Page 1 of 1

Re: James Webb Telescope

Posted: Sun Dec 26, 2021 2:21 pm
by The Aquila
Surely there are better things on this planet to spend the money on?

Re: James Webb Telescope

Posted: Sun Dec 26, 2021 3:35 pm
by Devil
As a scientist, I would state that the more we learn and understand the universe around us, the better. As a member of the race of humankind, I would agree with you more than 10,000% of the time and I do believe that the money could be better spent.

Re: James Webb Telescope

Posted: Sun Jan 09, 2022 1:46 pm
by Devil
Increase our knowledge of the universe? Maybe, but to what end, to what benefit? Benefit mankind in the future? Maybe, but doubtfully. Knowledge for knowledge's sake? Again, I question whether mankind will benefit from seeing a bit closer to the big bang. Mankind would benefit more and better by looking after the gas we breathe in and trying to bring it closer back to where it should be. You do realise, don't you, that we are in the process of reducing the pH of the world we live in? This may be very good for cosmetic manufacturers but what percentage of the world population regularly uses man-made cosmetics? But there are more people likely to benefit from cosmetics than from the knowledge that the universe may or may not contain forms of energy previously unknown to us, but resulting from the big bang zillions of years ago.

Re: James Webb Telescope

Posted: Wed Apr 06, 2022 4:51 pm
by Dominic
There are calls to change the name to something because of stuff that happened 50 odd years ago.

On the one hand, it seems a bit pathetic. Mind you, if it were called the Jimmy Savile Telescope I guess people would have no problem with a name change, so it isn't necessarily as pathetic as you might think.

Re: James Webb Telescope

Posted: Mon Apr 25, 2022 10:06 am
by benjo
Devil wrote: Sun Dec 26, 2021 3:35 pm As a scientist, I would state that the more we learn and understand the universe around us, the better. As a member of the race of humankind, I would agree with you more than 10,000% of the time and I do believe that the money could be better spent.
I'm not a scientist, but I absolutely agree with you. The question has two sides of coin.