Today is the 40th anniversary of the most momentous event in human history: The day when human beings first landed and set foot on another celestial body.

(Lesen Sie diesen Artikel hier auf Deutsch)

Strange but apparently true: Some people just don't seem to be able to grasp the point of the event itself and the massive program that led to it.

More than any other, this image symbolizes technological progress in the 20th century: A space-suited astronaut on the Moon (here: Buzz Aldrin, Apollo 11)

Of course everyone is entitled to question the benefit of the most ambitious and costly scientific project in history. The Apollo program cost 25 billion dollars - 1960s dollars, that is. In today's terms, that sum would correspond to well over a 100 billion dollars. Certainly a lot of money, by any yardstick, so questioning the benefits is perfectly legitimate.  It's just that the search for the answer often appears to be conducted in a way that leads me to believe that people don't really want to find that answer in the first place. 

I don't see the point in adding up products such as radial ply tyres, bar codes, space pens and - that old chestnut! - teflon plated frying pans (which didn't even originate from space research). Talk about not seeing the forest for the trees. Surely a program as vast as Apollo cannot be measured in terms of business-oriented thinking such as profit or products. This approach is so obviously petty that it must have been taken on purpose. 

Of course one has to look at the benefits in terms of national economics. The problem is that when looking at things on a nation-wide scale, you can no longer measure the effect down to dollars and cents. Still, the studies that I have read on the subject arrive at the conclusion that the return that far outstrips the investment, for simple reasons:

• Rocket technology, space technology, large-scale manufacturing and core elements of modern information technology such as computers, networks and data transmission experienced a massive boost in those years, not least thanks to the large sums invested into research in these fields. Taking rocket science, it is remarkable just how rapid progress was and how quickly launchers evolved from a kind of oversized firecracker to powerful, reliable backbones of spaceflight. All the points listed above are enabling technologies; they render other technologies possible, such as satellite communications, space-based meteorology, earth observation and satellite navigation - each of these items are key technologies offering almost endless potential.
• The public perception of science and technology changed dramatically, re-kindling a renewed interest especially with the young generation who started studying science again ... this is indispensable for any technologically leading nation. Only scientifically advanced societies will maintain their wealth and keep up with the pace of progress. President Eisenhower specifically took note of this when he took up the challenge posed by the Soviet space activities in the wake of the Sputnik shock.

Sure - nobody can prove that all of this would not have happened also without Apollo. But that is beside the point. The issue is that thanks to Apollo there were these benefits on a societal scale, so the Apollo program was of benefit to society. Period.

Typically, in argument on this topic, the next step would be to confront me with a large dose of pseudo-humanism along the lines of "We have so many problems here on Earth that should be solved before gallivantin' to outer space." That sounds very convincing at first. Can't say anything against that without appearing to be indifferent to the problems and strife that plague this world, can you? But look closer and you see that this statement is so vague, so applicable to absolutely anything, that it is totally devoid of any meaning.

As costly as Apollo may appear to have been, societies spend much more on things that are worth much less and don't waste much thought on that. President Kennedy related the Apollo cost to the sum Americans spend each year on tobacco products in his Rice University Speech. Apollo cost Americans less than the direct expenditure for tobacco products, and certainly far less than the cost incurred by tobacco-related health problems. 

Topping the list of wanton money wasters is humanity's all-time favourite pastime: warfare! The Vietnam War alone cost the American taxpayer as much month for month as Apollo did in an entire year. And that's just the direct cost - I'm not talking about reconstruction of the devastated countries of Vietnam, Laos and Cambodia, the 1.5 to 4 million dead and the untold casualties, orphans, widows and those reduced to abject poverty - which did not cost the US taxpayer a penny. So, is it because of the excessive cost of scientific research that the world's problems are not solved? What patent nonsense.

I've been talking too much about money so far. That's not because I think that the value of everything can be expressed in such terms, but because I was referring to points made by others.

President John F Kennedy's famous speech at Rice University ("We choose to go to the Moon ..."). Still one of the greatest and most inspiring political speeches ever: Concise, clear, to the point, true, and poignant.

The chief accomplishment of the Apollo 11 mission is that everyone in the world took part in it emotionally, apart from those who were unable or not allowed to, such as the hundreds of millions living in China, torn by that decade of quasi-religious strife that the Cultural Revolution turned out to be. This was the first time people everywhere were following a major human achievement in real time, spellbound, bringing normal everyday life to a temporary halt. 

Now, typically, someone will tell me that this is also the case with every finals of the soccer world cup. Thanks, that gives me the opportunity to point out that such events can be broadcast worldwide due to telecommunications satellites, proving that spaceflight effectively brings people together.

But that is just an aside, and perhaps even a cheap shot. What I am getting at is something different:

Those spectators who are watching a close-up of an Italian player as he takes aim for a penalty kick don't all want the same. The Italian supporters want him to succeed, others (essentially, everyone else) just as ardently want him to fail. 

But the spectators of the moon landing broadcasts were different. There, everybody was rooting for those two human beings who were risking their lives on a venture of unprecedented boldness. For the first time ever - and that's why Apollo is the defining moment in human history - exceptionally, race, religion and nationally of both actors and spectators were of secondary  importance. 

It was just an issue of two human beings, human beings like us, and everyone wanted them to land safely and return safely. In short: Everyone wanted them to succeed in what they were doing. Nothing else mattered.

The commemorative plaque attached to one of the legs of the landing stage of the lunar module reads:

Among all the verbosity and propaganda, some corny, some chauvinistic, some exaggerated and some very well put, this simple phrase, just seven words, twenty-six letters, immediately comprehensible to anyone and easy to translate into equally simple prose in any language, stands out as something special. There is nothing boastful or exaggerated about this statement. It is the plain truth.

This is part of the legacy of Apollo, the part that will be remembered. 

Related Articles:

• Nigeria: Emerging Nation Status Soon?
• The Low Down on Methane on Mars
• ESA's Mars Webcam and the Real Science it Produces
• Tunguska 101
• Tomorrow: Japanese Asteroid Probe Hayabusa Limps Home