| Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Liberator 1
Gallente
Tribal Liberation Force
   |
Posted - 2008.09.10 07:52:00 -
[1]
Edited by: Liberator 1 on 10/09/2008 07:52:10
There should be a list of problems that we, humanity should attempt to solve. It starts like this:
1. Stop people dying from lack of water/clean water.
2. Feed the starving.
3. Stop people from dying of entirely preventable diseases like TB,flu,diarrhoea etc.
.
.
345. Go back to the moon.
.
.
.
567. Go to Mars.
.
.
894. Build a giant particle accelerator to answer a question most people don't care about much less understand so some scientists can go 'Oh yeah, thats why we have mass then.'
We are doomed, not because it will make a black hole and destroy the Earth, but because we are too stupid to save ourselves.
-------------------------------------------
ôIf you are in a spaceship that is traveling at the speed of light, and you turn on the headlights, does anything happen?ö
------------------------- |
Liberator 1
Gallente
Tribal Liberation Force
|
Posted - 2008.09.10 07:57:00 -
[2]
And whilst I'm on the subject, I have some questions, will the LHC provide me with :
1. Flying cars?
2. Free sports channels ?
3. More money?
4. Better weather ?
5. Free intergalactic travel ?
4. Doughnuts?
No it f&(*^ing won't.
-------------------------------------------
ôIf you are in a spaceship that is traveling at the speed of light, and you turn on the headlights, does anything happen?ö
------------------------- |
Nyakk Tradetard
|
Posted - 2008.09.10 07:58:00 -
[3]
oh c'mon. without diseases, without hunger and death everywhere earth would be overpopulated in a short amount of time. we wouldnt have reasons to fight, we wouldnt have reasons to invent, we wouldnt have reasons to find other habitable planets.
i think the op is very shortminded and would need a proper thinkthrough
|
Abrazzar
|
Posted - 2008.09.10 07:59:00 -
[4]
The problem here is money, not the LHC. If we get rid of money the issue is solved.
--------
Ideas for: Mining
|
KappaRho
The Golden Goat
|
Posted - 2008.09.10 08:19:00 -
[5]
 Originally by: Abrazzar
The problem here is money, not the LHC. If we get rid of money the issue is solved.
WTB: Everything you have. My offer.. 0 ISK.
|
The TX
Gallente
Pulsar Combat Supplies
Alternative Realities
|
Posted - 2008.09.10 08:20:00 -
[6]
Originally by: Abrazzar
The problem here is money, not the LHC. If we get rid of money the issue is solved.
It's be like Star Trek: First Contact - Picard tells us there's no money in the future!!!!!!!!!!!11111
--------------------
[Signature]
[/Signature]
|
Shadowsword
COLSUP
Tau Ceti Federation
|
Posted - 2008.09.10 08:21:00 -
[7]
Getting rid of money would be counterproductive since it would remove the referencial for direct trading, as well as kill most jobs not producing anything material, and gouging would become the norm.
Now, about science, there's two kind of it:
- Fundamental science, with no direct application, just to increase your knownledge. The LHC is part of it.
- Applied science, the one that improve your life. But guess what? Without fundamental science, there is no applied science...
------------------------------------------
|
shaqarava
Amarr
24th Imperial Crusade
|
Posted - 2008.09.10 08:24:00 -
[8]
4 or so billion isn't actually alot of money when you consider the amount of nations taking part and the amount of money governments are spending elsewhere in their budget, such as defense. I read somwhere that the LHC costs around the same as the USS Ronald Reagan. If you want to complain about a waste of money then complain about that, why criticize the cost of the LHC when the US could cure world hunger with its defense budget?
And if you don't like how the work being done benefits science then think of the LHC as a giant piece of contemporary art, art being intrinsically useless in itself.
|
Reven Cordelle
Caldari
School of Applied Knowledge
|
Posted - 2008.09.10 08:26:00 -
[9]
The LHC's manufacture was started 13 years ago.
Why didn't you whine then?
And whilst we're on the subject of the LHC being a waste of money, what the hell is professional sport.
"oh yeah we pay you like.. millions a year to just hoof about a ball. Not really doing anything.. but its cool. We seem to value you that much over what else we could be spending millions on."
The people dying from a lack of water are only dying because we refuse to let them learn to survive. We constantly power them with handouts so they never will learn to fend for themselves.
"These people have to walk THREE MILES to the nearest well."
Move your village to the damn well then?
