Wasted money?

**SOPEK** · 12-07-11, 12:55 AM

As we all know Politicians are not scientist. Politically speaking science has always been a waste of money. They are in the business of control not education.

for any scientist any mission, project, hypnosis, idea, experiment etc is not a waste of time or money, what they are after is knowledge. Projects like the kepler Project/mission can be consider a waste of money by people that are not really interested in ‘X’ field science or want to play politics.

Which I think is what you (death) are doing. You see we are in debt and want to cut funding or questioning certain project funding. Right?
Or should politicians control and direct science.

**deathgodusmc** · 12-07-11, 06:36 AM

Originally Posted by SOPEK

As we all know Politicians are not scientist. Politically speaking science has always been a waste of money. They are in the business of control not education.

for any scientist any mission, project, hypnosis, idea, experiment etc is not a waste of time or money, what they are after is knowledge. Projects like the kepler Project/mission can be consider a waste of money by people that are not really interested in ‘X’ field science or want to play politics.

Which I think is what you (death) are doing. You see we are in debt and want to cut funding or questioning certain project funding. Right?
Or should politicians control and direct science.

No. What i want is money spent on a different field of science that would enhance this field. As for your second question the bulk of science in any field remotely like this has always been under political control. Thats where the money comes from to do the bulk of it.

**Alundil** · 12-07-11, 07:34 AM

Originally Posted by SOPEK

....for any scientist any mission, project, hypnosis, idea, experiment etc.....

I see what you did there

**Menoske** · 12-07-11, 08:44 AM

All Hail the HypnoToad.

I don't personally see it as a waste, but I'm a part of developing techonlogies to see better/developing technologies to get there aren't mutually exclusive. It's important to identify potential places that we would like to explore, but at the same time if we aren't pursuing the technology to get there then it's pointless.

**chray00** · 12-07-11, 08:52 AM

Originally Posted by deathgodusmc

See but were thinking in oposite directions. You simply can not study it. With current tech its impossible to study. All we can do is take a picture. Invest the money in tech to make something that can actually make the trip. Then use that tech to study it whether it be manned or unmanned probes.

dude, really... Do you really think astrophysicists working in observatories do nothing else than "taking pretty pictures"?... I find this very insulting for them. As I've already said, there's A LOT of things we can figure just by analyzing the light and other forms of radiation emmited by a star/planet/pulsar/whatever the fuck you're studying.

**SOPEK** · 12-07-11, 02:11 PM

Ohh shoot how did I misspelled that. I meant to say hypothesis... Must be tpg autocorrect/auto-spell…we have that right?

:P

Nevertheless all hail HypnoToad

Originally Posted by deathgodusmc

No. What i want is money spent on a different field of science that would enhance this field. As for your second question the bulk of science in any field remotely like this has always been under political control. Thats where the money comes from to do the bulk of it.

Yes I agree they are under political control but to a point and not in the sense they run the place. The only thing they control is a portion of their funding and that’s only because they are to represent the people (people, scientist, military personnel. etc.) sure they can (and do) manipulate and fund certain research but that just playing true politics; getting lobbyist to get politicians to fund your research.

as to where or what project to fund, I think it's only a matter of opinion.

speaking of the Kepler telescope, I think is the first step: to discover earth like planets that can support liquid water and therefore maybe earth life like. When we find the Perfect earth like planet then we will have constant Variables to go by: how far is, where it is and etc. and develop our technology based on those Variables.

kepler is truly not a waste of money.

**DJ Ms. White** · 12-07-11, 02:19 PM

Originally Posted by deathgodusmc

No. What i want is money spent on a different field of science that would enhance this field. As for your second question the bulk of science in any field remotely like this has always been under political control. Thats where the money comes from to do the bulk of it.

I actually agree.

The last time I went to an APS conference, at the key notes speech...all the speaker did was brag about how his program to find out what was at the center of Jupiter had received nearly a billion in funding so far...yeah, everyone not in the field (mainly dominated by nanotech guys) was pretty pissed.

**deathgodusmc** · 12-07-11, 05:42 PM

Originally Posted by chray00

dude, really... Do you really think astrophysicists working in observatories do nothing else than "taking pretty pictures"?... I find this very insulting for them. As I've already said, there's A LOT of things we can figure just by analyzing the light and other forms of radiation emmited by a star/planet/pulsar/whatever the fuck you're studying.

Thats not an exact science so you cant really say there are lots of things we can figure. Now ignoring that and saying we can figure those items out what does it do for us? Im not talking about adding another page into a book. Im talking what does the knowledge give us to advance us? Nothing. Its advancing our knowledge base and thats it. Not that its a bad thing but we have plenty of other shit that would be useful we could be doing.

Those pictures do nothing in getting us any closer to solving a single problem. Research and experiments on technology to get us their however would most likely advance us greatly. As an added bonus that tech would most likely lead to items that would be useful in picture mode.