Return to Transcripts main page

Live From...

Manned Missions

Aired January 09, 2004 - 13:39   ET

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.


MILES O'BRIEN, CNN ANCHOR: To the moon. NASA, that's the (UNINTELLIGIBLE) urging coming from within the space agency and from the White House as well. Washington is in orbit with leaks, deep background calls, and off-the-record guidance about a renewed push into outer space. The president is slated to make a big announcement next week, we are told. A new trip to the moon just part of a fundamental retooling of NASA's vision, making it more firmly focused on exploration. Exploring the pros and cons of the Bush trial balloon, Robert Park, physics professor at the University of Maryland, and a frequent critic of NASA's manned space program, and Andy Chaikin, author of the preeminent account of the space race, "A Man on the Moon."
Good to have you with us.

ANDY CHAIKIN, AUTHOR, "A MAN ON THE MOON": Thank you, Miles. It's good to be here.

O'BRIEN: All right.

Andy, let's begin with you. The idea of firmly rooting of NASA in exploration, good idea or bad?

CHAIKIN: Boy, I tell you, it's a terrific idea, and of course we haven't heard the actual announcement yet. If it is what we're hearing it will be, it would really do something that's long overdue, which is to get the space program back in the business of exploring, to explore not only with robots, but with astronauts in deep space, and for the purpose of making scientific discovery, and I think it's going to be a spectacular adventure for a all of us.

O'BRIEN: All right, Andy Chaikin. We are having some difficulty talking to Bob Park, who is in Washington, unable to hear us right now. Not fair to do a debate when he can't hear half of it.

So we're going to take a quick break, try to get our audio situation straightened out. Back with more LIVE FROM in just a moment.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

O'BRIEN: We're talking about a new vision for NASA, a lot of talk about a speech the president intends to make next week, perhaps retooling the space agency's vision, perhaps sending it off on its way to the moon, and perhaps ultimately on to Mars. Our guest to talk about this Andy Chaikin, author of the book "A Man on the Moon," and Robert Park, a professor at the University of Maryland, who's been critical of the space program in the past, as least the manned portion of it.

Professor Park, I want to start off with you, since we had a word or two from Andy Chaikin. The basic concept here to put the manned space program on a footing toward exploration, ultimately perhaps a trip to Mars, might have a little more scientific validity than what it is doing now, would you agree?

ROBERT PARK, UNIV. OF MD: Well, a little more than what it's doing now, which is almost nothing.

But it's a curiously old-fashioned idea. I mean, we measure progress in society by the extent to which work that is dangerous or menial is done by machines, and our machines are doing it very well on Mars right now. We're on Mars now, and the robot that is there, it's is a telerobot. It's just a natural extension of a human being back on Earth, who uses it for his senses. So this is the way, I think, we'll explore the universe. We won't explore it by sending human beings out there. If you've seen the images from Mars, it's not a pleasant spot.

O'BRIEN: Andy Chaikin, make the case for putting humans in the loop? Why should they be a part of exploration, and what value added do they provide?

CHAIKIN: Well, first of all, just in terms of the science, in any scientific endeavor, the power of the human brain, the power of human hands, greatly increase the scope and pace of discovery, but in fact this is about more than just science, even though science is a spectacular outcome from all of this. It's about the human spirit, and it's about what this country can be. It's about the fact that exploration is part of who we are, and we're doing it to answer some of the most fundamental questions we know how to ask -- where did we come from? Are we alone in the universe.

And finally, I think that is desperately needed inspirational element for inspiring the next generation of scientists who are going to take Dr. Park's place and make us a strong society, the next generation of engineers and innovators. And the public, by the way, supports space exploration, and I think this is going to be a space program that the public can believe in.

CHAIKIN: Dr. Park, what do you make of that point there? As an educator, you want to encourage young people to study precisely what you teach, which is physics. Wouldn't sending people off on these far-flung adventures do more to inspire these young people than it would a robot?

PARKS: No, this is more like inspiring them to do bungee jumping or something. It's the instruments that do the measurements, and this robot that is on Mars now is just a natural extension of the operator back on Earth, and it has whatever senses we build into it, so the operator can feel the warmth of the sand at midday. Hopefully, he won't feel the cold of the night, because it's pretty bitter up there.

O'BRIEN: Well, let me ask you this, though, if those robots, spirit and opportunity included, were to find signs of life or an underground aquifer there, some tantalizing reason to explore more, would you change your opinion? Would that be time to send some human geologists in spacesuits.

PARKS: Well, look, we got two geologists up there now, and they're doing a good job. But, in fact, I would bar human beings from going there if we discover any sign of life.

O'BRIEN: Really?

PARKS: And the reason is that we would contaminate mars. This is an experiment we can only do once, and we have to do it very carefully. You know, if there were an accident, God forbid, on Mars with a human being, there are enough living creatures in one human gut to destroy any chance of ever finding what's there naturally. So this is not the way to do the experiment.

O'BRIEN: Andy Chaikin, if there's a significant finding from these robotic missions, does that make the case for going there more?

CHAIKIN: Look, of course, it does, and nobody is talking about going to Mars tomorrow. We'll have time to figure out what the best strategies are to explore Mars once the robots have done their job, which is going to take years. And I think to say that the only thing space exploration inspires is bungee jumping makes me think that Dr. Park hasn't talked to very many of the people that grew up in my generation and the generations that came afterwards, who were inspired to become not only scientists and engineers, but writers, and filmmakers, and educators and a whole slew of occupations that make our country better, and I think that there is no substitute for hearing the sound of a human voice from a place where no one has ever been and see the discoveries that that will bring.

O'BRIEN: Andy Chaikin, Robert Park, thank you very much. Time is expired. We'll be continuing this discussion as the weeks go on. Thank you very much.

TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com







Aired January 9, 2004 - 13:39   ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
MILES O'BRIEN, CNN ANCHOR: To the moon. NASA, that's the (UNINTELLIGIBLE) urging coming from within the space agency and from the White House as well. Washington is in orbit with leaks, deep background calls, and off-the-record guidance about a renewed push into outer space. The president is slated to make a big announcement next week, we are told. A new trip to the moon just part of a fundamental retooling of NASA's vision, making it more firmly focused on exploration. Exploring the pros and cons of the Bush trial balloon, Robert Park, physics professor at the University of Maryland, and a frequent critic of NASA's manned space program, and Andy Chaikin, author of the preeminent account of the space race, "A Man on the Moon."
Good to have you with us.

ANDY CHAIKIN, AUTHOR, "A MAN ON THE MOON": Thank you, Miles. It's good to be here.

O'BRIEN: All right.

Andy, let's begin with you. The idea of firmly rooting of NASA in exploration, good idea or bad?

CHAIKIN: Boy, I tell you, it's a terrific idea, and of course we haven't heard the actual announcement yet. If it is what we're hearing it will be, it would really do something that's long overdue, which is to get the space program back in the business of exploring, to explore not only with robots, but with astronauts in deep space, and for the purpose of making scientific discovery, and I think it's going to be a spectacular adventure for a all of us.

O'BRIEN: All right, Andy Chaikin. We are having some difficulty talking to Bob Park, who is in Washington, unable to hear us right now. Not fair to do a debate when he can't hear half of it.

So we're going to take a quick break, try to get our audio situation straightened out. Back with more LIVE FROM in just a moment.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

O'BRIEN: We're talking about a new vision for NASA, a lot of talk about a speech the president intends to make next week, perhaps retooling the space agency's vision, perhaps sending it off on its way to the moon, and perhaps ultimately on to Mars. Our guest to talk about this Andy Chaikin, author of the book "A Man on the Moon," and Robert Park, a professor at the University of Maryland, who's been critical of the space program in the past, as least the manned portion of it.

Professor Park, I want to start off with you, since we had a word or two from Andy Chaikin. The basic concept here to put the manned space program on a footing toward exploration, ultimately perhaps a trip to Mars, might have a little more scientific validity than what it is doing now, would you agree?

ROBERT PARK, UNIV. OF MD: Well, a little more than what it's doing now, which is almost nothing.

But it's a curiously old-fashioned idea. I mean, we measure progress in society by the extent to which work that is dangerous or menial is done by machines, and our machines are doing it very well on Mars right now. We're on Mars now, and the robot that is there, it's is a telerobot. It's just a natural extension of a human being back on Earth, who uses it for his senses. So this is the way, I think, we'll explore the universe. We won't explore it by sending human beings out there. If you've seen the images from Mars, it's not a pleasant spot.

O'BRIEN: Andy Chaikin, make the case for putting humans in the loop? Why should they be a part of exploration, and what value added do they provide?

CHAIKIN: Well, first of all, just in terms of the science, in any scientific endeavor, the power of the human brain, the power of human hands, greatly increase the scope and pace of discovery, but in fact this is about more than just science, even though science is a spectacular outcome from all of this. It's about the human spirit, and it's about what this country can be. It's about the fact that exploration is part of who we are, and we're doing it to answer some of the most fundamental questions we know how to ask -- where did we come from? Are we alone in the universe.

And finally, I think that is desperately needed inspirational element for inspiring the next generation of scientists who are going to take Dr. Park's place and make us a strong society, the next generation of engineers and innovators. And the public, by the way, supports space exploration, and I think this is going to be a space program that the public can believe in.

CHAIKIN: Dr. Park, what do you make of that point there? As an educator, you want to encourage young people to study precisely what you teach, which is physics. Wouldn't sending people off on these far-flung adventures do more to inspire these young people than it would a robot?

PARKS: No, this is more like inspiring them to do bungee jumping or something. It's the instruments that do the measurements, and this robot that is on Mars now is just a natural extension of the operator back on Earth, and it has whatever senses we build into it, so the operator can feel the warmth of the sand at midday. Hopefully, he won't feel the cold of the night, because it's pretty bitter up there.

O'BRIEN: Well, let me ask you this, though, if those robots, spirit and opportunity included, were to find signs of life or an underground aquifer there, some tantalizing reason to explore more, would you change your opinion? Would that be time to send some human geologists in spacesuits.

PARKS: Well, look, we got two geologists up there now, and they're doing a good job. But, in fact, I would bar human beings from going there if we discover any sign of life.

O'BRIEN: Really?

PARKS: And the reason is that we would contaminate mars. This is an experiment we can only do once, and we have to do it very carefully. You know, if there were an accident, God forbid, on Mars with a human being, there are enough living creatures in one human gut to destroy any chance of ever finding what's there naturally. So this is not the way to do the experiment.

O'BRIEN: Andy Chaikin, if there's a significant finding from these robotic missions, does that make the case for going there more?

CHAIKIN: Look, of course, it does, and nobody is talking about going to Mars tomorrow. We'll have time to figure out what the best strategies are to explore Mars once the robots have done their job, which is going to take years. And I think to say that the only thing space exploration inspires is bungee jumping makes me think that Dr. Park hasn't talked to very many of the people that grew up in my generation and the generations that came afterwards, who were inspired to become not only scientists and engineers, but writers, and filmmakers, and educators and a whole slew of occupations that make our country better, and I think that there is no substitute for hearing the sound of a human voice from a place where no one has ever been and see the discoveries that that will bring.

O'BRIEN: Andy Chaikin, Robert Park, thank you very much. Time is expired. We'll be continuing this discussion as the weeks go on. Thank you very much.

TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com