What Price Progress?
Since the smashing of the atom, more than 40 years ago, and since the advent of space exploration, 30 years ago, this planet has had nothing but grief!
Wasn’t “cheap nuclear power” supposed to be the great benefit of the splitting of the atom. I remember, back in the ‘40s when all the popular “science” magazines were telling us that an ocean liner could generate enough power to go around the world from the atomic energy derived from the atoms in a single glass of water. Bunk! Does anybody today have a lower utility bill, even discounting the effects of inflation over the past 40 years? Energy costs are now even higher because nobody correctly calculated the costs (and dangers) of construction of nuclear power plants.
What about the fears and ever-present threat of catastrophe from the nuclear “ticking bomb” power stations on our doorsteps. Chernobyl, Three Mile Island, and who can tell how many other “accidents” lie in our future? How about radioactive toxic wastes growing larger and larger?
As for space science, what ever happened to the “moon dust”? What else have we got to show for our adventures into the interplanetary vastness. Satellites? Yes, some of them even work OK. What has this huge effort and expenditure put into the pockets of Joe Taxpayer? Even the so-called advances of scientific knowledge are, to me, questionable. They keep telling us about the huge amounts of knowledge they’re gaining, but they never tell us what it is, or what good it is.
Can anyone estimate the amounts of money and effort the world has given to these achievements? How many quadrillions have been spent thus far, and to what benefit for mankind?
Yet, we condone a Third World, where poverty, disease and ignorance is the normal standard of life, where infants and older folk die of starvation and neglect and lack of shelter. Even in our own “prosperous” world, there is poverty and homelessness.
Is not the welfare of mankind, of our brothers, the first and highest mission on this planet?
Well then, I say . . . if the world cannot support its people, as well as nuclear and space research . . . then I choose the people first!
I am not anti-science, nor do I advocate a return to the Dark Ages. It is a simple case of first things first! When all people are cared for, and the ecology and our environment made safe for living again and for generations in the future, then we can go back to our research and exploration.
ARTHUR FLORMAN
Los Angeles
