Cost of the Perseverance Mars trip.

[Joey Shabadoo]

Other experts

The most obvious concern of dropping sperm counts is infertility. Even with sperm counts in decline, most men retain their fertility potential, says Skakkebæk. But birth rates have been declining in industrialized countries for decades, he says, and it’s not clear that’s entirely by choice.

Recent studies suggest that 20-30% of young men today have sperm counts in a range that is associated with reduced fertility, says Skakkebæk.

Some research suggests we may be reaching “a tipping point” where more couples will take longer to conceive or may need the help of assisted reproductive technology such as in vitro fertilization (IVF), he says. He points out that in Denmark, the number of couples seeking help for infertility has increased significantly since 2001. “Almost 10% of children are now born after assisted reproduction,” he says

I think this discussion is entirely relevant in any thread about exploring space. Well, maybe not the Women's Lib bit. We have to understand what benefits can come from exploring Mars and right up there has to be gaining knowledge that helps with the continuance of the species.

 

[mudsticks]

Kettle / Fryingpan

Sorry is this a deliberate mixing of metaphors here ??

Are we comparing pots with kettles ??

Or leaping from frying pans into fires ??

If we're combining the two , i think we should have a certificated fire officer on hand, at the very least

 

[mudsticks]

Other experts



I think this discussion is entirely relevant in any thread about exploring space. Well, maybe not the Women's Lib bit. We have to understand what benefits can come from exploring Mars and right up there has to be gaining knowledge that helps with the continuance of the species.

Why on earth not the 'womens lib*' bit too ??

You're not going to suggest that the space missions - and any associated benefits - haven't been enhanced by having a larger and more diverse pool of scientists to draw from - which now thankfully includes far more women than previously - are you ??
https://www.easterneye.biz/indian-a...role-behind-nasas-perseverance-rover-mission/


* this is such a charmingly old fashioned phrase - it almost makes me nostalgic for the 1970's

Continuation of the species yes for sure - but continuation of a species living happily and healthily within its natural planetary bounds - even more importantly i'd say

 

[Oldhippy]

If men could have babies we would have been extinct a long while ago.

 

[Joey Shabadoo]

If men could have babies we would have been extinct a long while ago.

Aren't you assuming gender there?

 

[mudsticks]

If men could have babies we would have been extinct a long while ago.

You mean if they had to be pregnant and give birth to and bf them, with their currently available equipment??


Well yes that would be tricky.

But otherwise, lots of men are very good at caring for babies, or at least I've come across a good few, who are anyhow.

 

[Oldhippy]

Sorry I was being flippant. I meant physically.

 

[mudsticks]

Sorry I was being flippant. I meant physically.

Yes, problematic..

But who knows, maybe the solution to all that might be up there on Mars, just waiting to be discovered.

After all according to that dreadful book, it's your place of origin

Maybe there's a way you could become sea horses too

 

[Wobblers]

You misunderstand me completely if you thought I was decrying 'boffins' or the significance or importance of earth sciences.


I agree we should be investigating all these things very thoroughly - far more thoroughly in fact.

Especially the effects of mans activities on our planet, and how to correct that - we should have been doing all that decades ago really , instead of the science being directed by the oil companies.

Science funded by commerce isn't necessarily used for benign purposes.

But it seems to be far easier to get people excited about space travel, than what we need to do here.

If we could do both that would be nice, but you've still got people decrying, or questioning the significance of the work of climate scientists , for instance.
And saying they're 'making it up'

Respect for science overall seems to be patchy.

And which science gets funding, and why, is an issue of concern.

Presenting matters as being a straight choice between blue sky research with no immediate benefits and "worthwhile" science is a misrepresentation. Most scientific research is directed towards some specific purpose - it's long been the case that a researcher simply will not get funding is their grant proposal doesn't go into detail as to the applications and benefits of the proposed project (in the UK at least). We can afford to do both. It's a political choice, not a resource choice.

Furthermore, the sums spent on the more speculative research are really very small - we're talking about a small fraction of a percent of overall economic output here. As an example, Uber lost $8.5 billion in 2019 - and has never turned a profit. Uber has a business model of undercutting rivals to put them out of business (presumably then jacking up prices to exploit their monopoly position) whilst reducing costs by being structured in a way as to deny its drivers employment rights. By contrast, Perseverance enlarges our understanding of the universe, has applications which benefit earth observation and learning more about Martian geological processes will aid in understanding similar processes back here. Yet Uber is canonised as a successful tech company while we're seeing complaints about the other. That suggests to me that there is a major malaise in the values of our society.

The argument that there are limited resources thereby justifying cutting out activities deemed frivolous (as you're in effect making) is the text book argument of the utilitarian. My deepest objection is a philosophical one. The suggestion that all research should be directed solely to useful goals (and most already is) is a purely utilitarian outlook. In particular, it disallows any other value. There is no room for such things as an appreciation of beauty, research simply for curiosity's sake, philosophy or art - things that have been responsible for many of humanity's greatest achievements. What a bleak outlook and miserable existence that would be! Surely there is not only room for Perseverance and all these other worthy enterprises, but they are every bit as essential as the worthwhile research?

 

[winjim]

If men could have babies we would have been extinct a long while ago.

