FtlIsAwesome said:
Waaaa?
So you're saying Earth is cool in temerature, but uncool as in not awesome?
I stand corrected! Earth is the coolest in both senses. :)
wildwohl said:
Also, since we can't get to them, can't communicate with them, or do anything with them, why bother?
I know one person already talked about this a bit, but I would like to mention that this is exactly the sort of attitude toward science that bothers me. We can't get to the stars either, or other galaxies, so why are we studying them?
Astronomers are searching for the answers to questions about the nature of our universe. Answering those questions is worthwhile even if there is no short-term benefit. The search for knowledge is one way in which humanity shapes itself and its philosophy (how we perceive the universe in turn affects how we perceive ourselves, and I feel this is worthwhile all by itself in the same way that the arts are).
I would like to know whether our universe is teeming with planets, or whether systems like our own are relatively rare. Maybe we can't get to one of these planets anytime soon, but that does not mean our descendents won't. The search for Earth-like planets is also the beginning of the search for life in other star systems, and many people would love to know whether or not there were other life forms out there - especially intelligent life forms. If we find a planet that is relatively close, we could send a transmission to it, and wait the appropriate amount of time to see if any transmission is returned. Would it take time? Yes.
There is no obvious short-term benefit to many scientific endeavors. However, scientific knowledge often has unexpected consequences for innovation. James Burke's
Connections series drove that into me when I was a kid. Cutting off some area of research due to a lack of immediate measurable profit is, I believe, short-sighted.
Kepler is
so worthwhile, and I sincerely hope its funding continues for a long time. :)