Columbia Space Shuttle

  • Hey - turns out IRC is out and something a little more modern has taken it's place... A little thing called Discord!

    Join our community @ https://discord.gg/JuaSzXBZrk for a pick-up game, or just to rekindle with fellow community members.

P

Penny

Spenda
Jun 11, 2001
2,472
0
I was watching the news today as lots of us did about the Columbia Space Shuttle, where they play the pictures over and over again of it burning up. Of course, my thoughts are with the families of those on board, it's a terrible tragedy. I'm also concerned for those who will suffer the repercussions, those who will lose their jobs and have lost out.

However, what I can never quite understand is why when something like this happens is it such major headline news when at the same time in other countries there are 100x as many people dying from basic causes such as famine and preventable disease? Why do we stop getting pictures of mothers watching their children succumb to starvation? Is it for some reason less shocking/moving because these people aren't on the same land mass as us?

Perhaps someone could also enlighten me as to what advances are being made through the space program. What are we learning from sending people into space that helps the world as a whole?

I felt it wasn't appropriate to add all this to the end of Wint's thread in the Chit Chat forum - I don't want to take anything away from the people who lost their lives today. My opinion is my opinion and I don't mean to offend anyone by posting this. It's something that makes me feel uncomfortable. I just wondered if anyone else looked at the big picture this way..?
 
yeh i totally agree it's something which bugs me and makes me think just how shallow we all are.

think about if they used all that money for the space exploration to go on food and stuff. it's sick that this doesnt happen. i give to charity as much as i think i can but it aint enough. if our governments joined forces however and eradicated hunger for good.... hmm. millions if not billions of dollars have been wasted when that shuttle burned up, 7 lives were wasted too. but what has it achieved for us. we're so interested in seeing whats "out there" that we're blocking our sight of what is already in front of us.
 
Originally posted by Penny
However, what I can never quite understand is why when something like this happens is it such major headline news when at the same time in other countries there are 100x as many people dying from basic causes such as famine and preventable disease? Why do we stop getting pictures of mothers watching their children succumb to starvation? Is it for some reason less shocking/moving because these people aren't on the same land mass as us?
Click to expand...
The News Companies don´t care about those "minor" problems in the world. Every big bang or kaboom is a big kaboom in their money pocket...
Originally posted by Penny
Perhaps someone could also enlighten me as to what advances are being made through the space program. What are we learning from sending people into space that helps the world as a whole?
Click to expand...
Probably this planet, or what you call "Earth" is a dead planet already? We can´t sit on this planet and wait till somebody will help us, since we aren´t capable to keep this planet alive. Watch the Birth Rate, Population Rate and other important factors, you will notice this Planet is already overpopulated, since our resources are not infinite! (e.g. known OIL resources will last the next 40 years by constant (daily) usage and no new known found oil)
The goal of such Space Missions is to find a way to explore Space (beyond our solar system, but first goal is the red planet, called "Mars").
And since we are "destroying" our planet, we need an other planet to populate and keep mankind alive.
 
Heres a site that lists some of the technologys which have been produced due to the space program:
http://www.thespaceplace.com/nasa/spinoffs.html

It's news headlines because it's a disaster, and it's an unusual one concerning something that a lot of people are enthusiasts over.

People starving etc is unfortunatly an ongoing problem, it's not new, it's not unusual, and people don't want it forced in their faces. You still get the odd tv program covering such issues, and often news reports (and occasionally up in the headlines), and there are adverts asking for donations. I've lost track for example of the number of wells that i've seen built on tv, and who doesn't know the words from the "Give a man a fish.." advert?!
Everyone is already made aware that there are problems like this and have the ability to research them further and/or try and do something to help....if they want to.

Regionally wise? Well the people in the UK are mainly most concerned with the UK, then Europe, and/then places like the US and Austrailia etc... But things still get covered no matter how far, earthquakes, plane crashes, sea disasters, mud slides, floods.... You don't get britain's homeless problems on the news that often do you?