If they die, well ****. Thats ****ing natural selection I think.
Feed the starving? Uh. Right okay, So they don't want to move to land where they can actually grow something so we should just keep giving them handouts too, yeah they're arent going to develop either, handouts for all!
There are Tribes in the most remote places of the earth that have learnt to survive for centuries, a testament to the use of survival instinct and basic common ****ing sense. They don't need handouts, in fact they "hide from the white man" just because they've got their shit dialled.
Disease controls population.
Curiosity drives the human race and therefore it'll put obscene amounts of money into finding answers, unfortunately it'll also put a lot of money into some incredibly pointless causes.
Since curiosity is more important than saving people too idle to help themselves, we built the LHC.
If the LHC somehow destroys the world and everything in it, the point of the human race is complete. To destroy itself and everything around it.
|
Mutabae
|
Posted - 2008.09.10 08:29:00 -
[10]
Personally, plumbing the depths of the Universe sounds pretty laudable to me.
Fact: there will always be starving people. Don't like science budgets? The LHC didn't cost *anything* in terms of it's reach. So shut up.
Ban warfare (lol) if you want to save cash.
|
Liberator 1
Gallente
Tribal Liberation Force
|
Posted - 2008.09.10 08:32:00 -
[11]
*Shakes fist at crazy people!
In the battle of good causes if its LHC vs Feeding the Starving, Feeding the Starving wins !
Geddit ?
-------------------------------------------
ôIf you are in a spaceship that is traveling at the speed of light, and you turn on the headlights, does anything happen?ö
------------------------- |
Nomakai Delateriel
Amarr
Shadow Company
G00DFELLAS
|
Posted - 2008.09.10 08:33:00 -
[12]
The problem with money is that you don't solve all sorts of issues by throwing money at it (you need small funds and TIME to find a solution and then perhaps that solution requires a lot of money), and in some cases where it needs money you don't have people willing to spend money on it.
In general that means that "Why are you spending money on this when there is still AIDS/Cancer?" statements are dumb and counter-productive. Some of our best solutions to important problems have been discovered as a side-effect from pursuing "silly" projects like the LHC, or going to the moon or discovering more effective ways of changing a persons status from "alive" to "dead".
______________________________________________
-My respect can not be won, only lost. It's given freely and only grudgingly withdrawn. |
Liberator 1
Gallente
Tribal Liberation Force
|
Posted - 2008.09.10 08:35:00 -
[13]
Edited by: Liberator 1 on 10/09/2008 08:34:55
Originally by: Nomakai Delateriel
The problem with money is that you don't solve all sorts of issues by throwing money at it (you need small funds and TIME to find a solution and then perhaps that solution requires a lot of money), and in some cases where it needs money you don't have people willing to spend money on it.
In general that means that "Why are you spending money on this when there is still AIDS/Cancer?" statements are dumb and counter-productive. Some of our best solutions to important problems have been discovered as a side-effect from pursuing "silly" projects like the LHC, or going to the moon or discovering more effective ways of changing a persons status from "alive" to "dead".
Name one. Directly.
-------------------------------------------
ôIf you are in a spaceship that is traveling at the speed of light, and you turn on the headlights, does anything happen?ö
------------------------- |
Sara Alexandra
|
Posted - 2008.09.10 08:37:00 -
[14]
Originally by: Liberator 1
Edited by: Liberator 1 on 10/09/2008 08:34:55
Originally by: Nomakai Delateriel
The problem with money is that you don't solve all sorts of issues by throwing money at it (you need small funds and TIME to find a solution and then perhaps that solution requires a lot of money), and in some cases where it needs money you don't have people willing to spend money on it.
In general that means that "Why are you spending money on this when there is still AIDS/Cancer?" statements are dumb and counter-productive. Some of our best solutions to important problems have been discovered as a side-effect from pursuing "silly" projects like the LHC, or going to the moon or discovering more effective ways of changing a persons status from "alive" to "dead".
Name one. Directly.
Transistors
|
Liberator 1
Gallente
Tribal Liberation Force
|
Posted - 2008.09.10 08:39:00 -
[15]
If you are talking about Velcro, Teflon or The Parker Pen Refill, then yes we got them from going to the moon, but if you think that stuff not sticking to your pan is important then you're just barking bloody mad!
It cost how much to go to the moon? And you got what for it ? Pens that write upside down?
-------------------------------------------
ôIf you are in a spaceship that is traveling at the speed of light, and you turn on the headlights, does anything happen?ö
------------------------- |
Benco97
Gallente
The Star League
|
Posted - 2008.09.10 08:43:00 -
[16]
You see, the problem is that items 1 and 2 will never be solved.
You see all those people WHO DO NOTHING THEIR ENTIRE LIVES AND GET CONSTANTLY GIVEN STUFF BY US? Well it may seem like their lives suck to us but to them their lives are awesome, there is no incentive at all to better THEMSELVES while we give them everything they need.
We've been helping these places for years and years and years and they still need "just one tap to save them all" but guess what.. when that tap breaks they need another and another and another and another ad infinitum because there is no need for anything to be solved when they are handed everything.
I have no problem whatsoever with "Saving" people but I think it needs to be done in such a way as to advance them and make them self sufficient as quickly as possible instead of just giving them handouts for 80 years.
Originally by: P'uck
You're a DUMBASS - bold italic underline at the VERY LEAST.
|
Nomakai Delateriel
Amarr
Shadow Company
G00DFELLAS
|
Posted - 2008.09.10 08:45:00 -
[17]
Edited by: Nomakai Delateriel on 10/09/2008 08:46:48
Originally by: Liberator 1
Name one. Directly.
Digital Image Processing.
Originally developed by NASA to enhance photographs of the moon the technology has been used in many fields, particularly in medicine (Magnetic Resonance Imaging for example).
Considering that every hospital with an MRI conducts at least several scans per day it has probably saved thousands (if not millions) of lives by now (saved cancer patients, given us vital insight into diseases like Alzheimers etc).
P.S: And no. NASA did not invent Velcro or Teflon. Teflon for example was invented in 1938. However they moved those products out of a life in obscurity and into the limelight)
______________________________________________
-My respect can not be won, only lost. It's given freely and only grudgingly withdrawn. |
shaqarava
Amarr
24th Imperial Crusade
|
Posted - 2008.09.10 08:45:00 -
[18]
Not to mention in certain places corruption is rife, so even if we poured 4 billion into one country there's no guarantee all that money will make it to the starving, and instantly injecting money doesn't give instant results.
|
Taua Roqa
Minmatar
Groping Hand Social Club
|
Posted - 2008.09.10 08:50:00 -
[19]
how come the OP gas a computer to post on, sending that money to africa would have been a better use surely?
|
Liberator 1
Gallente
Tribal Liberation Force
|
Posted - 2008.09.10 08:53:00 -
[20]
And transistors was 1925.
My point is that its silly spending money on crazy science toys when people are dying and that problem is entirely solvable.
-------------------------------------------
ôIf you are in a spaceship that is traveling at the speed of light, and you turn on the headlights, does anything happen?ö
------------------------- |
Reven Cordelle
Caldari
School of Applied Knowledge
|
Posted - 2008.09.10 08:57:00 -
[21]
Originally by: Liberator 1
And transistors was 1925.
My point is that its silly spending money on crazy science toys when people are dying and that problem is entirely solvable.
Why is death a bad thing?
You think saving everyone is the ideal thing to do? If the people in Ethiopia (for example) didnt die by the minute, they'd breed like rabbits, overpopulate and consume a lot of resources.
Overpopulation is a surefire end of the world scenario. A lot of people don't realise that the amount of shit we currently use is in the balance as it is, let alone adding another hundred million people to it.
The best thing we can do in that respect is, quite simply.. let them die for the good of the developed world.
And before you get up my ass saying "Well you clearly think your life is worth more than theirs" ...
Yes. Yes I do. 100%.
|
shaqarava
Amarr
24th Imperial Crusade
|
Posted - 2008.09.10 09:00:00 -
[22]
Originally by: Liberator 1
And transistors was 1925.
My point is that its silly spending money on crazy science toys when people are dying and that problem is entirely solvable.
The point of virtually all the posters here is that no matter how hard you try you cannot completely cure hunger and poverty etc, and that virtually all technology begins from theoretical science which is why the LHC is money well spent and crucial to advancing civilization.
And why are you picking on the LHC, 4 billion is not alot of money, complain about defense budgets or corruption, or the cost of sports entertainment.
|
Liberator 1
Gallente
Tribal Liberation Force
|
Posted - 2008.09.10 09:15:00 -
[23]
Originally by: Reven Cordelle
If the people in Ethiopia (for example) didnt die by the minute, they'd breed like rabbits, overpopulate and consume a lot of resources.
Oh, well thats Ok then.
-------------------------------------------
ôIf you are in a spaceship that is traveling at the speed of light, and you turn on the headlights, does anything happen?ö
------------------------- |
Digital Solaris
|
Posted - 2008.09.10 09:15:00 -
[24]
Originally by: shaqarava
Originally by: Liberator 1
And transistors was 1925.
My point is that its silly spending money on crazy science toys when people are dying and that problem is entirely solvable.
The point of virtually all the posters here is that no matter how hard you try you cannot completely cure hunger and poverty etc, and that virtually all technology begins from theoretical science which is why the LHC is money well spent and crucial to advancing civilization.
And why are you picking on the LHC, 4 billion is not alot of money, complain about defense budgets or corruption, or the cost of sports entertainment.
Or what came with capitalism, greed.
|
Benco97
Gallente
The Star League
|
Posted - 2008.09.10 09:16:00 -
[25]
Originally by: Liberator 1
Originally by: Reven Cordelle
If the people in Ethiopia (for example) didnt die by the minute, they'd breed like rabbits, overpopulate and consume a lot of resources.
Oh, well thats Ok then.
So then what is your solution, a new dark age for the good of mankind?
Originally by: P'uck
You're a DUMBASS - bold italic underline at the VERY LEAST.
|
shaqarava
Amarr
24th Imperial Crusade
|
Posted - 2008.09.10 09:27:00 -
[26]
I'm also curious as to where the OP draws the line. Say we cure world hunger, what about raising standards of living, giving money to people they they can afford common necessities of life, like a tv, a gas cooker, a computer, winter heating, a bed, enough money to buy nice food and not just the bare essentials. Where do you draw the line?
There's always going to be something that can be improved upon, if we focused on the quality of human life all the time and not focus on advancing our knowledge then we'd get no where. Investments in science, however, have created methods to solve problems such as world hunger, like Gm crops, whilst advancing human civilization in other areas. It's not about just focusing on one thing all the time, it's about balancing it all.
|
Liberator 1
Gallente
Tribal Liberation Force
|
Posted - 2008.09.10 09:35:00 -
[27]
I'll tell you exactly where I draw the line.
Big problems require big solutions, from the government of countries. Once you eliminate water and food poverty, a country can maybe begin to stand on its feet and take its place in the world, freeing it from dependance on charity from other nations.
I re-iterate my point: If a govt wants to do things with lots of money, there are priorities above chasing around after some hypothetical "God particle".
-------------------------------------------
ôIf you are in a spaceship that is traveling at the speed of light, and you turn on the headlights, does anything happen?ö
------------------------- |
Myrhial Arkenath
Ghost Festival
|
Posted - 2008.09.10 09:37:00 -
[28]
Edited by: Myrhial Arkenath on 10/09/2008 09:38:44
Quote:
Everyday examples of particle accelerators are those found in television sets and X-ray generators. Low-energy accelerators such as cathode ray tubes and X-ray generators use a single pair of electrodes with a DC voltage of a few thousand volts between them. In an X-ray generator, the target itself is one of the electrodes. A low-energy particle accelerator called an ion implanter is used in the manufacture of integrated circuits.
From Wikipedia. Asuming you have had a TV or computer before the LCD screen age, you've used one, which makes it pretty hypocrit to say this research is useless :\
Diary of a pod pilot |
Deviana Sevidon
Gallente
Panta-Rhei
United Front Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.09.10 09:39:00 -
[29]
Edited by: Deviana Sevidon on 10/09/2008 09:41:29
Besides people like the above moaner, do not understand how science works.
If people a century ago focused only on what was back then, considered useful areas of science, then we would have no computers, no TV and our overall life expectancy would be much shorter.
The people that really make progress are those that give us further understanding how the universe works.
Searching for the Higgs Boson might not sound useful at first, but what if it furthers our understanding and one day might lead to new sources of energy or the understanding of dark matter, might lead to further understanding of gravity. Maybe even give us the ability to create gravity or anti-gravity fields.
Or it might not. We will never know before we tried.
Edit:
Oh and Governments are full of Idiots. Governments trying to improve scientific research, usually achieve the opposite effect.
There are countless examples in history about this.
|
Flash Bombardo
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2008.09.10 09:42:00 -
[30]
Dark matter my ass.
Their maths has a hole in it that they have to fill with invisible,indetectable matter ?
Sounds like bad maths to me.
2+2=5 therefore there is a dark number ? Wot ?
|
| |
|
| Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |