3 ms·
I'll take both, please! This is an old and tired viewpoint, that space is just a huge waste of resources that could be applied to more down to Earth (haha) nee
by nickserv 7y ago
I'll take both, please!
This is an old and tired viewpoint, that space is just a huge waste of resources that could be applied to more down to Earth (haha) needs. It's usually used when discussing poverty, though.
For the current climate emergency, it's factually wrong, without even getting into philosophy. Two words: artificial satellites. Without them we would be unable to track deforestation, thinning ice sheets, atmospheric composition, surface temperature, all of which are absolutely critical in understanding climate change and monitoring our impact.
And while the rockets that have placed these satellites in orbit are not capable of sending humanity to other worlds, I'm sure that the people that design them would love for that to be the case.
- perfunctory 7y ago> Two words: artificial satellites. Without them we would be unable to track deforestation, thinning ice sheets, atmospheric composition, surface temperature, all of which are absolutely critical in understanding climate change and monitoring our impact. This is not what article is about " Didier Queloz ... denounced those who argue against fighting climate change because of the distant possibility that humanity “might leave the Earth at some point”. "
- larnmar 7y agoDo the people he’s denouncing actually exist?
- beatgammit 7y agoAnd if they do, are they significant enough in number to actually matter?
- Zanni 7y agoThe only one "cited" in the article is Stephen Hawking, but 1) he doesn't argue against fighting climate change and 2) he presents a list of threats to a single-planet humanity, including wars, epidemics, asteroid strikes and overpopulation.
- imtringued 7y agoHow is overpopulation a threat? As long as you increase the number of women in the workplace we will all have less children.