We do this 'round here from time to time, right? We try to break down an incorrect statement, into what logical fallacy, or collection of fallacies it is, right?
Its a very old cliche, but it never really stops. Some one says, “We can send a man to the moon, but we can’t …” Perform whatever, cure cancer, give my engine free energy, whatever the speaker thinks they need, and should be so easy for all those rocket scientists. Seems a little bit like appeal to authority, but maybe also, something else. Maybe Appeal to Authority plus Appeal to Ignorance? Or something like that?
It’s not a fallacy. It is true that we can send a man to the moon, and it is true that we can’t cure cancer. The reason why both are true is that we have dedicated sufficient resources to reaching one goal, but not the other, which may be partly due to the fact that one of them has a steeper and/or more challenging research curve than the other…
Sending a man to the moon was easy. Just keep hurling inanimate objects into space, and ob serve the failures, until you think you can safely throw a human into space. If researches had sent thousands of human test subject into space (like a cancer cure requires), there would be an insurmountable outcry from moralists.