There was much fanfare recently when space experts crashed a probe into the comet Temple 1. As I watched the collision on television, a TOEFL essay question came to mind: 'If you had a large sum of money, would you spend it on exploring outer space?' I had answered 'yes'. I reasoned that by exploring other planets, discoveries or inventions could be made that would resolve problems on Earth - such as starvation or global warming. However, my opinion has changed. Thousands of years ago, our ancestors fought for their survival with stones and spears, and often bickered among themselves due to a lack of understanding of each other. Today, the world is fighting for religious, financial and physical survival. Advances in technology and society should have brought an end to damaging and meaningless conflict. Yet the improvements have proved powerless in terms of changing the big picture. Telegrams didn't prevent the first world war, nor did radios stop the second world war. Instead, advances in technology allowed us to murder one another on a much greater scale - the Holocaust and the atomic bombing of Hiroshima would be the biggest examples. The gap between the rich and poor is horrifying. There are people all over the world who struggle to eke out a living while others make a fuss over makeup. Injecting more money into space projects wouldn't provide guaranteed technological advances that would benefit global citizens or feed impoverished people. Would it not be rational to divert money allocated to weapons development and spend it on tackling world poverty and international aid? Corrupt dictatorships would dwindle and die, and social disorders would be put right if the world's citizens worked hand in hand. Poverty, illness and terrorist attacks would become a thing of the past. It's all a matter of opportunity cost. Jason Ng is a student at King George V School