoting qualification of living on Earth. Isn’t that what you think right?