“It means nothing to me. I have no opinion about it, and I don’t care.” Pablo Picasso on the moon landing of July 1969.

“Mars has been flown by, orbited, smacked into, radar examined, and rocketed onto, as well as bounced upon, rolled over, shoveled, drilled into, baked and even blasted. Still to come: Mars being stepped on.” Buzz Aldrin Mars: My Vision for Space Exploration (2013)

This Futurism article discusses a BBC documentary where Apollo 8 Astronaut Bill Anders says that its stupid for NASA to send a crewed mission to Mars. He goes on to say:

“What’s the imperative? What’s pushing us to go to Mars? I don’t think the public is that interested,”

I would agree that there is no imperative to do so and that if polled the majority of American’s would say, that is not a good use of taxpayer money. It begs to question then, using his logic – Anders – why did we go to the moon in the first place? Would he say that his and the several other trips to the moon were a waste of time and money? Additionally, there are a lot of things the public, if polled, would consider a waste of time and taxpayer money. I’m certain the internet and its predecessor would have been viewed as such by a considerable number of the US population back in the 70s and 80s.

I have always been a proponent of commercial initiatives for space exploration exactly because of arguments like Anders. Musk and Bezos SpaceX and Blue Origin’s respectively are programs that have taken such steps. What I cant understand is the hostility towards private enterprise and their objectives for space exploration. If the issue with public funding of space exploration is that its a waste of time and money to pursue Mars or asteroid mining, isn’t the private sector the perfect answer? Yet even in this BBC interview Anders expresses hostility towards the two companies plans for Mars exploration and colonization.

If private sector organizations develop a business model that allows them to support their initiatives they should be allowed to reap the benefits of their technological developments and exploration. They take the risk, they should reap the rewards. Why then hostility towards organizations pursuing, with their money, such goals? Even astronaut Frank Borman, a crew-mate of Anders Apollo 8 mission, who supports manned missions to explore the solar system has hostile words towards Space X and Blue Origins:

“I do think there’s a lot of hype about Mars that is nonsense…Musk and Bezos, they’re talking about putting colonies on Mars. That’s nonsense.”

If Musk and Bezos were talking about taxpayer dollars Borman’s argument would be valid. But if its their money, their technology, and their goals, why the hostility?

Time and again experts have failed to capture the potential of ideas because, well, they are experts. The narrow scope of their understanding and thinking inevitably generates blindsides. Thomas Watson, president of IBM in 1943 said, “I think there is a world market for maybe 5 computers.” Ken Olsen, founder of Digital Equipment Corporation said in 1977, “There is no reason anyone would want a computer in their home.”

Perhaps manned Mars missions are a fools errand and colonies on the red planet an utter fantasy. But the limited foresight of the masses and their experts should not get in the way of those who can finance and chase such dreams. To paraphrase the Buddhist proverb, the effort is the reward.