I see this argument occassionally, 'if men had periods / babies / breasts / whatever...'. But if men had those things then they would be women*. We wouldn't suddenly live in some non-patriarchal society, it's just that who we now call men we would call women, who we now call women we would call men and they would be the patriarchy.



*Assuming orthodox notions of gender identity in order to simplify the point.

 

[Wobblers]

They really, really are. The Shuttle severely hobbled NASA's independence, and created the public perception of them as a money pit, paving the way for the private space industry to take over. It's easy to say "Look at how much more efficiently the private sector can do it than NASA!" when NASA was stuck with the millstone of that horrible thing around its neck for nearly 40 years.


Found the Musk fanboy

Musk?!? Sod off, he's just a loudmouth arse. But he - or rather, the people he's recruited - do know how to build rockets - and get them into orbit, successfully.

You're actually making my point for me. The military actually have no interest in manned spaceflight. All they want is to be able to get their spy and communication satellites into orbit. They've already got the capability to do that, and have no wish to spend money to improve on that capability. The military (and I've work in the defence industry in the past) are actually very conservative in outlook. The new companies like SpaceX or Blue Origin are on the other hand highly innovative - they have to be in order to compete against the incumbents like Ariane Space. The results are obvious, especially when compared to lumbering beasts like Boeing who've grown fat on cost plus contracts and just don't know how to operate cheaply or quickly.

 

[mudsticks]

Presenting matters as being a straight choice between blue sky research with no immediate benefits and "worthwhile" science is a misrepresentation. Most scientific research is directed towards some specific purpose - it's long been the case that a researcher simply will not get funding is their grant proposal doesn't go into detail as to the applications and benefits of the proposed project (in the UK at least). We can afford to do both. It's a political choice, not a resource choice.

Furthermore, the sums spent on the more speculative research are really very small - we're talking about a small fraction of a percent of overall economic output here. As an example, Uber lost $8.5 billion in 2019 - and has never turned a profit. Uber has a business model of undercutting rivals to put them out of business (presumably then jacking up prices to exploit their monopoly position) whilst reducing costs by being structured in a way as to deny its drivers employment rights. By contrast, Perseverance enlarges our understanding of the universe, has applications which benefit earth observation and learning more about Martian geological processes will aid in understanding similar processes back here. Yet Uber is canonised as a successful tech company while we're seeing complaints about the other. That suggests to me that there is a major malaise in the values of our society.

The argument that there are limited resources thereby justifying cutting out activities deemed frivolous (as you're in effect making) is the text book argument of the utilitarian. My deepest objection is a philosophical one. The suggestion that all research should be directed solely to useful goals (and most already is) is a purely utilitarian outlook. In particular, it disallows any other value. There is no room for such things as an appreciation of beauty, research simply for curiosity's sake, philosophy or art - things that have been responsible for many of humanity's greatest achievements. What a bleak outlook and miserable existence that would be! Surely there is not only room for Perseverance and all these other worthy enterprises, but they are every bit as essential as the worthwhile research?

And it's a misrepresentation of my post to suggest that I was making a simply utilitarian argument.

Mine was more about emphasis on funding, and indeed reporting of research, who gets the funding, and attention and why.

No problem with research for researchs sake, at all.

But there's a lot of important research that is currently going underfunded, or not being funded at all - for both political and economic reasons.

Whilst other fields attract a lot of funding because of their potential commercial use, or prestige value.

I know this is 'the way of the world' right now but that doesnt mean I can't object to it, both morally and philosophically.

I'm involved in research in very vital fields myself, and getting funding is often difficult, because it's not nearly so high tech, or glamorous, or potentially 'saleable' as in many other areas.

But its important research, nonetheless, so I'm no stranger to these issues.

I think we're basically arguing from the same POV, regarding research funding, but with a slightly different emphasis.

 

[Mtbsensa]

Agree, the military budget for many countries is obscene..

Industrialised human slaughter devices, funded by, and exchanged between national governments.

Yes UK Arms industry, we're looking at you.

Yuk

But don't you sense any tie up between space programs, and technology development, and the overall industrialised military agenda??

Right nobody says we shouldn't spend money on the military, but when you compare the costs of exploring the universe (our reality) to the budget of making sure other homo sapiens don't murder us, it's just laughable.

 

[mudsticks]

Right nobody says we shouldn't spend money on the military, but when you compare the costs of exploring the universe (our reality) to the budget of making sure other homo sapiens don't murder us, it's just laughable.

Mmn Well I think quite a few
of us might take exception to military budgets.

Budgets often tastefully reframed as 'defence' spending.

But one persons 'defence' is in reality often another person's 'offence'.

Thinking about for example, the UKs supplying of arms to dodgy regimes, and those armaments being used against civilians.


With the excuse that if we didn't do so, then others would, and that the revenue gains us 'good business' for Britain.

And yes we could talk at great length, about the proportionality of what gets funded, and why, what gets given the kudos, the weighting, and the publicity and what doesn't, in terms of research budgets, for sure.

None of these decisions are made free from financial and political influences.

A bit more ethics, in the decision making process, as to what does or doesn't get funded, wouldnt go amiss, imo.