space exploration or not?

[slvri]

come on ppl wat do u think?

[zara]

i think yes it should be explored n get to kno whas out there.
With exploration we get to discover new things which are outta our imaginations ooo...loll

[staceyboy3]

Oh yes definitely!

At the rate humans are reproducing, we will need to expand our colony to the corners of the universe!
...very soon.

[zara]

Oh yes definitely!

At the rate humans are reproducing, we will need to expand our colony to the corners of the universe!
...very soon.

LMAO!
buh earth is just enough

[staceyboy3]

LMAO!
buh earth is just enough

The earth is just enough for us to survive.

But it won't be enough for your great grandchildren... I bet.

And that's why we need spaceships... and fast!

[O.T.13.]

NOT

why not? cuz we got plenty of problems over here, why are we supposed to waste money taking pictures of mars and the moon when we got a gazillion ppl without water or adequate nutrition? dont temme that bs about finding water on moon, its still too much money

[staceyboy3]

NOT

why not? cuz we got plenty of problems over here, why are we supposed to waste money taking pictures of mars and the moon when we got a gazillion ppl without water or adequate nutrition? dont temme that bs about finding water on moon, its still too much money

Point taken. It is a lot of money, and it would be better to use more money on the millions of people without water.

But the world is one day going to run out of fresh water and resources, not to mention how much damage we are doing to the earth. It's not a bad idea to go looking for a planet or moon capable of sustaining life.

[O.T.13.]

Point taken. It is a lot of money, and it would be better to use more money on the millions of people without water.

But the world is one day going to run out of fresh water and resources, not to mention how much damage we are doing to the earth. It's not a bad idea to go looking for a planet or moon capable of sustaining life.

lol good points
on the other hand, we can keep on messing up earth and let our grandchildren carve their own life! you dont see us crying cuz our great grandfathers killed the dinosaurs and mamoths now are we 

[Alpha]

Yes, I agree. Good point. 
Space exploration consumes much more of our resources.

But tell me one thing, do not things like the cinema, games and sports gulp in much more money?Are these not wastes? Apart from leisure and pleasure, what do we get from them? If money is to be moved to solve pressing socio-economic problems like poverty, famine and over-population, shouldn't it be removed from these activities first?


Poverty and famine exist and will continue to exist-- not because we have too few resources, more money can always be issued, but because in the first place we have too many mouths to feed (over-population) and in the second place, some people "live to eat", wealth is not distributed equitably (most said poor countries are infested with corruption).

Space exploration is a huge investment, I don't deny. But it's a productive one. Anyway, only developed countries-- those who can afford the money-- dare to invest in aeronautics. The NASA does not snatch away food and potable water from the poor to fill its fuel tanks. Besides, space stations are collective investments-- rich countries like the USA, Japan, Russia and others group together to spread risks, especially financial ones.


How about wars? And the military? Are these productive? Or rather destructive? How much money do we lose in them? It's better to ask how much money is left after?? LOL

Man-driven problems, are they to be alleviated, if not solved, must be done with rationale. The solution does not lie in our pockets, but in our brains. If poverty is to be lessened, it's by starting to diminish corruption and wars. And money helps to aggravate these two factors.


Were there no space exploration, we would still be living in delusion. We would still believe the Sun revolves around the Earth; night would be when the Snake God swallowed the Sun God Ra; no satellite-- no internet, no television, no mass communication; there would be no universe at all; no notion of time; the moon would be a big mass of cheese suspended on the sky; eclipses would be bad omens, we would be doing unreasonable sacrifices to please the Gods (can you imagine your skin being plucked?); we would never understand phenomena like Global Warming and we could even be destroying our planet in a better way.

Maybe then... we would be like our mammoth-killing forefathers, ignorant beings who still believe the Earth is flat and would be wasting a whole lifetime trying to get to the extreme of our 'flat' Earth...


Nice idea the debate, carry on  !

[master786]

watch 2012 nd the day after tommrow

both sides of the arguemnts get ana nswer there

[Alpha]

I can give you the answer now... Two films will take up 3 hours! Take just 3 seconds, and think. 

We need a satellite to watch it!!   

So, we also need to have explored space...

[master786]

stil lwatch the movies they are pretty good

and about exploring space.... ppl shud do it not only bcoz of the reasons tht make it more esssential to carry out but also do it just for the hell of it ...
humans are a curious race :p we need to know stuff happening arnd us jsut because its HAPPENING :d

[Alpha]

We are living... I need to know why we live.... Keeping religious views aside... 