Money is what makes the would goes round, and the majority of it is in the hands of a few. And don't not forget the corrupt leaders in some of these countrys with major poverty issues who rob their country blind and stop aid from getting to who needs it.

Sucks.
 
#1 Sensationalism (I've heard that out of a 30 minute news broadcast, only about 3 minutes isn't sensational type things e.g. crimes)

#2 Perhaps because to some these guys are considered heroes.. and the craft they were flying is worth a couple billion. Although the space program isn't followed anywhere near as much, some do consider astronauts the brave and the like. Many times astronauts are considered to be the best of the best; finishing top in their classes etc. Seven of them at once. Only the second time a space shuttle has lead to disaster. Also it streaked across half of Texas, falling all over the place.

In any event, death is death. Death is sad. All life is equal, therefore you'd think all death is equal. I suppose not.

Anyhow, I don't know where to go from there. Death of those sort of hero/role models being sad isn't a new thing either, but yeah.
 
Who is the biggest hero?

The guy who gets spoon-fed say 2 years of astronaut training, gets to fulfil a dream perhaps of going up in space, the guy who gets millions of dollars thrown their way just so that they can go into a void piece of space, worth very little to mankind.

Or is it the person who raises their child in a half desert somewhere in the third world, living on very little or nothing, walking 10 miles for water everyday and doing everything they possibly can for their kid and family, who often have to go days without food.


HRMPHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!

disclaimer: thats a generalisation im not talking about the space shuttle im just saying any astronaut in general ok
 
Thanks for splitting this off Penny, it's more appropriate to discuss in this forum.

Penny:
I reckon the reason no-one gives a rats ass about deaths from famine, disease etc to the same extent, is that we have absolutely no interest or emotional investment in the people of these other places.

Technology is the thing that enables the modern world: refrigeration, electricity, television, the Internet, all these things started out in the Military and Scientific domain, and yet all of them add to the daily lives of billions of the world.

The loss of the shuttle is sad and terrible, because it carries with it the hopes and dreams of so many people: future experiments into newer, stronger (and safer) materials for aircraft, ultra pure crystals (which can only be made in space) which allow us to study possible new drugs easier. At the moment, people will concentrate on the crew, because of the family's loss. In five years time, most people in the world will know the name Columbia, and very few will remember the crew.

Extase:
If all the money usd on space exploration went on "food and stuff", it would have precisely DICK effect on the problems of the third world.

Despite the amount the UK spends on health and food, we have a population where 1 in 3 will suffer from cancer in their lifetime, TB is reaching alomst epedemic proportions, as many as 4 percent of school children are malnourished due to poor nutrition and so on.

The problems of this world are down to religion and politics, in that order. every nation on the earth which has famine or diease problems, or is crushingly poor, has widespread extremist religion, poor education and corrupt to hell governments.

If you think the west can solve any of the problems of the developing world (or in the case of the really nasty states, *un*developing world) by throwing money at them, you are deluding yourself.

Proph:
Earth is not overpopulated, despite what the racists in the Environmental Movement will tell you.

Earth would be overpopulated if everyone were to live like the USA. With proper management of resources, recycling of materials, using renewable energy, good forestry and fish stock management, etc this Planet can sustain a population of around 12 Billion.

The best solution to population growth? Education and Health Care. In the UK, we have a negative birth rate (more people die than are born, and the population is shrinking) and most families have two kids, a neutral population.

Out in the pig-shit-thick, god-bothering world, the birth rates are astronomical, and the infant mortality rates would make you just weep. Having ten children, and only seeing three of them survive to adulthood is normal.

Extase:
The astronaut is not pampered, but they are iven a chance to do something that a great many of us want to do: fly into space. They may not be heroes to everyone, but they are to me.

And as far as I am concerned, the dirt farmer raising a kid in the boonies is no hero. Why bring a child into an environment like that? I can only think of four reasons:

1) Not educated well enough to know *how* children are conceived, and therefore, really surprised when Mrs Wife pops up pregnant *AGAIN* with *ANOTHER* mouth to feed...

