Actually, there is much more to man’s space ventures than the desire for scientific enlightenment, the search for life and man’s curiosity and desire to do the “impossible.” And what is that? Nationalistic prestige.

For example, America’s space program began in earnest after Russia put its Sputnik into orbit. Thus the writers of the book Journey to Tranquility say about the American space exploits:

“The project was born of calamity. It was begun as a hasty response to an immediate crisis: the crisis thought to have been brought about by Soviet space triumphs. . . . The decisive aspect of the threat, however, was its bearing on American prestige. This was the fear which impelled President Kennedy. . . . Prestige . . . added up to a belief that America could not afford to be beaten by the Russians. Prestige, in other words, was equated with power in the world, and the moon was seen as a medium through which worldly power might be increased.”

That prestige was a key motivating factor is evident from a memorandum of President John F. Kennedy dated April 20, 1961, to the United States vice-president, who was then chairman of the Space Council. President Kennedy asked:

“Do we have a chance of beating the Soviets by putting a laboratory in space, or by a trip around the moon, or by a rocket to land on the moon, or by a rocket to go to the moon and back with a man? Is there any other space program which promises dramatic results in which we could win?”

So the space race began, and thus far there have been over a thousand space exploits by the Soviet Union and the United States combined. Nationalistic prestige, then, has had a more direct bearing on space ventures than even the evolutionists’ search for life beyond the earth.

Doubts and Questions Raised

At the success of the Apollo moon missions and the safe return of the men involved, there was much praise for the accomplishment. President Nixon even remarked: ‘Can we not see God’s hand in it?’

However, there were doubts about the matter. For example, Time magazine of January 1, 1973, commented: “The fault in such a pronouncement [by President Nixon] lies in its assumption that the conquest of space is such an unalloyed good that God would deign to grant it some special protection. If motives were taken into account​—especially the bald chauvinism that motivated so many who voted for Apollo appropriations—​divine wrath rather than benevolence might have attended the project.”

Indeed, man’s space exploits have provoked a number of doubts and questions. One of the biggest questions is whether it was worth, for example, $25 billion to finance the Apollo moon program. What could that money have accomplished in helping to make conditions on earth more desirable? “Is scaling the moon the only ‘impossibility’ we can think of?” asks Amitai Etzioni in his book The Moon-Doggle. “The earth has never been free from starvation or war. Those anxious to engage ‘impossible’ challenges are welcome to try these.”

Doubts also exist, says this writer, about the relevancy of many scientific objectives, used for promoting space ventures: “Statements that space probes will tell us ‘how the universe ticks’ and ‘how life began on earth’ are an outrageous affront to straight thinking, a gaudy packaging of an interesting but far from sensational line of exploration.”

A related question that needs to be explored is whether it is worth the expenditure of vast sums of money in searching for evolved life on other planets. How wise or unwise is such a quest?

And, for purposes of nationalistic prestige, has the effort been worth it for the nations involved? Many in the United States think it has been worth $25 billion to plant the American flag on the moon six times. But not all agree. Say the writers of Journey to Tranquility: “Developments strongly suggest that, in the short-term impact which was sought from it, Project Apollo will be counted among the more palpable miscalculations of the twentieth century. Although the immediate task was performed perfectly, its ultimate objective was in ruins. Men took their step on the moon, but there was no giant leap in the drawing-power of the American way of life.”

But though America may not have got $25 billion worth of prestige from the Apollo program, it did give man a new understanding of the moon and forced him to revise some of his theories about it.

The Moon​—What Was Discovered?

MAN‘S going to the moon and back was certain to bring forth some surprises. Scientifically, there were many. One of them concerned the moon itself, which was thought to be a relatively simple heavenly body.

But not so. Says Dr. R. J. Allenby, assistant director for lunar science of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration: “Probably the most significant thing we have learned is that the moon is a very complex body​—not just the simple ‘blob’ that many people thought it was. The Apollo missions have sent a lot of scientists back to the drawing boards. It will take many years to come up with new concepts that are generally accepted.”

