4 ms·
And still mostly wasted. Look after the people on Earth first. Once we show we can accomplish that, then and only then do we begin to earn the stars.
by throwanem 3y ago
And still mostly wasted.
Look after the people on Earth first. Once we show we can accomplish that, then and only then do we begin to earn the stars.
- least 3y agoSorry, but no. There's billions of people on earth; we can tackle many problems at once in parallel.
- throwanem 3y agoYes, that's worked out wonderfully for us of late, hasn't it.
- scarface_74 3y agoHow would spending billions on the space race help?
- throwanem 3y agoExactly my question.
- least 3y agoNumerous technological advancements have been made as a result of the space race, but asking for justification on spending money on scientific inquiry is just going to come to whether or not you support science generally.
- throwanem 3y agoI'd like to see some justification for considering science and space exploration as one and the same. It's hardly as if we've run out of things to learn from this planet, after all.
- jacquesm 3y agoPersonally I'd like to see some justification for discovering America, there was plenty to be learned in Spain and Portugal at the time.
- throwanem 3y agoGiven how Europeans have behaved themselves on this continent, that really doesn't qualify as a meaningful counterargument. If anything, it's more to my point than yours.
- scarface_74 3y agoWell the people that were already here and died from both disease brought by the Europeans and murder might not see that as progress
- least 3y agoThey don't have to be the same, but exploration is a necessary part of the scientific process, whether that be in the depths of the ocean, inside the earth, or in space. Curiosity has driven exploration, discovery, and subsequently science. It's fine that you're not as curious as some, but suggesting that we must only focus on things on Earth when we have literally billions of people on earth that all have individual interests and things they're curious about is just about limiting progress, not about preserving Earth.
- eru 3y agoWe could have spent money directly on the technologies we are interested in. That would have likely been more efficient.
- least 3y agoIt largely has, yes. The fact that things aren't perfect isn't justification for condemnation of the entire process.
- throwanem 3y agoIt's rare I find myself reaching for the adjective "Panglossian".
- robertlagrant 3y agoSadly you aren't Dr Strange, able to see the results of every possible decision to get the best outcome. That would be cool. But for now, we have to just observe how countries enact progress, and it does seem to be that the ones that delegate and diversify do the best at it.
- throwanem 3y agoIt takes being a Marvel superhero to extrapolate from yesterday and today to tomorrow?
- robertlagrant 3y agoNo, to know what past change would've made today much better.
- throwanem 3y agoI do wish that people who feel the need to dispute what I've said in this thread would more reliably address themselves to things I have said, rather than to claims I've not even approached making.
- robertlagrant 3y agoIf you rely on implication to make your point, you should mentally underwrite the risk of being frustrated at people who read what you wrote, rather than read your mind :-)
- jvanderbot 3y agoYou don't have to convince this person and won't. This is what it looks like to parallelize: vehiment disagreement on priorities.
- wiseowise 3y agoWe would be still in caves if everybody followed your logic.
- throwanem 3y agoThe equation of all progress with any progress is yours, not mine. I haven't made that argument; if you want to see it defended, I'm afraid you'll have to do so yourself.
- ben_w 3y agoThis feels like you're unaware that, for all that remains to be done, less than half as many people are living in extreme poverty today as compared to 1990: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extreme_poverty#/media/File:Total_population_living_in_extreme_poverty,_by_world_region_(PovcalNet,_World_Bank_(1987_to_2013)),_OWID.svg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extreme_poverty#/media/File:To...
- throwanem 3y agoIn a counterfactual that begins with a trillion dollars to spend on something other than war - even in reality, for that matter - do you really not imagine we could choose to do better as a species than a dollar a day?
- ben_w 3y ago1) A trillion dollars, spread over the 1.8 billion people in extreme poverty in 1990 and the 32 years since then, would have been 0.046 USD/person/day. 2) There's also this graph, if you want to see how the other income brackets are changing: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extreme_poverty#/media/File:The_number_of_people_below_different_poverty_lines.svg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extreme_poverty#/media/File:Th...