[master786]

we are living bcoz we dont hav ny other choice

if we were thrown into Mars from before... who knows .... we myt hav adjusted to the atmosphere there :O
i guess its too late now

[O.T.13.]

Yes, I agree. Good point. 
Space exploration consumes much more of our resources.

But tell me one thing, do not things like the cinema, games and sports gulp in much more money?Are these not wastes? Apart from leisure and pleasure, what do we get from them? If money is to be moved to solve pressing socio-economic problems like poverty, famine and over-population, shouldn't it be removed from these activities first?

Yea thats ryte, i agree with that actually, cutting down movie productions but not sports. Movies might look fancy and whatnot, but nothing is more vivid and detailed as a nice novel. As for the sports, it might cost a lot, but I think it is worth it. The entertainment might be the main thing, but you also need to keep in mind that the money gained from television rights and stadium tickets is no tsimply stuffed into the owner's and copyright holders' pockets; a lot of that money is gone into developing youth programs, where players (just look at Nigerian and Ivorian players, the country itself might not be so rich, but when the once-poor players start getting rich, they invest their money into developing athletic academies, which takes away kids who don't even get proper education into something more useful. When these players start getting rich, it is not a great surprise when you see them spending heavy amounts of money into the education of their children, which on the not-so-long term (comon, its only one generation )will raise the average education level of that country. Aeuronautics might be productive, but they consume waaaay too much money than any other field, compare the costs of all cinema businesses in the USA, Europe, and Japan to the costs of Aeronautics in just one of them, i am sure it will not be anywhere near the cinemas. Yes, actors are overpaid, and yes, that should be cut down too, but not by as much the the spending on taking pics of Mars (man that sounds so touristic )


Poverty and famine exist and will continue to exist-- not because we have too few resources, more money can always be issued, but because in the first place we have too many mouths to feed (over-population) and in the second place, some people "live to eat", wealth is not distributed equitably (most said poor countries are infested with corruption).

Yups, very true, which is why more money should be spent on education and civil engineering than anything else (referring to Africa especially). And hey, if people wanna "live to eat" then simple, raise the prices of the fancy foods, oh wait they're already high, damn. Yes, corruption, main reason why everyone's going all over Canada US and Europe lol, but yea.

Space exploration is a huge investment, I don't deny. But it's a productive one. Anyway, only developed countries-- those who can afford the money-- dare to invest in aeronautics. The NASA does not snatch away food and potable water from the poor to fill its fuel tanks. Besides, space stations are collective investments-- rich countries like the USA, Japan, Russia and others group together to spread risks, especially financial ones.

Well as far as the moon goes then fine, i guess it won't hurt if they go there, but TRYING, to reach Mars, TRYING to find alternative life forms, this all seems like money gone to waste, just cuz ur rich doesnt mean you have the ryte to throw your money on the floor, or space


How about wars? And the military? Are these productive? Or rather destructive? How much money do we lose in them? It's better to ask how much money is left after?? LOL

I don't think anyone will disagree on this, wats should not be hapennin in the first place. If, nevertheless, money is still wasted on weaponary, does that mean we're supposed to waste even more money on space?

Man-driven problems, are they to be alleviated, if not solved, must be done with rationale. The solution does not lie in our pockets, but in our brains. If poverty is to be lessened, it's by starting to diminish corruption and wars. And money helps to aggravate these two factors.

Brains is the most essential thing, but without resources, which cost money. Sure, we can teach people for low costs, but applying this education will be impossible without resources; we can't build a villa if we havent got cement now can we


Were there no space exploration, we would still be living in delusion. We would still believe the Sun revolves around the Earth; night would be when the Snake God swallowed the Sun God Ra; no satellite-- no internet, no television, no mass communication; there would be no universe at all; no notion of time; the moon would be a big mass of cheese suspended on the sky; eclipses would be bad omens, we would be doing unreasonable sacrifices to please the Gods (can you imagine your skin being plucked?); we would never understand phenomena like Global Warming and we could even be destroying our planet in a better way.
This is all true (duh), and yes you me and everyone will not be able to survive without these. But now you mentioned global warming and whatnot, now wouldn't it be more sensible if money is spent until these effects are totally under control, THEN we might move on to the next phenomenon? Or are we just gonna be identifying more and more catastrophes and just sit down and watch em hit us?

Maybe then... we would be like our mammoth-killing forefathers, ignorant beings who still believe the Earth is flat and would be wasting a whole lifetime trying to get to the extreme of our 'flat' Earth...

Yea true lol, but again, we must get rid of the problems on hand before moving on to the next one 

Nice idea the debate, carry on  !