2) Religions tell them not to use contraception, where they haven't already nobbled the government to make sure no contraception is available.

3) Because they want someone to look after them when they are old.

4) purely selfish "we want a child", for social reasons, or simply from self-vanity.

All:
I understand that this is a deeply emotive issue, but really, we as a society have gained so much from the application of science, and it has always had people in the wings complaining that the money wasn't being used on some more mundane need that seemed so pressing at the time.

I know that *I* would not be here if it wasn't for a child incubator, as I was born very premature and needed intensive care for the first weeks of my life. Those only happened as a direct result of the space program, like countless other technical parts of the fabric of our world.

Given the choice, I would spend more on scientific research, including space, and remove charity status from religions and make the scum pay tax to help pay for it.
 
Hmmmmmm if it wasn't for the use of that void piece of space you would hardly know what was going on the world. The fact that you do is due to loads and loads of technology. The fact that the world is such a small place now, is something due to the advances in technology and people with dreams and ambitions pushing those. This happens everywhere, without them you would still be sleeping in dirt, scraping hide and die before you would become 40.

A house to sleep in, your daily bread, health, prosperity, yes spending time in a pub with your mates is something which is the result of many people who did things, persued their ambitions which at the time seemed odd and useless. Its is part of what moves us forward, its what drives this chain of discoveries.

I'm not too bothered about the 7 who lost their lives to be perfectly honest. I lost no sleep over it, since I didn't know them. They knew the risk. But I still respect their ambition and of those who will follow them. Personally I will never even try to get out there in space, since I'm too aware of the risks. I like me beer in the evening chatting, fooling around and stuff.

The amount of money spend on space exploration is to be honest not that much. yes billions, so what? Its a small percentage of the money governments spend on education and healthcare.... Also money is spent to help people who are less fortunate than we are. Providing for food and help underdeveloped countries forward is very very difficult. An awfull amount of money in that area is simply waisted since it never provides for the help it was intended for. Still we should keep pushing and help them. We all give to charity if we can and that is a good thing. Helping eachother is also what helps us forward. Loads of shit going on in the world, just do your bit to make it a better place. But also some respect for those, often lunatics, who persue things that seem useless at first, since it is exactly that that brought us so many good things. Sure technology also gives us grieve when thinking about war and all. But all in all, the benefits of pushing those boundaries outweigh the disadvantages and sacrifices 1 to 10 imo.
 
Originally posted by Lex_Mortis
http://www.osearth.com/resources/wwwproject/

Go to that site and look, it will probably piss everyone off. Because it is possible to make the world a better place with about 1/3 off all the money spent on military stuff.

If only the big countries of the world realise it and do something about it..
Click to expand...

Sorry Lex, that site did piss me off, but not for the reason you think.

It's PACKED F*ING BULLSHIT.

Each of those goals is noble, and would change our world in a spectacular way, but the numbers are complete looney tunes.

The UK's NHS budget is 70 BILLION gbp a year, and the service it provides is good, but patchy, far from perfect, and the nation's health is still poor.

This guy thinks that he can provide primary health care (the most expensive) for 780 Million people for 15 billion, when it costs us 70 Billion for 55 Million people, and we spend much less of GDP on health care than many of our European peers.

And anyway, this is missing the point somewhat.. These nations have military forces, precisely because they don't WANT other people coming in and telling them how to run their country.

What would you do? go to war first? wipe out their army, then rebuild their society?

It didn't seem to work in Afghanistan, did it? They are as pig-shit thick about religion as before, women still have little or nothing in the way of basic rights, and the Heroin is pissing out of the borders towards us like a tide.

I would love to see a more mature world as described on that page. But then I'd like to guess six numbers on a saturday night too, and theres more chance of that happening whilst world politics looks like it does just now.
 
Firstly, the news coverage dedicated to this ...
The famines and terrible quality of life for those around the globe is reported regularly, it doesnt get as dedicated coverage because it is not *new* news. It is something that everyone knows about already. People die everyday from starvation, or malnutrition. We know this already. We have Comic Relief once a year, we have Telethons, we have coffee mornings, we have car boot sales, sponsored bike rides ......
The Shuttle breaking up is new News. It is something the news crews can show images of over and over again. There is investment of time, money, and most importantly hope and pride in the space program. When it fails in such an obvious way, it is news worthy of hours of dedicated broadcasting. Once some time has passed (and that will probably be by now), the famines and homelessness are still there, still regularly reported on.


Secondly, the money invested in NASA, ESA etc, rather than "good causes" in general ....

I think it is a case of balance. Governments have many different things to juggle, Health Care, Tax Collection, Education, etc etc etc, and also scientific advancement. We do not have a "One World Government" New World Order style of oversight (yet!) So we cannot think of global improvement, we have to concern ourselves with local improvement, and then pass some to a global concern like hunger, partly because it is the right thing to do, partly to help our guilt.

As part of the juggling, I dont think there is a huge amount of cash is invested in the space program ... It sounds like a lot heard on its own, but in relation to the amount spent on Health Care, Education etc, its not huge. (I dont have figures to hand, so I suppose this is just my guesswork rather than fact).

Fixing homelessness, malnutrition, or anything else will not happen by throwing money at it. A nation sends cash, supplies, equipment to (for example) Ethiopia, very little gets to the people who need it, the government there takes the rest. Sending more money there will not help. The other option is to remove the Ethiopian government and replace it with something we prefer. We have tried that in Afghanistan .... I am sure there are some improvements since the removal of the Taliban, but it sounds pretty damn scary still! The best we can do is look within our own borders to solve problems, and in comparision, there are few.

I would rather divert the budget that will be burned for going to war with Iraq to cancer research, AIDS awareness, helping the homeless get accomodation. But we dont yet know what the outcome there is, if Hussien is preparing to attack, what then .....
we will need to do something, and that uses cash.

Anyways, I am rambling, I think the point I am trying to make is: We need to juggle budgets, and we have been getting improvements in quality of life and other such advancements from the space program. Money is wasted on far more trivial things (Like the £80,000 desk for the scottish parliament building, or the goddamn building itself!) with no return. Or is wasted by bad management in government controlled services. I would rather see those budgets diverted to "good causes" than that of the space program.
 
Not sure if Wintermute believes that stuff he wrote but it seemed pretty much like shite to me.

For example:

.
It didn't seem to work in Afghanistan, did it? They are as pig-shit thick about religion as before, women still have little or nothing in the way of basic rights, and the Heroin is pissing out of the borders towards us like a tide.
Click to expand...

Apart from the last bit (maybe), that is uninformed crap. It ain't perfect, but it's better.


And of course diverting money would make a difference. Maybe not in the long term but it would certainly stop individual children and others from dying an unpleasant death. Long term solutions will take a change in the way we think. Not in the way other people think, but in the way WE think. We in Europe (and the West generally) seem to think that "others" are responsible for the inequity in the distribution of wealth but all of us are net gainers from this. We have computers, food, houses, jobs, education, beer, afghani heroine even, etc etc. We are all way above average in the wealth stakes.

So what do we do? Pass up some of it so the world can be a fairer place? Do we bollocks. We merely try to get an even bigger share for ourselves. The next biggest DVD player, the next bigger car, the next bigger house, the next fashionable designer drink. And so on. We are all guilty. And a few of us give a few quid a month to some charity or other to salve our consciences.

So do we purposely become poorer to solve "the problem"? I think not. Probably, the best way to increase global wealth and relieve poverty is to completely stop weapons production. The Czechs would go bankrupt but hey! The developed world sells weapons and then complains about the damage they do. It's a funny old world.

When I was younger I was idealistic and optimistic. Worse still, I thought that I could make a difference. Not any more. Now I look after me and mine and salve my conscience every month with sticking plaster for a few unlucky individuals.

Pity really. It could all be so much better.
 
Ok for the UK:

Total spending on space activities: £169.180,000

Of which £ 5,000,000 from MoD

See this link for a total overview

The approximate figure for civil space expenditure by the Government is around £170 million per year, of which about two-thirds is invested in European Space Agency programmes. Half of this is funded by DTI; other Government Departments and Research Councils provide the remainder.

The Government's involvement in space covers the work of many departments and research councils - from weather reports to crop monitoring, geological surveys and space science. The British National Space Centre is the body, which brings all of these programmes together. BNSC liaises with industry and other agencies to ensure that the UK gets the best possible scientific, economic and social benefits from putting space to work. A full detail of the BNSC partnership is available on this site.


Most of ends up (almost 40%) being used for Earth observation stuff. About £ 40,000,000 is spent on science......


40 million......


So what is spent on foreign aid?

About 85 times as much as on science and 20 times as much for the whole 'space' budget

Gordon Brown spoke of the UK's 'moral obligations' to people in poverty when he outlined the overseas aid budget increase in the Government Spending Review. The UK's level of Overseas Development Assistance will increase by £1.5bn to reach £4.9bn by 2005/6.


Edit: typos and stuff
 
Last edited:
Originally posted by Twonko
Not sure if Wintermute believes that stuff he wrote but it seemed pretty much like shite to me.
Click to expand...

Thats because you don't bother to get off your ass and do some research before you open your mouth in public. :P

The Pro-US Northern Alliance are not one *ounce* better than the Taleban with regards to Human Rights. They have:

1) banned cable TV as "immoral"
2) re-instated the Taleban ban on listening to any radio station from outside Afghanistan.
3) intercepted books being sent by international aid organisations to help re-stock the library at Khabul University and burned those deemed inappropriate.
4) beaten women protestors attempting to support "human rights day" to prevent them from marching through Kabul.

and a whole host more besides.

The new regime has, on the other hand, agreed to the construction of several new oil pipelines from the fields of the Southern Former Soviet republics to the north across the country to the Indian Ocean, which is the only reason the United States gave a rats ass about them in the first place.

Originally posted by Twonko
Apart from the last bit (maybe), that is uninformed crap. It ain't perfect, but it's better.
Click to expand...

I keep an eye on the websites of people like RAWA for current news, and reports from inside Afghanistan, and I think I am informed on the subject. Also, according to the guy I know who was previously a political journalist in Khabul, now an Afghan refugee living in Glasgow, things as his family (now living in Khandahar) see them on the ground are not any better.

I know who I choose to believe.

Originally posted by Twonko
We are all guilty.
Click to expand...

No, we are not. we are enjoying the benefits of our ancestors over a period of generations prising power from the hands of the church, initially, then from the hands of the landowners. For all the poisoned view we sometimes have of politics, our lives are generally free and easy, because we have built a society that is compassionate, and rules that prevent politicians from getting, and keeping, too much power. We aint perfect, but when was the last time you got arrested for not going to church on a Sunday?

Originally posted by Twonko
Probably, the best way to increase global wealth and relieve poverty is to completely stop weapons production.
Click to expand...

yeah, just flick the "sell weapons" switch. :rolleyes:

Don't talk Bollocks. How do you think you can get the major weapons producing nations of the world, who can't even agree on the colour of the sky on a good day to agree to simultaneously stop selling weapons?? The only thing we can do (which I think we *should* do) is change our own rules to stop selling weapons to nations that we do not work with (ie, those outside of NATO)

Your view of world politics is just soooo imperialist and western minded, it's verging on paternalism.

The "world" needs to solve it's own problems, not be project managed by a few western governments. We can, and do, provide engineering and financial support in water purification efforts, help set up vaccination programs, and provide both basic food and medicine needs. Until the rest of the world realises that religion is a dead end, and starts to build their legal systems and governments on fundamental princiiples like the UDHR posted at the top of this forum, throwing money at them is simply helping to keep the existing corrupt regimes in power.

The best way to increase global wealth has bugger all to do with trying to run people's countries for them, by giving aid for carefully selected projects, and a lot to do with Moral Foreign Policy, Trading fairly with progressive nations, and not trading at all with those nations who refuse to "get with the program".
 
Hmm, this is by far the most interesting thread I ever read on UTA.
Thank you penny for starting all this, brings out lots of different views from different perspectives. I just hope ppl don't go back to usual stuff insulting each other of ignorance/wisdom/experience and so on.
I would like to talk to a great extent on this matter, but I would guess this is not some kind of conversation that could be done on a forum/thread basis. As a matter of fact, I just had this conversation with a couple of my friends some days ago.
It seems that generally people are divided into 2 camps:

First Camp
ppl that think we owe everything that has been reached so far in humanity, to technology/research/science, and usually ignore social problems, considering them some kind of plague for the not-so-worthy ppl, and blame religion, luck, or incapability. I would tend to call these ppl as idnividuals with a more practical view of the world, from my experience, but that don't bother too much in figuring out causes of problems, and don't really care too much for other human beings, eventhough they might claim so. They can even go to the extent of makin contradictory claims, as in worrying about earth's survival in a longg time from now(new planet habitat etc), when ignoring much bigger problems that require immediate attention, as mentioned on the above threads.(penny, twonko..)
Most ppl on the civilized world belong to this camp, as usually the whole society sytem is built on that base, where the individual's interest/profit governs the social behaviour. Going along more this path would lead us into interesting philosophical/pshychological fields, beyound this scope, anyone interested could have correspondence with me on this matter :)

Second Camp
ppl that think allmost all the money spent on technology/science/research is money wasted. Their general view is that most of the social problems in this world are a result of civilized world not caring about 3rd world countries, and putting a stop to weapon production, spending all the money on social reforms/charity purposes and similar things would put an end to these problems. I would call these ppl idealist in a way, because a lot of times they fail to see some of the practical issues that arise if such solutions were put into practice. Winter/Mughi correctly stated some of them, and some previous tries have shown similar results. Communism, Socialism or Totalitarian systems usually tend to arise from this camp's views, and what they usually lack the most, is a correct economical model: the practical aspect of a society. Hence, most of the times the ppl with these views end up in a pessimistic pool of individual that after failed attempts think there's no real solution at all, or to a passive stand where in theory they are eager to argue their points, but in realilty don't really do anything at all.

Now, to my personal stand on this matter.
Coming from a third-world-alike country, and now living in the stereotype of the civilized country, I would say I have seen both sides, yet I wouldnt dare to say I've seen the worst, or the best in that matter.
I tend to stay between the two camps, or maybe in a third camp ;)
I completely disagree with points from the first camp such as:
"we have built a society that is compassionate", "No, we are not (guilty)" "Religion is to be blamed", "we have absolutely no interest or emotional investment in the people of these other places" "If all the money used on space exploration went on "food and stuff", it would have precisely DICK effect on the problems of the third world" etc.
Yet a agree with issues such as, poor education, inability to bring ppl to a common purpose, corruption, politics are not somth that cann be addressed really quicky with just an amount or money given or some other kind of help.
On the other hand, I completely agree with points from the second camp such as:
"we're so interested in seeing whats "out there" that we're blocking our sight of what is already in front of us", "we can't ignore/accept the present state of crimes/poverty/deaths as a simple reality that cannot be dealt with", "egoism, individualism and profit should not be the sublime motivation in how a society works" etc.

My solution?...
I would not think of myself as capable enough to give a real solution to this, (not yet at least ;) ) but I coul make some comments. It would take way to long to express my full opinion on a solution, so I will just point out some of the most important features. IMO, we need a change in the whole system alltogether. This change should be in the economical model first, then social. For this, a personal change in the way we think, on a psychological/spiritual level is required. Yet this change cannot be abrupt, and the present situation requires use of the current tools. IMO, a totalitarian system could be needed, to take care of quick disposal of biggest causes of problems, as cited above.
Education, should be way much more important than it is, and it should not reflect the views of an egoist, personal-profit driven society. Sacrifices are to be made, and ppl need to accept them.
Human rights, freedom of expression and the likes, need to be incorporated in the system, to the extent of giving it a utilitarian limit.
There's way too many other things, and each of these points needs to be developed on full for it to make a lot of sense, but this is not the time or place to do that.
Also, there are issues with implementing of each of the points I mentioned, and some of them can be dealt with, some maybe not..I'm welcome to suggestions

I won't go anymore longer, because it won't server a purpose, once I lose your attention :) Sorry for any misunderstandings, or confusion I might have made.

Just wanted to say thanks if u did read everything, I'm open to suggestions as I said, and keep it up with these discussions :)
 
Well it's good to see that this thread has sparked interesting debate. I don't wanna argue with anyone on it though cos i just wanted to voice my somewhat strong opinions. Though i have read the replies... be better if i don't reply.
 
An interesting post..

I suspect that the vast majority of the population live between the two, and simply do not care about anything beyond their day to day... Until asked for an opinion down the pub, of course.

Personally, I feel that "spiritual" aspects have no place in any society. They are a throw back to caveman past, and will, as the species moves on, be remembered as something of a big joke.

What I think is desperately needed is an acceptable moral framework, devoid of religion.

After all, how can we develop a peaceful world, when all the moral systems are based on retribution? You do not kill your fellow man because you will go to hell or you will reincarnate in a lower form, and be set back, rather than the moral reason that most people come round to: because it is simply wrong to do so.

Base laws and morality on the simple respect for human life, and everything else flows from it. Base your laws on who has the better imaginary friend, and we are screwed...

Suggested reading for anyone is "Godless Morality" by Richard Holloway, the former episcopalian bishop of Edinburgh...

(and go for it extase, this has all been good natured enough that no-one seems to be getting offended... )
 
Hi Squirrel #2 :wave: Somemore interesting points you have raised...

Second Camp
ppl that think allmost all the money spent on technology/science/research is money wasted. Their general view is that most of the social problems in this world are a result of civilized world not caring about 3rd world countries, and putting a stop to weapon production, spending all the money on social reforms/charity purposes and similar things would put an end to these problems. I would call these ppl idealist in a way, because a lot of times they fail to see some of the practical issues that arise if such solutions were put into practice.
Click to expand...

Well, I'm not against the space program, nor do I think that money spent on science is money wasted. If it wasn't for science, we wouldn't have the means to take aid to underdeveloped countries, we wouldn't even be aware of their need in the first place.

I just wanted to ask why? Why do seven western lives take precedence over the hundreds and thousands who lose their lives every day in these third world countries? It's not just because they were astronauts or because of sensationalism or because of the money involved, it's because so many of us in the developed world are still so very uneducated and ignorant. We have no concept of how our fellow man lives in these places and more often than not we turn our backs because we think we can't make a difference. We invent invisible western problems to occupy our minds: "Oh shit I'm £100 overdrawn and I can't buy that suede coat I saw the other day, my sister is squabbling with her bf - not that I like him anyway - and my Mum's inviting us all round for dinner and oh crap I better go down to the doctors and get signed off work with stress, especially as I'm a teacher and I'm so hard done by, I might have to get a hatchback instead of a saloon GOD FORBID!!!!!"

The future of the world and mankind is in our hands, and if we all take the attitude that nothing can be done nothing will be done. I have to agree with squirrel, education is the key. Think big. If there are a few of us free thinkers who can post threads like this on UT forums, there are so many more everywhere else then perhaps one day if we educate the generations to come we can eradicate - to an extent - unnecessary suffering and in turn ease our consciences.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back