Ugh, both James Bodn and Annovis missed the point completely. Ignore Rob's asinine comments for the time being.

I have no problem with scientific research! Go ahead and learn about black holes and deep sea fish and all that nonsense! Good! We might get something from it.

But don't try to glorify it too much. There *are* better uses of time and money. Yes, we should still research these things, but we should attempt to divert some of the resources spent on long term discoveries (which may not even yield any beneficial results) into more immediate, useful ends: improved public education, improved transportation systems (faster and cleaner), more accessible medical care.

If we inprove education, for instance, guess what happens? We get more astropycisists! Yay! And more physicians! And more dentists (which Britain desperately needs). And more professors, businessmean, engineerrs, programmers, artists, lawyers and politicians (wait, I am trying to support my argument, scratch those last two). Whereas if we pile on money to our current scientists and neglect education, everyone loses in the long run.

Everything you mentioned involved putting money into science.

Damn, you're thick!

I HAVE NO PROBLEM WITH FUNDING SCIENCE!

I do , however, have a problem with trying to "build a future" when our present is screwed up. Fix the current problems, then fix future problems, and make improvements.

That's what she said last night. >.>

[QUOTE='That one guy who doesn't care about science'] I HAVE NO PROBLEM WITH FUNDING SCIENCE!

I do , however, have a problem with trying to "build a future" when our present is screwed up. Fix the current problems, then fix future problems, and make improvements.[/QUOTE]

I agree. But I think we're doing enough. But that's just me being biased. Cutting funds to science doesn't help the immediate future, really, because then we won't have a future to continue the immediate future.

I do agree there's some stuff that doesn't need money to be spent on. Like babies.

Havn't you ever watched Stargate?

Hey! Welcome to this humble place!

Okay, okay, you guys have convinced me. We should solve all current problems before we work on anything else. Let's see where this line of reasoning takes us. Notwithstanding the old Columbus argument, if everyone believed that the only priority is current problems then we'd still be smarter-than-average apes stuck on the African savannah. Because, you know, we shouldn't be working on exploring or perfecting this newfangled "fire" technology when we still have the problem of being eaten by lions. As long as we're getting eaten by lions, ain't NOBODY gonna work on anything else except a solution to getting eaten by lions.

Then when we figure out a way to stop getting eaten by lions, we'll start trying to cure all our diseases. And only after we no longer have any disease, or hunger, or any problems whatsoever can we start anything else. Too bad that early homo sapiens had no chance of curing cancer.

Dearest Kyle Number Ninety from Canada, have you ever heard of the "strawman" or "slipper slope" fallacies?

I'm just taking the argument to the logical extreme. Slippery slope is fun. Especially when it's a steep hill, and you pour water down it to make a mud slide, and then some kid goes down and flies off the edge into a pile of old rusty metal and starts crying, and then everyone points and laughs.

As far as "strawman" goes, I made one for halloween once and made it look like it was all bloody, and laid it out in the yard with "police line" tape around the "crime scene". That was a good year.

hah

(welcome)

Advancements such as space exploration have more benefits than just exploring space. We've seen a slew of technological advancements that have helped many fields due to NASA's early research. It's not just the space exploration, but the things that come with it. For example, we need strong, efficient propulsion for any kind of effective space travel. Cold fusion, for example. Such a power source would also solve all our energy problems here on Earth.

Not to mention all the societal consequences and chances that could come about through space exploration. Oh, and let's not forget that funding isn't just a giant pool of money. If you spend 15 million on a space project, you aren't taking 15 million away from AIDS research. Different funds come from different places. Also, not everybody can become doctors and solve all our medical problems. Many people will study physics and engineering because they like it. It's not so simple as "let's fix our problems here before moving on."

Oh, let's not forget that we're already INCREDIBLY overpopulated and we NEED to expand SOMEWHERE. Trying to just "solve our existing problems" doesn't work very well when we have more and more and more people to deal with on a daily basis. It could even be argued that the value of human life has become negative with respect to soceity. That is, the more people are born, the worse the overpopulation, and the worse off we are as a people.

Trying to just solve our problems before moving on just isn't going to work. We've had problems for thousands of years, and we always will. Granted, in time, as we develop, those problems would (hopefully) decrease, but they will always be there. If we try to perfect ourselves before moving on, we'll never get anywhere.

Oh, and Hellequin, don't go saying I missed your point. This post is not directed at anyone inparticular. Although it seems that you have a problem with putting ALL our funds into science, which I don't understand, because we don't do that, and never will. I do think funding is lacking, however. I also agree that it isn't the only thing we should be researching, but I see no reason to skimp out because we already "have problems" that we need to fix.

cold fusion....??? *cough-bullsh*-cough*

if(getThingFlags(source) & 0x8){
  do her}
elseif(getThingFlags(source) & 0x4){
  do other babe}
else{
  do a dude}

Joey - welcome to Massassi. Sorry everyone had to crap on your thread.

I really don't want to get involved in the big "Where should government funding go?" argument, as a seperate thread would probably be best for that. I did just want to state that I would prefer government grants go to phycisists to research the workings of the universe rather than pork barrel projects such as the Bridge to Nowhere. Of course, I would also like to have honest politicians with common sense in office. One can dream I guess.

Hi! Welcome to massassi!

The previous 3 pages, although they looked like a debate, were actually greetings!



Oh... no... they werent. They were people derailing this thread horribly.

Welcome