|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Tue Jun 06, 2006 6:35 pm
Seeing as how this is an Astronomy Guild I'm sure most of the answers would be "yes you idiot!" But not everyone agrees; It has been argued that there is so much good that may be done here on our own planet with the money going towards NASA. Does our space fixation actually bring any practical benefits to mankind?
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Jun 08, 2006 12:03 pm
Someone actually based a public debate around this from my school. He gave the speech in front of lower/middle school and it is very relevant to this.
NASA has a yearly budget of around $16 billion! It's crazy and I think it's true (although my memory may be a bit hazy) and $16 million doesn't seem enough for the aeronautics department. With that money you could actually end world hunger, which to me seems a lot more important despite my love of all things celestial.
I think space exploration is a very important factor to human advancement, but perhaps we should fix some of the bigger options on Earth before moving away so blindly.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Jun 08, 2006 5:52 pm
There is only so much that can be done on our planet, sooner or later some of us will have to leave.
By 2050 we will have to increase our power production by more than double what we can produce now, something that will prove difficult with resources running out and limited alternatives.
I agree, there are many things we can do here on earth, but I think we can draw the necessary funding from that from elsewhere, like some of these coorporations that somehow manage to generate more revenue than entire countries.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Jun 11, 2006 9:45 pm
I have an activist friend who says that even before the war in Iraq increased military funding, one week of the U.S. Military budget could solve world hunger for a year. Come to think of it, 16 billion doesn't seem too bad compaired 450 billion in military spending for 2007. Maybe it would be more responsible to spend Nasa'a funding on the people of earth, but I'm not so sure that if the money cut would actually go towards suffering people.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Jun 14, 2006 7:57 pm
Many technological advancements and inventions are made in the space program. Bar codes, fire resistant fabric, smoke detectors, joysticks, space pens (that write upside down or in 0 gravity), satellite tv, GPS, infrared thermometers, etc... were all originally used by NASA or developed with technology invented in the space program.
I think any kind of knowledge gained in space exploration is beneficial. What could be more important than understanding the universe we inhabit?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Jun 24, 2006 11:08 am
It cost a lot of money. Yes. However, the potenital to learn more about our planet through the exploration of others is too great an opportunity to throw away.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Jul 03, 2006 10:28 am
yeh, they are trying to but they can't figure out how to have babies in space. there was a documentry on the inventions how we can stay fit in space with no gravity. i think it was on the discovery channel of national geographics look it up
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Jul 09, 2008 10:58 am
Sorry to necro the topic ...
I love learning about the celestial, and (in a selfish way) I would hate to delay any new discoveries, but this is a difficult question.
No one denies that there are problems on our own planet, and vastly unexplored areas. For instance, currently we've only explored 3% of Earth's oceans. eek Somehow, it seems prudent to understand a bit more of one's own planet before presuming to explore others.
Screaming Wombat, I disagree that "There is only so much that can be done on our planet, sooner or later some of us will have to leave." I believe that the vast majority of problems on our planet can be solved without loss of rights, etc. To accept that we will need to find more resources than Earth can produce seems a lot like accepting that we're somehow entitled to use up one habitat and then pick up and move on to another.
Again, part of me would truly hate to see a slow down (or even halt) in space exploration, but the greater part of me would hate even more to see us colonize Mars before we've fixed colonization problems on Earth. Once we learn how to properly share Earth, I'll whole-heartedly embrace new ventures into space. 3nodding
|
|
|
|
|
|
Romantic Conversationalist
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Oct 18, 2008 2:29 pm
It has to be put into perspective. What's being spent on NASA is pocketchange compared to what's being squandered on the war in Iraq.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Nov 18, 2008 7:49 pm
Boadicia It has to be put into perspective. What's being spent on NASA is pocketchange compared to what's being squandered on the war in Iraq. I agree, not only that but with our army stretched through out the world that costs s**t loads of money, lets not skimp on science there are a lot of other areas where we could be saving money with out having to cut back on exploration.
|
|
|
|
|
|
M u s t a n g Vice Captain
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat May 30, 2009 12:12 pm
M u s t a n g Boadicia It has to be put into perspective. What's being spent on NASA is pocketchange compared to what's being squandered on the war in Iraq. I agree, not only that but with our army stretched through out the world that costs s**t loads of money, lets not skimp on science there are a lot of other areas where we could be saving money with out having to cut back on exploration. Totally agree with you guys!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat May 30, 2009 12:21 pm
Also, here are 2 articles from the DailyGalaxy relevant to this topic:
Will Space Technology Be the Solution to Earth's Future Environment?:
http://www.dailygalaxy.com/my_weblog/2009/05/will-space-tech.html
The "Hawking Solution": Will Saving Humanity Require Leaving Earth Behind?:
http://www.dailygalaxy.com/my_weblog/2007/05/the_hawking_sol.html
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply
