A 99-Million year old bird wing was found encased in amber. Should we be devoting more money to science?

  • Yes, human presence in science is almost the definition of science.

    We’re living in a tremendously virtual age where many young people think that all of the discoveries that they need to make will happen on their laptops and smartphones. There is probably 99 per cent of deep oceans and all of space to left explore, and it is only by putting humans into new physical locations that we’ll be able to make genuine and crucial scientific discoveries.

  • Yes, more money should go to science

    When we find something that was once living and breathing on this earth, that is amazing. Things such as this can tell us so much of our past and the possibilities for a future. If we devoted more money to science, so many things could be done that would improve the human race and earth as a whole.

  • i think some fields of science do need money.

    I say some because I saw a news report where some research being funded was about things as silly as whether a gold fish was sexy. Now what is described above about finding out about ancient animal life could be an interested study and one that should be considered. Too bad it seems like the money is going toward things that are unnecessary while the real projects go undetected.

  • Yes, we should be devoting more money to science.

    We should be devoting more money to science, ultimately because, money is put into many things that it shouldn't. Money goes to many places and some of these places are not necessary or are black holes for finances. Science is just as good as anything to put money to. Public finance may just need to be completely reconfigured.

  • No responses have been submitted.

Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.