Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Urgent help with persuasive SPACE PROGRAM speech?

  1. Apr 22, 2012 #1
    I'am doing doing a persuasive speech on the manned space program. I have a general outline starting with the history of NASA : space race, cold war, Apollo landings etc. I then go on to talk about the decline in manned space exploration and then switch to space probes and robotic exploration. I give some general information on the voyager and mars rover programs like the discoveries. But after that i am stuck i was going to bring up the benefits and spin offs from the manned missions and i have some other ideas like talking about international relationships. Problem is i have it in my head but i cant get it on paper i want it to be sincere and really talk to the people. I have one day left i could really use some help..TY

    Edit: this is for a comm 101 speech assignment
  2. jcsd
  3. Apr 22, 2012 #2


    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    I have been a Toastmaster for over twenty years. Since you specify this is "Urgent" my response now is probably useless for you. Learn to get prepared in plenty of time before due date. You have said you are working on a "persuasive speech on the manned space program". But you have not said how you want to persuade your audience. What is the goal of your persuasive effort? What do you intend to persuade them of? I could guess, but that is not useful.

    Voyager and Mars Rover programs are NOT manned, so are outside the subject of your speech. The spin-off benefits from the manned space program are HUGE and IMPORTANT! I would say they are really relevant because they have affected our lives so much in so many areas, so should be included.

    International relationships form a significant part of the International Space Station, so also should be included.

    How much time have you been allotted? Have you practiced your speech to discover if it is within that limit? You will impress your audience with your sincerity if you truly are sincere. Believe me, they'll know if you are faking it because they can read a speaker's body language fluently! Good Luck!

  4. Apr 22, 2012 #3
    The main point was going to be that we still need manned space missions and exploration. I was using the voyager and rover missions to show that they were invaluable but we still need manned missions.

    The main this i wanted to persuade were.

    1. NASA needs i bigger budget to continue research on manned space missions.

    Id like to add that i don't think they need the money so that they can spend it on technology that is going to go anywhere. But that it is better to spend money on NASA and research then on some of the useless things our money is going to.

    2. That even though robotic missions are invaluable we will need manned space technology at some point in the future.

    3. Manned space missions have a lot more social impact then robotic missions.

    I'm not trying to make the point that manned is better then robotic or the other way around.

    Most people wonder why we should have manned space missions when we have robotics and other technology to explore.

    My main point is to persuade that we need manned space explorations to insure that human existence continues and that international manned missions can directly and indirectly make this world a better place.
  5. Apr 22, 2012 #4

    D H

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor

    I'm not just a human space buff. It's my job.

    That said, spinoffs from NASA's human space program have been neither huge nor important. There were some significant ones from the Apollo program, but those were low hanging fruit. Since then, the spinoffs have been on the order of better foam for mattresses. With one exception, focusing on spinoffs is the wrong way to go. That one exception is that human spaceflight has motivated lots of young people to pursue a technical education and later on pursue a career in some aspect of technology.

    With regard to medical spinoffs, materials science spinoffs, or computer science spinoffs, investing in research in medicine, materials science, or computer science will give a much better ROI than giving money to NASA. With regard to aeronautics spinoffs, investing money in the aeronautics side of NASA will give a much better ROI than investing in the aerospace side. Expecting huge payoffs from what is at best tangential to NASA's human space flight effort is a fool's errand.

    We explore space because we are human. It is our nature to explore. We explore space because there are huge potential direct payoffs (not spinoffs) from the resources this exploration will open up. It is also our nature to find and exploit opportunities. We also explore space because "my space program is better than yours". It's called soft diplomacy. Don't leave politics out of your equation. Except for some budding commercial space projects, space exploration is still funded primarily by governments. Politicians might not understand rocket science, but they do understand people, much better than rocket scientists understand people. Politics isn't rocket science. It's a lot harder.

    We should not abandon human space exploration at this point in time. We are getting close to the point where a true monetary advantage to human space exploration is in sight. Just because our nation was at the forefront of human space exploration does not mean we will realize those benefits. It's those nations who see things through to the finish who will realize those benefits. China knows this. So does India. And so do our politicians.
  6. Apr 22, 2012 #5


    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    Robotic exploration has a huge plus minus ratio compared to sending humans into space - not to mention far more economical. The usual argument is humans are more adaptable data collectors and can 'save the mission' in the face of unforeseen circumstances. My personal opinion is we should send humans only after we have thoroughly scouted the objective, associated risks and have an unambiguous reason to prefer humans over robots. Losing a probe does not engender nearly as much unfavorable popular opinion as losing astronauts.
Share this great discussion with others via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook