A new large-scale, multidisciplinary ocean exploration program would increase the pace of discovery of new species, ecosystems, energy sources, seafloor features, pharmaceutical products, and artifacts, as well as improve understanding of the role oceans play in climate change, says a new congressionally mandated report from the National Academies' National Research Council. Such a program should be run by a nonfederal organization and should encourage international participation, added the committee that wrote the report.
At least seventy percent of our planet is covered with water, yet only 2% of our oceans have been explored. I am dumbfounded by the lack of foresight and common sense in both the political sphere and in the scientific community. Who is responsible for dictating what we research? Lauren Mueller, of the Daily Utah Chronicle, said of NASA:
After a $500 million budget cut in 2007 ended in the threat of job losses and program cuts, the space agency requested $17.6 billion for 2009. The budget, which is sure to be reworked by the congressional powers that be, would be a 2.9 percent increase over the fiscal year of 2008, according to Wired magazine.
...With the support of unlikely climate enthusiast President Bush, the budget provides for six new Earth-monitoring satellites...Of course, the president then proposed across-the-board cuts in renewable energy and energy efficiency, so I guess we're back to square one politically.
The space program, then, will cost $17 billion, and while the exploration of space is fascinating, I feel that life on THIS planet should be the object of our allegiance; especially when there's still so much to be repaired, and so much to learn and benefit from in the depths of our oceans. We have every reason to believe that Earth seas will provide many things of value, not the least of which is the medicinal breakthroughs we so urgently need, and perhaps more bluntly, learning about Inner Space could lead us to useful solutions for Climate Change, which threatens profound global upset, if not annihilation.
This is another illustration of what I believe to be a lack of understanding about where our priorities should reside. I am a firm believer in the adage that Charity begins at home. Our government's tendency to be overly concerned about the well -being and the activities of other countries, has led to the decline of well-being in America. What sense does it make for our government to spend $275 million per day to "free Iraq", not to mention the cost of lives-close to 4,000 U.S. soldiers have died and more than 60,000 more wounded, and over 700,000 Iraqis have been killed while there are another 4 million refugees-all in the name of "bringing" a supposed democracy, freedom, and general well-being to another country, when citizens of America are ignored, starving, homeless, unable to get healthcare, and being taxed into poverty? Before we sink billions of tax dollars and other funds into building another nation, I believe we should build this one.
And what have we to show? A huge and unnecessary death toll in a war that lasted longer than any of the numbskull politicos presumed, and is without merit. Indeed, if America wishes to make this world a better place, it could start by paying attention to climate change, and taking steps to prevent the inevitable catastrophe that looms on that horizon. On a global scale, the money going to the idiocy of war can instead be spent developing things like alternative clean energy sources, providing healthcare for every citizen, education and educational opportunity, and that inimitable research of our oceans, among other things.
I'll say it again: Charity begins at home.
No comments:
Post a Comment