A Variety of Discoveries

Since the moon is no mere simple “blob,” what about the widespread theory that the moon originally shot out from the upper surfaces of the earth? A recent scientific report says: “The idea that the moon was torn from the upper layers of the earth has virtually died as a consequence of the Apollo findings.”​—New York Times, December 4, 1972.

As for the moon’s composition, the Apollo 16 mission found that the moon material is rich in aluminum and calcium. Metallic iron was present in the moon rocks. The Apollo 11 rock samples disclosed sixty-eight of the known elements. Moon rocks are composed of essentially the same raw materials as are earth rocks. However, there is a difference​—in proportion.

For instance, in moon rocks the ratio of uranium to potassium was found to be four times as high as in typical earth rocks. Titanium was found to be more than twice as common in moon rocks as in the most titanium-rich earth rocks. Not the elements themselves but the combinations of elements found in the moon rocks were indeed “unearthly.” As one lunar scientist put it: “It’s the same alphabet but a different grammar.”

A discovery made by Apollo 12 in 1969 was that a lunar magnetic field exists. Early unmanned spacecraft had not detected any lunar magnetism.

Temperatures on the moon were found to range from 280 degrees F. below zero to 250 degrees F. above zero. A hole drilled on the moon revealed a steady increase of temperature with depth, about one degree per foot. But as to whether the moon’s core is partially molten or relatively cool there is still some doubt. Seismic observation pointed to a partially molten core. However, data obtained with magnetometers on the moon’s surface and in lunar orbit have led some scientists to believe that it has a relatively cool interior.

As to the search for evolved life beyond the earth, the moon landings have made it clear that nothing even remotely resembling life has been found. Microscopic studies were made to try to find any living, previously living, or fossil material. None were found on the moon.

Have you wondered about the moon’s age? Rocks taken from the early Apollo missions were estimated at from 3.3 to 3.7 billion years in age. However, one lemon-size rock was estimated to have an age of 4.6 billion years. The moon’s soil was estimated at being from 4.2 to 4.9 billion years in age. Thus Science World of February 16, 1970, commented: “Several researchers confirmed that the moon is about 4.6 billion years old. The Earth and meteorites are about the same age.”

So it is now generally agreed that the moon’s age is the same as that of the entire solar system, including the earth. This is a noteworthy confirmation of the Bible account at Genesis 2:4, which indicates that the earth and the heavens were formed in the same general period of time.

Not Put into Orbit by Chance

An outstanding feature about the moon that man’s space exploits have disclosed is this: The moon could not possibly have been put into its orbit by chance or accident. Commenting on this discovery, William Roy Shelton writes in the book Winning the Moon:

“It is important to remember that something had to put the moon at or near its present circular pattern around the earth. Just as an Apollo spacecraft circling the earth every ninety minutes while one hundred miles high has to have a velocity of roughly 18,000 miles per hour to stay in orbit, so something had to give the moon the precisely required velocity for its weight and altitude. For instance, it could not have been blown out from earth at some random speed or direction. We found this out when we first began to try to orbit artificial satellites. We discovered that unless the intended satellite reached a certain altitude at a certain speed on a certain course parallel to the surface of the earth, it would not have the necessary centrifugal force to maintain the delicate balance with the gravity of earth which would permit it to remain in the desired orbit.

“At Old Cape Canaveral on the night of March 5, 1958, for instance, I watched the launch of Explorer 2 which was scheduled to be the second U.S. satellite to orbit successfully. Everything worked perfectly until the fourth and final stage attempted to achieve the required precise velocity, altitude and speed. On this occasion the difficult combination was not achieved and our intended satellite very soon plunged back into earth’s atmosphere. . . .

“The speed required for orbit changes every time either the altitude or the weight of the intended satellite is altered and objects farther away from the earth require more time to circle the earth. For the moon’s distance and weight, that time, called the orbital period, is approximately 27.3 days. The point​—and it is one seldom noted in considering the origin of the moon—​is that it is extremely unlikely that any object would just stumble into the right combination of factors required to stay in orbit. ‘Something’ had to put the moon at its altitude, on its course and at its speed.