Monday, November 23, 2009

Pee Arr Eye Oh Arr Eye Tee Eye Eee Esssss...

We can successfully hurtle 2 infinitesimally small particles of matter, protons, into each other to create a mind boggling scientific explosion (very cool) and yet we're unable to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and stabilize climate decline...

Hey everybody, we've created a black hole and unveiled all the secrets of the known Universe! Yaaaaaay! Of course, the ice caps are going to melt soon, thousands will die and the planet will change as we know it! Boooooo! It's clear where priorities lie. Very sad.


4 comments:

Stu said...

Whether we solve global warming sooner or later, the cost will be infinitesimal compared to the cost of getting off the planet and out of the solar system when our Sun dies. We will solve global warming, but that won't be as costly a fix (e.g. if we all go vegan it's fixed and the cost is next to nothing compared to the savings) - We need to do both, solve global warming and solve the mysteries of the atom (it's the only way we'll figure out how to ship eight to twelve billion people to the nearest earth-lile planet)... This is like folks who complained about poverty while we were landing folks on the Moon. Both were necessities, both were addressed, both were mild success stories.

Dangermouse said...

Do you really think blasting people by the droves off of planet Earth is a realistic near-term happening? As opposed to helping subdue the effect we have on the global climate?

Stu said...

Your post asserts that the government's priorities are out of whack. My suggestion is that you re-examine your perspective, as I believe that, while we may not be doing everything we can to retard global warming, our spending resources on long-term discovery is an equal necessity - That the glass is half-full, not half-empty. Busting on particle physicists will only lead to less discovery, not more global warming solutions.

Dangermouse said...

The government is consistently proving how irresponsible and improperly prioritized it is. I am not against discovery by any means. In fact, I laud it. I am merely suggesting that it might be more pragmatic to focus energy on those issues that have a more feasible and tangible solution for the near future.