This is not a NASA Website. You might learn something. It's YOUR space agency. Get involved. Take it back. Make it work - for YOU.
Policy

The Public's Opinion(s) on Space

By Keith Cowing
NASA Watch
September 10, 2015
Filed under
The Public's Opinion(s) on Space

A Look at What the Public Knows and Does Not Know About Science, Pew Research
“Fully 73% of Americans distinguish between astronomy and what is commonly considered a pseudoscience: astrology. Twenty-two percent of Americans incorrectly say that astronomy not astrology is the study of how the positions of stars and planets can influence human behavior. Another 5% give some other incorrect response.”
Major Gaps Between the Public, Scientists on Key Issues, Pew Research
– “Astronauts are essential for the future of the U.S. space program”: 59% of the public agrees whereas only 47% of AAAS members agree.
– “The Space Station has been a good investment for the U.S.”: 64% of the public agrees while 68% of AAAS members agree.

Recent Space Poll: The Public is Not Always in Synch With Space Advocates, earlier post
Poll: Space Travel in the 21st Century: American Public Sees Benefits But Balks at Cost, earlier post
Poll Suggests Public Concern Over Direction In Space, earlier post
New Gallup Poll Reveals Americans Strongly Support Space Exploration, Believe it Inspires Younger Generation, earlier post

NASA Watch founder, Explorers Club Fellow, ex-NASA, Away Teams, Journalist, Space & Astrobiology, Lapsed climber.

13 responses to “The Public's Opinion(s) on Space”

  1. Jeff Smith says:
    0
    0

    That actually seems pretty good to me. How many people 100 years ago would have even known what a radio wave was, let alone its applications in everyday life (which would have admittedly been limited). The fact that people have a pretty decent grasp of the things they deal with on a semi-regular basis shouldn’t be surprising though.

  2. TheBrett says:
    0
    0

    That’s actually pretty good. The polling numbers are noticeably better than the popular support that the Apollo Program had in its era, meaning that the advocates for these programs have done a better job selling them.

    The AAAS stance on astronauts doesn’t surprise. I’d probably cancel the crewed program if I could keep at least 75% of its funding to be re-allocated to robotic programs and telescopes.

    • AstroInMI says:
      0
      0

      Obviously there’s no way to prove what I’m about to say (so I guess I can say whatever I want 😉 but I don’t think the robotic program would keep 75% of the budget. If anything, NASA would go away, the robotic program would be consumed by NSF, and there would be less money. I’m a huge supporter of the robotic program, but without human spaceflight, I really don’t see the public supporting NASA nearly to the degree that it does now.

      • TheBrett says:
        0
        0

        I don’t think so either, which is why I made that conditional. I don’t think NASA would die outright, but they’d end up as a much smaller agency operating on $1-2 billion/year, with funding only for Discovery Program-level missions – if they wanted anything bigger, they’d have to go beg Congress to appropriate money for it specifically.

      • fcrary says:
        0
        0

        Random conversations aren’t exactly evidence, but I remember a number of them from around the time the Shuttle program ended. They were the sort of “so what do you do for a living?” Conversations you can get into with taxi drivers or people sitting next to you on airplanes. When I said I worked on experiments on NASA satellites, I kept getting questions about what I’d do, now that NASA had shut down. So, yes, there was a widespread view that Space Shuttle = astronauts = NASA. Therefore, I really doubt the science side of NASA would get 75% of the money if human spaceflight were cancelled. Just holding their own might be optimistic.

  3. Michael Spencer says:
    0
    0

    The trend to value education solely for remunerative properties leads to a poor level of general knowledge. Even basic stuff like algebra is deprecated. Algebra! If there’s ever a math that teaches conceptual thinking, it’s algebra.

    And try asking an adult with a high school education about Viet Nam or civil rights or- here’s one- the ERA amendment. You’ll be face-palming.

    Don’t even start with mean/mode/median.

    Oh. And I have a respected colleague fully immersed in astrology. He ‘explains’ it with a straight face.

    • eddrw2014 says:
      0
      0

      I take it you’ve never watched Street Smarts.

      • Michael Spencer says:
        0
        0

        Isnt that the show wehre they ask people in the street 5th grade questions, which they fail? sorta makes the point?

        • eddrw2014 says:
          0
          0

          My point was, probably shouldn’t get bent out of shape over mean/mode/median or U.S history when people can’t even recognize the shape of the state of California. I would say they asked questions at a much lower level than 6th grade. A troubling prospect. But…maybe times are a bit different now than when that show aired? Who knows…

  4. eddrw2014 says:
    0
    0

    Astrology isn’t pseudoscience! It’s entertainment. Or maybe a belief system at the most…

  5. Neal Aldin says:
    0
    0

    I’ve noticed that usually the planetary missions provide a pretty balanced view of their individual program: plenty of credit to the spacecraft and instruments, and plenty of information on the environment(s) they travel to: images of this worlds being explored, etc.

    But I have also noticed that in the case of the human space flight program NASA does a really poor job; like ISS, I don’t think there is even an agreement on the mission or purpose. They seem to focus almost all attention on the rinky dink science they have in work, but they hype it as though there is something really big and important-no actual signs of just what that might be however. What is most interesting is no credit at all to the program’s origins and evolution, the laws of mphysics or chemistry or even internationals by which it flies; no reference to its significance for now or to the future.

    What is most interesting is that NASA teaches webinars for teachers and students, and yet essentially nothing on the functions of the ISS systems, which would offer a lot of science and engineering basis for what goes on in HSF. It is almost like the manned program is so big and complicated they don’t really know what they are doing or why; and so all of this attention on others’ submitted experiments that have little or nothing to do with human space flight at all.

    • Littrow says:
      0
      0

      If NASA cannot figure out what’s it is doing, what it is supposed to be doing, or how to tell the story, why does anyone think Americans would know any better?

      In particular in HSF I see this on many fronts.

      NASA had a Shuttle that was unmatched in its capabilities, and instead of fixing it, upgrading it, streamlining it, they trashed it. Inexplicable.

      NASA wants to send people into deep space. Logic would say they should start with a practicable, supportable program and move towards Mars. Instead they trash everything else and declare the goal to be Mars with a test flight to a boulder. What is that about? Mars is not on the horizon for decades.

      ISS started out as a base for operations,a gateway to other places, and also a general purpose lab, observation post, maybe a foothold for eventual production facilities and the space commerce envisioned in the 1980s. Why the current sole focus on minor experiments?

  6. ThomasLMatula says:
    0
    0

    The basic problem with all polls like this is they just measure opinion, not the basis for it. Its like reporting the temperature without understanding what causes it. And at least thermometers are standardized, unlike polling questions.