Billions of dollars are being wasted each year on space research. The money could be better used to improve conditions on earth. To what extent do you agree or disagree with this statement?

Extraterrestrial life is something that has always fascinated the scientific curiosity in each and all of us. Authorities dedicate hefty funding to find some evidence that would prove that our planet isn’t the only one capable of sustaining a living organism. A general notion believed by a few is that monetary assets should preferably be utilized to solve the day-to-day problems of the population rather than on the search. I strongly challenge

this

belief, and

this

essay will provide the reasons for the same.

To begin

with, climate change is a growing concern for leaders all around the globe. Drastic differences in temperatures have shown that the habitability of our planet is headed for a steep decline. Global warming is a topic

that is

frequently on the radar of political leaders, and the interest has only been accentuated by recent natural disasters. It has now become a common goal to find a heavenly body that supports life, to terraform an astronomical body similar to our Earth.

This

step would help to prevent the extinction of humanity if our planet ceases to support life.

For example

, Mars recently showed promise that it might be able to sustain lifeforms and numerous commodities are already being used to take advantage of

this

fact by both sectors, public and private.

Additionally

, emphasizing the fact that the needs of the current population are just as important as the goal to find extraterrestrial beings, money could be diverted from other sectors to achieve the same. A fortune is spent on war, and history has always pointed out most battles to be futile. Money could be redistributed after providing security for one’s nation as time and time again, science has led the way forward in development and not wars.

For instance

, Europe spends trillions of Euros on war but fails to allocate the recommended 5% of GDP for healthcare.

To conclude

, funds designated to science are assigned to their rightful place and spending resources on research will only lead to the betterment of one’s country. The backing shouldn’t be cut off to allocate it to other problems when other steps could be undertaken for the same.