You seem to think that fetishized "hungry children" will be fed if we defund science.
That's nonsense. One may legitimately argue about how many people this planet can support, and the resultant ecological risks associated with high technology, but...
The fact is that there is no way in hell that this planet could support the 7 billion people now on it without high technology, and frankly, high technology requires that some people have a love for science, a love inspired by understanding the farthest reaches of the universe.
Trust me, without science, the number of starving children in the world would grow exponentially.
I note, with some disgust, that you would not have the privilege of expressing your contempt for scientific inquiry on the internet were it not for the "space race" of the 1960's, investment in which did a lot to drive computer technology, in particular, small localized small computers, like those that fit into the Apollo spacecraft, also decried at the time as a waste of money that could go to starving children.
Never the less, in percentage terms, fewer people are starving today than were starving in the 1960's.
If you hate astronomers because according to you they are taking money out of the mouths of crying starving babies in your imagination, not mine, I would suggest that you sell your computer and everything else you own and donate the money to Unicef.
I hope for a world where all children will have the opportunity to see these great things, but the world will not be served by bashing science funding.
Bashing science and its funding is popular with a certain orange traitor who occupies a house once occupied by men like Lincoln and Adams and two Roosevelts, and is so defiling their legacy, but really, in my opinion, it has no place here, especially not in the science forum.
= new reply since forum marked as read